After hours of heated debate, India’s parliament has passed a controversial bill that seeks to change how properties worth billions of dollars donated by Muslims over centuries are governed.
The upper house passed the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024 early on Friday, a day after the lower house cleared it amid strong opposition criticism. How did we get here?
Muslim leaders and opposition parties say the bill is ‘unconstitutional’ and infringes on the rights of India’s Muslim-minority community. This raises an important question: Is the government truly acting in the best interest of all citizens?
But the government says the bill aims to make the management of waqf properties more transparent. Transparency is often lauded as a vital quality in government. But whose transparency are we talking about?
The bill will now be sent to India’s president for her assent. This approval is expected to come soon. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has called the passing of the bill a ‘watershed moment’.
In a post on X, he said the waqf system had been ‘synonymous with a lack of transparency and accountability’ for decades. But critics argue that the history and cultural significance of these properties are being overlooked.
‘The legislation passed by parliament will boost transparency and also safeguard people’s rights,’ he wrote. This lofty assertion has left many feeling uneasy. Will the rights of the minority truly be secured, or just diluted?
The opposition has been vociferous in their condemnation of the bill. They allege that it is another ploy by the governing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to dilute the rights of minorities. Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge pointed out the stark voting divide. While 288 members voted in favor of the bill in the lower house, a significant 232 opposed it.
‘From this, we can guess that despite opposition from various parties, this bill was brought arbitrarily,’ he wrote on X. This begs the question: What does it mean for democracy when a bill passes under contentious circumstances?
Legal website LiveLaw reported on Friday that lawmaker Asaduddin Owaisi had challenged the bill in the Supreme Court. Owaisi is quite the character, known for his fiery speeches and unwavering resolve.
What exactly is waqf property? In Islamic tradition, a waqf is a charitable or religious donation made by Muslims for the benefit of the community. Such properties cannot be sold or used for any other purpose. They are more than just land or buildings; they are lifelines for a community of about 200 million Muslims in India.
These properties are essential. They provide mosques, madrassas, graveyards, and orphanages. They serve as a cornerstone for Muslim culture in India. What would happen if these properties become vulnerable to re-interpretation or misuse?
Historically, waqf properties were governed by the Waqf Act, 1995. This act mandated the formation of state-level boards to manage them, bringing some order to often chaotic systems. But what happens when these boards become more about government control than community benefit?
In August, the BJP introduced a bill to amend the Waqf Act. The government claims that changes will modernize waqf administration and help clarify legal ambiguities. Yet, Muslim leaders argue these amendments carry more risks than promised rewards.
The new bill proposes significant changes, particularly concerning how waqf properties are determined. In the past, many properties were legitimized through oral declarations or community customs. Now, Waqf boards must provide valid documents to claim a property as waqf. This change could open the floodgates for disputes.
What about disputes concerning land that the government deems owned? Under the new bill, final decisions will rest with the government. Isn’t that a bit unsettling?
Moreover, the bill allows non-Muslims to be appointed on waqf boards and tribunals. This is a notable shift, stirring up questions around representation and who gets to govern these important properties.
Also, the bill suggests that judicial intervention will replace the previous system. Previously, decisions made by waqf tribunals were considered final, adding a layer of autonomy to these bodies that is now being challenged.
Further, a central registration system will require waqf properties to be registered within six months of the law coming into effect.
Requests for new registrations must now go through waqf boards—via this system, further entrenching government oversight. Many wonder whether these efforts are genuinely modernizing or merely controlling.
This situation evokes various emotions. On one hand, there’s hope for efficiency and more systematic management. But the fear of losing cultural heritage is pervasive. How can we balance modernization with cultural preservation?
As debates continue, one thing is certain: the fate of these properties is now caught in a tangled web of politics, rights, and cultural identity. Are we witnessing a step forward in governance, or a step back for minority rights? Only time will tell.
Leave a Comment