Buzzflix The Waqf Amendment Bill 2023 has ignited controversy across legal, political, and religious circles. While the government claims the bill is meant to enhance the efficacy of Waqf governance, a deeper look into its provisions suggests otherwise. With no concrete basis, no substantial consultations, and significant rollbacks on previously agreed-upon reforms, this bill seems less about reform and more about control.
The Legislative Legacy: A Brief Look Back
The Waqf Act of 1954, amended in 1995 and 2013, was the result of broad consultations, committee reports, and parliamentary consensus. The Sachar Committee Report (2006)—a crucial basis for the 2013 amendment — laid down the socio-economic realities of the Muslim community and the importance of safeguarding Waqf properties.
Unlike these prior efforts, the current bill appears rushed and underrepresented, lacking any white paper, public consensus, or genuine stakeholder participation.
“Have you ever come across a situation where a bill is being brought to Parliament cunningly and cleverly to remove the amendments that were brought in 1995 and 2013 after due deliberation?”
Examining the Five Pillars of the Amendment
The government outlines five reasons for the current bill:
- Redefinition of Waqf
- Removal of Encroachments
- Survey of Properties
- Registration of Waqf
- Empowerment of State Waqf Boards
Let’s break these down:
1️⃣ Redefining Waqf: Legal Confusion or Deliberate Ambiguity?
The new definition does not simplify or clarify Waqf; instead, it adds legal confusion, leading to potential misinterpretation and disempowerment of the community. The introduction of vague qualifications such as a person practicing Islam for at least five years” raises the question:
How can religious adherence be measured in a secular democracy?
Removal of Encroachment: A Backdoor for Land Acquisition?
Encroachment laws are essential—but empowering the government without checks to identify and remove “encroachments” turns this into a property-grabbing tool. With the government already claiming in an affidavit to the Supreme Court that over 90% of Waqf land surveys are complete, why this sudden urgency?
Survey of Properties: Conflict of Interest?
Earlier, an independent survey commissioner handled Waqf property verification. The amendment replaces this role with the district collector—a government officer. But how can the government be both a party to a dispute and a judge?
📚 Learn more about natural justice in our Legal Buzz section on BuzzFlix.
Registration of Waqf: Bureaucratic Nightmare?
Section 7A now states that any dispute during registration must first be resolved in court—potentially dragging the case on for decades. Until then, the property is deemed government-owned. This provision is not just anti-community but anti-justice.
Empowering State Boards: Recreation Clubs in Disguise?
Instead of empowering Waqf Boards for better governance, the changes might turn them into rubber-stamp institutions. Adding non-Muslim members, without precedent in similar religious boards, raises further concerns about intent and bias.
Section 3A and 3C: Undermining Legal Ownership
Section 3A limits the creation of Waqf to original owners only—blocking gifts and community-driven endowments. Section 3C states that government property cannot be declared Waqf, further restricting historical Waqf claims.
Tribunals: A Judicial Downgrade?
Tribunals were created to ease the legal process—not to replace it. Now, Tribunal decisions can be overridden by the collector or executive. This contradicts the idea of fair judicial recourse and violates basic jurisprudence.
🔍 Understand the role of Tribunals in India’s legal framework here
Section 40: Silent Takeover of Trust Properties?
The removal of the Waqf Board’s power to inspect properties under the Indian Trusts Act or Societies Registration Act opens the door for non-Waqf assets to evade scrutiny. Why dismantle a provision that existed to prevent fraud?
Where’s the Constitutional Safeguard?
Section 108(a), which provided overriding power to protect minority rights—similar to SC/ST Acts or the Dowry Prohibition Act—has been removed. The absence of this clause leaves Waqf properties vulnerable to legal dilution.
Secularism, Not Symbolism
This is not about Muslims vs. government. It’s about preserving constitutional rights, judicial fairness, and community autonomy. When political agendas interfere with religious institutions, it damages the very secular soul of India.
“Our prayer is religion is something different, and politics is something different. Do not mix it.”
Final Thought: Is This Parliament or a Rubber Stamp?
As jurist Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer once said:
“Parliament is a great inquest of the nation… the final arbiter, policy monitor, and destiny decider of the people.”
Let’s ensure it stays that way.
🚀 Stay informed. Stay aware. If you care about democracy, secularism, and institutional integrity, follow BuzzFlix for more in-depth legal and socio-political analysis.
👉 Visit www.buzzflix.in for regular updates on law, politics, society, and more.
📩 Subscribe to our newsletter | 💬 Join the discussion | 📲 Follow us on YouTube
