The much-anticipated eight-hour debate on the Waqf Amendment Bill began on Wednesday with Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju launching a scathing attack on the Congress. He alleged that the party, which has strongly opposed the bill, would have gone as far as handing over the old Parliament building to the Waqf Board.
Rijiju further accused the Congress-led UPA government of making dubious amendments to Waqf laws, claiming that 123 major properties were denotified and allocated to the Waqf. His remarks came amid fierce objections from the opposition, which questioned the legitimacy of the parliamentary committee tasked with reviewing the bill.
Revolutionary Socialist Party MP NK Ramachandran and Congress’ KC Venugopal raised concerns that the opposition had not been given adequate time to review the amended draft before the debate. Ramachandran argued that the committee had exceeded its mandate by introducing 14 modifications, all proposed by the BJP and its allies.
Union Home Minister Amit Shah countered these claims, asserting that the committee merely recommended changes, which were later approved by the central government. Shah also took a swipe at Congress, stating that unlike past governments, the BJP’s committees were not “rubber stamp bodies” but genuinely consultative platforms.
The Waqf Amendment Bill, originally tabled in August last year, had been met with strong opposition, with critics labeling it as “draconian.” The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC), which reviewed the bill, faced intense disagreements, with opposition MPs claiming their inputs were ignored. The committee, dominated by BJP members, ultimately approved 14 out of 23 proposed changes while rejecting all 44 amendments suggested by the opposition.
The bill proposes significant reforms, including the inclusion of non-Muslim and at least two female members in Waqf boards, along with government officials and individuals of national repute. Additionally, it aims to regulate donations, limiting contributions to those practicing Islam for at least five years.
With tensions running high and opposition parties accusing the government of sidelining dissenting voices, the debate over the bill is set to be a major flashpoint in the ongoing parliamentary session.
