Written By: Mutiur Rahman Aziz
AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi stands accused of controlling waqf properties worth over ₹3,000 crore, raising significant concerns about the management and utilization of these assets. The issue of waqf properties, which are intended for the welfare of the Muslim community, has long been mired in controversy, with allegations of misuse and neglect. The recent call for amendments to the Waqf Act aims to address these issues, but Owaisi and other influential Muslim leaders see it as an attack on their religious freedom.
The Waqf Conundrum: A History of Neglect and Misuse: Waqf properties, donated for religious or charitable purposes, are meant to support the community’s needs, including education, healthcare, and religious institutions. However, the system has been plagued by mismanagement and corruption. Many leaders and religious organizations, including Owaisi, have allegedly leased waqf properties at nominal rents, failing to ensure that the benefits reach those in need.
Javed Ahmed’s Perspective: A Call for Reform : Javed Ahmed, chairman of the Waqf Welfare Forum, supports the proposed amendments to the Waqf Act. According to him, the current system allows for too much leeway, enabling powerful individuals to exploit waqf properties. "The amendments are part of the government’s regular process to address the evolving needs of the time. The 2013 amendments, though well-intentioned, left room for improvement,” he explains. One significant issue is the lack of enforcement power. Waqf boards can identify illegal encroachments, but they lack the authority to take decisive action. Ahmed points out that the involvement of revenue departments in verifying waqf properties could bring much-needed transparency and accountability.
Allegations Against Owaisi: Exploitation of Waqf Properties : Owaisi, who vehemently opposes the amendments, is accused of controlling substantial waqf properties in Telangana. Reports suggest that he has been utilizing these properties, valued at over ₹3,000 crore, for his benefit, flouting the rule that limits waqf property leases to 30 years. The properties are leased at nominal rents, depriving the waqf board and the needy of substantial revenue. The misuse of waqf properties is not limited to Owaisi. Several other religious leaders and organizations have been similarly accused.
The Legal and Ethical Dilemmas : The Supreme Court’s 1998 ruling that "once a waqf, always a waqf” underscores the sanctity of waqf donations. Properties donated in the name of Allah cannot be repurposed or reclaimed. However, this principle has been twisted to justify the wrongful occupation and exploitation of waqf assets. Ahmed acknowledges that errors in the system can lead to wrongful claims, but he insists that these issues can be rectified through proper surveys and government oversight. He argues that the amendments, if implemented with genuine intent, could help reclaim waqf properties that have been lost to encroachments and misuse.
The Broader Implications: Religious Freedom vs. Accountability : Owaisi and other leaders argue that the proposed amendments threaten religious freedom. They claim that increased government scrutiny could undermine the autonomy of waqf boards. However, Ahmed contends that transparency and accountability should not be viewed as an infringement on religious rights. Instead, they are necessary to ensure that waqf properties serve their intended purpose.
The Need for Reform: Ensuring Proper Utilization of Waqf Properties : Waqf properties encompass not only land but also buildings, cash, and other assets donated for community welfare. Historically, wealthy Muslim landowners donated these assets to support schools, colleges, mosques, and other institutions. Despite the noble intentions, the current system’s flaws have allowed for significant misuse. Ahmed emphasizes the importance of regular surveys and proper documentation to maintain transparency. He points out that state governments have the authority to oversee waqf properties, but they often fail to exercise this power effectively. Proper implementation of the amendments could bring much-needed reform and ensure that waqf properties benefit the broader Muslim community.
Owaisi’s Resistance: A Self-Serving Stance? : Owaisi’s vocal opposition to the amendments raises questions about his motives. Given his control over significant waqf properties, his resistance can be seen as an attempt to protect his interests. The proposed changes could disrupt the status quo, bringing to light the misuse and ensuring that waqf assets are used for the community’s welfare.
Conclusion: The Path Forward : The debate over waqf properties and the proposed amendments to the Waqf Act highlights the need for a balanced approach. While religious freedom is paramount, it should not be used as a shield to protect malpractice and exploitation. Ensuring transparency, accountability, and proper utilization of waqf assets is crucial for the welfare of the Muslim community. As the government prepares to introduce the amendments, the focus should be on implementing them with integrity and fairness. The aim should be to reclaim waqf properties from wrongful occupants and ensure they serve their intended purpose. Leaders like Owaisi must recognize that genuine reform can benefit the community at large, rather than clinging to practices that only serve a privileged few. The controversy surrounding waqf properties and Owaisi’s alleged exploitation serves as a reminder that accountability and transparency are essential in managing community assets. The proposed amendments offer an opportunity to address long-standing issues and ensure that waqf properties fulfill their intended role in supporting the welfare of the Muslim community.
