Paromita Das
New Delhi: Bharat’s legislative corridors recently echoed with both hope and controversy as the Waqf Amendment Bill passed through the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on April 2nd and 4th, 2025. This legislative development, while primarily administrative in its intent, has unfolded amidst a storm of debate. The bill, tabled by Union Minister for Minority Affairs Kiren Rijiju, aims to bring clarity, transparency, and coordination to the administration of Waqf properties across Bharat.
At its core, it proposes mechanisms to streamline management, enhance coordination between Waqf Boards and local authorities, and protect heritage and community interests. Yet, this legislation has also been labeled divisive, with opponents calling it discriminatory, while supporters laud it as overdue reform. It has also become a lightning rod for political narratives, misinformation, and communal insecurities. Understanding the multifaceted implications of the bill demands an in-depth look into its background, contents, and comparisons with global practices.
Political Genesis and Legislative Journey
The Waqf Amendment Bill was initially introduced in August 2023 by Kiren Rijiju, the Union Minister for Minority Affairs. It was soon referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) chaired by BJP MP Jagdambika Pal. After extensive consultations, the JPC recommended 14 amendments, which were incorporated into the final version of the bill. This parliamentary scrutiny was not merely a formality but an intensive national outreach involving close to one crore public memoranda and consultations with major Islamic organizations and legal experts.
Key voices during this outreach included Darul Uloom Deoband, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, and multiple Jamaat factions, reflecting a comprehensive engagement process. The committee’s findings, submitted in February 2024, paved the way for Cabinet approval and its eventual tabling and passage in Parliament.
Objective and Scope of the Amendment
One of the primary intentions of the bill is to modernize the Waqf management system. The focus lies on digitizing land records, preventing unauthorized encroachments, and ensuring that the revenues generated are used transparently for community welfare. Moreover, it attempts to regulate the claim of Waqf status on private and public properties—an issue that has led to several legal disputes and civic tension.
Through statutory provisions, the bill empowers local authorities to challenge dubious land claims, thereby streamlining legal redress mechanisms. By enhancing the transparency and accountability of the Waqf Boards, the bill seeks to protect both donors’ intentions and public interest.
The Backlash and Allegations of Bias
Despite its stated goals, the bill has drawn criticism, primarily from opposition parties and segments within the Muslim leadership. They argue that it undermines minority rights and is part of a broader political agenda. Terms like “anti-Muslim” and “unconstitutional” have been used to describe the bill by its detractors, who see it as an infringement on religious autonomy and property rights.
However, such narratives often overlook the widespread issues within the Waqf administration, including lack of transparency, unregulated claims on land, and mismanagement of funds—concerns that have long been highlighted even by members of the Muslim community. The opposition to the bill, therefore, appears to be fueled as much by electoral calculations and communal sensitivities as by genuine legal apprehensions.
Global Precedents and Comparative Frameworks
Contrary to claims that the Bharatiya amendment is an outlier, many Muslim-majority countries have integrated similar or even more stringent regulations concerning Waqf properties. In Saudi Arabia, for example, the General Authority for Awqaf (GAA) oversees the management and development of endowments under direct government supervision. This agency, formed in 2010, has legal and financial autonomy but remains under the strategic guidance of the Prime Minister.
The GAA has adopted a multi-pillar approach that includes institutional governance, investment, and regulatory frameworks. Notably, its alignment with the goals of Saudi Vision 2030 illustrates how Waqf properties can be used effectively for national development without compromising religious intent.
In Singapore, all wakafs are strictly regulated under the Administration of Muslim Law Act 1966. The Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (MUIS) registers and monitors every wakaf, requiring annual reports, financial statements, and even police access for legal inquiries. Trustees cannot be appointed without prior MUIS approval, thereby ensuring rigorous checks and balances.
Turkey’s approach presents an even more aggressive stance, especially during the early Republican era. Waqfs were not only abolished or nationalized, but their revenues were channeled toward secular state institutions. The renaming of Waqf to “Foundation” under the Civil Code in 1926 symbolized a deliberate push to limit religious influence over public assets. Today, Turkey’s Directorate General of Foundations manages and restores remaining Waqf assets while promoting public welfare.
In Egypt, Waqf properties have been under parliamentary control since 1924. While respecting traditional Islamic endowments, the Egyptian state has actively intervened in cases of legal ambiguity or misuse. Muhammad Ali’s policies even included reclaiming lands with dubious Waqf status.
These international examples clearly demonstrate that Bharat’s Waqf Amendment Bill is not an exception. Rather, it aligns with global norms where religious endowments are harmonized with legal oversight and public accountability.
A Step in the Right Direction—With Room for Dialogue
While the Waqf Amendment Bill introduces much-needed reforms, the manner in which it was passed—amid loud political rhetoric and societal division—deserves scrutiny. Transparency in religious endowment management is essential, particularly when public welfare is involved. However, it’s equally important for the government to maintain open lines of communication with all stakeholders, especially marginalized communities.
Legislative clarity, digitization of records, and removal of bogus claims are vital goals, but so is maintaining the delicate balance of constitutional rights and religious freedoms. Thus, while the bill is a progressive move, its success depends on thoughtful implementation, judicial safeguards, and inclusive governance.
The Waqf Amendment Bill reflects a significant shift in how Bharat perceives and regulates religious endowments. Its passage should not be viewed through the narrow prism of religion or politics alone but as part of a broader movement towards institutional reform. By learning from international precedents and customizing solutions to suit local realities, Bharat can both preserve the sanctity of Waqf properties and ensure they contribute meaningfully to national development. In a country as diverse as Bharat, striking this balance will always be challenging—but that is precisely why it matters so much.
The post The Waqf Amendment Bill: A Controversial Yet Necessary Reform in Bharat’s Legal Landscape appeared first on Global Governance News- Asia's First Bilingual News portal for Global News and Updates.
