Parliament recently passed the Waqf Amendment Bill, calling it the ‘Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995’ — UMMID, in short. In its wake, the Leader of the Opposition, Rahul Gandhi, stated that after this, the religious properties of other communities would be targeted. He was spot on, as immediately after the passage of the bill, the RSS mouthpiece Organiser published an article about the property of the Catholic Church. Though the article was quickly withdrawn, the message was loud and clear.
A Jharkhand minister expressed her anguish, stating that in a similar fashion, RSS-BJP would target Adivasi properties next. So, who will be in the line after them? During the debate on the bill, non-BJP NDA allies like Nitish Kumar, Chandrababu Naidu, Chirag Paswan, and Jayant Chowdhury also fell in line with the BJP, betraying the Muslim community in the worst possible way. Had they held any principles of pluralism, they could very well have stopped the bill from passing.
As Pastor Martin Niemöller's classic anguish shows, the method of fascists is to target one group at a time with the help of others — and then, one by one, crush the rest. The case of Catholic bishops falls in line with this. They enthusiastically supported the Waqf Amendment Bill, but tragically, they may be the next targets. They are a strange group, deeply infested with Islamophobia, and are supporting communal strategies in a shortsighted manner.
Waqf is a property donated by Muslims (even others can donate) for religious purposes. India has vast properties that fall under this provision. While claims are made that Waqf is the third-largest property owner in the country, Hindu trusts and temples own much more property. The present amendments to Waqf are entirely dictated by the Hindu nationalist agenda, aiming to diminish Muslim control over the Waqf Board.
Control of Hindu temples and trusts remains exclusively in the hands of Hindus. Now, in contrast, Waqf will have non-Muslims on the board, and the District Collector will become the main authority in ownership-related issues. This contrast in the handling of Hindu trusts and Waqf is blatantly partisan, and the government seems determined to undermine Muslim authority in these matters.
Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju, while introducing the bill, claimed that the bill aimed to improve the conditions of poor Muslims. But Waqf is meant for religious and social purposes — poverty alleviation is the job of the government. This government, in particular, has washed its hands off that responsibility. Whether Muslims, Hindus, or the poor from any other community, all government policies are directed toward serving big corporates.
If Rijiju's logic holds, why not begin with the majority Hindu community? Hindu temples and trusts have astronomical wealth that could support education, health care, and employment. Why doesn’t this government — guided by the RSS’s Hindu nation agenda — ensure that temple trust properties are used to help poor farmers, unemployed youth, and other marginalized sections of society?
Rijiju also claimed that many poor Muslims thanked him for introducing the bill. Good joke! Thousands of Muslim organizations have registered their opposition to this amendment, which the BJP is imposing to reduce the power of the Muslim community. His claim is a warped argument.
As far as democratic and secular values are concerned, the BJP couldn’t care less. Its visible tears for the plight of Muslims in India would shame even crocodiles. Muslims have been the worst victims since the BJP came to power at the Centre. They are beaten for offering namaz on roads, targeted for eating beef, boycotted during Hindu festivals, or accused under pretexts like "Corona Jihad" and "spitting jihad." Despite Supreme Court directions, state authorities continue using bulldozers to target Muslim properties.
Mr. Modi placed the Constitution on his forehead as a symbolic gesture of respect — all while campaigning for the 2024 general elections, where the INDIA coalition made the Constitution a central symbol of their campaign. But for the BJP, the Constitution is just a showpiece. In Uttar Pradesh, anyone opposing the Waqf Bill must now post a bond of Rs 2 lakh — so much for our democratic freedoms under this regime.
The Waqf Amendment Bill blatantly violates the Indian Constitution in both letter and spirit. P. Chidambaram aptly summarizes:
“…Courts have recognized a waqf that was created by a non-Muslim, and examples are many. Further, under the existing law, a waqf is, by and large, independent and autonomous. The highest regulatory body in a State is the Board of Waqfs that consists of members who are all Muslims, and the Chief Executive Officer is required to be a Muslim. The Board, in exercising its powers, is required to ‘act in conformity with the directions of the waqf, the purposes of the waqf and any usage or custom of the waqf.’ The only body that has adjudicatory jurisdiction over waqf(s) is a Tribunal, which is a judicial body presided over by a District Judge.”
The bill introduced by the BJP turns that spirit on its head and shatters the original purpose of Waqf. This is one more step to intimidate and disempower Muslims.
Corruption in Waqf management is a serious concern. But, as the Anna-Kejriwal campaign for Jan Lokpal showed, such top-down methods don’t work. What can remove corruption is making institutions more transparent and democratic. This doesn’t apply only to Waqf — but also to most religious organizations that control wealth and land.
The Organiser’s jumping in with an article about Catholic properties reminds us that those supporting attacks on Muslims should not delude themselves into thinking they will be spared.
While protests are gaining momentum among the Muslim community, all who believe in democratic and pluralistic values must stand in solidarity with them. The turncoats — those who sell out for power and pelf — are now exposed. One hopes that, in the upcoming elections and people’s campaigns, they will be shown their rightful place: the dustbin of history.
---
Comments