Union Ministers Rajnath Singh, Amit Shah and other members in the Lok Sabha during the Monsoon session when the Centre introduced the Waqf (Amendment) Bill in the Lok Sabha.
Credit: PTI File Photo
The new Waqf Amendment Bill, which proposes to make sweeping changes in how waqfs–unique Islamic charitable endowments—are managed, has invited strong opposition and criticism from the community and the Opposition. Introduced in the last session, the Bill has been referred to a Joint Committee of Parliament. The Opposition has described it as ‘unconstitutional’, ‘anti-minority’, and ‘divisive’. Waqfs have an important role in the religious, social, and economic life of the Muslim community. They are properties given by Muslims for religious, charitable, and other purposes. It is estimated that there are about 9.4 lakh acres of such property, worth about Rs 1.2 lakh crore. These are controlled by waqf boards, often criticised for mismanagement, inefficiency, and even corruption. The declared aim of the amendments is to manage the boards well, but the government has sought to do it in a way that is seen as arbitrary and insensitive.
The amendments, if they become law, will pave the way for the stripping of state waqf boards of much of their power. Elections may be replaced with nominations and district collectors may be appointed as surveyors of waqf land. The Bill empowers collectors to determine the status of the land in case of a dispute. It also allows non-Muslims to be included on waqf boards. Waqfs are Muslim properties. The Bill gives the government the power to direct the audit of any waqf to the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India (CAG), or a designated officer. The result of all these amendments would be to shift the power of governing the waqfs from the boards and tribunals, now largely run by the Muslim community, to governments. It is also being seen as a measure to control extensive waqf property.
It is surprising that a Bill which overhauls the structure of an important institution of the Muslim community and changes its working was formulated without consultations with the community. The government should have held discussions with all the stakeholders about its provisions. Some of the allies of the BJP have reservations about some provisions. There is concern that the Bill would violate the fundamental rights under Articles 25 and 26 guaranteed to the religious minorities. The government and the BJP claim that the Bill serves the best interests of the Muslim community. The community and others should also be convinced about this.