On Monday, 14th October, several opposition MPs walked out of the parliamentary committee meeting considering the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, complaining that the said panel was not following parliamentary procedures. This was after the BJP accused Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge of being involved in a Waqf land scam.
The Joint Parliamentary Committee, which has seen several frequent clashes between BJP and Opposition members, further saw conflicts rise when opposition MPs blatantly objected to the presence of representatives from Hindu organisations claiming the legislation primarily concerned Muslim religious properties.
The walkout was caused by the deposition of the former chairman of the Karnataka State Minorities Commission and Karnataka BJP vice-president, Anwar Manippady. Manippady accused several Congress politicians, particularly Kharge and Rehman Khan, of their involvement in misappropriating Waqf properties in Karnataka.
It is important to note that recently, Rahul Kharge, son of the Congress President returned the land that he had sought for setting up a ‘Multi Skill Development Centre Training Institute and Research Institute’ in Karnataka’s Banglore. His trust, Siddhartha Vihar Trust had submitted the proposal to get the land from the Karnataka Industrial Development Board in February 2024. However, he withdrew the request for the allotment of 5 acres of land recently. This move is believed to have been executed by Kharge after the ongoing MUDA scam exposed the wife of Karnataka CM Siddharamaiah, Parvathi. The lady returned 14 lands to the development authorities after police cases were registered against her, CM, and his brother-in-law.
After this, the BJP alleged that the entire top leadership of the Congress was involved in corruption relating to land transactions and suggested that they should resign on moral grounds after being “exposed”. Later BJP spokesperson Sudhanshu Trivedi launched a sharp attack on the Congress and said that the party, which was once associated with Mahatma Gandhi and Vinoba Bhave’s “bhu daan” (giving away land in charity), was now necking deep in “bhu harap” (land grab) under the “inspiration” of Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi.
Opposition MPs contested that parliamentary norms prohibit putting forward unsubstantiated allegations against notable people, especially when they are not there to defend themselves. They also objected to Manippady’s plea for Muslims not to oppose the proposed amendments, which they deemed inappropriate and offensive.
“Such allegations cannot be made without the accused being present to respond,” asserted one opposition MP, as quoted by PTI. Despite these protests, the committee’s chairperson, BJP leader Jagdambika Pal, overruled them and permitted the testimony to proceed, claiming that it was pertinent to the law being considered.
Opposition MPs, including Congress leaders Gaurav Gogoi and Imran Masood, DMK’s A Raja, Shiv Sena’s Arvind Sawant, AIMIM’s Asaduddin Owaisi, Samajwadi Party’s Mohibbullah, and AAP’s Sanjay Singh are believed to have walked out in protest of the proceedings, as per the initial reports.
Shiv Sena MP Arvind Sawant while talking to the media claimed that the committee was not following established rules and regulations. The opposition MPs then held a separate meeting to discuss their future measures, including plans to write to the Lok Sabha Speaker about their concerns. A major cause of discord probably remained the committee’s decision to invite several Hindu organizations to submit input on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill. Opposition MPs contended that these institutions had no place in talks about Waqf issues, which concern Muslim religious endowments.
However, the BJP endorsed the move, claiming that these groups had expressed fears about how the Waqf law affects non-Muslim estates, such as temple lands. They said that such consultations were required for a thorough examination of the law.
AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi had already written to Jagdambika Pal, protesting the inclusion of parties such as Sanatan Sanstha and Hindu Janajagruti Samiti, accusing them of allegedly spreading extremist ideology. In his letter, Owaisi stated that these organizations advocate for the creation of a “Hindu Rashtra” and have engaged in insurgent actions against the Indian state.
Other witnesses called to testify before the committee included notable lawyers Vishnu Shankar Jain and Ashwini Upadhyay, as well as Mahant Sudhirdas Maharaj of Maharashtra’s Kalaram Temple. On the opposing side, Mehmood Madani of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind spoke out against the proposed Waqf Bill modifications.
Opposition MPs have previously claimed that stakeholders were not heard and that politics was being conducted in the name of the proceedings. Dr. Mohammad Jawed, the Congress leader in the Lok Sabha, stated on social media last week that religious organizations that do not belong to the Muslim community were being invited to the conference, which should be reconsidered.
“During the recent committee meetings… representations have been invited from various religious organizations that do not belong to the Muslim community… In my view this practice should be reconsidered, as these organizations neither contribute to waqf properties nor have any locus standi in such matters, with most of them having biased notions about waqf, which are far from the true essence of waqf. Their inclusion in discussions about waqf is deeply concerning to the Muslim community and risks disregarding the sentiments of India’s Muslim population,” said the MP.
“Additionally, it is worth noting that in matters concerning other religious communities, Muslim representation is not sought. This raises the question as to why such a practice is being adopted here, where the matter pertains specifically to the Muslim community,” he said.
Notably, last month, BJP MP Nishikant Dubey, a member of the Joint Committee of Parliament on the Waqf Bill, sparked a row when he wrote to Pal, raising severe concerns about the enormous volume of submissions received on the issue and requesting that the Union Home Ministry conduct an investigation, including into the geographical origin of the submissions.
Dubey claimed that ‘fundamentalist groups,’ ‘individuals like Zakir Naik,’ or ‘foreign powers like the ISI (Pakistan), China, or their proxies’ could be engaged, given that 1.25 crore submissions have been received. If such forces were involved, Dubey stated that it would be an attempt to manipulate our legislative process, an attack on the basic underpinnings of our parliamentary system, and a national security issue.
