The Waqf Amendment Bill 2024 aims to overhaul Waqf property management in India, sparking debate over transparency, governance, and religious autonomy
A Turning Point in Waqf Management:
The Waqf Amendment Bill 2024
(1500 years old Shiva temple at Tiruchendurai (Tamil Nadu) claimed by the Waqf Board as their property_
By Prime
Point Srinivasan, Managing Editor
(The Waqf Amendment Bill 2024 aims to overhaul Waqf property management in India, sparking debate over transparency, governance, and religious autonomy)
The Indian Parliament recently witnessed the introduction of the Waqf Amendment Bill 2024, a significant legislative measure aimed at overhauling the management of Waqf properties across the country. The bill, which has stirred both support and opposition, is a response to longstanding issues of alleged mismanagement and encroachment of Waqf properties. While the government justifies the need for this amendment on the grounds of transparency and accountability, various opposition parties and Muslim organizations have raised concerns about its potential implications.
The Need for the Waqf Amendment Bill 2024
According to an estimate, India's Waqf Boards own 8.7 lakh properties across 9.4 lakh acres, with an estimated value of Rs 1.2 lakh crore. This makes them the third-largest landholders in the country, after the Railways and the Defence Department.
Waqf properties in India represent a vast pool of assets dedicated to religious, charitable, and social purposes within the Muslim community. However, these properties have long been plagued by encroachment, mismanagement, and inadequate governance issues. Despite its amendments, the government has argued that the existing Waqf Act of 1995 has been insufficient to address these challenges. The new bill aims to rectify these issues by introducing stricter governance mechanisms and expanding the powers of authorities overseeing Waqf properties.
The urgency for reform was further highlighted by a recent incident in Tamil Nadu, where Waqf authorities laid claim to an entire Tiruchendurai village, shocking its residents. The claim included a 1,500-year-old Shiva temple, triggering a heated debate nationwide. Minister Kiren Rijiju referenced this incident during the bill's introduction, as it underscored the need for clear legal frameworks to prevent such controversies and ensure that Waqf's claims are transparently and justly managed. This case has highlighted the potential for disputes between Waqf authorities and local communities, emphasising the necessity for a stronger regulatory framework.
Key Features of the Waqf Amendment Bill 2024
The proposed amendments introduce several key changes to the Waqf Act 1995:
1. Shift in
Survey Responsibility: The role of the Survey Commissioner, whom the State
Government previously appointed, is now transferred to the District Collector.
This move will streamline the survey process and ensure more accurate and
timely documentation of Waqf properties.
2. Changes in
Waqf Board Composition: The bill mandates the inclusion
of two non-Muslim members on Waqf Boards, which has sparked significant debate.
The government justifies this change as a step towards inclusivity and better
representation. Two women members are also included in Waqf Boards.
3.
Restriction on
Declaring Government Property as Waqf: The amendment
restricts the declaration of government property as Waqf, aiming to prevent
disputes over land ownership between the state and Waqf authorities.
4. Mandatory
Verification of Waqf Properties: To ensure
transparency, the bill introduces a mandatory verification process conducted by
district authorities. This is seen as a measure to prevent wrong claims and
misuse of Waqf properties.
5. Expansion of
Legal Recourse: The amendment allows for legal suits to be filed up
to two years after a Waqf Tribunal's decision, providing a broader window for
contesting rulings on Waqf property disputes.
Judicial Influence on Waqf Legislation
Over the years, the Supreme Court of India has delivered several landmark judgments highlighting the need for amendments to the Waqf Act. For instance, in the Board of Muslim Wakfs, Rajasthan v. Radha Kishan (1979), the Court emphasised that Waqf Boards have the authority to recover properties illegally occupied. This ruling reinforced the need for Waqf Boards to have stronger enforcement powers, a principle reflected in the current amendments, which aim to empower these boards further.
In another significant judgment, Punjab Wakf Board v. Gram Panchayat (2000), the Supreme Court ruled that once a property is declared as Waqf, its status cannot be challenged except through proper legal channels. This judgment underscored the importance of protecting Waqf properties from unauthorised encroachments, a concern that the Waqf Amendment Bill 2024 seeks to address through stricter verification and proper mechanisms.
These judgments and
others have paved the way for the amendments proposed in 2024, which aim to
close legal loopholes and strengthen the framework for managing Waqf
properties. Including provisions that enhance the legal recourse available to
Waqf Boards and expand their powers to recover properties directly reflects the
judiciary's call for more robust protections for these assets.
Objections from Opposition Parties and Muslim Bodies
1. Inclusion of
Non-Muslims on Waqf Boards: Critics argue that this move
undermines the religious autonomy of Muslim-managed charitable endowments. They
question whether non-Muslim participation is necessary, given that similar inclusivity
is not mandated for other religious communities' endowments.
2. Centralisation
of Control: There are concerns that the bill centralizes too
much control over Waqf properties by government-appointed officials,
particularly District Collectors. Opponents fear this could reduce community
control over these assets.
3. Potential for
Misuse of Power: The expanded powers granted to district authorities
to oversee Waqf properties have raised concerns about potential misuse,
particularly in regions where Waqf lands are highly valuable.
4. Legal and
Constitutional Concerns: Some argue that the bill may
infringe upon constitutional guarantees of religious freedom by imposing state
control over religious properties. Opposition parties have voiced concerns that
the bill could set a precedent for further encroachments on religious autonomy.
Comparative Legal Frameworks in Other Countries
The management of Waqf properties varies significantly across the world. In
Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Pakistan, Waqf management is
deeply integrated into the legal framework, with dedicated ministries or
councils overseeing their administration. For example, Saudi Arabia has aligned
its Waqf operations with national development goals under Vision 2030, emphasising
transparency and accountability. Similarly, the UAE has a robust Waqf system
supported by federal laws that ensure the proper management of Waqf assets.
In contrast,
non-Islamic countries like the UK, USA, and Germany manage similar charitable
trusts under broader charity and trust laws. These countries do not have
specific Waqf legislation, but Islamic charities operate within the framework
of general trust laws, ensuring some degree of regulation while allowing
religious autonomy.
The Role of the Joint Parliamentary Committee
Conclusion
One
truth remains constant in the ever-evolving governance landscape: change is inevitable. There is broad consensus that Waqf
properties must be shielded from unauthorized claims. However, recent
controversies have spotlighted significant gaps in transparency and procedural
integrity when declaring Waqf properties. In a democracy like India, no entity
is beyond the reach of law, and all actions must align with the nation’s legal
framework. For the sake of communal harmony and to ensure transparent, accountable
management of Waqf assets, reforms in the current legislation are necessary.
Simultaneously, political parties must refrain from exploiting the Muslim
community for electoral gains. The Joint Parliamentary Committee is responsible
for refining this bill with the nation’s best interests at heart, ensuring that
the final legislation balances reform and justice.
[contact]
COMMENTS