The proposed Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024 poses a grave threat to the autonomy, rights, and religious freedom of India’s Muslim community. By compromising the traditional Islamic governance of Waqf assets – charitable trusts managed by Muslims for religious and social welfare – this bill jeopardises the community’s ability to practise their faith freely and manage their affairs autonomously.
Waqf Properties: A Sacred Trust
Waqf properties hold a pivotal role in Islamic practice, serving as a form of perpetual charity or SadaqahJariyah (an ongoing charity that continues to benefit others long after the donor’s death, such as building wells, schools, or endowing properties. It is considered a lasting act of virtue, ensuring continuous rewards in the Hereafter.). These assets – such as land, buildings, and other resources – are donated by devout Muslims with the intention of addressing societal needs and seeking divine blessings. The concept of Waqf is deeply embedded in Islamic jurisprudence, where it is recognised as a means of ensuring ongoing benefits for the community long after the donor’s death.
The Quran supports this practice, which illustrates the enduring rewards of charitable deeds, symbolising continuous and expansive benefits:
“The example of those who spend their wealth in the cause of Allah is that of a grain that sprouts into seven ears, each bearing one hundred grains. And Allah multiplies the reward even more to whoever He wills. For, Allah is All-Bountiful, All-Knowing. (Surah Al-Baqarah -2:261)
The following Hadiths also underscore the significance of Waqf.
1.The Prophet Muhammad ﷺstated, “When a person dies, all his deeds come to an end except three: ongoing charity, beneficial knowledge, or a righteous child who prays for him.” (Sahih Muslim)
2.Ibn Umar reported: Umar acquired a piece of land at Khaibar. He came to Allah’s Apostle ﷺand sought his advice regarding it. He said: Allah’s Messenger, I have acquired land in Khaibar. I have never acquired property more valuable for me than this, so what do you command me to do with it? Thereupon he (Allah’s Apostle) said: If you like, you may keep the corpus intact and give its produce as Sadaqah. So, Umar gave it as Sadaqah declaring that property must not be sold or inherited or given away as gift. And Umar devoted it to the poor, to the nearest kin, and to the emancipation of slaves, aired in the way of Allah and guests. (Sahih Bukhari)
In contemporary settings, Waqf properties are managed according to the Waqf Act of 1995, overseen by state Waqf Boards to ensure alignment with Islamic law and the donors’ intentions. This legal framework aims to uphold the principles of transparency, accountability, and adherence to the original charitable goals of Waqf. Such management is crucial for maintaining the benevolent spirit of the Waqf system, which plays an integral role in the socio-economic fabric of Muslim communities in India.
Renaming the Act: Diluting the Religious Essence
Renaming the Waqf Act 1995 to the “Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development Act” represents a significant shift from the law’s original intent. Replacing the term “Waqf,” which holds deep religious and cultural significance, with a technocratic title, appears to dilute the law’s religious essence and community-focused purpose. This change suggests a move away from protecting the sanctity and autonomy of Waqf properties, favouring government control and administrative efficiency over traditional and spiritual obligations. This rebranding risks Subverting the principles of religious endowment and self-governance integral to the Waqf system.
Restricting Waqf Eligibility: A Threat to Inclusivity
The proposed amendment to Section 3(r), which restricts Waqf creators to “any person practising Islam for at least five years,” fundamentally alters the inclusive nature of the Waqf system. Traditionally, Waqf allowed individuals, regardless of religious background or the duration of their faith, to dedicate property for charitable, religious or pious purposes recognised under Muslim law. This flexibility ensured that Waqf served as a robust mechanism for social welfare and included the contributions of non-Muslim rulers and benefactors. The new restriction undermines a core Islamic principle: the moment one accepts Islam, he or she inherits the rights and responsibilities of the faith, including the ability to create Waqfs. By narrowing eligibility, the amendment threatens to disenfranchise Muslims from properties endowed by those not meeting the new definition, potentially leading to misappropriation of assets and altering the essence of Waqf, ultimately acting as a barrier to charity and community support highly valued in Islamic teachings.
Mismanagement Claims: A Cover for Government Overreach
The Bill introduces new oversight mechanisms under Section 27 of the Act, granting the government unprecedented authority to dissolve or reconstitute Waqf Boards on grounds of mismanagement. This amendment appears to be a tool for stripping the Muslim community of control over its assets rather than addressing genuine concerns. Such a move undermines the community’s right to manage its religious endowments, violating constitutional guarantees under Articles 25 and 26, which protect religious freedom and the management of religious affairs.
Poverty Alleviation: A Flawed Justification
The proposed amendments to Section 32 of the Waqf Act consolidate control over Waqf properties, thereby minimising the autonomy of Waqf Boards that have historically operated under Sharia principles. While ostensibly aimed at poverty alleviation, these changes misdirect efforts by allowing the government to control Waqf assets, potentially diverting resources from community-led welfare initiatives. This shift risks diminishing Waqf’s historical role in providing social services and support, conflicts with constitutional guarantees of religious freedom and minority rights and raises concerns about transparency and accountability, potentially leading to mismanagement and corruption.
Legal Reforms: A Path to Entanglement
Amendments to Section 83, which introduce a new tribunal system, are justified based on relieving the legal system’s burden. However, these changes are likely to lead to prolonged legal battles, marginalising Waqf Boards and complicating the management of properties. The new tribunal system may create a parallel legal framework, entangling the community in endless litigation rather than simplifying dispute resolution.
Amendment: A Constitutional Crisis with Malafide Intentions
The Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024 introduces troubling changes that endanger the Waqf system and raise serious constitutional concerns. It grants the government broad powers over Waqf properties, including the authority to override Waqf Boards, appoint administrators, and seize properties. This represents a significant deviation from the original intent of the Waqf Act and infringes upon fundamental rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution, particularly those related to religious freedom and property rights. Article 26 of the Constitution ensures that every religious denomination has the right to manage its own affairs, including its properties. The proposed amendments infringe upon this right by permitting government interference in Muslim religious practices, weakening the secular nature of the nation, and casting doubt on the government’s commitment to protecting minority rights. The Bill’s malafide intentions threaten the long-term stability of the Waqf system and the broader principles of justice and equality in India.
Centralising Control and Undermining Shariah Principles
The proposed Waqf Act amendments significantly undermine the traditional autonomy of the Muslim community in managing Waqf properties. By increasing non-Muslim representation on the Central Waqf Council, which oversees state Waqf Boards, the amendments challenge the Shariah principle that Waqf should be managed exclusively by Muslims.
Furthermore, the amendment to Section 3(r), which limits Waqf creators to those practising Islam for at least five years, threatens the Waqf system’s inclusivity. Traditionally, Waqf enables individuals, irrespective of their religious affiliation, to designate property for charitable purposes. This restriction contradicts the Islamic principle that anyone who accepts Islam immediately gains full rights, including the ability to create Waqfs, and risks excluding Muslims from properties endowed under previous criteria.
District Collector’s Authority over Waqf Tribunal
Moreover, centralising authority in the District Collector over the Waqf Tribunal introduces excessive bureaucratic oversight. Historically, the Tribunal’s decisions were final and could only be contested in the High Courts, ensuring specialised and efficient resolution. The proposed changes reduce the Tribunal’s autonomy and introduce delays, allowing a potentially less knowledgeable government official to influence its decisions. This centralisation threatens Shariah principles of justice and undermines the Waqf system’s integrity.
New Deed Requirements: Imposing Bureaucratic Hurdles
The amendments to Section 36 of the Waqf Act introduce the requirement of formal deeds and government approval to declare properties as Waqf, imposing unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles. These changes erode the autonomy of Waqf Boards and dilute the original intentions of donors, who endowed properties for specific religious and charitable purposes per Shariah. Previously, properties could be considered Waqf based on established usage, even without formal documentation, as Shariah recognises the spirit of the donor’s intention. Requiring formal deeds may undermine collections that have operated in good faith without stringent documentation, thereby threatening the essence of Waqf as traditionally understood.
Excessive Government Control and Bureaucratic Oversight
The Bill introduces amendments to Sections 54 and 83, which grant excessive powers to government officials, including the district collector, thereby undermining the traditional Waqf management structures and the authority of the Waqf Tribunal. The bill centralises control, granting government officials the authority to supersede established Waqf management systems. This could potentially result in the misappropriation or misuse of Waqf assets, sidelining community interests, and encroaching upon religious freedoms. Notably, this centralisation contravenes Shariah principles governing Waqf properties and presents a threat to constitutional protections outlined in Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.
Challenging Misconceptions and Restoring Integrity
There is an urgent need to address the false narrative that Waqf institutions are involved in land grabbing and misuse. This misinformation distorts public perception and undermines the integrity of Waqf Boards. The proposed amendments exacerbate these misconceptions by increasing governmental control based on unfounded claims. While claiming to seek transparency, the Bill centralises control and grants excessive authority to government officials, risking misappropriation, marginalising community interests, and infringing on religious freedoms. It is crucial to balance oversight with autonomy and address whether we can protect Waqf assets and dispel myths without compromising their integrity. This requires a collective effort to uphold the truth, protect heritage, and honour the original intent of Waqf.
Defend Constitutional Values Now
The Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024 poses a grave threat to the autonomy, rights, and religious freedoms of India’s Muslim community. By undermining the traditional Islamic governance of Waqf assets – charitable trusts managed by Muslims for religious and social welfare – this bill endangers the community’s ability to freely practise their faith and manage their affairs.
This moment represents a critical crossroads for those who cherish justice, equality, and India’s founding secular principles. The bill’s implications extend beyond the Muslim community, setting a dangerous precedent for how minority rights might be eroded under the guise of legal reform. The erosion of religious autonomy threatens the pluralistic and inclusive identity that has long defined India.
There is an urgent need for a united, decisive response from civil society, legal professionals, and political leaders. Defending the constitutional values that protect the rights of all citizens, regardless of background, is essential. Public discourse, legal challenges, and cross-cultural solidarity are critical steps in this fight to preserve India’s democratic ethos. The time to act is now. This is a call to action for all who believe in justice, equality, and the preservation of democratic ideals.
[The writer is Assistant Secretary, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind]