Obstruction by Interested Parties Accused in UMEED Act 2025: TMML Demands Justice and Accountability
The Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development (UMEED) Act and its Controversy
India's passage of the Waq Amendment Act 2025 has sparked a heated debate, with some organizations advocating for it and others vehemently opposing it. Among the supporters is the Tamil Maanila Muslim League (TMML), a Tamil Nadu-based Islamic organization. In a bold move, the UMEED Act aims to harness the potential of Waqf properties, currently valued at over Rs 9 lakh crore and spanning 9.4 lakh acres across 8.7 lakh endowments, to uplift India's marginalized communities, including 200 million Muslims.
"The UMEED Act reflects the Quranic ethos of universal charity. Yet, vested interests are obstructing this reform. TMML advocates for the Act's full implementation, ensuring justice and empowerment for the people," said TMML chief Ameerul Millat S. Sheikh Dawood.
UMEED: A Necessary Step Forward
Chronic mismanagement has undermined the potential of Waqf properties to fund education, healthcare, and welfare initiatives. Only 13% of Muslims benefitted from Waqf revenues due to the lack of accountability, as revealed by the 2006 Sachar Committee Report. The UMEED Act addresses this issue through transparency, inclusivity, justice, fraud prevention, and empowerment. Measures include digitized records of 8.7 lakh Waqf properties, audits by the Comptroller and Auditor General, and fast-track dispute resolution in district courts.
Why the Opposition?
The UMEED Act faced fierce opposition, with some political actors fearing the loss of power. TMML chief Ameerul Millat S. Sheikh Dawood claimed that critics hide behind religious autonomy, but their aim is self-enrichment. State Waqf boards, allegedly controlled by politically connected individuals, have mismanaged funds and now fear UMEED's transparency.
Arguments Against the UMEED Act
Critics argue that the Act infringes on the autonomy of Muslim institutions by allowing the government to replace elected members of State Waqf Boards with nominees and mandating non-Muslim members on these boards. They also oppose the abolition of "Waqf by User" as discriminatory, as it potentially threatens Waqf properties that are traditionally considered inalienable under Islamic law.
Counterarguments by Supporters
The BJP government, the UMEED Act's supporters, argue that these reforms strengthen religious institutions by ensuring transparency, preventing misuse, and enhancing efficiency. The government contends that these changes are necessary to ensure Waqf properties benefit the intended communities, not profiteers.
The Supreme Court, while seeking truth, has temporarily paused denotification or alteration of Waqf properties and appointments to boards until May 5, 2025.
The implications of the UMEED Act are far-reaching. The stakes are high, as illustrated by instances such as the eviction threats faced by 150 families in Vellore in April 2025, or the communal unrest sparked by the Waqf Board's claim to 480 acres in Thiruchendurai in September 2022.
The TMML's call to action encourages the acceleration of digitization, fixing WAMSI gaps, and ending opposition to the Act. The struggle for the rightful use of the 9 lakh crore Waqf legacy continues.
Conflicting views center around religious autonomy, misuse, and the intent to empower the people, not line the pockets of profiteers. The Supreme Court's decision will decisively shape the future of Waqf properties and the communities they aim to serve.
- The UMEED Act's objective of harnessing Waqf properties' potential for societal uplift, particularly for India's marginalized communities including 200 million Muslims, aligns with the Quranic ethos of universal charity.
- In the discourse surrounding the UMEED Act, concerns have arisen about its potential infringement on the autonomy of Muslim institutions, as it permits government intervention in the appointment of members and the inclusion of non-Muslim members on State Waqf Boards.
- Proponents of the UMEED Act argue that these reforms are integral to ensuring transparency, preventing misuse, and enhancing efficiency in the management of Waqf properties, thereby ensuring they benefit the intended communities rather than profiteers.
- The opposition to the UMEED Act has been vocal, with critics fearing a loss of power due to increased government oversight, and accusing certain political actors of obstructing reforms for self-enrichment.
- The stakes are high in the ongoing debate about the UMEED Act, as the Act's implementation could significantly impact various sectors, including health, education, and welfare, and potentially resolve longstanding issues of accountability and inequality.
