The Waqf Act, 2025 introduces significant reforms to the management of Waqf properties, but has sparked controversy over a key provision affecting recent converts to Islam.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The recently enacted Waqf Act, 2025 has ignited widespread debate across political and legal circles, primarily due to a contentious provision that mandates a five-year waiting period for converts to Islam before they can make Waqf donations. While the government defends this clause as a safeguard, critics view it as a discriminatory barrier to religious freedom and charitable expression.
The Clause in Question
The new law stipulates that only individuals who have practised Islam for at least five years are eligible to declare or donate property as Waqf. This waiting period is not applicable to those born into Islam, but applies solely to new converts. Effectively, it introduces a mandatory delay before a convert can endow property for religious or charitable purposes under Islamic law.
This provision has been challenged in the Supreme Court, with critics arguing that it violates fundamental rights and introduces arbitrary distinctions between Muslims based on duration of practice.
Government’s Rationale
According to members of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) and ruling party lawmakers involved in drafting the Bill,
“the five-year clause is intended to ensure that new converts have a meaningful understanding of the faith before making legally binding religious pledges such as Waqf.“
A BJP MP explained that this measure was necessary to prevent individuals from being misled or coerced into making donations shortly after conversion. The concern, they argue, is not just about religious integrity but also about protecting individuals from exploitation or fraudulent manipulation of their property under the guise of religious obligations.
This clause, the government insists, does not affect born Muslims and is only aimed at ensuring that new converts have sincerely embraced Islam before making irrevocable decisions involving property.
Context Behind the Amendment
The Waqf Amendment Bill, 2025, passed by Parliament after lengthy debates and approved by the President on March 5, aims to enhance transparency in the creation and management of Waqf properties. It replaces the earlier Waqf Act of 1995, which was last amended in 2013.
According to Union Home Minister Amit Shah,
“Waqf boards across the country held about 18 lakh acres of land between 1913 and 2013”
However, in the last 12 years, an additional 21 lakh acres were reportedly claimed as Waqf property—a significant jump that raised concerns about unchecked and potentially abusive declarations of Waqf under the previous law.
Government ministers have attributed this surge to the 2013 amendment, which, according to them, weakened safeguards by allowing any Indian—regardless of religious background—to create a Waqf.
The 2025 law seeks to roll back this change and reinforce the original intent of the 1995 legislation by specifying that only Muslims, and specifically those practising for at least five years, can create a Waqf.
ALSO READ: LEGAL EXPLAINER| Waqf & The Waqf Amendment Bill 2024: Key Legal Changes & Impact
Opposition’s Objections
The five-year restriction has been strongly opposed by several Members of Parliament, including AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi, Congress MP Syed Naseer Hussain, and TMC’s Nadimul Haque. Critics argue that
“the clause is unconstitutional, violating Article 14, which guarantees equality before the law, and Article 25, which ensures freedom of religion”
A common concern is the lack of clarity on how the government plans to determine whether someone has been “practising Islam” for five years.
“Will the government issue certificates? Who will certify a person’s faith? Will there be surveillance to check whether someone is offering namaaz regularly?”
asked Congress spokesperson Supriya Shrinate, highlighting the practical and ethical challenges in enforcing such a provision.
Legal Ambiguities: Who Decides a Practising Muslim?
At the core of the controversy lies a practical dilemma:
how will the government identify someone as a practising Muslim for five years?
While the government has suggested that the process will be document-based, it has yet to release the rules that will specify the procedure. Historically, such implementation guidelines, or “rules,” are notified well after the law is enacted, sometimes even years later—as was the case with the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), where the rules were only published five years after the legislation was passed.
This delay creates a legal vacuum, leaving room for uncertainty and administrative discretion. As Owaisi pointed out in Parliament,
“Faith is a personal matter, and there is no objective test for religious practice. Until the rules are clarified, the criteria for determining who qualifies as a “practising Muslim for five years” remain ambiguous and potentially discriminatory”
Balancing Religious Freedom and Property Protection
The central argument from the government is that the waiting period acts as a safeguard against misuse. Lawmakers contend that there have been instances of coerced conversions where property was transferred to Waqf under duress or false pretenses. The five-year clause is seen as a cooling-off period to confirm that the conversion was genuine and informed.
However, critics argue that such a clause paternalistically restricts the rights of individuals to make religious donations and sets a dangerous precedent by grading religious identity based on duration.
While the intent to safeguard against misuse may have merit, the implementation of a rigid five-year rule raises critical questions about religious autonomy, equality, and procedural fairness. The real impact of this provision—and whether it withstands judicial scrutiny—will depend on the rules yet to be framed by the government and how they are enforced in practice.
Until then, the debate continues:
“Can the state legitimately delay a person’s right to make a religious donation based on how long they’ve practised a faith? Or does such a delay cross the line into unconstitutional discrimination?“
READ MORE REPORTS ON WAQF AMENDMENT ACT
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE