Dr. Zakir Naik, a popular Islamic preacher, has long been a polarizing figure in India and globally. His speeches, which often focus on religious debates and inter-religious dialogues, have attracted millions of followers. However, his controversial views have also attracted criticism, leading to his ban in India. In 2016, the Indian government took decisive steps to ban him from the country, citing a number of concerns ranging from alleged hate speech to extremist ideologies.
Dr. Zakir Naik’s Background
Dr. Zakir Naik founded the Islamic Research Foundation (IRF) in 1991, with a mission to disseminate Islamic teachings and dispel misconceptions about the religion. He gained popularity due to his unique style of delivering speeches, often referencing Islamic texts and combining them with other religious texts to argue his arguments. His public debates, which mostly targeted non-Muslim audiences, attracted widespread attention.
Naik’s influence grew with the advent of Peace TV, a channel dedicated to broadcasting his sermons and other Islamic content. It became a global platform, reportedly reaching more than 100 million viewers, primarily in South Asia and the Middle East.
Ban and allegations
Despite his wide following, Dr. Zakir Naik’s speeches have not been without controversy. Critics argue that Naik’s rhetoric, often cloaked in religious scholarship, comes dangerously close to promoting intolerance. His statements on topics such as terrorism, homosexuality, and conversion have been particularly controversial.
The turning point for the Indian government came after the 2016 Dhaka terrorist attack, where some of the attackers reportedly claimed to have been influenced by Naik’s speeches. Although Naik denied any connection to the attackers, Indian authorities began to investigate his work more closely. Subsequently, the government banned the IRF under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), accusing it of spreading hatred between different religious groups and indirectly inspiring extremist activities.
Further investigations led to allegations of money laundering, leading India’s Enforcement Directorate (ED) to file a case against Naik and his organisation. Naik, who was abroad at the time, did not return to India to face these charges and the Indian government cancelled his passport.
Allegations of hate speech
A significant part of the government’s case against Dr. Naik revolves around the claim that his speeches promote communal violence and hate speech. Critics point to instances where he appeared to support the actions of Osama bin Laden, although Naik has consistently said that his statements were taken out of context.
Naik’s views on terrorism have been complex. Although he has publicly condemned acts of terror and violence, his stance on individuals such as bin Laden or groups such as the Taliban has often been ambiguous. He has said that although he does not support terrorism, he sees some attacks as a response to Western policies in the Middle East.
Religious sensitivities and political environment
India’s decision to ban Naik also needs to be understood in the broader political and social context. As a secular country with a large and diverse population, India has always been sensitive to religious tensions. In recent years, with the rise of nationalist movements and growing polarisation between religious communities, individuals such as Naik—who engage in public debates on religion—are seen as potentially provocative.
In a country where communal violence has flared up over religious provocations, any speech that could be construed as inciting division is taken seriously. The Indian government, led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), has taken a strong stand against what it sees as a threat to national unity, especially in the context of radical Islam. The decision to ban Naik can thus be seen as part of a wider effort to prevent religious extremism and maintain communal harmony.
Dr. Zakir Naik’s response
Since the ban, Dr. Naik has remained defiant. From his self-exile, initially in Saudi Arabia and later in Malaysia, he has continued to defend his actions, denying all charges of promoting hatred or supporting terrorism. In his view, the Indian government’s actions are politically motivated, aimed at silencing a prominent Muslim figure. He argues that he has never advocated violence and that his only goal is to promote peace through understanding religious texts.
Naik has also received support from several quarters. His supporters argue that his speeches have been misrepresented and that his ban is symptomatic of a wider crackdown on dissent and freedom of expression in India. In Malaysia, where he lives, Naik has continued to deliver public lectures, although there, too, his activities have come under scrutiny.
