The Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind Halal Trust, one of
the petitioners challenging the Uttar Pradesh government's ban on halal-certified
products, has filed an affidavit before the Supreme Court objecting to
statements made by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta during the last hearing. The
Trust took exception to Mehta's remarks that halal certifying agencies generate
"a few lakh crores" through the certification process and that the
Court may need to consider whether the entire country should bear the cost of
pricier halal-certified products due to the demands of a select few. The Trust
argues that the Central government's assertions unfairly maligned and targeted
the petitioners, leading certain media organizations to hold debates that
further discredited the halal certification process.
The same resulted in creating a narrative
against the very concept of halal and its certification process, the petitioner
says.
"Unfortunately, the Central Government
has made misleading submissions which has created serious prejudice to the
concept of halal and enabled the prejudiced media to create a narrative against
the very concept of Halal."
Aggrieved by the statements, the petitioner
also seeks a direction from the Court to the Central government to disclose as
to which Central government officer instructed SG Mehta to make the subject
statements, as they were "without any basis, inconsistent with the record
and the pleadings sworn on oath by public officials".
"This Hon'ble Court may direct the
Central Government for disclosure of the fact as to which officer instructed
the Ld. Solicitor General to make such statement before this Hon'ble Court as
these statements have caused serious prejudice to the concept of Halal; which
is considered to be one of the basic requirements of behaviour and lifestyle
(including eating habits and consumption in general) of a very large community
of our country. It is a serious issue of religious belief and practice of a large
section Indian citizenry and the same is protected under Article 25 and 26 of
the Constitution of India."
Furthermore, the petitioner asserts that
halal certification is not limited to non-vegetarian items or products meant
for export. Instead, it is an essential aspect of every Indian consumer's right
to be informed about the products they use in daily life.
"It is also a matter of Right of an
individual to be informed with the component used in edible products whether it
is vegetarian food or a non-vegetarian food. For instance, Tulsi water, or
Lipstick or biscuits with or without chocolate, packaged water bottles are
projected to be as ridiculous expansion of Halal Certifications. The said
criticism of ridicule is baseless and due to ignorance of fact in general
public."
The petitioner contends that the FIRs
registered for violating government notifications are an abuse of process and
lack justification.
Regarding allegations that halal certifying
agencies make substantial financial profits, the petitioner states that the
Centre is already aware of its financial records, as they are filed with tax
authorities. It provides 14 years of data on its average collections,
expenditures, income, and tax payments, revealing that between 2009-10 and
2022-23, its average total collection was Rs. 2,07,83,304, with an annual surplus of approximately Rs. 71.6
lakhs.
Addressing the Solicitor General's concerns
about halal certification for items like water bottles, lipstick, and tulsi
water, the petitioner clarifies that some manufacturers use animal fat,
alcohol-based extracts, or enzymes derived from animals. Additionally, water is
often filtered through carbon, which may be sourced from animal bone,
necessitating halal certification.
"after advancement of technologies and
way of manufacturing different items/products, the manufacturing companies use
different components which may or may not be permitted as per the Islamic
beliefs within the country or outside the country. Hence, the certification of
the products as 'halal' by the issuance of appropriate certificate becomes
necessary," the petition states.
In response to the Solicitor General’s
claims regarding the halal certification of iron bars and cement, the
petitioner categorically denies issuing any such certifications and challenges
the Central government to provide strict proof of such claims.
However, the petitioner clarifies that
certain steel and cement manufacturers produce materials used for preserving or
protecting edible products, such as tin plates and food cans for packaging.
Exporting companies may be required by international buyers to ensure that the
materials used in packaging comply with halal standards. In such cases, at the
request of exporters, the petitioner reviews the manufacturing process and
components used, issuing halal certification only if no prohibited substances
are found, facilitating international trade.
"It is not for the benefit of the
petitioner. It is completely voluntary by the exporting company on whose demand
and requirement Halal Certificate is issued."
The petitioner also alleges selective targeting of halal
certifications, highlighting that certificates like Kosher are still prevalent,
and are being sold in different parts of the country (including UP).
info@adhwaitha.com