During the debate in the House, the Nilgiris MP took strong exception to Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju’s account of the bill.
Published Apr 02, 2025 | 8:05 PM ⚊ Updated Apr 02, 2025 | 8:05 PM
Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam MP A Raja
Synopsis: Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam MP A Raja launched a fierce critique of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024 in Parliament, accusing the Union government of undermining minority rights, judicial independence, and secular governance. He lambasted Union Minister Kiren Rijiju’s defence of the bill as a “cock-and-bull story,” warning that the proposed amendments allow arbitrary state control over minority properties and erode natural justice.
Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) MP A Raja launched a scathing attack on the Centre’s contentious Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024 in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday, 2 April, terming it a threat to minority rights and the integrity of judicial processes.
During the debate in the House, the Nilgiris MP took strong exception to Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju’s account of the bill.
“I have received the courageous speech of the Honorable Minister with rapt attention, and I wonder where he found such courage to present an entire cock-and-bull story in Parliament,” Raja said.
“Sorry, Madam. I dare to say to the Honorable Minister: please go through the speeches tomorrow by text, compare them with the JPC [Joint Parliamentary Committee] report, and tally them with the documents submitted to the JPC. If that is not the case, I will resign from this House.”
In his lengthy address, Raja described the bill as an attempt to reshape property rights under the guise of reform.
He stated that existing legal protections for minority institutions were being dismantled, and urged the government to uphold India’s secular and constitutional values.
Warning of long-term consequences for India’s democratic framework, he added, “If we want to preserve India’s democratic and secular character, we must stand against attempts to blur the lines between governance and religion.”
The former Union Minister also called for the government to rethink its approach and commit to a legal process that is transparent, impartial, and inclusive of all communities.
Also Read: Union Minister Kiren Rijiju expresses hope on all-party support for Waqf Amendment Bill
Calling the bill a “diabolical contrivance”, Raja accused the government of using legal provisions to unjustly claim ownership of minority properties.
He cited Section 333, questioning the fairness of allowing authorities to take over land without respecting original ownership or the donor’s intent.
“If I get money from my brother, it is still mine,” he said, arguing that property gifted or donated should not be arbitrarily reassigned or cancelled by government intervention.
Further, Raja warned against the misuse of judicial discretion, stating that legal power should not be selectively applied.
Quoting Justice Patanjali Sastri from 1960, he said, “Judicial discretion should not be a common discretion,” and accused the government of undermining independent legal oversight.
According to Raja, the bill sets out an ambiguous legal framework that enables government agencies to declare encroachments and assert ownership without adequate checks.
He argued that such measures could set a dangerous precedent, particularly for properties owned by minority groups.
The former Union Minister also criticised proposed changes to the way property encroachments are identified and handled.
Drawing a distinction between conducting surveys – an affirmative legal process – and declaring encroachments, a punitive measure, he raised concerns over due process.
He took issue with the replacement of the independent Survey Commissioner, once governed by the Civil Procedure Code and the Indian Evidence Act, with a government-appointed official, warning that such a move erodes the principle of natural justice.
“No one can be a judge in their own case,” he said, suggesting that the bill compromises the impartiality of the process.
Raja pointed out that Section 54, which deals with encroachments, remained unchanged in the bill despite the government’s claims of revision.
He argued that the bill could allow the state to make retroactive claims on historic Waqf properties, thereby putting existing ownership at risk.
If passed, he warned, the law could be used to declare any property as encroached and seize it based on dubious legal interpretations.
Raja also raised the issue of the government’s growing influence over judicial and quasi-judicial bodies under the proposed Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024.
He argued that the bill compromises the independence of tribunals, allowing the executive to interfere in matters that should remain under the purview of judicial authorities.
“What type of jurisprudence are you following?” he asked, adding that tribunals were originally intended to streamline justice and reduce legal backlog, but under the proposed changes, their authority would be weakened by executive oversight.
He cited Section 61 of the bill, arguing that it shifts powers from independent bodies to district collectors – a move he said risks legal bias and compromises fairness in dispute resolution.
Additionally, he warned that such provisions would increase the burden on the judiciary, leading to prolonged litigation and placing an additional strain on property owners, especially from vulnerable and minority communities.
Turning to issues of property registration, Raja criticised the bill’s potential to create prolonged uncertainty.
He said clauses that prevent the registration of properties involved in disputes could push owners into years of unresolved litigation, effectively placing their properties in legal limbo.
By invoking Section 10, which bars suits and appeals, he claimed the bill would trap individuals in a complex legal process, with no recourse outside the courts.
According to Raja, these measures would disproportionately affect minority communities, undermining their property rights and economic security.
He further cautioned that freezing property transactions in this manner could effectively make some properties unsellable, and thus could cause stagnation in areas where economic development is already fragile.
Raja strongly opposed what he saw as the government’s attempt to politicise the Waqf Board by introducing non-Muslim participation in its matters.
He questioned why endowments and trusts of other religious groups were not subject to similar oversight.
Warning against the blending of religion and politics, he urged the government to preserve India’s secular structure.
Citing a letter from Jawaharlal Nehru, he highlighted Nehru’s warning about organisations like the RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) following the “strict Nazi lines,” and how if such organisations gained influence, the country would suffer grievously. “India will survive, but she will be grievously wounded,” Raja quoted Nehru.
He also invoked Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, praising his efforts to unify the nation and maintain religious harmony.
Raja acknowledged Patel’s contributions in integrating India and ensuring stability, while maintaining that Patel’s vision for India was distinct from the ideology promoted by right-wing groups.
He argued that Patel had taken necessary steps to maintain communal harmony and that his legacy should not be misrepresented to justify divisive policies today.
(Edited by Dese Gowda with inputs from Subash Chandra Bose)
