NEW DELHI: The Indian government introduced the Waqf (Amendment) Bill in the Lok Sabha on Thursday, triggering intense protests from opposition MPs. The bill proposes 44 amendments to the existing Waqf Act, of 1995, including changes to the composition of Waqf boards and the management of Waqf properties. Critics have labelled the bill an ‘attack on the Constitution’ and a ‘draconian assault on the freedom of religion and federal system.’
The bill proposes 44 amendments to the existing Waqf Act, of 1995, including changes to the composition of Waqf boards and the management of Waqf properties. Opposition has labelled the bill an “attack on the Constitution” and a “draconian” assault on the freedom of religion and federal system.
ALSO READ: Not targeting any community: Rijiju defends Waqf (Amendment) Bill amid criticism
Prominent opposition leaders voiced strong objections. Congress MP KC Venugopal criticised the bill’s provision for including two non-Muslim individuals on Waqf boards. He described it as a “direct attack on the freedom of religion” and warned, “Next you will go for Christians… Jains. People will not buy this divisive politics.”
Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav questioned the inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf boards, stating, “What is the point of including non-Muslims in Waqf boards when this is not done in other religious bodies?” He accused the ruling party of seeking to acquire Waqf lands, saying, “This morning, the ruling party should call itself ‘Bhartiya Zameen Party,’ since it seeks to acquire Waqf board lands.”
AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi condemned the bill as “discriminatory” and “arbitrary,” arguing it interferes with fundamental rights. “No law limits the right of a person to will their property. Hindus can give complete property to their children, but Muslims can only give one-third. I can gift, but I cannot give it to Allah. You are stopping me from praying,” Owaisi said.
ALSO READ: Modi government introduces controversial Waqf (Amendment) Bill
He also questioned the five-year rule for converts, asking, “To insist that a person has been practising for five years — how can this be verified? Who will decide? Does a new convert have to wait for five years to donate?”
DMK MP Kanimozhi flagged constitutional concerns, stating, “It is a direct violation of Article 30… this bill targets a particular religious group.”
NCP leader Supriya Sule demanded that the bill be either withdrawn or sent to a standing committee, warning, “Please do not push agendas without consultations.”