Dealing with the Waqf storm

The contentious Waqf (Amendment) Bill was passed by Parliament after a long and intense debate in both the Houses. The Bill is expected to make radical changes in the regulation and management of Islamic charitable trusts and endowments in the country, which is not necessarily a bad thing. However, it has been roiled in politics with the Opposition questioning the intent behind the amendments in Parliament. The floor managers of the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA) were successful in convincing two of its major members, the Janata Dal (United) and the Telugu Desam Party, to back the amendments while the Opposition stood together as speaker after speaker deliberated on provision after provision in Parliament — the Lok Sabha discussed it for 14 hours before clearing it early Thursday morning and the Rajya Sabha debated the Bill for over 13 hours, clearing it at 2.40 am Friday. The discussions were in the best of our parliamentary traditions, with the members preferring to debate the Bill and voice their positions rather than stall the House.

The debate over the Bill is unlikely to be over with its passage. Critics of the Bill, among them many Muslim groups, insist that its provisions violate their right to equality and religious freedoms guaranteed by Articles 14, 25 and 26 of the Constitution. Street protests have been reported from many places in the country, including West Bengal and Gujarat. The Congress and DMK have declared that they will petition the Supreme Court against the Bill, calling it unconstitutional. There are rumblings within the JD(U), an NDA member, over the party’s support for the amendments — and at least five senior leaders have quit the party over the issue. With assembly elections due in Bihar later this year, the Waqf Bill is likely to stay in the headlines. The government, however, has been at pains to explain that the reforms proposed in the Bill are necessary and well-intentioned and will make management of Waqf property more gender and class-inclusive and reduce litigation. It has blamed the Opposition for misleading the Muslim community that Waqf reforms violate community rights and are aimed at usurping land and property.

Laws and regulations need to be updated with time. Waqf law can be no exception to this trend — the Waqf Act has been amended multiple times. However, it isn’t surprising that Waqf reform this time has been viewed through the lens of contemporary politics. The Bill was finalised following due parliamentary process — a Joint Parliamentary Committee held extensive consultations, with multiple stakeholders and many suggestions were incorporated in the draft — but the non-NDA parties have been consistent in claiming that the amendments encroach on the domain of faith, encourage state overreach, and violate Constitutional provisions. The onus is on the government to engage with the Muslim community and address their concerns. Waqf is not a secular institution since its goals and purposes are linked to aspects of religion, particularly the element of charity in it. This is why the provision making inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf boards mandatory has become a contentious issue. A comparison has been drawn with the management of Hindu shrines, which restricts the holding of office to persons of the Hindu faith.

The challenge before the government is to build a consensus on issues such as State oversight of Waqf land, property and institutions — this can help in avoiding litigation — and making their management more inclusive. However, this asks for the government to lend an ear to the fears and concerns of community leaders and organisations and wherever necessary, make changes or institute guardrails against any potential mischief. Building trust across the board is a necessary first step towards the successful implementation of reforms.