Debate Intensifies Over Waqf Reforms Amid Legal and Constitutional Questions

 New Act Draws Flak for Allegedly Undermining Religious Freedom, as Supreme Court Set to Hear Challenge

The recently passed Waqf Amendment Act, 2025, touted by the government as a reform for transparency and modernization, has sparked a national debate over religious autonomy and constitutional rights. While the BJP and its allies claim the law will streamline the administration of Waqf properties, critics say it’s a veiled attempt to assert control over Muslim charitable endowments and undermine minority rights.

Legal Challenge Looms

A series of petitions filed in the Supreme Court argue that the Act contradicts the apex court’s long-standing principle: “Once a Waqf, always a Waqf.” These petitions allege that the new provisions violate religious and property rights protected under the Constitution and facilitate the secular conversion of centuries-old Waqf lands into private or government property.

“The move threatens Article 26 of the Constitution, which guarantees religious denominations the right to own and manage their properties,” said a legal expert involved in one of the petitions.

From Oversight to Overreach?

While the government insists that the changes are aimed at regulatory reform, critics say the Act extends state control over religious endowments, without applying similar scrutiny to Hindu temples, Christian trusts or Sikh Gurudwaras.

One of the most contentious clauses stipulates that a Muslim must practice Islam for at least five years before making a Waqf. The Act also bars non-Muslims from creating Waqf properties, a move viewed by many as restrictive and discriminatory.

“How can you regulate a personal, faith-based contribution like Waqf with such rigidity?” asked a Muslim scholar.

Power Shift from Boards to Bureaucracy

Under the amended law, district magistrates and collectors now hold the power to validate Waqf claims—a role previously held by specialist survey commissioners and Waqf boards. This, say critics, dilutes the autonomy of Waqf institutions and could lead to politically motivated decisions.

“The community’s fear that its role in managing Waqf properties is being eroded is not baseless,” said an Opposition MP.

Political and Ideological Undertones

Observers have raised concerns about the political timing and intent behind the Act, particularly in the context of elections and rising communal polarisation. They argue that no meaningful consultation was held with Muslim representatives, and that Opposition suggestions in the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) were entirely ignored.

“A parliamentary majority should not substitute for public morality,” said one lawmaker, stressing the importance of inclusive policymaking.

Reform vs. Religious Rights

Even as the government claims that the Act empowers Muslim women and supports the poor, it has not provided any clear roadmap or explanation for these benefits. Meanwhile, transparency in Waqf revenue usage, which is a genuine concern, could have been addressed without such sweeping structural overhauls, say community leaders.

Key Highlights:

• Supreme Court to hear petitions against Waqf Amendment Act on April 16
• Law allegedly violates Article 26 and property rights of religious denominations
• District collectors given control over property validation, replacing Waqf boards
• Controversial clause: Only Muslims practising for five years can make a Waqf
• Non-Muslims barred from Waqf donations, raising secularism concerns
• Critics: Act may lead to backdoor encroachment of Waqf land

Author: This news is edited by: Abhishek Verma, (Editor, CANON TIMES)

Authentic news.