Waqf Amendment Bill Passed: Why Muslims Are Concerned

Critics Say It Infringes Upon Constitutional Rights of Muslims

April 4, 2025

Jama Masjid, Delhi, a Waqf Property

The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, passed in Parliament on April 4, has raised significant concerns among Indian Muslims regarding its potential implications on religious autonomy and minority rights. Despite assurances from the government that the amendments aim to improve governance and transparency, critics argue that the changes could undermine the independence of Waqf institutions and jeopardise the management of historical Islamic endowments.

The bill was passed after extensive debate, securing approval in the Lok Sabha with 288 votes in favour and 232 against, followed by its acceptance in the Rajya Sabha with 128 votes for and 95 opposing, as reported by The Hindu.

Introduced by the central government, the legislation mandates alterations to the administrative structure of Waqf Boards, including the appointment of two non-Muslim members to both the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards. While the government insists that these members’ roles will be limited to administrative functions and will not interfere with religious activities, many argue that this provision infringes upon the constitutional right of Muslims to manage their religious affairs independently.

The bill also grants the government greater authority to validate disputed Waqf properties, a move the government claims will enhance transparency and reduce corruption. However, Muslim organisations and opposition parties contend that this could lead to the confiscation of religious properties, particularly those without formal documentation, and weaken the autonomy of Waqf Boards.

Furthermore, the requirement for Waqf Boards to seek approval from district-level officers to confirm property ownership has been criticised as a mechanism that could strip Muslims of their land and undermine the boards’ authority.

In Bihar, the passage of the bill has reportedly sparked political fallout, with two members of the Janata Dal (United), Mohammed Qasim Ansari and Mohammed Nawaz Malik, resigning from the party in protest, according to The Times of India. Both leaders criticised JD(U)’s support for the bill, stating that it betrayed the trust of Muslim voters who had previously believed in the party’s secular ideology.

The Waqf (Amendment) Bill has also prompted protests from several organisations, including the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), which recently organised demonstrations in Patna. The AIMPLB has called on Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and other National Democratic Alliance (NDA) leaders to oppose the legislation.

Opposition parties, including the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), Congress and the Left, have strongly criticised the JD(U) ahead of the upcoming Bihar state assembly elections later this year.

The Waqf system, governed by Islamic law, involves charitable endowments such as mosques, madrasas, graveyards and other religious or community properties. These endowments have historically been managed by Waqf Boards under the Waqf Act of 1995.

Union Home Minister Amit Shah has stated that the bill does not interfere with religious practices and that the inclusion of non-Muslim members is purely for administrative purposes. The government has also dismissed opposition concerns, accusing them of spreading misinformation to discredit the bill.

However, Muslim leaders cite a larger context of marginalisation and political targeting of the community in recent years. In this climate, any legal changes affecting Waqf properties—central to community religious and social life—are perceived as a threat to autonomy and religious freedom.

With Hindu nationalist groups increasingly laying claims to mosques, alleging they were built on the ruins of Hindu temples, the amendments could complicate the legal status of these properties.

The bill was first introduced in Parliament last year. After facing opposition, the bill was sent to a parliamentary committee for review, but opposition leaders have alleged that their concerns were ignored in the final report.

The bill now awaits presidential assent to become law.