The Modi government has yet again missed the forest for the trees. At a time when the country stares at growing communal tension over land ownership, historical revisionism, and institutional appeasement, the Centre has chosen to amend the Waqf Act instead of abolishing it. One must ask: why buy fresh trouble when the solution lies in legislative euthanasia? The Waqf Act, 1995, has long outlived any justification for its existence in a modern, secular, democratic republic. It allows a religious body to exercise vast powers, without oversight, over land it merely claims to be “Waqf property.” Not only does this law violate the spirit of Article 14 (equality before law), but it also institutionalizes a parallel legal system where the rights of non-Muslims are trampled without due process. Take for instance, the shocking case in Tamil Nadu where the Waqf Board claimed ownership over centuries-old Hindu temple land, ignoring historical timelines and the fact that Islam arrived in the subcontinent much later. Or consider Karnataka, where a public ground used for Eid prayers was quietly claimed by the Waqf Board and meekly handed over by the Congress government. When religion-based land grabs are sanctified by legislation, what remains of a secular state? The Supreme Court is now seized of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf Act. The Centre has sought time to respond—but for what purpose? Why not bite the bullet and push for abolition rather than tweaks? Even Islamic countries like Turkey, Tunisia, and Egypt have reformed or done away with their Waqf systems in favour of centralized, secular property laws. Why is India stuck in reverse gear?
Worse still, the judiciary has allowed this medieval construct to thrive, even as it micromanages governance in other areas. Recall how the Supreme Court in the Ayodhya case demanded documentary proof from Hindus to reclaim their temple land, but when it comes to Waqf claims, it conveniently waives off the same burden of evidence. How can such judicial asymmetry be justified? Absurdity has reached new heights. A Delhi-based Muslim cleric recently claimed that even the Parliament and the Supreme Court complex are “Waqf lands” because the Mughals once ruled Delhi. Is this the level of audacity India must now tolerate under the garb of secularism? And where is the judiciary headed when such claims aren’t summarily dismissed as seditious and fraudulent? Even more worrisome is the recent SC verdict in the Tamil Nadu Governor case, where the Court declared that if a Governor or President delays assent to a Bill, it is “deemed to have been given.” Has the judiciary now assumed legislative authority? What if a rogue state cabinet—say, in J&K or West Bengal—passes a Bill rejecting Central laws or enforcing religious bias? Should courts rubber-stamp such defiance too? The judiciary must also introspect on its credibility. The recent incident involving a Delhi High Court judge and unexplained cash raises serious questions. The judge was transferred, not suspended, not arrested. Instead of an open investigation, there’s now a secret internal inquiry. Is this transparency? Is this the justice system we want? The time has come to scrap the opaque and nepotistic Collegium system. Independence is vital, but unchecked independence breeds unaccountability. A handful of dynasties cannot be allowed to “call the shots” in the highest court of the land. If the Modi government is serious about reform, it must act with spine, not half-measures. Push the Uniform Civil Code. Abolish the Waqf Act. Reform the judiciary. And above all, stop appeasing those who misuse religion to bend the Constitution to their will. India cannot remain a hostage to vote-bank politics and judicial timidity. The Constitution guarantees equality, not immunity, for any community.