Oppn members hit out: Waqf panel an ‘eyewash’

Opposition members on Wednesday alleged that several provisions in the revised draft of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024 undermine the federal structure, and expressed concerns over the process followed by the joint parliamentary committee (JPC) that overlooked their amendments before adopting the report.

The Opposition MPs submitted their dissent notes to the report, adopted by the JPC headed by BJP’s Jagdambika Pal on Wednesday, containing the changes proposed by the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) members to the contentious legislation.

Trinamool Congress (TMC) lawmakers Kalyan Bannerjee and Nadimul Haque in their dissent notes are learnt to have termed the entire proceeding of the JPC as “eyewash and farce”. Stating that the bill violates not only the basic structure but also the federal structure of the Constitution, they also criticised chairperson Pal for violating the members’ rights to oppose the bill, people familiar with the matter said.

In his dissent note, AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi apparently said that changing the name of the Waqf Act, 1995 to “Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995” in the revised bill “hides an agenda of systematically weakening the legislative architecture regulating waqfs in India”.

The Hyderabad MP is also learnt to have said that at a time when “divisive elements have raised mischievous claims questioning the status of ancient mosques and dargahs as places of Muslim religious worship, the Bill seeks to weaken the defence of the Muslim side in these disputes by removing the statutory recognition given to ‘waqfs-by-user’, a rule of evidence that hitherto allowed long use of a property as a waqf to be sufficient basis for the property to be statutorily recognised as a waqf.”

In a bid to allay fears, a parliamentary panel had recommended that no cases will be reopened against Waqf properties on a retrospective basis, provided the asset is not in dispute or does not belong to the government.

Arvind Sawant of the Shiva Sena (UBT) also submitted a dissent note, opposing the nomination of non-Muslims to the waqf boards, saying it could lead to chaos in the management of other religious boards as well, HT has learnt.

Sawant has also apparently dubbed the proposed takeover of the waqf properties by the government through the authority of the collector as “illogical”. He noted that the collector being the head of the revenue at district level used to file a complaint on the government’s behalf in a dispute, and as per the Waqf Act, the survey commissioner and tribunal use to deliver the justice as order. But in the revised draft of the bill, the collector will be both the complainant as well as justice, he is believed to have said.

Congress lawmaker Gaurav Gogoi has flagged that the bill does not elaborate the necessity of introducing amendments which “clearly diminish, erode and destroy certain essential and fundamental characteristics of Waqfs”.

The deputy leader of the Congress in the Lok Sabha is learnt to have opposed the amended definition of waqfs and removal of “Waqf by Users”, noting that government records show that 402,000 of the total 872,000 recorded waqf properties fall under the definition of “Waqf by Users”.

He is also learnt to have underlined that the bill allows excessive government interference in the functioning, control and management of waqf and waqf properties in India, which, he said, has a detrimental impact on the community as well as the autonomy of the institution.

DMK lawmakers A Raja and MM Abdullah have criticised the insertion of two terms — “government organisation” and “government property” — in the revised draft of the bill, calling it an attempt to change the character of an existing waqf insidiously, people familiar with the matter said.

Opposition members told the panel to incorporate their dissent notes in the final report that is expected to be tabled in the Budget session. 

In their dissent note, Congress lawmakers Nasir Hussain, Mohammad Jawed and Imran Masood said the JPC failed to conduct a comprehensive clause-by-clause deliberation before finalising its report. They alleged that instead of facilitating a structured discussion on specific clauses of the bill, chairperson Pal directly proceeded to voting on amendments moved by members, claiming such a “departure from due parliamentary process has seriously compromised the quality and fairness of the deliberations,” a person aware of the details said.