In Rajya Sabha

Synopsis of the debate on the #Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2025 and the Mussalman Waqf (Repeal) Bill 2024, by the Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha and Congress President Shri Mallikarjun Kharge, MP on April 3, 2025.

Chairman Sir, I rise today to oppose the #Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, with full conviction and clarity. This is no ordinary law – it is being weaponised for political gain. This bill is being used by the Modi government to weaken the Indian Diversity in a systematic manner.

When this bill was passed in the Lok Sabha late at night, it got 288 votes in its favour and 232 votes against it. From this, we can guess that despite the opposition of various parties, this bill was brought arbitrarily.

The BJP government is talking a lot about the welfare of minorities. There is a lot of talk about Empowerment, but what is the truth? This is clear from the budget allocation of the Minorities Department of the government in the last five years. I want to put some facts before you.

Chairman Ji, the budget allocation of this department in 2019-20 was Rs. 4,700 crores, which was reduced to Rs. 2,608 crores in 2023-24. The budget allocation in 2022-23 was Rs. 2,612 crores, out of which the ministry could not spend even Rs. 1,775 crores.

In total, the budget received in five years was Rs. 18,274 crores, out of which Rs. 3,574 crores could not be spent. Year BE (Rs. Cr.) Unspent Fund 2019&20 4700 194-9 2020&21 4005 6-43 2021&22 4346 21-2 2022&23 2612 1775 2023&24 2608 1576 Total 18274 3574

From 2020, the Government of India has discontinued the schemes of providing free coaching to minority students to prepare for UPSC and state commissions, Maulana Azad Fellowship, Padho-Pardesh Scheme.

After independence, legal initiatives were taken in 1954 and 1995. In 2013, the Act was amended to strengthen the State Waqf Boards. During the UPA, a provision was made in 2013 to include 2 Muslim women in the Central Waqf.

BJP itself had supported these bills both the times, in 1995 and 2013.

In 1995, Sikandar Bakht in Rajya Sabha and Bandaru Dattatreya in Lok Sabha had expressed their views and supported it.

During the discussion in 2013 for Amendment, Syed Shahnawaz Hussain in Lok Sabha and Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi in Rajya Sabha had expressed their views and supported the bill. You talk about the right to women and empowerment of Pasmanda Muslims. If you want to bring empowerment, then do it in Hindu society as well. Give Dalits, tribals, women and backward people an entry in temples. Give them the equal status.

I am surprised that despite so much opposition, why do you want to change its basic structure and form. Why should non-Muslims be included in their board? The beliefs, worship and customs of different communities are different. The structure of Hindu temple management boards is different, the structure of places of worship and religious places of other religions is different.

Nothing should happen that destroys our secular fabric.

You have added a strange clause in this bill. Only a person who has been a Muslim for five years can dedicate property to Waqf. Is there any law to stop a Hindu from donating to a church? If a Hindu donates money to a Gurudwara, is there a ban on that? This is a matter of making two laws. One for the minorities and one for yourselves.

This bill is not for any reform, but for control. This is contrary to the thinking of Baba Saheb and the makers of the Constitution. You answer and tell the country whether we will make such arrangements in the boards of Hindu monasteries and temples. Will we do this in the institutions of Christians, Sikhs or Parsis? The Modi government is not only attacking the Waqf properties, but it is also attacking the idea of constitutional democracy. I conclude my speech by saying these few things and also strongly oppose this bill.

In Lok Sabha

Synopsis of the debate on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2025 and the Mussalman Wakf (Repeal) Bill 2024 by the Deputy Leader of Lok Sabha Shri Gaurav Gogoi, MP In 2013, misleading statements were made regarding the UPA Government. We challenge them to verify these claims.

The Constitution of India guarantees every individual social, economic, and political justice, along with the freedom of thought, expression, belief, religion, and worship. It also upholds the principle of brotherhood, ensuring the dignity of the individual and the integrity of the nation. This Bill strikes at the very foundation of our Constitution. The entire speech delivered is an assault on our fundamental rights and the federal structure of our democracy. The government objective appears to be to weaken the Constitution, spread confusion, insult minority communities, and sow divisions within Indian society. While claiming to show sympathy towards minorities, the power that he has failed to provide them adequate representation in the Lok Sabha. Today, the situation for minorities has deteriorated to the extent that they are required to obtain a religious certificate from the government.

India is a land rooted in ‘Sanatan Dharma’, where every religion, culture, and tradition is respected. Would the Government demand such certificates from people of other religions? Why is the government interfering in the matters of religion? Furthermore, the Government has even removed Clause 3R (1) today. It is reflected in our secular nature that any person can do Waqf. The rights of any person should not be taken away. Whether it is the protection of a widow or providing more support to women, all these provisions are already there in the law. The revenue outlined under clause 33 has been reduced. The revenue share has been reduced from seven percent to five percent, thereby further weakening the Waqf Board. My suggestion is to increase the revenue from seven percent to eleven percent. Today, the Government is targeting the land of a particular community through the Bill and I am concerned that in future, the Government may target the land of other communities as well. The Bill requires amendments.

While I am not opposed to amendments, they should strengthen the Bill rather than weaken it. Unfortunately, some of the amendments proposed are controversial. The process of Waqf has a long history, dating back to the advent of Islam. The powers of the Waqf Board have been diluted significantly. For instance, Section 110 has been completely removed. Section 110 deals with the power of the Board to make regulations. According to the Parent Act, the Boards can make some rules with the permission of the State Government. An attempt is being made to reduce the authority of the State Government through the present amendment. Furthermore, confusion has arisen regarding the role of the High Court, even though its responsibilities are clearly defined in Sections 83(A) and 96 of the Parent Act.

These sections should not be removed through amendments. If there are mistakes or areas needing correction, we are sensitive towards that. However, the introduction of provisions from the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act,1967, for amendment under Section 64, Clause 29, adds to the confusion. I must point out that the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) did not accept any amendments proposed by the opposition, and there was no clause-by-clause discussion; only a voting process has taken place. The current Bill also seeks to remove Section108 (A), which grants overriding power, a provision still present in the Acts of different states. We oppose this Bill as it is against the integrity of our country, our constitutional values, the dignity of our minorities, and our peace and tranquillity along with the way it should have been discussed in the House and the JPC.