 |
|
The recent adoption of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024 by the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) has sparked significant controversy, particularly among members of the Muslim community in India. Asaduddin Owaisi, a five-time Member of Parliament and president of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM), has vehemently denounced the bill, submitting a comprehensive 229-page dissent note detailing his objections. Owaisi, a consistent critic of the bill, argues that the legislation is inherently anti-Muslim and designed to weaken the power and influence of Waqf boards, organizations that manage Muslim religious properties and endowments. His dissent highlights several key concerns, including the potential loss of numerous properties, the threat to the legal standing of existing mosques and dargahs (shrines), and the erosion of established principles of Muslim personal law. He expressed deep concern over the potential loss of the Masjid located directly across from Parliament.
Central to Owaisi's critique is the bill's amendment to the legal recognition of 'waqfs-by-user,' a long-standing principle that acknowledges a property as a waqf (religious endowment) based on prolonged use. The new legislation eliminates this recognition, demanding written proof of dedication for all waqfs. This change, Owaisi argues, is particularly damaging to centuries-old waqfs that lack such documentation, leaving them vulnerable to legal challenges and potential seizure. Furthermore, the bill's de-recognition of orally dedicated waqfs directly contradicts established principles of Muslim personal law, further exacerbating the concerns raised by Owaisi and other members of the Muslim community. The bill's potential impact on the Masjid near Parliament and other historical structures underscores the gravity of the situation, as Owaisi believes these sites are directly under threat from this legislation.
Owaisi's dissent note also criticizes the JPC's deliberative process, alleging that the committee disregarded the overwhelming opposition to the bill from numerous Muslim organizations, including the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board, Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Hind, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, and the Muttaheda Majlis-e-Ulama (Jammu & Kashmir). These organizations represent a substantial portion of India's Muslim population, and their collective opposition suggests a widespread discontent with the bill's provisions. Owaisi accuses the JPC chairman, BJP MP Jagdambika Pal, of bias, asserting that the committee prioritized the views of a few supportive voices while ignoring the concerns of the vast majority of stakeholders. He alleges that the chairman exploited the numerical advantage of the ruling party to push the bill through with minimal changes, effectively silencing dissenting voices and overlooking the legitimate objections raised during the committee's deliberations. This process, in Owaisi's estimation, was a mere ‘eyewash,’ neglecting the genuine concerns of the committee's numerous Muslim members.
Owaisi's dissent extends beyond the procedural aspects, directly addressing the bill's potential to widen the already existing gap between the majority and minority communities in India. He argues that at a time when divisive elements are questioning the status of ancient mosques and dargahs, the bill actively weakens the legal defenses of the Muslim community. This, he believes, contributes to a climate of fear and insecurity among Muslims and serves to further marginalize the community within the broader Indian society. His call to the Parliament is one of justice, fairness and upholding the constitutional values of the nation – a plea that directly challenges the government's actions. He stresses that this action will be judged by history and that it should not be allowed to stand.
The submission of Owaisi's extensive dissent note, along with those of twelve other opposition members, including YSRCP MP Vijaysai Reddy, underscores the deep divisions surrounding the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024. Even with the addition of fourteen new amendments, the bill's future remains uncertain. It must now go back to the cabinet for approval before being presented to Parliament for a final vote. The debate surrounding the bill is far from over, and Owaisi's strong condemnation, coupled with the extensive documentation of his objections, is likely to fuel further discussion and protest within the political and religious spheres of India. The implications of this bill are significant and could shape the future of religious freedom and minority rights in the country.