Vishnu Shankar Jain on Modi's Big Waqf Act Push | Bigger Plan Behind Action Against Muslims

The speaker discusses the 1995 Waqf Act, asserting it should be repealed, but argues for necessary amendments instead of total repeal to ensure government control over Waqf properties. The context is the takeover of temples by state laws in places like Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, drawing parallels with Waqf property management.

The Waqf Amendment Bill, introduced in the Parliament, is now being debated. The speaker, Vishnu Shankar Jain, outlines the history of petitions against the Waqf Act in various courts, highlighting the introduction of the Amendment Bill as a step from the accumulation of public objections.

Jain explains the arbitrary nature of the Waqf Act by focusing on two main provisions: Section 4-6 surveys and Section 40, which allows any property to be declared as Waqf. The new Bill proposes to repeal Section 40, which was a major source of arbitrary property declarations, and shifts the responsibility of property surveys from private commissioners to government collectors.

Under the previous Waqf Act, properties could be declared Waqf by either dedication or usage, often without proper documentation, leading to disputes in notable cases, including the Taj Mahal and religious sites. The new Bill seeks to address this by repealing the concept of Waqf by user and tightening the criteria for property dedication to require personal ownership and prolonged practice of Islam.

Discussions include the removal of the term 'Waqf by user' from the Amendment Bill, focusing on ensuring properties are Waqf only by voluntary dedication of owned properties. It also adds stringent new definitions and criteria to prevent misuse, aiming to correct historical overreach in property declarations under the Waqf Act.

A legal battle ensued over the rights of non-Muslims to challenge Waqf declarations, which the Amendment Bill tries to address by removing the requirement of Islamic law experts in Waqf Tribunals. There's emphasis on the need for government amendment to align tribunals with constitutional provisions, allowing civil disputes to go to civil courts instead.

The Amendment Bill's potential impact on legal disputes surrounding Waqf properties is discussed, including pending high-profile cases. The Bill's removal of problematic provisions like Section 40 and the restriction of its scope aim to prevent new grievances related to Waqf property declarations.

The Amendment Bill mandates reconfirmation of all previously registered Waqf properties within six months, requiring detailed submissions for government verification. Historical and government-owned properties, like the Red Fort and ASI monuments, are discussed as needing protection from Waqf claims.