The West Bengal government has halted all projects based on religious classification. Allowances for imams, muezzins, and priests will no longer be provided. Renowned author Taslima Nasrin welcomed this decision by the state government. She said, “Religious allowance is not just financial aid; it is a kind of political message.”
On Monday, she posted a lengthy statement on social media. There she wrote, ‘The West Bengal state cabinet has decided to stop allowances for imams, muezzins, and priests starting next June. This is a very important decision. When the state begins to pay allowances to imams, muezzins, priests, or other religious workers, the question arises: is it the job of a secular state to financially support religious officeholders? Should the state limit itself to the welfare of citizens, or should it also become a patron of religious institutions?’ She further wrote, ‘All state allowances for religious officeholders should be stopped. Because the job of a secular state is not to patronize religion. If the state takes responsibility for supporting the employees of mosques and temples with taxpayers’ money, then the state ceases to be a neutral guardian of citizens; it gradually becomes a patron of religious institutions. Many say that helping poor imams, muezzins, and priests is a humanitarian act. Of course, poor people should be helped. But the question is, what should be the basis of that help? A person’s poverty, or their religious identity? A poor farmer, a poor laborer, a disabled woman, an unemployed youth—are they any less helpless? If the state wants to provide social security to someone, it should do so as a citizen, not as a religious employee.’
Read more:
In Taslima’s words, “Religion is not just a matter of belief; it is also a political weapon. Religious allowance does not mean just financial aid; it is a kind of political message. Today the imam, tomorrow the priest, the day after tomorrow a leader of another religion—in this way, the state becomes the financier of all religious institutions. Then the distance between politics and religion begins to shrink. Vote bank calculations enter state policy. Secularism does not mean keeping all religions equally happy. Secularism means the state will remain separate from religion. The state will look after citizens, not their religion. Religion is a matter of personal belief. Some will pray namaz, some will perform puja, some will follow none—this is individual freedom. But why should the state take on the economic burden of that belief? Sustaining religious structures with state money cannot be the task of a modern democratic state.”
Taslima added, “In a country where there is a shortage of teachers in schools, a shortage of beds in hospitals, science is neglected, and unemployment is rising—giving allowances to religious officeholders cannot be called progressive statecraft. Every penny of the state should be spent for the rights and development of the people, not for religious identity. The more religion is mixed with the state, the more society will move towards fanaticism and communalism. And the more secular the state becomes, the more separate from religion, the more people will become science-minded and gain dignity as citizens.”
Notably, after the cabinet meeting on Monday, the state’s Minister for Women and Child Development, Agnimitra Pal, announced that while assistance under the scheme will be provided this month, it will be completely stopped from next month. She stated clearly, “Assistance projects under the Information and Culture Department and the Minority Affairs and Madrasa Education Department, based on religious classification, will be stopped. They will run this month. From next month, this is being stopped. A detailed notification will be issued in this regard.” Before the elections, the BJP had called for rice, not allowances. In their ‘Sankalp Patra’ (pledge document), they promised employment and good governance. Following that path, Agnimitra made this major announcement just nine days after the formation of the government.