 |
|
The recent passage of the Waqf Amendment (2025) Bill in Parliament has not triggered the widespread protests that many, including opposition parties and Muslim organizations, predicted during the debates leading up to its enactment. These critics had warned of an unrest mirroring the intense opposition to the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC). However, aside from isolated incidents of violence in parts of West Bengal and some scattered protests in southern states, the overall response to the amendments has been significantly subdued. This raises the crucial question: why have the predictions of widespread Muslim discontent and resistance failed to materialize? One compelling reason lies in the contentious and often arbitrary manner in which properties are claimed as waqf assets, a practice that has directly affected both Muslim and non-Muslim communities alike. This has led to questioning the true intentions of the waqf boards and contributed to the lack of widespread public support for protesting the amendments. The inherent flaws and inconsistencies within the pre-amendment waqf laws, which the government claims the legislation aims to address, appear to be a significant factor in the muted response.
A stark illustration of this issue emerged in Kattukollai village in Tamil Nadu’s Vellore district, where approximately 150 families received a shocking notice from the Kilandai Masjid and the Hazarath Syed Ali Sultan Shah Dargah. The notice declared that the land these families had owned and resided on for generations was now designated as Waqf property. The families were given a stark choice: either vacate their homes immediately or begin paying rent to the dargah management. This announcement sparked widespread panic and desperation among the villagers, who possess valid title documents proving their ownership. They organized a march to the Vellore District Collector's office, desperately pleading for intervention to protect their homes and ancestral lands from what they perceived as an unjust seizure. This incident, however, is not an isolated occurrence. A similar case surfaced in 2022 in Tiruchendurai village, also in Tamil Nadu, where the local waqf committee laid claim to a staggering 480 acres of land. This claim included a significant portion belonging to a 1500-year-old Chola-era temple, further highlighting the indiscriminate nature of waqf property claims and their potential to impact diverse communities. These cases underscore the inherent problem of arbitrary acquisition and the distrust it generates. The fact that both Vellore and Tiruchendurai districts have a considerable Muslim population (around 15%) suggests that the waqf boards' actions are not solely directed towards non-Muslims and that flaws in the pre-amendment laws, which the government says it wants to fix, have resulted in injustices even towards members of their own community. This undermines the claim that these properties are solely intended for the benefit of poor Muslims.
Furthermore, the management and utilization of existing waqf properties have been plagued by issues of corruption and mismanagement. Waqf properties are often rented out at significantly below-market rates or even sold off at drastically reduced prices. During the parliamentary debates on the Waqf Amendment Bill, the government emphasized that waqf properties were generating a fraction of their potential revenue, which indicated the extent of the problem. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, during a public address, cited letters from hundreds of Muslim widows as a key motivator for the government's efforts to reform the management of waqf properties. He asserted that if these assets were properly managed, Muslim youths would not be forced into menial jobs to earn a livelihood. Home Minister Amit Shah echoed this sentiment during the parliamentary debates, denouncing the accusations that the amendments were designed to diminish the rights of Muslims as a fear-mongering tactic employed to build vote banks. He emphasized that the properties rightfully belong to poor Muslims but are being exploited by corrupt politicians who utilize them for personal gain, such as constructing five-star hotels. Shah declared that the reformed waqf councils and boards would be focused on identifying and prosecuting those who exploit waqf properties.
A critical distinction between the Waqf Amendment Bill and contentious issues like the CAA and NRC lies in the nature of their impact. While the waqf amendments primarily affect institutions (waqf boards), the CAA and NRC were perceived as direct attacks on individual rights and entitlements. The existing waqf boards had enjoyed largely unchecked rights and privileges, which were concentrated in the hands of a few individuals. This system was marred by widespread complaints of abuse of power and financial corruption. The Waqf Bill was passed by Parliament on April 4th and received presidential assent on April 5th. In contrast to the immediate and widespread protests that erupted following the CAA and NRC, the response to the Waqf Bill was initially muted. Protests against the Waqf Act, notably in West Bengal, emerged only after the Friday prayers on April 11th. The resistance to the Act appears to stem not from ordinary citizens, as was the case with the NRC and CAA, but from vested interests who benefit from the current system of opacity and lack of accountability.
A report published in The Indian Express highlighted the role of rumors circulated on WhatsApp groups, fake social media accounts, and mass mobilization tactics in fueling the violence in West Bengal. This suggests a degree of planning and coordination behind the protests, contrasting with the spontaneous and widespread outrage that characterized the earlier unrest surrounding the CAA and NRC. The delay in the reaction, the limited geographical spread (mainly confined to states ruled by opposition parties), and the overall scale of the protests suggest a lack of genuine grassroots participation and the absence of the coordination observed during the earlier unrest. The reforms implemented through the waqf amendment act directly threaten individuals and groups who have profited from the opaque management of waqf properties, including those involved in illegal encroachments and corruption. The focus on digitizing records, streamlining surveys, and ensuring efficient dispute resolution directly challenges these practices that have plagued the waqf system for decades. The government maintains that its aim is to curb institutionalized corruption through reforms in how waqf properties are acquired and maintained, and that the primary beneficiaries of these changes will be Muslims. The relative absence of spontaneous or sustained protests suggests that a significant portion of the Muslim population accepts this argument. The lack of widespread support for the corrupt practices and mismanagement associated with waqf properties indicates that the Muslim community recognizes who the real beneficiaries of the status quo are and who stands to lose from increased transparency and accountability.
Source: Vellore waqf shocker shows why law didn't trigger CAA-like protests