Explainer: What is the Waqf Amendment Bill 2025, and Why is it Controversial?

India’s Lok Sabha recently passed the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, sparking heated debates between the government and the opposition. Supporters say it will bring transparency and efficiency to the management of Waqf properties, while Indian Muslim groups and politicians like Asaduddin Owaisi and some Congress leaders calling it “anti-Muslim” and unconstitutional.

Here’s a simple breakdown of what the bill is, why it matters, and why it’s so contentious.

1. What is the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025?

The bill seeks to amend the Waqf Act of 1995, which governs Islamic charitable endowments (Waqf properties). These include mosques, dargahs, graveyards, and educational institutions managed by Waqf boards.

Key Changes Proposed:

✅ Digital Management – A centralized online portal for tracking Waqf properties.
✅ Stricter Audits – Mandatory audits for Waqf institutions earning over ₹1 lakh annually.
✅ Reduced Political Interference – Fixed tenures for Waqf tribunal members.
✅ Non-Muslim Inclusion – Two non-Muslim members in Central & State Waqf Boards.
✅ Repeal of Controversial Section 40 – Prevents arbitrary declaration of private properties as Waqf.

2. Why is the Government Pushing for This Bill?

The BJP-led government in India argues that the current Waqf system is inefficient and prone to misuse. Key issues include:

🔹 Mismanagement – Illegal occupation, financial irregularities, and delayed property surveys.
🔹 Legal Disputes – Endless litigation due to unclear ownership rules.
🔹 Lack of Oversight – Waqf tribunal decisions cannot be appealed in higher courts.
🔹 Section 40 Abuse – Some Waqf boards allegedly misused this clause to claim private lands.

The government claims the new bill will improve transparency, reduce fraud, and ensure funds reach the needy.

3. Why is the Opposition Against It?

Opposition parties, including Congress and AIMIM, argue:

1. Removal of “Waqf by User” Clause – This provision currently allows properties used for religious purposes for generations (even without formal documentation) to be recognized as Waqf. The new bill restricts Waqf declarations to only those who have owned and practiced Islam on the property for at least five years, excluding many historic religious sites.
2. State Control Over Disputed Land – The bill transfers authority to decide disputed Waqf properties to government-appointed collectors, raising fears of bias. Critics argue this violates natural justice, as the state becomes both claimant and judge.
3. Impact on Muslim Welfare – Waqf properties fund schools, hospitals, and welfare projects. Opponents fear increased state control will weaken Muslim autonomy and deprive communities of essential resources.
4. Government’s Justification – Supporters argue the bill tackles corruption, mismanagement, and encroachments in Waqf Boards. BJP MP Jagdambika Pal called it “historic,” claiming it benefits poor Muslims through better oversight.
5. Accusations of Exclusion & Communal Agenda – Muslim leaders allege the government ignored their input during drafting. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) called the bill “anti-constitutional” and part of a broader agenda to undermine Muslim rights.
6. Minister’s Defense – Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju dismissed concerns, renaming the bill “UMEED” and insisting no land would be “snatched.” He accused opponents of spreading misinformation.

4. How Will This Affect Ordinary People?

Stated Benefits:

✔ Better Use of Waqf Funds – More money for schools, hospitals, and housing for the poor.
✔ Fewer Land Disputes – Clearer rules may reduce legal battles over Waqf properties.
✔ Reduced Corruption – Mandatory audits could curb financial mismanagement.

Possible Concerns:

⚠ Loss of Autonomy – Some Muslims fear the government may exert more control over Waqf boards.
⚠ Legal Delays – Cases may pile up if tribunals aren’t strengthened properly.

5. What Happens Next?

• The bill will now go to the Rajya Sabha for approval.
• If passed, it will become law after the President’s assent.
• Legal challenges are possible, especially if opponents argue it violates constitutional rights.

Reform or Overreach?

The government says this is a much-needed cleanup of a broken system. Critics see it as state interference in Muslim religious affairs.

The real test will be in its implementation—will it actually improve Waqf management, or create new conflicts? Only time will tell.