The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Opinion | Wary of wakf

The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Opinion | Wary of wakf

WARY OF WAKF

There’s a ruckus over the Wakf (Amendment) Bill, 2010. V. Kumara Swamy investigates why the bill is getting lambasted from all sides

Trust travails: Thousands of acres of wakf land have been lost to encroachment When the Wakf (Amendment) Bill, 2010, was passed in the Lok Sabha a year ago, everyone thought that the amendment was a progressive step that would help improve and streamline the administration of wakf properties across the country. However, a year down the line, when the bill is awaiting approval in the Rajya Sabha, many Muslim organisations have begun to express their scepticism over it. Right from the definition of wakf properties to the powers of the proposed wakf tribunals, many provisions of the bill are now being questioned. The term “wakf” refers to a donation or an endowment in the form of land or money that is placed in a trust. The proceeds from the trust are used for charitable purposes such as the running of schools and hospitals or even the upkeep of mosques. Estimated to be worth a staggering Rs 1.2 lakh crore, wakf properties across the country are administered by the state wakf boards. The Wakf (Amendment) Bill, 2010, prohibits the sale and gifting of wakf properties and proposes stringent measures against encroachers. It also suggests the setting up of tribunals to look into disputes related to these properties and proposes changes to the Central Wakf Council and the state wakf boards, besides making a provision for the representation of women and professionals in these bodies. However, some consider the bill flawed right from the way it defines the word “wakf”. It is described as a “permanent dedication by a person professing Islam, of any movable or immovable property for any purpose recognised by the Muslim law as pious, religious or charitable.” Experts point out that this definition is completely wrong as there are several wakf properties in the country that have been donated by Hindu, Sikh and even British rulers. “If this definition is accepted, it will lead to new problems like land disputes,” says Abdur Rahman Quraishi, spokesperson of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB). Others complain that the government should have amended Section 87 of the original Wakf Act of 1995 in the new law. The section states that “no suit, appeal or other legal proceeding for the enforcement of any right on behalf of any Wakf which has not been registered in accordance with the provisions of this Act, shall be instituted or commenced or heard, tried or decided by any court.” In other words, unless a wakf property is legally registered, one cannot seek to enforce a trust’s right to it. Muslim organisations such as the AIMPLB want this section scrapped. As Quraishi explains, “There are thousands of villages and towns where auqaf (plural of wakf) haven’t been registered because people are simply not aware of the rules. Because of this provision, wakf boards lose enormous amounts of land and property to encroachers. The latter are well aware that no action will be taken against them if they usurp unregistered land.” However, some allege that organisations opposed to Section 87 are not telling the “whole truth”, and that they have a vested interest in keeping wakf lands unregistered. “According to the rules, auqaf cannot be sold. Making registration mandatory would mean losing control over these vast tracts of land that could be sold for profit by the caretakers and corrupt wakf boards,” says a member of the Central Wakf Council in Delhi. According to some estimates around 40 per cent of all wakf lands have been encroached on by governments and private individuals and organisations. The AIMPLB has demanded a comprehensive survey of the entry of wakf properties in the state revenue departments so that the wakf lands “encroached” on by the governments can be listed and also returned or compensated for. A persistent complaint of wakf boards is that they are not equipped with adequate powers. Says Ahmed Khan Pathan, a Pune-based advocate and a local wakf board member, “Governments have failed to gauge the importance of auqaf and their worth. The amendment bill too fails to address the issue of giving more powers to the boards.” Wakf boards allege that the government has simply not given them enough powers to go after the encroachers. “Every time we have to approach the district administration and ask it to file a complaint against the encroachers. This is a complete waste of time. We should have the power to file FIRs directly,” says Mohammed Irshadullah, chairman, Bihar State Sunni Wakf Board, Patna. Still, there is no doubt that the amendment bill has taken some steps to tone up the functioning of the wakf boards and tackle the problem of resolving disputes related to wakf properties in a more efficient way. It suggests the setting up of a National Wakf Development Corporation and State Wakf Development Corporations to “facilitate proper utilisation of valuable wakf properties.” What’s more, it also proposes the formation of wakf tribunals to see to all disputes. While most leaders of the Muslim community have welcomed this proposal, they are uncomfortable with the idea of keeping these tribunals under the control of a Wakf Council, which is what the bill suggests. “The tribunals are a good step. But since the Wakf Council will be a nominated body of the government, the tribunals’ independence will come under a cloud,” says Quraishi. The barrage of objections to the bill seems to have shaken up even those who voted in its favour in the Lok Sabha in 2010. For example, Maulana Asrarul Haque, a Congress MP from Bihar who voted for the bill, is now being more circumspect. “Now that the bill is being examined by the select committee of the Rajya Sabha, I hope it will look into the grievances of the community and come up with the necessary changes,” he says. However, it is not as if the bill is being lambasted in its entirety. Members of the community acknowledge that it has many positive features. One such is the provision that increases the period for lease and sub-lease of wakf properties from three to 30 years. “Because of the three-year limit, we couldn’t attract anybody to develop these properties. But now that we are allowed a longer lease period we can develop our properties and earn money which can be used for the good of the community,” says Salawat Khan, former chairman, Rajasthan Board of Muslim Wakfs. It remains to be seen how far the select committee of the Rajya Sabha goes to address the concerns and demands regarding the Wakf (Amendment) Bill. Perhaps Khan echoes the sentiments of most members of his community when he says, “A comprehensive law on wakf is the need of the hour, so I hope the bill will see the light of the day very soon.”