‘To give justice to ordinary Muslims’: Rijiju defends Waqf Bill amid opposition
Rijiju called the proposed act the United Wakf Act Management Empowerment Efficiency and Development Act, or UMEED (Hope)
New Delhi: Union minority affairs minister Kiren Rijiju on Thursday introduced the controversial Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024 in the Lok Sabha. With 40 proposed changes, the bill seeks to repeal several provisions of the current Waqf Act, which governs Waqf boards. The legislation also aims to address issues related to the powers of the Waqf Boards, registration and survey of Waqf properties, and removal of encroachment.
After a heated debate in Parliament with several opposition leaders opposing the bill and calling it “draconian and anti-Muslim,” Rijiju gave an hour-long speech giving a point-by-point reply to the opposition and agreed to send the bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee.
Rijiju called the proposed act the United Wakf Act Management Empowerment Efficiency and Development Act, or UMEED (Hope).
Defending the bill, the minister said the opposition is trying to “mislead” the Muslims of this country. “With this bill, there is no interference in the freedom of any religious body....Forget about taking anyone’s rights; this bill has been brought to give rights to those who never got them”, he said.
Also Read: Explained: What is the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024?
The Congress had described the bill as an attack on the constitution.
Attacking Congress, Rijuju said, “Because you couldn’t do it, we had to bring these amendments. We are elected representatives; support this bill, and you will get the blessings of crores of people. Some people have captured Waqf Boards, and this bill has been brought to give justice to ordinary Muslims.”
Rijiju also said that the bill is not taking away rights from anyone but is rather giving rights to “those so far who were supressed and backward, like women and backward castes among Muslims.”
He continued that under the existing rules, many children are not able to inherit property as those lands are given and declared as waqf. He cited an incidence where a village was declared waqf property. “Don’t link this [incident] to religion…how can municipal land be declared as waqf!” he said, adding that the new bill addresses such issues.
Countering the opposition’s allegation that there was no consultation before introducing the bill, Rijiju said consultations took place at an “official and political level with state government representations, and consultation happened across the nation.” He said, “Active consultation took place after 2015, even with Waqf board chairman, CEOs, and other representatives.”
Rijuju said that Congress leader Rahul Gandhi also believes that the bill should be passed but cannot say it out loud. “They (the opposition) are misleading Muslims…Many MPs have told me that the mafia has taken over Waqf boards. Some have said that they personally support the bill but can’t say it due to their political parties…We have held multi-layered country-wide consultations on this bill,” the minister said.
Referring to the Supreme Court ruling of Brahmachari vs State of West Bengal, wherein the Court held that Waqf board does not fall within Articles 25 and 26, Rijuju said that the bill is not violative of the Constitution and added that the bill has been brought under Concurrent List Entry 10 and 28.
In response to why an amendment is needed despite the amendments made in 2013 under the United Progressive Alliance government, Rijiju said the first act came in 1954, and since then, many amendments have been done. The amendment that we are bringing is to the 1995 Act, which was amended in 2013 by the then UPA government.
He said, the Sachar Committee and the Joint Parliamentary Committee have analysed the functioning of the 1995 Act and found out that it does not serve the purpose and many flaws exist.
Rijiju mentioned the 1976 Waqf inquiry report, which mentioned that the Waqf Boards in control of Mutawali need disciplining as there are many litigations and cases that need a tribunal and the auditing of the accounts needs to be done properly.
He said that the Sachar Committee report also found out that the annual income of Waqf property from many properties is very low and not justified; hence, it should be managed as per market rates.
Attacking the Congress again, Rijiju said, “The Sachar Committee also recommended that the Waqf Board needs women representation in it, secretary at joint secretary level, and that a Class I officer should be in it. We are following the committee recommendations. You should be happy.”
In 2005, a seven-member high-level panel headed by former Delhi high court chief justice Rajinder Sachar was formed by the then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to study the social, economic, and educational condition of Muslims in India.
Also Read: Govt proposes to send Waqf (Amendment) Bill to joint parliamentary panel
Rijiju told the parliament that in the past one year, the government has received 194 complaints related to encroachment and illegal transfer of Waqf properties, 93 complaints against Waqf Board officials, and 279 general complaints alleging that the Waqf has been captured by the “mafia.”
Ahead of Rijiju’s speech, the Janata Dal (United) and Telegu Desam Party, the two most important allies of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), supported the bill. The TDP said that it would not mind the bill being sent to JPC.
“I appreciate the concern with which the government has brought this bill. The purpose of the donors needs to be protected. When purpose and power get misused, it is the responsibility of the government to bring reforms and introduce transparency in the system,” TDP MP GM Harish Balayogi said.
“We believe that the registration is going to help poor Muslims and women and bring transparency,” he said.
Defending the legislation, Union minister Rajiv Ranjan Singh said that the bill has been brought to make the functioning of Waqf boards transparent.
Countering the opposition’s charge that the bill is against the minorities, Singh said that Congress must not talk about the minority’s interest as it was involved in the killing of thousands of Punjabi Sikhs.
“Who killed Indira Gandhi? Was a taxi driver responsible? Why was he killed? We witnessed the anti-Sikh riots.” He also asked, “How is the bill anti-muslim?”
He further criticised opposition MPs for drawing parallels between the Waqf Board and temples, questioning their understanding of the differences between these institutions.
“Here, an example of Ayodhya is being given… Can you not differentiate between a temple and an institution? This is not an attempt to interfere with mosques. This law is for the institution, to make it transparent…”