November 14, 2024
📰 FEATURE STORY
Is the Waqf Bill anti-Muslim?
A lot has been written about the current government’s treatment of Muslims in India over the past decade. Policies like the Citizenship Amendment Act or the Uniform Civil Code are seen by many as explicit ways of undermining them and their rights. Much attention has been given to reforming their rights and status as citizens.
That brings us to the latest polarising political fight. The Union government wants to bring efficiency and transparency to the administration of Waqf properties through the Waqf (Amendment) Bill. Those opposed to it see this as another way the Modi government is trying to undermine the Muslim population. Is the Bill inherently anti-Muslim?
Context
The demolition of the centuries-old Akhonji Masjid in South Delhi and other religious structures in the city is of concern to historians. Some worried that the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) would target other cultural spaces like Sunehri Masjid in Chandni Chowk. Questions were asked whether these properties came under the purview of Waqf lands.
Waqf dates back to the time of the Prophet Muhammed. He encouraged the act of giving property in charity. Waqf would include any movable or immovable property donated in the name of the Prophet for religious or charitable purposes.
During the British colonial era, Muslims continued to dedicate lands to Waqf. As Gandhi continued his non-cooperation movement, several schools, colleges, and other institutions were established on lands endowed as Waqf by Muslims.
Waqf laws date back to the early 1800s. The properties were initially overseen by judges appointed by the government. Since they began to deteriorate after the Mughal empire collapsed, laws were enacted. In 1810, a law was passed for areas under Fort William of Calcutta. A similar law was enacted for those under Fort St. George, Madras.
Waqf properties began to be dismantled under the British Raj. They were sold and transferred as personal assets. In some cases, they were also destroyed or usurped.
When Barrister Sir Syed Ali Imam became India’s law minister in 1910, Muslims saw an opportunity. The following year, he presented the Waqf Bill. Following a couple of years of advocacy in front of the British government, the Muslim Waqf Validating Act of 1913 was enacted. It serves as a regulatory framework to protect Waqf properties.
There are 32 state-level Waqf boards and a Central Waqf Council, an autonomous body that protects Waqf properties. Their functioning or perhaps even their existence could be threatened by the controversial Waqf (Amendment) Bill which has ignited heated debates since it was introduced in Parliament.
Some think the Waqf is in dire need of reform. Others say this is yet another way for the Modi government to undermine Muslims through legislation.
VIEW: Inherently anti-Muslim
To talk about the Waqf Bill is to talk about the past decade of being Muslim in India. They’ve been at the receiving end of threats, hate, and intimidation. Communal forces have propagated rumours about Muslim shopkeepers, vendors, and businesses. They incite people to boycott Muslims and deprive them of their livelihoods. The latest trend is ‘land jihad’. Muslims have supposedly taken and monopolised large chunks of land across India that seemingly belong to Hindu temples or other religious places. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Waqf is exclusive to Muslims, and only they can earmark properties as trusts. How much property? It’s not as much as some say. According to the government, Waqf owns 9.4 lakh acres of land. Hindu trusts in Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana alone hold over 10.37 lakh acres of land. This doesn’t mean there aren’t privileges for non-Muslims. Many states have passed legislation to protect Hindu shrines and temples.
Waqf assets have helped in the development of the Muslim community through the establishment of mosques, madrasas, and educational institutions. Some insist that this hasn’t done much for Muslims. They say the waqf land should be transferred to the government. Should a government acquire private endowments to address public and societal inequalities? Why would taxes be necessary?
The Waqf Act stipulated that state governments would set up tribunals to settle waqf property disputes. Section 7(1) of the Act states that the tribunal’s verdict will be final. The government’s latest Bill doesn’t include that clause. The strategy seems to be to centralise power and undermine minority rights. Another amendment to include two non-Muslims in each waqf board is an infringement of the right to freedom of religion. The institution needs experts in Muslim law to remain transparent and reliable.
COUNTERVIEW: Much-needed reform
The Waqf boards desperately needed reform, and the government decided to take action. Mismanagement has led to various changes over the years. Since the original law in 1995, Waqf has continued to perform poorly and be woefully administered. Complaints of encroachments, illegal appropriation, misuse, and corruption have been common. The government’s Bill is transformative. In the spirit of transparency and consensus-based decision-making, it was referred to the Joint Parliamentary Committee.
The accusations of theft and corruption have resulted in heavy monetary losses and a decline in public confidence. The question the government has is why would anyone oppose measures that would help improve Waqf boards, given their importance to Muslims. If they’ve been functioning effectively, then why are Muslims often faring worse than scheduled castes socio-economically? There are no data on how many Pasmanda Muslims or women hold positions on waqf boards.
The Bill addresses these issues by guaranteeing representation to Shia, Sunni, Bohra, Agakhani, and other backward classes among Muslims. The establishment of “waqf-alal-aulad” will ensure that heirs, including women, aren’t denied inheritance rights. Broadly, the Bill ensures that vast land ownership in the country doesn’t go unchecked and unregulated.
The legislation has public support. A recent survey by Local Circles showed that nearly 91% of people supported the amendments to the existing Waqf Act. 96% of respondents said Waqf boards should register all lands with district collectors. 93% said disputes should be resolved through district and high courts instead of the Waqf tribunal.
Reference Links:
- Waqf in India: Unraveling Its Rich History and Contemporary Landscape – Clarion India
- From legitimacy to conspiracy: Decoding the Waqf Bill, 2024 – The Leaflet
- What’s the tearing hurry to amend the Waqf Act? – National Herald
- Waqf Bill and the bogey of land jihad – Deccan Herald
- Who really benefits from the Waqf Amendment Bill? – Frontline
- Waqf Amendment Bill isn’t radical enough. Reinvent or wind up – The Print
- Survey reveals what Indians think of Modi govt’s Waqf Amendment Bill – Moneycontrol
What is your opinion on this?
(Only subscribers can participate in polls)
a) The Waqf (Amendment) Bill is anti-Muslim.
b) The Waqf (Amendment) Bill isn’t anti-Muslim.
Previous poll’s results:
- Indian historians and academics are to blame for ‘WhatsApp history’: 52.5% 🏆
- Indian historians and academics aren’t to blame for ‘WhatsApp history’: 47.5%
🕵️ BEYOND ECHO CHAMBERS
For the Right:
Rahul Gandhi Wants Corporate India to Count the Cost of Modi’s Crony Capitalism
For the Left:
After Lok Sabha polls setback, how the BJP is trying to make an outreach to Dalit voters