From Bias to Balance: A Secular Reimagining of the Waqf Act in 2025
Introduction
Secularism, as a foundational principle of modern democracies, demands impartiality in governance, especially in matters involving religion. When state policies or laws exhibit preference or bias toward a particular religious group, it undermines the very fabric of a secular state. In India, the Waqf Act of 2013 drew significant criticism for being inconsistent with secular principles. However, the Waqf Act 2025 represents a notable shift toward aligning with constitutional values of equality, justice, and neutrality. This article explores how the Waqf Act 2013 conflicted with secularism and how the 2025 version is a step toward restoring balance.
Understanding the Concept of Waqf
A waqf is a charitable endowment under Islamic law, where a person dedicates property or wealth for religious or philanthropic purposes. Traditionally, waqf properties have been used for mosques, schools, hospitals, and social welfare. In India, the management and protection of waqf properties are governed by specific legal frameworks, most notably the Waqf Acts passed by Parliament.
Waqf Act 2013: A Case Against Secularism
The Waqf Act of 2013, enacted during the UPA regime, amended earlier versions of the legislation to strengthen the Waqf Boards’ powers. While the intention was to protect waqf properties from encroachment and mismanagement, the act raised serious concerns regarding its secular compatibility.
1. Exclusive Governance for One Religion
The most obvious concern with the 2013 Act was its exclusive focus on Islamic religious endowments. While other religions have trusts and endowments, none enjoy the same level of legislative support or autonomous boards backed by the state. The state-sponsored administration of Islamic properties, while ignoring similar concerns of other religions, creates an imbalance in the secular framework.
2. Government Involvement in Religious Administration
Though secularism calls for the state to maintain distance from religious affairs, the 2013 Act allowed for deep state involvement in Islamic endowments. Government-appointed Waqf Boards, funded by public resources, oversaw the management of waqf properties. This raised questions: Should a secular government facilitate and fund religious management bodies?
3. Lack of Transparency and Public Accountability
The 2013 law gave Waqf Boards considerable autonomy but limited public oversight. There were multiple cases of land mismanagement and illegal transfers, and since the Boards operated largely within religious jurisdiction, seeking legal redress became difficult. This lack of transparency further fueled perceptions of favoritism.
4. Special Legal Status and Powers
The Act empowered Waqf Boards to override decisions of local governments in matters of waqf land and had special courts exclusively to handle waqf disputes. These provisions created a parallel legal mechanism privileging one religious group, which is antithetical to secularism, where all citizens are equal before the law.
Waqf Act 2025: A Move Toward Secular Justice
The Waqf Act 2025 introduces critical reforms to restore the secular balance in the administration of religious endowments. It addresses the core criticisms of the 2013 Act by emphasizing neutrality, transparency, and constitutional equality.
1. Equal Treatment for All Religious Endowments
One of the hallmark features of the 2025 legislation is its effort to bring parity among all religious endowments. Instead of singling out waqf, the new law proposes a Uniform Religious Endowments Framework that regulates trusts and endowments across religions in a fair and equal manner. This step marks a true reflection of secularism—treating all faiths equally under the law.
2. Reduced State Involvement in Religious Affairs
In line with secular ideals, the 2025 Act limits the state’s role in direct religious administration. Instead of appointing and funding Waqf Boards, the government now enables the formation of independent, community-elected boards with regular audits by neutral third-party agencies. This reduces state entanglement while ensuring accountability.
3. Unified Legal Redress Mechanism
Under the 2025 Act, waqf-related disputes are now handled through the regular judicial system rather than special courts. This ensures that all citizens and religious groups have equal access to justice and that there are no parallel legal systems favoring one community over others.
4. Transparent Property Management
The 2025 law mandates digital registration of all waqf properties, publicly accessible databases, and annual property audits. This brings much-needed transparency and protects public land from misuse. Importantly, these measures are consistent with the treatment of other religious and charitable assets, promoting fairness.
5. Emphasis on Public Benefit Over Religious Identity
A key philosophical shift in the new act is its focus on public welfare rather than religious identity. While still respecting the religious origin of waqf, the act emphasizes using endowment resources for inclusive development—education, healthcare, and poverty alleviation that benefit all communities, not just the adherents of a specific religion.
Impact on National Unity and Governance
The secularization of the waqf framework is more than just a legal reform—it is a political and social statement. In a pluralistic society like India, laws that prioritize any one religion over others risk creating divisions and resentment. By making the legal treatment of religious endowments uniform and impartial, the Waqf Act 2025 fosters a sense of national unity and equal citizenship.
Moreover, reducing state involvement in religious administration frees government institutions to focus on core functions—development, governance, and public service—without being burdened by religious disputes.
Criticism and Caution
Despite its many positives, the 2025 Act has not escaped criticism. Some stakeholders from within the Muslim community have expressed concerns about losing control over centuries-old religious institutions. Others fear that removing special protections might expose waqf lands to external threats or commercialization.
However, these concerns can be addressed through robust legal safeguards and continued dialogue. The point is not to weaken community rights but to ensure that these rights are exercised within a fair, secular, and transparent framework.
Conclusion
Secularism is not the absence of religion but the equal distance from all religions. The Waqf Act 2013 failed this test by giving one religious group privileged legal and administrative status. In contrast, the Waqf Act 2025 is a commendable attempt to rectify that imbalance. By promoting fairness, transparency, and neutrality, it upholds the constitutional promise of a secular state where no community is above the law, and every citizen enjoys equal rights and responsibilities.
In a time when religious polarization threatens social harmony, such reforms are not just necessary—they are a moral imperative.
Comments are closed.