Opposition criticises JPC on Waqf Bill, walks out over redacted dissent notes

The report of the joint committee of Parliament on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill was tabled in the Rajya Sabha amid uproar on Thursday, 13 February, with the proceedings briefly adjourned as a heated debate ensued between the treasury and the opposition benches.

It wasn't unexpected, given rumblings of discontent had already been almost continuous throughout the JPC process.

Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge — also the Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha — called the JPC's submission a "fake report", which he said should be withdrawn and sent back for a further review by committee.

Today, just ahead of the JPC report being presented in Parliament too, Congress MP Pramod Tiwari and party leader Imran Masood expressed strong criticism regarding the committee's handling of the consultations for the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024.

Tiwari highlighted that all 44 amendments proposed by the Opposition were rejected, while those from the ruling party and its NDA allies were accepted. He questioned the purpose of the JPC, then, suggesting it was mere eyewash, and emphasised the need for reconsideration of the draft before proceeding further.

Imran Masood, on the other hand, simply asserted that the Waqf (Amendment) Bill represents a direct attack on the rights of Muslims and violates Article 26 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the freedom for each community to manage its own religious affairs.

He emphasised that the government should not push through decisions solely based on majority power and vowed to continue the fight against the bill. "History will record in black letters that the rights of minorities in this country were bulldozed," he added.

On his way into Parliament this morning, Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi — who was also one of those who submitted a dissent note — was a little more measured in his response, saying the details of the constitutional lapses of the JPC and the Waqf Bill would be put forth in detail in the open discussion in Parliament.

AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi had been another who had been vociferous about his dissent notes being redacted weeks before the report was tabled.

The JPC report on the bill was tabled today in Parliament by BJP member Medha Vishram Kulkarni, who was also a member of the panel.

In Parliament, Opposition MPs led by Kharge, who is Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, formally repeated Tiwari’s (and others’) allegations that dissent notes were deleted from the report — which was denied by union parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju.

In the uproar that followed, the Upper House was adjourned for a time, until 11:20 a.m.

The JPC, chaired by Jagdambika Pal, had adopted the draft report and the amended bill on 29 January 2025. The report was subsequently presented to Lok Sabha speaker Om Birla on 30 January 2025.

Opposition leaders had submitted dissent notes during the process and after, expressing concern that their perspectives were not adequately considered during the committee's deliberations.

The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024, aims to address issues related to the management and regulation of Waqf properties.

The opposition parties have long contended that the proposed amendments could undermine the autonomy of state waqf boards and infringe upon the constitutional rights of the Muslim community.

When the Rajya Sabha reconvened, vice-president and chairman Jagdeep Dhankar had his piece to say — singling out Muslim members of Parliament Samirul Islam, Nadimul Haque (both of the Trinamool Congress) and M. Mohamed Abdulla (of the DMK) as having "created chaos and disruption in the House".

Other Opposition members also entered the well of the House as the chairman tried to proceed with Zero Hour rather than continue discussion of the Waqf Bill, while BJP chief J.P. Nadda taunted them that the House was not in order when the President's message was read out.

Finally, Kharge was called upon to speak and said, "The report of the joint committee of Parliament on Waqf… in which several members had given their dissent note has been taken out.

"Bulldozing the report by only keeping the views of the majority members is not right. It is condemnable, anti-democratic."

Kharge gently thwarted personal attacks on individuals and their identities too, adding, "This is not about any individual... These MPs are not protesting for their own sake, they are protesting for the community against which injustice is being done."

And indeed, it was not just Muslim members protesting, certainly.

The DMK's Tiruchi Siva and AAP's Sanjay Singh were among those who formally objected to the removal of dissent notes from the report — an allegation that parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju dismissed, saying, "There is no deletion or removal of any part of the report. Don't mislead the House. Opposition members (are) making unnecessary issues. The allegation is false."

Even as union ministers Bhupender Yadav and Nirmala Sitharaman joined in to claim the opposition was trying to mislead the Rajya Sabha, the Congress' Syed Nasir Hussain accused Rijiju — who is, notably, also the union minister for minority affairs — of being the one to mislead the House, as, he said, "My own dissent note has been redacted."

TMC member Saket Gokhale then noted it was not just a religious issue being discussed but a "constitutional issue".

As Rijiju reiterated that the report had "all annexures" and "nothing was taken out", the Opposition MPs then staged a walkout while the House proceeded with Question Hour without them.

Later, Rijiju would double down in an interview to the press — which seemed, however, to reconcile the allegations and counterallegations.

"If there is something in the note which the chairman feels is tantamount to casting aspersions on the committee itself, he has power to remove it," he said.

"Some of the points which amount to casting aspersion on the committee itself have been removed. The chairman of the committee has powers to do so," he said, asserting, "Everything has been done as per rules."

If the JPC members have any objection, he added, they can appeal before the chairman of the committee, the parliamentary affairs minister said.

Now, given that chairman Jagadambika Pal of the BJP, who led the JPC, was often cited by opposition MPs as being highhanded, non-inclusive and unconstitutional in his running of the committee — and the MPs had already formally objected to Speaker Om Birla about it — this essentially creates a circular paradigm of unresolvable objections.

For indeed, how are MPs to take their objection for review to the person whose actions they are objecting to and expect a fair outcome?

With PTI inputs