The central government told the Supreme Court that it is strongly against any kind of stay, partial or full, on the new Waqf laws while the court is still hearing the case. The government said that courts should not stop laws made by Parliament unless the law is completely proven to be against the Constitution.

In its submission to the court, the government said, "There is a presumption of constitutionality that applies to laws made by Parliament, and an interim stay is against the principle of balance of powers."

The government also explained how the law was made. It said, "The law has been made on the recommendations of a Joint Parliamentary Committee... followed by an extensive debate in both Houses of Parliament."

It also said that while the Supreme Court does have the power to check if a law goes against the Constitution, stopping the law temporarily would be wrong at this early stage. "The grant of an injunction against operation of any provision would be violative... of the delicate balance of power between the different branches of the State," the government added.

No harm shown yet, says government

The government also pointed out that the petitions filed against the law have not shown any specific or personal harm to individuals. It said, "The petitions in this case do not complain of injustice in any individual case," and because of this, no urgent protection is needed through a stay or freeze.

The Supreme Court is currently hearing fewer petitions after reducing the number from nearly 200. The court is looking into complaints about some parts of the new law, such as the rule that only practising Muslims can donate to Waqf and the requirement to include non-Muslim members in Waqf boards and the Central Waqf Council.

Petitioners say these rules go against basic rights given by the Constitution. Earlier, the court had asked the government if it would allow Muslims to be part of Hindu religious trusts or temple boards.

The court had also thought about giving an interim stay because of the violence in some states. In Bengal, people died in protests, and in Lucknow, clashes happened over the law. However, the court postponed the decision after the government requested more time.

In the last hearing, the government gave a clear assurance. It promised that for now, there will be "no Waqf appointments... (and) no change in status (of properties claimed by Waqf boards)" until the court finishes hearing the case.

Many people have challenged the law. This includes opposition parties like Congress, AAP, DMK, and CPI. Even the JDU, a BJP ally and party of Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, has raised concerns. This is important because Bihar has a large Muslim population and will have state elections soon.

Religious bodies like the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind and All India Muslim Personal Law Board have also filed objections. Some want the law to be cancelled, while others just want a freeze until the court makes a final decision.

 

You might also be interested in: Watch: Pak minister admits terror links, says ‘did it for America and allies’