 |
|
The contentious Waqf (Amendment) Bill faces a significant delay, pushing its potential passage to the upcoming Budget session in February. This postponement stems from a joint parliamentary committee's decision to seek an extension to thoroughly consult with relevant stakeholders. The committee, tasked with scrutinizing the bill, currently has a deadline of November 29th, but this is expected to be extended until at least the commencement of the Budget Session. This development underscores a deep-seated disagreement between the ruling party and the opposition regarding the bill's progression and the fairness of the committee's process.
Opposition members have voiced strong concerns about the handling of the bill, claiming irregularities and a biased approach by the committee chairman. Prominent opposition figures, including A. Raja of the DMK and Gaurav Gogoi of the Congress, have publicly criticized the committee chairman, Jagdambika Pal, accusing him of prioritizing directives from a 'big Union Minister' over the instructions of the Lok Sabha Speaker. These allegations highlight a breakdown in trust and communication between the ruling party and opposition members within the committee, casting a shadow over the bill's legitimacy and the integrity of the parliamentary process. Their concern centers around the lack of sufficient time and opportunity to properly investigate the matter, engage with all relevant stakeholders, and ensure that the committee's report accurately reflects a comprehensive and unbiased assessment of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill.
The opposition's accusations include claims that the chairman was attempting to rush the process and finalize a report by the November 29th deadline without properly addressing their concerns or engaging with all relevant parties. They cite instances where key stakeholders, including representatives from several states and crucial central government ministries, have yet to be fully consulted, hindering a thorough review. Members of the opposition parties have noted that they are not seeking to obstruct the bill's progress; rather, their primary concern is ensuring a fair and comprehensive review which takes into account all relevant evidence and opinions. This underscores the importance of transparency and procedural due diligence in legislative processes, especially when contentious issues are involved. The opposition's actions are indicative of their commitment to ensuring fairness, accountability, and a thorough examination of the implications of the proposed bill.
The committee's request for an extension is supported by several allies of the ruling BJP, including the TDP and JD(U), suggesting that the need for additional time to collect information and complete consultations transcends party lines. This added support underscores the complexity of the issues involved in the bill and the need for careful deliberation, irrespective of political affiliations. The necessity for an extension has also been justified by the committee itself, citing a significant backlog in receiving crucial reports from multiple states. These reports concern disputes between state governments and Waqf boards over the ownership of Waqf properties, adding another layer of complexity to the deliberations. The lack of timely responses from several states, including Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Bihar, highlights the challenges inherent in coordinating information from diverse governmental entities and underscores the need for additional time to fully assess the implications of the proposed legislation.
The initial referral of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill to the committee in August was a direct response to the opposition's initial objections. The committee, composed of 21 Lok Sabha members and 10 Rajya Sabha members, including a substantial representation from the opposition (13 members), was tasked with submitting its report by the first week of the winter session. However, the ongoing disagreements and the subsequent request for an extension suggest that the initial timeline proved unrealistic, highlighting the complexities and potential pitfalls of setting overly ambitious deadlines for such important legislative processes. The opposition's meeting with Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla underscores their commitment to using proper parliamentary channels to express their concerns and ensure a fair process. The letter submitted to the speaker highlights their concerns regarding the inadequacy of the number of sittings and the inclusion of 'irrelevant' individuals and organizations in the committee's proceedings. The inclusion of several ‘irrelevant’ organizations suggests a possible lack of focus and a dilution of the committee’s efforts toward a thorough examination of the bill's provisions and implications.
The delay of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill until the Budget session reflects the continuing tension and lack of consensus between the ruling party and the opposition regarding the bill's provisions and the process by which it is being considered. The opposition's concerns regarding procedural irregularities, potential biases, and the need for a more comprehensive consultation process raise fundamental questions about the legitimacy of the legislative process and the importance of ensuring a transparent and inclusive approach to policy-making. The extended deadline provides an opportunity to address these concerns and ensure a more thorough examination of the bill’s far-reaching implications. However, the ongoing debate underscores the deep political divisions that exist, making the future of the bill uncertain. The outcome will significantly impact the management and governance of Waqf properties across India, with far-reaching consequences for religious communities and land administration.
Source: Oppn-Govt Faceoff: No Waqf Bill this Session, panel set to get an extension to continue talks