“If they can’t control you, they will hate you.”
Chanakyaneeti
India is a secular state where no religious laws or sub religious group laws can be above the Constitution. The same minorities crying in the name of the Constitution, now are silent when their own Waqf board violates the rights of others. Religion is the façade for the interests of a few to control money and power illegally. The Narendra Modi government must be congratulated for putting petty appeasement interests of earlier governments aside and introducing this bill to strengthen democracy and civil society. This exposes the Woke ecosystem that is dubious, deceitful and disastrous for an independent civilizational state, the face of neo-colonialism. The neo-colonialists of the Wokes are feeling insecure of Bharat’s economic strength and civilizational pride that PM Modi is bringing back.
Last month, Union Minister for Minority Affairs, Kiren Rijiju, put forth the Amendment Bill to the 1995 Waqf Act that proposes notable fundamental reforms to impart fairness, efficiency and development in the Waqf properties around the country. The Waqf is the third largest estate holder in the country after the military and the Indian Railways, with 8.7 lakh properties covering 9.4 lakh acres across India, with an estimated value of Rs 1.2 lakh crores.
The mismanagement of the Waqf has led to various changes over the years in its powers and structure. The landmark 1995 Act followed an amendment in 2013 made with inputs from the High-Level Committee under retired Justice Rajinder Sachar and a Report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Waqf. Detailed discussions were conducted with relevant stakeholders, including the Central Waqf Council. Yet, since the original Act came into effect, the Waqf has continued to illustrate poor administration with complaints of encroachments, illegal appropriation, misuse and corruption of varying degrees.
To bring reforms to such an ailing system, the government has tabled the Amendment Bill, which was promptly referred to the Joint Parliamentary Committee in the spirit of enabling greater transparency and consensus-based decision-making. Not much time has passed since, and the issue has gained wide traction, with politicization by varying groups and stakeholders. Indeed, political debates and discussions are at the heart of functioning democracy. Yet, the current arguments for and against will be understood in the broader framework of problems that linger in Waqfs and the necessity for the reforms therein.
First, there is a greater need to understand the context of the need for such reforms. The 1995 Act empowers the Waqf Board nationwide to claim ownership of any land or property in the name of charity. Under existing regulations, once the Waqf takes over a land holding, it cannot be returned or transferred, creating complex challenges that border on feudalism. This affects vast populations in the country, not to mention the Muslim community itself, which remains economically worse off even after years of state patronage. Even the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) stands in the crosshairs of Waqf Boards. Reports inform us that more than 120 monuments that ASI maintains are claimed by Waqf Boards in different states.
A major consequence of such rigidity has been massive corruption and misuse of the vast lands owned by Waqf Boards in all Indian states. We need to understand that the lack of accountability and transparency in their process and overall work invited the intervention in the first place. The 2024 Amendment Bill merely aims to rectify the inadequacies of the existing law by ensuring the Waqf properties are administrated and utilized efficiently. The proposed name change of the original 1995 Act from the Waqf Act to the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act elegantly encapsulates the spirit and philosophy of the Amendment Bill.
Second, much criticism of the government’s initiative is undertaken through the lens of polarizing religious narratives. However, such criticisms by the political groups and intelligentsia fail to capture the evidence and the underlying problems that the Bill seeks to address in the long term. For all the political and ideological leanings of different groups in the country, we can all get behind one fundamental idea that no institution, however great, has flaws, and it is necessary for the Parliament and the government to address such shortcomings. The failure to come to terms with this fundamental understanding is remarkably damaging to solving the real challenges of corruption in the Waqf institution.
Third, the proposed reforms aim for various changes, and the major ones include putting checks on Waqfs by increasing oversight. It shifts the governing power and tribunal role from the Boards to state governments, with the Union government in the overseeing role. All of this makes up for tangible reforms, which, most crucially, are driven by the change of authority from Boards to government (at the collector level) to decide and declare a particular disputed property as a Waqf property. This would be instrumental in clearing backlogs of disputed lands across India while ensuring auditing provisions carried out by the appointee of India’s Comptroller and Auditor-General (CAG).
Finally, the Bill will make the Waqfs more inclusive and diverse. This will be ensured by the inclusion of non-Muslims and the creation of separate boards for other denominations of Muslims beyond Shia and Sunni, which is how the current boards are constituted. Notably, the Boharas, Aghakhanis and other backward classes within the Muslim communities will be given greater participation. Perhaps most notably, the proposed Bill seeks to bring women into decision-making roles within the Waqf administration.
In such a sense, the proposed reforms are to be viewed through the lens of long-term benefits for the community and the nation, wherein the multi-dimensional reforms would allow greater participation and ensure accountability. The sheer size of landholdings by Waqf without any checks and balances is genuinely antithetical to the idea of democracy in this great nation. The government, Parliament and the judiciary, with all their powers and resources, function well because there are proper checks against misuse of power.
Therefore, in the case of Waqfs, the discussions need to be centred round the root cause of the problem rather than the political underpinnings and click-bait stories about the issue at hand. The JPC on Waqf is consulting profusely with a diverse set of stakeholders to arrive at an understanding of the problems with Waqf. Therefore, at this point, the energy and efforts should focus on promoting participative democracy so that all stakeholders work together to produce the overdue reforms in the Waqf institution, moving beyond petty politicization.
Prof Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is the Vice Chancellor of JNU.