The Waqf (Amendment) Bill of 2024 is shaping up to be a significant move by the Narendra Modi government, reflecting its intent to tackle the entrenched minoritarian politics that have coloured India’s political landscape for the past 70 years. This alliance government isn’t shying away from making tough decisions, and the amendments signify a commitment to reforming governance in a way that is both robust and necessary.

For years, the BJP has aimed to project an inclusive governance model, striving to counter criticisms from the Congress and the I.N.D.I Alliance. The slogan "Sab Ka Saath, Sab Ka Vikaas" is meant to resonate with everyone, yet there are still sceptics among some online supporters who perceive this narrative with a healthy dose of scepticism. They express frustration over what they view as a lack of genuine engagement with issues that affect the minority communities, sometimes dismissing outreach efforts like the Pasmanda initiative.

However, the new amendments signal that the BJP is taking concrete steps to address these concerns. They demonstrate that the party is not just paying lip service to inclusivity; it actually aims to dismantle the minoritarian politics that have been a feature of India's governance since Independence. 

The amendments address critical provisions from the Waqf Act of 1995, which granted considerable powers to Waqf Boards. Over time, this created an asymmetric structure that complicated governance and accountability. With these changes, the government seeks to streamline how Waqfs operate, potentially leading to more equitable management of resources that could benefit a broader segment of society.

To fully appreciate the implications of these amendments, it is important to understand the concept of Waqfs, which are charitable endowments in Islamic law used to support various community services like education, healthcare, and other social welfare initiatives. The governance of these Waqfs has often been mired in inefficiencies and lack of transparency, which the amendments aim to rectify.

Supporting reform in Waqf governance isn't merely a political manoeuvre; it stands as an opportunity for real change that can uplift communities by aligning the management of Waqf resources with the needs of the present. By tackling these issues head-on, the Modi government is positioning itself as a force for reform—one that is willing to rethink the traditional politics of exclusion in favour of a more inclusive narrative. 

As we move forward, it will be interesting to watch how these amendments are implemented and received by the public. 

Understanding Waqfs is essential for grasping their significance in the context of Indian society and law. Waqfs are often likened to trusts in common law—when property is given to a beneficiary through a bequeathal, but managed by trustees who have no personal interest in the property itself. However, a Waqf is unique; it is a bequeathal made in the name of Allah, which is considered irrevocable. That’s where the saying “Once a Waqf, always a Waqf” comes from!

The term “Waqf” literally means “to stop” in Arabic, reflecting the permanence associated with such bequeathals. A Waqf is intended to serve a specific purpose that aligns with Islamic principles, whether they be charitable, spiritual, or otherwise beneficial. It’s crucial to point out that Waqf is not mentioned in the Qur'an directly; instead, it is established through Hadith, which are the recorded sayings of the Prophet Muhammad. Because of this, there are varying interpretations and rules concerning Waqfs among different schools of Islamic thought.

In India, the history of Waqf can be traced back to the Delhi Sultanate, where entire villages were designated as Waqf by Islamic rulers, including the Mughals. Today, Waqfs represent approximately six lakh acres of property throughout the country. Unfortunately, this historical practice has also led to instances of malfeasance associated with Waqf management.

It’s important to clarify that Waqf Boards do not ‘own’ the properties associated with Waqfs. Instead, they serve as statutory bodies overseeing individual Waqfs, each managed by a mutawalli, or manager. Think of the Waqf Board as a regulator, ensuring these entities operate correctly rather than as a government entity that directly runs them. While they may not have direct control, these boards hold significant power and responsibility in overseeing the proper management and use of Waqf properties.

As we look at the recent Waqf (Amendment) Bill, understanding what Waqfs are and how they function is crucial. The amendments aim to address various governance issues that have arisen over time, ensuring that Waqf properties serve their intended purposes effectively. Ultimately, by putting these reforms into place, there is potential for Waqfs to contribute positively to community development in a way that aligns with their original intent. 

The governance of Waqfs have historically been riddled with complexities, largely influenced by colonial-era regulations. The original framework for Waqf management started to take shape during British rule, with limited oversight. Initially, traditional systems governed these endowments. Then came the Acts of 1863 and 1890, which introduced some basic management guidelines. By 1923, Waqfs had to be registered within a court six months after creation, but this was just the start of a somewhat disorganized structure.

As power shifted to provincial assemblies, individual states like Bengal, Sindh, and Bombay enacted their own legislation governing Waqfs. However, it wasn’t until after Independence that these state-level Waqf Boards gained substantial power. The Waqf Act of 1954 was one of the few pieces of legislation from the first Congress Government aimed at addressing issues pertinent to the Muslim community. This act significantly empowered the State Waqf Boards, allowing them to ascertain which properties were designated as Waqf. However, this power to determine the status of properties, while intended to suffice for good governance, often led to confusion and conflict, as these decisions could still be challenged in civil court.

Despite multiple revisions over the years, the governance of Waqfs has continued to face challenges. One of the core issues is that the process for establishing a Waqf is not well codified. This lack of a defined process stems from the recognition of Islamic law, allowing Muslims to create Waqfs as part of their wills. Moreover, the insufficient maintenance of land records has facilitated encroachment and misuse of Waqf properties. In many cases, mutawallis, those tasked with managing these properties, may either overlook or actively contribute to malfeasance due to this lack of oversight.

Attempts to strengthen legal frameworks, such as the 1995 Act and amendments during the UPA government in 2013, have not yielded significant improvement. On the contrary, some provisions in the 1995 Act created more complexities and imbalances. For instance, the Act mandates a survey by a specially appointed survey commissioner, and while the costs are to be borne by the state government, the effectiveness of such a survey can be questionable.

One of the most concerning provisions is found in Section 40 of the 1995 Act, which empowers the Waqf Board to "identify any property" as Waqf. This has led to the restriction of challenges to this identification being confined solely to a Waqf tribunal, effectively removing the jurisdiction of civil courts. This change, implemented by the Narasimha Rao government, stripped individuals of their ability to seek recourse through regular legal channels, thereby fostering a lack of accountability.

Adding to the controversy is the handling of evacuee property, or “enemy property,” left behind during Partition. In 1984, an amendment introduced by the Indira Gandhi government allowed for these properties—originally intended for rehabilitation and public welfare—to be retroactively classified as Waqfs. This means that properties formerly used to assist displaced persons from newly formed Pakistan were transformed into Waqfs based on the past status of those properties.

Even more troubling is how Section 108 of the 1995 Act solidified this classification, further complicated by the 2013 amendments that granted the Act overriding authority in these matters. Such changes enabled the continued mismanagement and misuse of these properties, detracting from the original purpose of providing for those in need.

These persistent and deep-rooted issues underscore the necessity for the proposed Waqf Amendment Bill. This new legislation aims to address these pervasive challenges comprehensively. By introducing measures that enhance transparency and accountability within Waqf governance, the bill is poised to restore trust in the system. It re-evaluates the extraordinary powers conferred upon Waqf Boards, aiming to create a more just and equitable framework for managing these important community assets.

The new amendment seeks to ensure that Waqfs serve their intended charitable and community purposes efficiently, free from mismanagement or malfeasance. This could significantly shift the landscape of how Waqfs operate, allowing them to fulfill their potential as entities for public good.

As we look ahead, it’s essential for communities, policymakers, and stakeholders to engage in discussions about the implications of these changes. The proposed amendments are not just bureaucratic adjustments; they are potentially transformative moves that can lead to better governance of Waqf properties and more effective contribution to social welfare.  Let’s explore how these changes could shape the future of community welfare initiatives tied to Waqfs.

The Waqf Amendment Bill of 2024 marks a significant shift in how Waqfs are governed, addressing long-standing issues that have plagued the original Waqf Act since its inception. This bill is not just a bureaucratic adjustment; it represents a thoughtful overhaul aimed at eliminating arbitrary provisions and introducing greater transparency and accountability into the system.

One of the most transformative changes is the complete removal of Section 40, which previously allowed Waqf Boards to identify and claim any property without rigorous checks. This provision had the potential to lead to significant abuses, as it enabled the arbitrary assertion of Waqf claims over various properties. The new amendment introduces requirements for better documentation and transparency. For instance, Waqf properties must now be registered within 90 days after being published in newspapers, ensuring that communities are aware of Waqf claims on properties around them.

Furthermore, the bill establishes a centralized portal for Waqf properties, which will mandate actual documentation proving that what is claimed as Waqf genuinely fits the criteria. This level of organization is likely to mitigate disputes arising from ambiguous claims, as every transaction or claim will now be more transparent and accessible. 

In a bid to promote clarity in Waqf governance, the amendment also removes the provision that allowed non-Muslim donations to Waqfs. This addresses concerns specific to the management of Waqf properties, ensuring that the integrity of these properties is preserved within the community they are intended to serve. 

Another common-sense addition in the amendment is the prohibition of converting government properties into Waqfs. This provision acknowledges the importance of maintaining state-owned assets for public welfare rather than allowing them to become entangled in potential misuse under Waqf claims.
The powers and roles of Survey Commissioners, initially envisioned to facilitate property surveys, are now essentially eliminated through the creation of the centralized portal. This helps streamline the identification and verification processes, contributing to more effective oversight of Waqf properties. 

Notably, the amendment tackles specific cases of excessive Waqf claims in regions like Vijayapura in Karnataka and Munambam in Kerala, which have faced scrutiny and legal disputes. By establishing clearer processes for Waqf claims, the bill reduces the likelihood of arbitrary assertions going unchecked and ensures that legitimate claims are handled with the required scrutiny.

A particularly contentious aspect of the proposed amendment is the inclusion of non-Muslims on the Central Waqf Council and the State Waqf Boards. This provision has stirred considerable debate, drawing comparisons to hypothetical scenarios where non-Hindus might influence temple trusts. However, these comparisons miss the mark. The heart of the Waqf framework is about property management rather than religious practices. The governance of Waqfs focuses on the administration of properties, not the religious obligations associated with them. 

In fact, the current structure of Waqf Boards allows for minimal administrative interference in religious functions. Unlike the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HRCE) departments, which appoint and transfer priests, Waqf Boards do not possess any authority to manage or change religious leadership. The appointment, dismissal, or transfer of a Mutawalli—the individual managing a Waqf property—remains untouched by this amendment. 

Importantly, a substantial portion of Waqf properties—over 50% according to the Waqf Asset Management and Sustainability Initiative (WAMSI)—is not tied to religious functions at all. This reality further underscores the necessity of governance structures focused on revenue and property administration, rather than religious oversight. 

While the final form of the bill may be influenced by negotiations surrounding the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) report, the essence of the Waqf Amendment Bill remains clear: it seeks to eradicate the unchecked ability of Waqfs to claim properties without appropriate oversight or judicial process. 

This legislation represents a fundamental resetting of the legal framework governing Waqfs and reflects a broader commitment to address minoritarian politics head-on. The BJP's willingness to take a stand on these issues, especially without having a majority, showcases its dedication to positioning itself as a bulwark against the politics of exclusion and arbitrary privilege.

The Waqf Amendment Bill, 2024, is not merely a set of legal reforms; it stands as a transformative piece of legislation poised to reshape the governance of Waqfs and enhance the accountability of their management. This proactive approach acknowledges the need for change in a system long regarded with misplaced reverence and aims to ensure that Waqfs serve their original intent of community benefit rather than become avenues for abuse.

As we anticipate the JPC report during the Winter Session, it will be crucial to see how the recommendations will further strengthen this amendment and help pave the way for effective enactment. The potential impact of these changes could be profound, not only for Waqf governance but for the broader socio-political landscape in India.  With these reforms in play, we're entering an era of enhanced accountability and opportunity—one that seeks to benefit.