India, Sept. 16 -- The Supreme Court's decision to suspend some of the most controversial provisions of the contentious Waqf (Amendment) Act is a significant moment in the evolving debate around the Islamic charitable endowments. It offers all stakeholders, especially the government, an opportunity to take a step back from the fractious politics enveloping the debate that is preventing genuine reform in the decades-old regulation that governs such charities. Hearing a batch of petitions, the apex court on Monday suspended the collector's powers to unilaterally decide whether a property is waqf (an endowment) or government land and alter revenue records, and the requirement that only a practising Muslim for at least five years can create waqf. It also stayed provisions allowing the authorities to derecognise waqf land during the pendency of decision or in the middle of a dispute, adding that no third-party rights should be created on such lands till the dispute is decided. The top court also said the Central Waqf Council cannot have more than four non-Muslim members and state waqf boards cannot have more than three non-Muslim members. But the court refused to stay the legislation in its entirety, upheld the scrapping of the waqf-by-user provision and the registration of new properties on a national portal, and agreed with the bar of declaration of any land in scheduled or tribal areas as waqf. These developments may be interpreted by the government as a vindication of its stated aim to modernise the law regulating waqfs. But the court's warning that adopting the law in full, without safeguards, could lead to "serious consequences" for property rights showed that there are some genuine concerns about federalism, separation of powers, and concentration of powers in the hands of some government officials, potentially leading to harassment and misuse. All laws need to evolve over time. This newspaper has noted in the past that management of many waqf properties in India is blighted by neglect, mismanagement, encroachment and poor oversight. Only well-intentioned moves towards establishing transparency can ensure a genuine overhaul. But polarised politics, unnecessary rhetoric, and a trust deficit have created a minefield of misunderstanding. The top court's decision offers a moment to the Centre to initiate broader consultations, build consensus on issues involving the states and lend an ear to the fears and concerns of the community. A considered and empathetic view will pave the way for a more inclusive and efficient waqf management system....