Waqf Bill to be introduced in Parliament's ongoing session: Amit Shah
New Delhi, Mar 28 (PTI): Union Home Minister Amit Shah made it clear on Friday that the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, which was referred to a joint parliamentary committee (JPC) in August 2024, will be reintroduced in the current session of Parliament.
Only four working days are left for the ongoing budget session to come to an end on April 4.
"We will introduce the Waqf Bill in Parliament within this session," Shah said at the "Times Now Summit 2025".
He said no one should be afraid of the proposed legislation as the Narendra Modi government is amending the Waqf Act in accordance with the ambit of the Constitution.
"The opposition is misleading Muslims. No rights of Muslims will be curbed. They are just telling lies after lies," he said.
The home minister said the government had to bring the amendment bill to the existing law as the original legislation was enacted due to the politics of appeasement.
He claimed that the Congress had made rules in the Waqf Act that were not in accordance with the spirit of the Constitution.
"We have aligned the Waqf Bill within the ambit of the Constitution, while the Congress had twisted the law for its political advantage," he said.
Shah said the BJP-led NDA government is working in a way that the legislation can be challenged in courts.
"A Bill cannot be above the spirit of the Constitution. We are making it in such a way that its decisions can be challenged in courts. Even government orders are challenged in courts. Laws enacted by us like the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) were also challenged in courts. Parliament's decision to scrap Article 370 (of the Constitution) was also challenged," he said.
Shah said the Waqf Board has declared 123 prime locations in Delhi as Waqf properties and the historic Chandrashekhar Azad Park in Prayagraj, where Azad sacrificed his life, has also been declared a Waqf property.
He said according to the existing law, enacted by the Congress, these decisions could not even be challenged in courts.
On the protests against the Bill, the home minister said everyone has a right to protest and any dispute can be challenged in courts.
"They are free to protest. If the Bill is not within the ambit of the Constitution, it can be challenged in courts," he said.
The Union Cabinet recently approved the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, incorporating the changes recommended by the JPC, paving the way for it to be tabled in Parliament for a discussion and passage.
The Bill was referred to the JPC in August 2024, after it was introduced in the Lok Sabha by Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju.
The parliamentary panel adopted the report with a majority vote, while all 11 MPs from opposition parties in the panel had objected to it.
They had also moved dissent notes. The 655-page report was submitted to both Houses of Parliament earlier this month.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
SC refuses to adjourn hearing on pleas against EC law, says this matter is more important
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to accede to the Centre's request to adjourn the hearing on pleas challenging the constitutional validity of a 2023 law that removed the CJI from a committee responsible for appointing the chief election commissioner and the deputies, saying the matter is "more important" than the Sabarimala case.
A nine-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant is currently hearing petitions regarding discrimination against women at religious sites, including the Sabarimala temple in Kerala, as well as the scope of religious freedom across various faiths.
A bench comprising justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma turned down the request by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, to adjourn the hearing on the ground that he was currently occupied before a nine-judge bench in the Sabarimala reference case.
Referring to the gravity of the current challenge to the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, Justice Datta said, "This matter is more important than any other matter."
"Let your (solicitor general's) associates take notes today. Let the petitioners start. All matters are important. We read in the newspapers that there is an observation that the PIL in Sabarimala should not have been entertained by the court. So, with due respect to the judges, nine judges are occupied in a matter where there is an observation that it should not have been entertained in the first place," Justice Datta said.
ALSO READ: Girl mauled to death by stray dogs in Punjab's Hoshiarpur
The bench then directed the petitioners to conclude their arguments by Thursday, allowing the Centre to present its submissions on a subsequent date. The bench then proceeded with the hearing which is underway.
Earlier on March 20, CJI Surya Kant recused himself from hearing the petitions. "I will be accused of conflict of interest. There is a conflict of interest," the CJI had said. The law, enacted by Parliament in December 2023, came months after a landmark verdict by which the apex court directed that election commissioners be appointed by a committee comprising the prime minister, the leader of the Opposition, and the chief justice of India.
The bench had said that the system will remain in force till a law is enacted.
Under the 2023 Act, the selection committee consists of the prime minister, a Union minister nominated by the prime minister and the leader of Opposition (or leader of the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha).
The PILs said the exclusion of the CJI from the panel undermines the independence of the appointment process.
The law has been challenged by multiple petitioners, including Congress leader Jaya Thakur and the Association for Democratic Reforms.
Earlier, the Centre defended in the Supreme Court the appointment of two new election commissioners under the 2023 law that excludes the chief justice of India from the selection committee, saying the independence of the Election Commission does not arise from the presence of a judicial member on the committee.
In an affidavit filed in the apex court, the Union law ministry rejected the petitioner's claim that the two election commissioners were hastily appointed on March 14, 2024, to "pre-empt" the orders of the top court the next day, when the matters challenging the 2023 law were listed for hearing on interim relief.
The apex court also refused to stay the appointment of new election commissioners under the 2023 law.
A five-judge constitution bench had in March 2023 ruled that the chief election commissioner and election commissioners shall be appointed on the advice of a committee comprising the prime minister, the leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and the chief justice of India.
