Various State Waqf Boards together control 8.7 lakh properties spanning 9.4 lakh acres across the country. This number is striking and has led to a lot of speculation about how the Waqf boards came to own such huge parcels of land.

It is important to clarify that the Central Waqf Council or the State Waqf Boards do not own even an inch of property. Waqf Boards merely oversee auqaf (plural of waqf) donated at some point of time in the past. Large chunks of lands were given as “inams” (land grants) by royal personages (of all faiths) over the centuries to mosques, dargahs, cemeteries, idgahs, and other centres muof religious activities, and this is what constitutes a sizeable proportion of the Waqf properties.

One Waqf Act amendment was that the properties managed by the Waqf Boards should be digitalised, and the WAMSI (Waqf Management System of India) portal was launched. The figure of 8.7 lakh properties was updated through this process. The [Waqf] number may seem striking, but if one were to add up the lands owned by, or associated with the religious activities of, other communities, the figure will be proportionate to that community’s share in the country’s population.

For instance, the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments boards in just Telangana, Tamil Nadu, and Karnataka together manage around 11 lakh acres of land. Thus, when we compare this data and see it alongside the properties managed by the various Waqf Boards, we should not be surprised. There are more than 6.5 lakh villages in the country, and Muslims are present in at least 80-85 per cent of them. This means that each settlement will have, at the least, a mosque, a cemetery, an idgah and several dargahs. (The idgah itself will at least be an acre in size).

In bigger centres, such as taluk headquarters, district headquarters, towns, and metropolitan cities, this number will obviously be much higher and may even run into hundreds of acres. One should not be surprised by this figure of 9.4 lakh acres; the real figure will be much more.

Much of this land is dedicated to religious activities, but has it been used for the socio-economic uplift of the Muslim community?

In some parts of the country, especially in south India, administrators of shrines and mosques have genuinely done welfare for the community by astutely managing Waqf lands. They have used the land and its resources to establish educational institutions, vocational and professional institutions, and activities relating to health and education.

In most of the places, small entities have been created to support the activities and maintenance of the Waqf institutions. Significant work may not have been taken place in many places due to the lack of financial means.
BJP members ask why this land has not generated any revenue. What they fail to understand is that investments are necessary to transform them into revenue-generating spaces, for which one requires generous financial assistance. Has the Union government or BJP-run State governments done anything in this regard in the last 10 years?

Large parcels of Waqf lands were located in rural areas and could not be converted into revenue generating properties. Many of these have been incorporated into urban areas because of rapid urbanisation. These land parcels can now be developed as they have tremendous commercial potential but the government must step in as huge sums of investment are required. It is extremely difficult for any government (both at the Centre and in the States) to cater to the educational and health requirements of its total populace, which is why the state itself encourages private entities in these sectors. Religious institutions may be utilised to take care of the educational and health requirements to fill the gap to the extent possible.

One of the intentions of the Waqf Bill is to provide greater transparency to prevent mismanagement of Waqf properties. Should you not welcome it as investment can follow only if mismanagement is curtailed?

There is no clarity about the government’s intentions. The government states that it wants to bring about greater transparency by digitalising information regarding properties managed by various Waqf Boards, but this has already been done.

The Union Ministry of Minority Affairs even gave a statement to the effect that all information regarding Waqf property has been digitalised. All this data has been gazetted by state governments after surveys by Survey Commissioners of Waqf appointed by respective state governments. It does not make sense after this to launch another portal to do the same task and waste government resources. Does the Union government not trust state governments, including many governed by the BJP, to provide reliable data?

There have been allegations of corruption in the management of Waqf properties and of encroachment by “mutawallis” (managers of Waqf properties), but what has the BJP government done to get these encroachments cleared? Has anyone been held culpable and convicted under these accusations or has an FIR been filed? It is also shocking that the new Bill reduces the punishment for an encroacher from two years to one year. The Central Waqf Council has been in limbo for the past three years. State governments where the BJP is in power have not framed rules after the 2013 Act. When one considers these aspects, I seriously doubt the government’s intentions.

Certain provisions of the Bill have become controversial. For instance, the compulsory appointment of two women in each Waqf Board; the Survey Commissioner’s replacement by the Deputy Commissioner; the appointment of non-Muslims to the Central Waqf Council and the Waqf Boards; the Waqf Tribunal’s decision can be appealed in the High Court; and the inclusion of sectarian minorities as members of the Waqf Boards. Why do you disagree with these provisions?

The strangest among all these provisions pertains to the inclusion of women in Waqf Boards. The Minister of Minority Affairs [Kiren Rijiju] displayed his ignorance when he mentioned this in the Lok Sabha, pitching it as a measure to empower women. The 2013 Act already provides for this, and all Waqf Boards in the country have two women members each. Clearly, the Minister has not read the 2013 Act.

The Bill wants to take away the powers of the Survey Commissioner and give it to the Deputy Commissioner [DC] but the Survey Commissioner is a senior IAS or State services officer specialising in survey methods. It is doubtful that DCs, who are general administrators and burdened with managing some 60-80 departments, can find the time or have the expertise to conduct detailed land surveys.

Disputes over Waqf properties are mainly between the Waqf Boards and the State governments. In such a scenario, it does not make sense for a DC to be a party in a case when he or she is a representative of the State government. Even the Supreme Court has given a judgment that a DC cannot decide on titles of land suits.

In a secular country, an administrator of any faith could ideally be appointed in any department. I do not have a problem with that personally, but laws governing the functions of Hindu endowment boards, temple trusts, etc., in States across the country explicitly mention that only a Hindu can be a member of the governing board or trust. When that is the case, why is a different yardstick being used for the functioning of Waqf Boards?

Moreover, Waqf or Hindu endowment boards deal with the religious activities of a particular faith. How will a person from a different faith understand the customs, traditions, and religious practices of a different faith? The appointment of non-Muslims will not improve the functioning of Waqf Boards in any way. It is only a way of saying that the government does not trust the Muslim community.

The tribunal appointed to arbiter disputes on the status of Waqf properties consists of three persons: a district-level judge, a State government official, and a domain expert on Islamic law. Tribunal members are not appointed by the Waqf Boards but by the State governments. There are several tribunals adjudicating on a variety of issues all over the country and their decisions are deemed to be final on facts. Globally, only two main sects are recognised within Islam: Sunni and Shia. Sectarian minorities such as Aghakhanis and Bohras are sub-sects of Shias. It does not make sense to have compulsory representatives from these two sub-sects when a Shia member (or members) is already represented. This just seems like a ploy to divide the Muslim community.

Another contentious provision is that only a person who has been practicing Islam for at least five years may declare a waqf. What is your opinion on this?

This is against the secular and liberal traditions of our country. Any citizen of the country should be allowed to donate to any person and, especially, to support any religious activity or institutions of any faith. We have innumerable examples from history when adherents of one faith have donated generously to religious institutions of other faiths.

Kings and queens, nawabs, and sultans, have given grants to people of all faiths in their kingdoms and empires. This provision that one should be a practicing Muslim is meaningless. I cannot fathom as to who will be the authority to certify the religious credentials of an individual. Why should a person be restricted to donate only to religious institutions of his or her faith?

Throughout history and even to this day, members of a faith have generously patronised religious centres of other faiths because of their syncretic beliefs and this is the beauty of India. Basically, the BJP wants to “desecularise” the country.

What is Union government’s intention with the proposed Bill?

The BJP’s agenda is clear: they want to polarise the electorate. They have an established method to do this. It starts with an issue getting immense traction on social media followed by massive fake news. Then, this propaganda is picked up by BJP politicians, who will provide specious arguments to give legitimacy to false claims, which is eventually followed by legislative measures.

The BJP wants to be seen as a party that is showing Muslims their place and making them second-class citizens. Through this, their aim is to create a social constituency which will vote for them in perpetuity.

Do you think that if this Bill is passed in Parliament, claims made by Hindu right-wing groups on historical Islamic sites will increase?

If this Bill becomes law, it has the potential to ignite religious divisions in every village of the country. Anybody can go to the DC and create doubts about the provenance of historical monuments and land titles leading to major communal contentions. All this will lead to litigation on communal linest, which in turn will be utilised to polarise [people]. That is why this Bill is dangerous for the democratic secular fabric of the country.

If the BJP wanted the Bill to be passed, it could have prevailed on its allies and done this instantly. Why did it send the Bill to the JPC?

This Bill was ill-conceived, poorly drafted, bereft of legal logic and hastily tabled in Parliament. No stakeholders were consulted in its preparation and there was no need for it at all, as there have been no serious complaints or judicial prodding about the functioning of the Waqf Act 1995 and its amendments of 2013.

The Bill was brought in to rake up political controversy. All opposition parties opposed its introduction; even some BJP allies such as the Telugu Desam Party suggested that it should be sent to the JPC. Sensing that the Bill would not get Parliament’s approval, they forwarded it to the JPC for further consultation.

Now that the Bill is being discussed by the JPC, are stakeholders being consulted and their views sought?

As a member of the JPC, I cannot discuss its proceedings, but I can say that there is an attempt to not just consult stakeholders but to also enlist support from many non-stakeholders who have a clear leaning towards BJP’s right-wing ideology. (Some of the invitees are part of institutions that are offshoots of the BJP/ Sangh Parivar.)

The Bill was sent to the JPC for wider consultation, and deeper study and understanding of the issue so that only stakeholders such as members of the State Waqf Boards, Muslim theologians, academics, and legal experts should be invited for the discussions. Inviting any random person to mobilise support for the Bill will only worsen the situation. If the government’s intention is to really help the Muslim community as it has stated, only stakeholders must be consulted.

Several farmers all over the country have complained about notices from district Waqf Boards claiming their agricultural lands. What do you have to say about this?

I cannot comment as I am not well versed with the facts of different cases but broadly, what is happening shows the disjuncture between laws related to land. Inam Abolition, Land Ceiling and Land Reform Acts were passed in many States. As part of this, land has been redistributed to the tiller but such laws were challenged legally and the Supreme Court delivered a judgment that a Waqf land cannot be alienated [part of the judgment reads: “Once a Waqf, always a Waqf”].

This has led to situations where the Waqf Boards feel that they have the right to claim such lands that were taken away. In such cases State governments should step in and come up with a solution so that the aggrieved farmers and the waqf do not suffer any loss and are compensated appropriately.

There are several misconceptions about Waqf properties. A common misunderstanding is that any property can be claimed by a Waqf Board. What do you have to say about this?

This would have been humorous but for the fact that so many people believe it. Nobody in this country can claim any property as their own unless they have documents establishing ownership or it has historically been under their use. There is no provision in the Waqf Act that allows for this.

Some people believe the myth that if the Quran is recited at a particular spot, it becomes a Waqf property. That is complete rubbish and has been created by the BJP to buttress their propaganda to discredit the auqaf. BJP members are acting as rabble rousers and using blatantly spurious means to emotionally provoke people. This is part of the BJP’s effort at polarising communities and to defame Muslims.