New Delhi: The President of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (JIH), Syed Sadatullah Husaini has criticized the Amended Waqf bill which will be tabled in Parliament today, saying it is unacceptable to the Muslim community.

In a statement to the media, the JIH President said, “We oppose the proposed amendments by the government to the Waqf Act, 1995, through the new UWMEED Act. Despite the seemingly positive acronym, the proposed changes are aimed at diminishing the autonomy and integrity of Waqf properties and the communities they serve. This is not acceptable to the Muslim community. We feel that this legislation has been designed to dismantle the established legal structure of Waqfs, effectively targeting a constitutionally guaranteed right to the religious minorities that allows them to conduct and preserve their community’s heritage and religious practices. The proposed bill introduces a form of “Collector Raj”, granting collectors unprecedented authority over Waqf properties. This shift not only undermines the finality and decisiveness of the Waqf Tribunal but also removes the concept of waqf by user. Under current law, any disputes regarding Waqf property must be settled within a year, but the amendment extends this period, creating confusion and legal disputes. It is alarming to note that this bill, with its overarching provisions, was drafted without meaningful consultation with key stakeholders. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Bill acknowledges the need for improvements but fails to justify such sweeping changes. Had there been any real consultation with experts in Waqf jurisprudence, it would be clear that redefining Waqf is beyond the legislative domain and deeply rooted in Muslim Personal Law. We wish to deny claims made through media propaganda that the current Waqf Board Act usurps lands of other religious communities. These false claims are fabricated and unsubstantiated. The Waqf Board operates legally under government-approved laws and is supervised by the government.”

Syed Sadatullah further stated, “The amendment draws inspiration from outdated colonial laws, positioning the Collector as the ultimate authority, thereby stifling the rights of Muslims to manage their religious endowments. This is akin to stripping the NGT of its environmental authority or the ITAT of its tax authority. A fundamental aspect of Waqf jurisprudence, the concept of waqf by user, which recognizes long-standing religious and charitable use, is being removed. This change threatens to create further disputes over Waqf properties. The amendment allows state governments to appoint all members of the Waqf Board, effectively eliminating the democratic election of at least two members from Muslim communities. By removing the provision for oral appointment of Mutawallis, the bill indirectly undermines the practice of oral dedication of Waqf, which has been a settled aspect of Islamic law. The amendment dilutes the requirement for Muslim MPs, judges, and advocates in the Central Waqf Council, paving the way for members of other religious communities, raising concerns about the government’s control over Waqf affairs.”

The JIH President reiterated, “In summation, we would like to state that the bill was created without any consultation with the Muslim community. No Muslim parliamentarian was consulted regarding the bill. No stakeholders were involved in the discussions about the bill. The changes proposed in the law are harmful rather than beneficial. The government should withdraw the bill. We expect the opposition especially the NDA allies like the JDU and TDP to oppose and prevent such detrimental laws from being enacted. Yes, certain changes in the law can be beneficial like the inclusion of women and representation from Shia or other under represented school of thoughts; we accept it as a positive step and welcome it. However, we would like to remind the government that laws should be made for the welfare of the people, and those affected by the laws should be included in the consultation process. If need arises, We will approach the Supreme Court to highlight that the proposed amendments to the Waqf Act are against guaranteed constitutional provisions, established norms, objectives of amendments to existing legislation, and the principles of natural justice. Instead of protecting people’s property, these changes could lead to their destruction. Hence, it is crucial to stop these amendments.”