 |
|
The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) concluded its deliberations on the Waqf Amendment Bill 2024 on Monday, approving 14 amendments, all proposed by members of the ruling party. The process, characterized by significant opposition contention, unfolded rapidly, concluding within a couple of hours despite over 450 amendments submitted by both the ruling and opposition members. The swiftness of the proceedings and the JPC's apparent disregard for opposition concerns sparked accusations of bias against the committee chair, Jagdambika Pal. Members of the opposition, notably from the Trinamool Congress (TMC) and the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), voiced strong objections to the chair's handling of the meeting, claiming they were denied sufficient opportunity to debate and present their arguments. Kalyan Banerjee (TMC) vehemently criticized the chair, describing the proceedings as dictatorial and calling for the committee to be renamed the 'Jagdambika Pal committee' instead of the JPC. Similar accusations were made by A. Raja (DMK), who vowed to pursue legal avenues to challenge the legislation.
The heart of the opposition's discontent stems from the perceived lack of due process and consideration of their proposed amendments. Many opposition MPs, including Asaduddin Owaisi of the AIMIM, aimed to fundamentally alter or even scrap the bill entirely. Owaisi alone submitted 43 amendments, all seeking to revise or remove key provisions. The opposition's concerns centered on several aspects of the bill, particularly provisions granting significant power to the collector. The original bill granted collectors considerable authority, a point of serious contention among opposition members who argued this created a conflict of interest—allowing the collector to act as both complainant and judge. The amended bill, however, introduces an ex-officio appointee from the state government to oversee Waqf matters, attempting to address these concerns. However, the opposition felt this compromise was insufficient, highlighting the broader dissatisfaction with the overall process.
One of the key amendments approved concerns eligibility for Waqf property donations. The bill now stipulates that only practicing Muslims with at least five years of practice can donate property for Waqf purposes. Another amendment alters the composition of the Waqf tribunal. It will now comprise three members, including a Muslim scholar or individual with expertise in Muslim jurisprudence, instead of the previously proposed two. The BJP, however, defended the bill and the chair's conduct. Dr. Sanjay Jaiswal characterized the opposition's stance as negative politics and asserted the bill's potential benefits for the poor and underprivileged within the Muslim community. Despite this defense, the accusations of bias and the opposition's threats of legal action cast a shadow over the bill's passage.
Following the Monday meeting, the JPC's recommendations and approved amendments will be sent to the Ministry of Law and Justice for review. A draft report will be shared with all members on Tuesday, followed by a meeting on January 29th for formal adoption of the report. This meeting will also allow MPs to submit dissenting notes, which will be appended to the final report. Finally, on January 30th, the report is scheduled to be submitted to the Lok Sabha speaker for final approval, and subsequently laid before Parliament during the upcoming budget session. The entire episode highlights deep political divisions regarding the Waqf Amendment Bill 2024, setting the stage for further potential legal challenges and parliamentary debate. The accusations of bias and the perceived lack of transparency in the JPC's proceedings raise serious questions about the fairness and inclusivity of the legislative process, leaving the ultimate fate of the bill uncertain despite its progress through this crucial committee stage.
The controversy surrounding the Waqf Amendment Bill underscores the complexities of balancing legislative efficiency with the need for comprehensive and inclusive discussion. The opposition's concerns regarding procedural fairness and the potential for abuse of power through the bill's provisions raise important questions about the integrity of the legislative process. The speed at which the amendments were passed, despite the volume of proposed changes, suggests a prioritization of expediency over thorough deliberation. This raises questions about the impact of this rapid legislative approach on the overall fairness and effectiveness of the final law. The potential legal challenges that have been foreshadowed further emphasize the deeply contested nature of this piece of legislation and its potential to become a focal point of political debate in the near future. The events surrounding the JPC's meeting not only highlight the political fault lines but also the importance of procedural fairness and due process in the legislative arena.
Source: JPC Approves 14 Amendments, Opposition Miffed With Chair: What Next For Waqf Bill?