New Delhi: During the debate on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 in the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday, independent MP and former Union minister Kapil Sibal launched a scathing attack on the government. He raised the issue of personal freedom regarding the donation of his property and raised questions on the new provisions of the bill. Sibal said, “My property is mine. Suppose I am a Hindu, Muslim, Sikh or Christian and want to donate my land, who can stop me? No one. This is my right.” His comment was on the provision of the bill, which imposes strict conditions regarding the donation of waqf property.

Controversial provision of the bill

Sibal explored the history of the Waqf Act in the debate. He said that in the provisions of 1954 and 1995, only Muslims had the right to create a waqf. But the 2013 amendment removed this restriction, allowing anyone to donate their property to the waqf. Now this new bill of 2025 is again bringing back the old condition. Sibal taunted, “Now you say that only Muslims can create Waqf. Not only this, the donor should be a follower of Islam for at least five years. What is this logic?” He cited court decisions where Hindus donated land for cemeteries and other projects. “The court recognized it. Then why are you imposing this ban?” Sibal questioned. He argued that ownership of property is a part of personal freedom, and the government should not have the right to interfere in it. Criticism of making the District Magistrate ‘omnipotent’ Sibal strongly objected to another provision of the bill. Under the new rule, the District Magistrate has been given the right to decide whether a property is a Waqf or not. Sibal said in a sarcastic tone, “What investigation will the district magistrate do? He will decide himself whether it is a Waqf or not, and his decision will be final. This is making one person all-powerful.” He asked how transparency and accountability will be ensured in this process. “Will the magistrate have any standard, or will it depend on his will?” Sibal’s concern raises questions on the practicality of the bill.

Human aspect in the debate

Sibal also presented his point from a human perspective. He said, “Donating property is a personal decision. Whether someone wants to give his land to a temple, mosque, gurudwara or church, it is a matter of his sentiment and belief. Why are you binding it to the criterion of religion?” His statement became a topic of discussion among many MPs present in the House. A senior journalist said after the debate, “Sibal not only presented a legal point of view, but also linked it to the sentiments of the common man. This is his strength.” Analysis: Controversies and possibilities
The aim of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill is said to be to make the management of waqf properties transparent. But critics like Sibal believe that it encroaches on private rights. The bill’s provision to prevent non-Muslims from creating waqfs and giving unlimited powers to the district magistrate is at the centre of the controversy. Political analyst Priya Mehta says, “This amendment can face charges of discrimination on religious grounds. Also, the possibility of administrative arbitrariness makes it more complex.” If this bill is passed, its legal and social implications will be discussed for a long time.

The way forward
Sibal’s argument can give a new turn to the debate on the bill. The opposition in the Rajya Sabha is already demanding that it be sent to the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC). Sibal’s question—”Who can stop me?”—not only reflects his personal opinion, but also highlights the debate between personal freedom and government interference. It will be interesting to see in the coming days how the government responds to this criticism and whether there is scope for changes in the bill.