Waqf law: ‘Hope’ or a well-planned misinformation campaign?
Onkareshwar Pandeya April 7,2025
It has now become unparliamentary to lie in the Indian Parliament. If ministers lie, it is okay. But if you call them a “liar”, you will be held guilty of violating the decorum of the House. You will be told, “Please lie, but call the ministers lier”
Father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhi used to say, “Democracy without truth is only the rule of the cunning.”
But this is where the irony begins, in which the most sacred institution of democracy—the Parliament—is becoming a platform for lies, illusions and half-truths.
One lie after another
Many BJP and NDA leaders, including ministers and even the Prime Minister, have repeatedly made claims that are either half-truths or outright false. This may be fine in election rallies—but when the same lies are told in Parliament, then things become serious. Because Parliament is not just a platform for debate, but for accountability. The Wakf Amendment Bill is a recent and stinging example of this. The false propaganda spread by the Central Government and BJP leaders to get this bill passed, from Parliament to the media, kept resonating. Yet the Lok Sabha Speaker remained silent. Is this not an insult to the traditions of democracy?
Applause for lies, objection to questions: The kind of things said in the House to get this bill passed, not only clash with historical facts, but also with the spirit of the Constitution. Union Minister Kiren Rijiju’s statement in Parliament that “If the amendment had not been made, the Parliament House could have also been declared a Wakf property”—was not just factually incorrect, but was an attempt to spread fear. There is no historical, legal or constitutional basis for this. Yet the Lok Sabha speaker did not raise any objection to this. Is this not an erosion of democratic norms?
Today there is a need to remember those historical examples when the dignity of the Parliament was considered paramount. When telling lies was given priority over the lure of power and not the prestige of the Parliament. The ruling parties had accepted the expulsion of their own MPs.
First case: Ram Sewak Yadav (1976)
This incident is from the year 1976. During Indira Gandhi’s government, Ram Sewak Yadav, an MP from her own party Congress, was accused of lying about his educational qualifications. In his election affidavit, he claimed that he had done B.A., whereas he did not have this degree. The Privilege Committee of Parliament recommended his expulsion. Lok Sabha Speaker Neelam Sanjiva Reddy said, “The dignity of Parliament should remain intact, whether the member is from the ruling party or the opposition.” Congress had a huge majority then. If it wanted, it could have stopped this. But Prime Minister Indira Gandhi supported the report of the Privilege Committee and allowed the expulsion of an MP from her own party. On 24 March 1976, Ram Sewak Yadav was permanently expelled.
Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Lal Krishna Advani (then leader of Jana Sangh, later one of the founding members of BJP) described the case as a “serious violation of parliamentary decorum” and said that “a member who deliberately gives wrong information to Parliament deceives Parliament. This cannot be acceptable in any democracy. We must deal with such behaviour strictly.”
Second case: Mahachandra Prasad Singh (1978)
Mahachandra Prasad Singh, an influential leader from Bihar and Janata Party MP, was accused of raising a land issue in Parliament on the basis of fake documents with forged signatures. After investigation, he was also permanently expelled on 15 December 1978. The then Prime Minister was Morarji Desai and in his government, Jana Sangh leader Atal Bihari Vajpayee was the Foreign Minister and Lal Krishna Advani was the Information and Broadcasting Minister. Then Vajpayee-Advani had said that it was a matter related to the purity of parliamentary democracy and said that – “If Parliament has to be kept honest, then strict action is necessary in such cases. To maintain the dignity of Parliament, rules should be equally applicable to all.” Vajpayee had said that “Democracy can survive only when Parliament stands on the principles of truth and morality.” Party with difference is not different:
The party which was once the guardian of the dignity of Parliament, today in its eyes dignity is determined by majority. Today the same party-BJP-which once used to give examples of parliamentary ethics, its ministers are now defying the dignity in the same Parliament. Vajpayee-Advani’s BJP, which claimed to be the party with difference, has turned away from its own values. ‘
Hope’ or ‘misguided’? Growing controversy over Wakf Amendment Bill
The BJP government named the Wakf Amendment Bill (Unified Wakf Management Empowerment, Efficiency & Development Act – 1995) as ‘Umeed’ and got it passed in both the houses with the help of NDA, but even after this the controversy is not stopping. Two Muslim leaders have reached the Supreme Court. The voices of dissent are also getting louder in JDU and some other NDA constituents because there is deep hopelessness and resentment among Muslim leaders.
The opposition is constantly asking questions: Did the government deliberately mislead the country to get this bill passed? Did the ministers lie in the House?
Misinformation No. 1:
“Wakf has the most land” — truth or illusion?
Union Minister Kiren Rijiju claimed in Parliament that Wakf properties in India are third after the Army and Railways — about 8.7 lakh properties and 9.4 lakh acres of land, which is worth about Rs 1.2 lakh crore.
· In fact, all religious trusts hold less than 1-2% of India’s total land area of 3.29 billion acres.
· Temples, monasteries and Hindu trusts hold an estimated 2-2.5 million acres of land.
· In South India alone, religious trusts hold more than 1 million acres of land (according to Kapil Sibal).
· Waqf properties are primarily for mosques, dargahs, graveyards and schools.
· Similar properties are held by Christian churches, Sikh gurudwaras, Buddhist monasteries and Jain temples—totalling around 5-1 million acres.
Misinformation No. 2
“Parliament House could have been Waqf land” — Politics of fear? On April 2, 2025, Rijiju claimed, “If this amendment had not been made, Parliament could have been considered a Waqf property.” This statement is contrary to facts. The land of the Indian Parliament House was Crown Property of the British rule, which was transferred to the Government of India in 1947. The new Parliament House built in 2023 is also on government land. Earlier, Badruddin Ajmal also claimed that the Parliament House and the airport are on Waqf land, but the Delhi Waqf Board rejected it. Congress’ Gaurav Gogoi strongly refuted the claims of Minister Rijiju, accusing Rijiju of making “misleading statements” and challenged him to verify his claims.
Misinformation No. 3
“Wakf Board could seize land”—a twist of law?The government claimed that earlier the Wakf Board could declare any land as its own—now this provision has been removed. But the Wakf Act 1995 already states that the Wakf Board can only make claims in cases of historical ownership. No land can be seized without documentation.Wakf properties are endowments, which once become ‘Wakf in the name of Allah’, are not sellable or transferable. The Supreme Court too had said in 1998—“Once a wakf, always a wakf.”
Misinformation No. 4 “
There can be no appeal against the decisions of the Wakf Tribunal” — a lie in Parliament? The Union Home Minister and Minority Minister said that there can be no appeal against the decisions of the Wakf Tribunal. Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi called it a “lie” in Parliament. Under Section 83(9) of the Wakf Act, the decisions of the tribunal can be challenged in the High Court—and the Wakf Board itself is fighting many cases in court.
Misinformation No. 5
“This bill will empower Muslim women” — empowerment or sham? The government claims that this amendment has been brought to include and empower Muslim women, especially the Pasmanda community, in the Wakf Board. But Mallikarjun Kharge reminded that in the 2013 amendment itself, the UPA government had made a provision for mandatory participation of two Muslim women in the Wakf Board—which the BJP had also supported in Parliament at that time.
Send feedback
Real intention—control?
Kharge said that this bill has been brought not for reform but for control. It is an attack not only on Waqf properties but also on the basic idea of constitutional democracy. BJP leaders also targeted Waqf regarding 123 properties in Delhi, whereas this matter is already under judicial investigation. The manner in which the Waqf Amendment Bill was passed is indicative of this decline.
Lying in Parliament—what is the rule, and what action is taken?
Amidst the misleading statements of ministers on the Waqf Bill, it is important to know that deliberately lying inside Parliament is not only a moral violation but also a constitutional violation. Under Rule 353 of the Lok Sabha and Rule 261 of the Rajya Sabha, if a minister or MP deliberately misleads the House, then an apology, suspension or privilege motion can be brought against him. The practical reality is different
Apart from old cases like Ram Sewak Yadav and Mahachandra Singh, in recent years such cases against leaders of the ruling party have either been suppressed or ignored.
In 2023, the government’s answers given in Parliament regarding the Adani Group were proved wrong by RTI—but no action was taken.
In 2019, the opposition called Arun Jaitley’s statements on the Rafale deal false, but due to the ruling majority, no investigation could be done.
In 2016, Smriti Irani’s educational degree was questioned, but no punitive action was taken.
But when it comes to the opposition—like Mahua Moitra in 2023—the Privileges Committee directly recommended expulsion.
‘Hope’ or ‘political illusion’?
The government says this bill is “hope” and will bring transparency and reform. But the way facts were distorted, lies were spoken in Parliament, and the powers of the Wakf Board were called into question further deepens the trust gap between democracy and minorities. Is this really “hope” or a political agenda that was passed in Parliament on the basis of lies and illusion?
The truth is that this bill breaks the “trust”-and this is the biggest crime in a democracy.
Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar had said that “The Constitution is not just a document, it is a moral outlook. If there is no morality in Parliament, then the Constitution has no meaning.” If lying in Parliament is forgiven, then what will be the value of speaking the truth?
But in the current Parliament, is the punishment for lying only for the opposition?
Do the rules of the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha not apply to the ruling party?
So the biggest question: Has lying in Parliament now become the ‘new normal’?
