Mumbai: Parliament has announced a 31-member joint committee to examine the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, but its terms of reference remain unclear. The committee, consisting of 21 members from the Lok Sabha and 10 from the Rajya Sabha, was established on August 9, the last day of the Budget session. This joint committee is tasked with studying the amendment bill and is expected to submit its report during the first week of the winter session of Parliament.
Minister of Parliamentary Affairs and Minority Affairs Kiren Rijiju moved a motion in both Houses to form the joint committee. The tabling of the Bill was met with strong criticism from Opposition parties, who labeled the proposed law as “unconstitutional,” “anti-minority,” and “divisive.”
Among the significant changes, the Bill seeks to substantially alter the existing framework of Waqf law. The proposed amendment would shift the governance of Waqfs from the Boards and Tribunals—currently overseen primarily by the Muslim community – to the state governments.
However, it is still unclear whether this committee will only consider the content of the Bill or also address broader issues, such as encroachments on Waqf properties and their management.
In an interview with The Hindu, former Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha and former Chairman of the joint parliamentary committee on Waqf Boards, K. Rahman Khan, expressed his expectation that the Centre would announce the committee’s terms of reference at the earliest.
“They have not provided any details on what the panel’s priorities will be, aside from the Bill. Procedurally, the Bill should have been referred to a standing committee. The committees are not yet formed, which is probably why the Centre has created a joint panel,” Khan told The Hindu.
In 2008, Khan presented a detailed report that examined the management of Waqf properties, identified systemic issues, and suggested reforms. The amendment to the 1995 law, Khan notes, was an outcome of the findings and recommendations in his report.
In a detailed interview with The Indian Express, Khan criticised the government’s introduction of the new bill as a sudden move made without consulting stakeholders.
“All of a sudden, the government has introduced this new Bill. No discussion was held with stakeholders—neither the AIMPLB (All India Muslim Personal Law Board) nor any other organizations. In the past (before the 2013 amendment legislation), the ministry consulted all stakeholders. But this government didn’t consult the Muslim community, which is the biggest stakeholder in Waqf affairs,” Khan told The Indian Express.
Former Secretary-General of the Lok Sabha, P.D.T. Acharya, also shared his views in an interview with The Hindu, agreeing that a JPC should have a specific agenda with defined terms of reference.
“For Bills, there is a specific provision in the rulebook for forming joint select committees, where Ministers can also be members. In the past, there have been several such committees where Ministers were members. Such a joint select committee would have the power to amend a Bill as the government is represented in it. It seems that this government has not understood the difference between a JPC and a joint select committee. A joint select committee would have been ideal for the Waqf Bill,” Acharya told The Hindu.
In the absence of clear terms of reference, it is uncertain how the JPC will begin its work. P.C. Chacko, a former MP and working president of Sharad Pawar’s faction of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), argues that forming a JPC has “no meaning.” Chacko, who chaired the JPC on the 2G scam in the past, told The Hindu, “JPCs seldom have the power of parliamentary oversight. A JPC is considered a mini-Parliament, but its reports consist only of suggestions and recommendations that the government may or may not accept.”
