Waqf Amendment Bill Tabled Amidst Heated Parliamentary Debate

The contentious Waqf Amendment Bill, 2024, has been tabled in the Lok Sabha, setting the stage for a significant parliamentary showdown. Union Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju presented the bill on Wednesday, April 2nd, initiating an allocated eight-hour debate amidst strong opposition and vociferous protests. This legislation, poised to significantly alter the governance of Muslim charitable properties, has ignited a fierce political and legal debate, raising critical questions about religious freedom, minority rights, and government oversight.

The bill, amending the Waqf Act of 1995, was initially introduced in August last year and subsequently referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination. The JPC's report, submitted in February, was itself marred by controversy, with opposition members alleging bias and a lack of proper consultation. Despite the tumultuous JPC process and persistent opposition, the government, armed with a comfortable majority in the Lok Sabha, is pushing forward with the amendments, asserting that they are essential for improving the efficiency and transparency of Waqf administration.

Background and Key Proposed Amendments

Waqf, in Islamic law, refers to a charitable endowment, typically of property, made for religious or philanthropic purposes. Waqf properties in India, estimated to be around 8 lakh acres, are managed by Waqf boards. The existing Waqf Act of 1995 was enacted to regulate these properties. However, concerns regarding mismanagement, corruption, and illegal encroachments have long plagued the system, prompting the current amendment bill.

The Waqf Amendment Bill proposes several significant changes to the existing legal framework. Key amendments include:

• Composition of Waqf Boards and Central Waqf Council: A major point of contention is the proposed inclusion of non-Muslim members in both state Waqf boards and the Central Waqf Council. Previously, the Central Waqf Council exclusively comprised Muslim members. The amended bill mandates the inclusion of two non-Muslim members in the Council, alongside Muslim representatives, including women and scholars of Islamic law. This provision has drawn criticism from opposition parties and Muslim organizations who view it as an unwarranted intrusion into the religious affairs of the community.

• Redefining Waqf and Removing 'Waqf by User': The bill seeks to restrict the definition of Waqf, stipulating that only individuals practicing Islam for at least five years can declare a Waqf and must own the property being declared. Crucially, it removes the concept of 'Waqf by user,' which previously allowed properties used for religious or charitable purposes for extended periods to be recognized as Waqf, even without formal documentation. This change is particularly contentious as it could potentially disenfranchise numerous Waqf properties established through long-standing community use but lacking formal paperwork.

• Government Auditing and Rule-Making Powers: The amendment bill empowers the Central Government to make rules regarding the registration of Waqf properties, publication of accounts, and proceedings of Waqf boards. Furthermore, it grants the Central Government the authority to audit Waqf accounts through the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) or a designated officer, a power previously vested in State governments. This shift towards centralized control has been criticized as undermining the autonomy of Waqf boards and increasing governmental interference.

• Changes to Waqf Tribunal: The bill modifies the composition of the Waqf Tribunal, which adjudicates disputes related to Waqf properties. It mandates the Tribunal to consist of a district judge and a state government official of Joint Secretary rank. Moreover, it removes the finality previously accorded to Tribunal decisions, making orders appealable to the High Court within 90 days. Critics argue this dilutes the efficacy of the Tribunal and could lead to prolonged litigation.

• Mandatory Centralized Registration: The bill mandates the registration of all Waqf properties on a central portal within six months of the law's enactment, with potential extensions granted by the Waqf Tribunal in specific cases. While proponents argue this will enhance transparency and record-keeping, concerns have been raised about the practicality and potential implications for properties lacking clear documentation, especially in light of the removal of the 'Waqf by user' clause.

Political and Legal Storm

The Waqf Amendment Bill has triggered a political firestorm, with the opposition vehemently denouncing it as unconstitutional and detrimental to the Muslim community's interests. Asaduddin Owaisi , AIMIM chief, has been a leading voice against the bill, labeling it the "Waqf Barbaad Bill" and a violation of Articles 14, 25, 26, and 29 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantee fundamental rights including equality before the law and freedom of religion. Owaisi questioned the inclusion of non- Muslims in Waqf bodies, drawing a parallel to Hindu Endowment Boards typically excluding non-Hindus. He asserted the bill is an attack on the religious freedom of Muslims , aiming to weaken Waqf institutions and seize control over community assets.

The Congress party has also pledged strong opposition. Congress MP Pramod Tiwari stated the party's objections were ignored during the JPC process and they would continue to oppose the bill in Parliament. Other opposition parties like the Samajwadi Party and Aam Aadmi Party have echoed these sentiments, accusing the government of pursuing an anti-minority agenda and seeking to control all aspects of religious life. Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav criticized the BJP for attempting to "interfere in everything" and consolidate power.

In contrast, Union Minister Kiren Rijiju has defended the bill, accusing the opposition of "misleading innocent Muslims " and creating a "dangerous narrative" about the government intending to seize Waqf properties. Rijiju emphasized that the bill aims to bring transparency and fairness to Waqf management, prevent misuse of Waqf assets, and empower those previously lacking rights. He dismissed claims of unconstitutionality, stating Waqf laws have existed pre-independence and the amendments are designed to improve their effectiveness, not undermine religious freedom. Rijiju highlighted the bill's intention to provide rights, particularly in the management of Waqf properties, implying empowerment for previously marginalized groups within the Muslim community.

Adding an unexpected dimension to the debate, the Kerala Catholic Bishops Council (KCBC) and the Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI) have expressed support for the Waqf Amendment Bill. The CBCI stated that certain provisions of the existing Waqf law are inconsistent with the Indian Constitution and called for amendments. This support, welcomed by BJP ministers, has been cited by the government as validation of the bill's necessity and its unbiased approach to reform.

Parliamentary Arithmetic and Future Trajectory

With the NDA holding a majority of 293 seats in the Lok Sabha, the passage of the Waqf Amendment Bill in the Lower House appears likely. The BJP is confident of securing the support of its allies, and even parties like JD(U), initially expressing concerns, have indicated a potential shift towards supporting the bill. The opposition, despite its vocal protests and planned resistance, lacks the numbers to block the bill in the Lok Sabha.

However, the Rajya Sabha proceedings and potential judicial challenges remain uncertain. While the NDA also holds a majority in the Upper House, the debate may be more protracted, and opposition parties are expected to raise significant legal and constitutional objections. Furthermore, the contentious nature of the bill and the strong opposition from Muslim organizations could lead to legal challenges in the courts after its enactment.

The Waqf Amendment Bill represents a significant legislative intervention in the realm of religious property management. While the government frames it as a reform measure aimed at enhancing transparency and efficiency, critics view it as an encroachment on religious freedom and minority rights. The ensuing parliamentary debate and potential legal challenges will be closely watched by legal professionals, religious communities, and political analysts alike, as the bill's outcome will have far-reaching implications for the governance of Waqf properties and the broader dynamics of religious freedom and minority rights in India.

The allocation of eight hours for debate in the Lok Sabha, extendable at the Speaker's discretion, signals the government's intention to push the bill through during the current budget session, which is scheduled to conclude on Friday. The coming days will be crucial in determining the final shape and impact of this highly debated legislation.