Ironically, Hindu women were not allowed to enter the Sabarimala shrine despite legal intervention, citing Hindu temple laws. In light of the BJP’s exclusion of Muslim men, Modi’s attempt to empower women is notable.
The Waqf Bill, introduced on the 8th of August 2024, amends the Waqf Act of 1995. The Bill was renamed the Act UMEED (United Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency & Development Act) 1995.
The bill states the following about the declaration:
The person declaring a Waqf should have practiced Islam continuously for at least five years. This provision in the bill was fiercely contested as it might significantly deter donors, primarily if the donation is intended to be made by a non-Muslim. The rationale for backing the motive was clearly beyond one’s realm of understanding.
The Survey Commissioner, appointed by the Board, was authorized to survey prior to the introduction of the Bill. However, it was noted that Waqf gained several of the properties through coercion. The Bill requires that the person be the legal owner of the property that he declares for donation, not just a user. Occupying the premises without legal documents in his possession does not authorize him to donate. In accordance with the Act, even an oral declaration was valid.
The Bill prohibits the identification of legally owned government property as Waqf. The district Collector of the area will determine ownership, and records will be updated accordingly. The District Collector is now authorised to conduct surveys as per state revenue laws.
The endowment occurs when the line of succession ends (Waqf-alal-aulad). As a result, the donor should ensure that no further inheritance rights exist. The Act mandates the inheritor’s consent to legalise the donation if inheritors exist. The donation is irrevocable as the land is intended for use by educational institutions, charitable homes, hospitals, graveyards, etc.
The Waqf Board controls properties covering an area of 9.4 lakh acres, collectively valued at ₹1.2 lakh crore. The Board is the third-largest landowner after the Armed Forces and the Indian Railways. The Waqf functions through 32 Waqf Boards and one Central Board. However, as per the Bill, the Waqf Board is not authorised to determine the ownership of the Waqf property now. The Bill has axed several of the Board’s provisions, delegating more powers to bureaucrats.
The Central Waqf Council advises the central and state governments and the Waqf Boards. A Union Minister is in charge of the Waqf, and the chairperson of the Council heads it. The Act mandates that the Council members be Muslims, with two being women. The Bill seeks MPs, former judges, and people of eminence appointed to the Council who may not be Muslims but makes it mandatory for the other members to be Muslims representing Muslim organisations, Islamic law scholars, and the Chairperson of the Waqf Board. The bill also specifies that two of the representatives should be women.
While the Act provides for the election of candidates from the Muslim electoral college of MPs, MLAs, MLCs, and Bar Council members from the state, the Bill directs the state government to nominate one person from the above-stated backgrounds to the board, and they do not need to be Muslims. Hence, the bill suggests that the Board be composed of two non-Muslim members and at least one from the Shia, Sunni, backward-class Muslim, Bohra, and one Agakhani community. The bill also insists on having two Muslim women members.
Ironically, Hindu women were not allowed to enter the Sabarimala shrine despite legal intervention, citing Hindu temple laws. In light of the BJP’s exclusion of Muslim men, Modi’s attempt to empower women is notable.
The nomination of non-Muslims on the board adds to the government’s influence in running the administration. This is mainly because the members are hand-picked and because their loyalty leans towards the government. Nevertheless, many of the nominees may disapprove of being included primarily due to their being secluded.
Moreover, the Bill does not favour deeming the tribunal’s decision irrevocable and permits an appeal to the high court within 90 days. This contradicts the Act, which vetoes matters raised in courts unless the Board or an aggrieved party moves the application and the court considers it acceptable.
The Bill makes the Waqf Board accountable to the Central and State governments. The source and legitimacy of funds in their accounts are subject to audit by the CAG or a designated officer. This is clearly for the government to ensure the means of funding Waqf and the source verification to ensure their authenticity.
Similar to establishing a separate Waqf Board for Sunnis and Shias if they constitute 15% of the Waqf properties or income, the Bill allows separate Waqf Boards for Agakhani and Bohra sects.
If the government’s power were to be reckoned with, the Bill could have cleared both houses in a matter of minutes. Today, it would have to undergo passage through several committees and considerable delay before it gets the concurrence — if it does, really!
The views expressed by the author are strictly personal
As an independent media platform, we do not take advertisements from governments and corporate houses. It is you, our readers, who have supported us on our journey to do honest and unbiased journalism. Please contribute, so that we can continue to do the same in future.
