DELHI: The Wakf Amendment Bill 2024 was passed in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday following a 12-hour debate, during which 520 MPs participated in the vote. Of these, 288 voted in favour while 232 opposed the bill.
Union Minister for Minority Affairs, Kiren Rijiju, referred to the bill as “UMEED” — an acronym for Unified Wakf Management Empowerment, Efficiency and Development. The bill will now be tabled in the Rajya Sabha.
During the debate, AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi tore a copy of the Wakf Amendment Bill in protest, alleging that it was intended to humiliate Muslims. “I am tearing the Wakf Bill in the spirit of Gandhi,” he declared in the House.
Home Minister Amit Shah asserted that the Wakf Amendment Bill did not allow any non-Islamic entities to interfere in Wakf matters. He dismissed opposition concerns as fear-mongering aimed at securing votes from minority communities. “There is no provision in this bill for non-Islamic inclusion in Wakf. The minorities are being misled for vote bank politics,” he said.
Rijiju warned that had the amendment not been introduced, even the Parliament building could have been subject to claims as Wakf property. He credited the Narendra Modi-led government with preventing the misappropriation of various non-notified properties.
He noted that the first Wakf Act was enacted in 1954, establishing State Wakf Boards. Several amendments followed, culminating in the Wakf Act of 1995. “No one said it was unconstitutional then. Now, when we are amending the same law, you call it unconstitutional. You’re misleading people by raising irrelevant issues,” Rijiju said.
He also criticised a decision taken just before the 2014 general elections, when 123 prime properties were transferred to the Delhi Wakf Board on 5 March 2014. “Only a few days remained before the elections. You could have waited, but thought it would win you votes. You lost the election nonetheless,” he remarked.
Amit Shah reiterated that the Wakf Amendment Bill was meant for the welfare of the poor and not for illegal appropriation. “One member said minorities will not accept it — is that a threat? This is a law passed by Parliament and must be accepted,” he asserted.
He reiterated that no non-Islamic entity would be included under the Wakf provisions. “There is no such clause. The word ‘Wakf’ itself is Arabic and refers to property donated for religious purposes in the name of Allah. One can only donate what one rightfully owns,” Shah said.
