KOCHI: Last Monday, a BJP Rajya Sabha member, Kirodi Lal Meena, introduced a private bill on the contentious Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in the upper house of Parliament. Opposition parties were quick to oppose it. Heated debates have ensued in the public sphere.
In Kerala, last week, the high court created a stir as it said “the Union government should consider having a uniform marriage code in India”. The court’s observations came while hearing a family case involving a Christian couple. And now, there are reports suggesting that the Kerala government may file an affidavit backing the validity of the Sharia law in an ongoing Supreme Court case. This, too, has sparked outrage and confusion.
Incidentally, the SC has more than once rapped the state of India for not implementing UCC. Following the Shah Bano case in 1985, the court stated: “It is a matter of regret that Article 44 has remained a dead letter... A common civil code will help the cause of national integration by removing desperate loyalties to laws, which have conflicting ideologies... It is for the state, which is charged with the duty of securing a uniform civil code and it has legislative competence to do so.”
The Constitution, under part IV in Article 44, says the state “shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India.” However, it is a directive principle of state policy and is not enforceable.
In an affidavit filed in SC in October, the government stated: “Citizens belonging to different religions and denominations follow different property and matrimonial laws, which is an affront to the nation’s unity.” It also added that considering the “sensitivity involved”, it had requested the Law Commission to study the “various issues” regarding UCC.
‘We are all Indians, right?’
Nikesh Sonu, equal marriage rights activists
We have always thought about why there is different laws for people. We are all Indians, right? Why is there a different age limit for girls in the Muslim community for marriage? Why are some laws different for Hindus, some for Christians? And we welcome a UCC that doesn’t discriminate based on gender, religion, caste, sexuality, etc.”
‘Religion will be confined to faith’
Sreejith Panickar, political observer
The criminal laws are already uniform. For example, they apply equally to people following Shariyat when it comes to personal laws. Just like that, if civil laws become uniform, many issues plaguing our society will be solved – such as property rights, marriageable age, etc. That means religion will be confined to faith, and not influence areas such as personal liberties. So, such a UCC brings about equality. Already many civil laws, too, are uniform like the Companies Act or Labour Act. Only some, but very significant, aspects remain different for various communities. Some people fear that UCC will restrain religious customs; for example, marriage rituals. That is not true
‘We are not ready for UCC’
M V Govindan, state secretary, CPM
As a country, we are not yet ready for a Uniform Civil Code. We still haven’t moved on from the age-old feudal system, and communal forces and belief systems are still prevalent in society. What the government wants is to make India into a ‘Hindu Rashtra’ by 2025, the 100th anniversary of the RSS – it is the ultimate step towards saffronisation. From the outside, they make it look like a colourfully wrapped gift, but the inside is rotten. The India that Ambedkar visualised was much different from the regressive feudal mess that exists in our time. We still have to grow socially and politically to have constructive discussions about UCC
‘Any modern, secular country needs it’
K Surendran, state president, BJP
The BJP is all for the Uniform Civil Code. The UCC will not favour any particular religion, but make the personal laws uniform across various communities. There are many regressive practices, such as triple talaq, in certain communities, across religions. The UCC will make the laws regarding marriage, inheritance and property division, adoption, etc., equal for all citizens. It also makes personal laws much more women-friendly. Which is what any modern, secular country requires
‘Discuss in public domain first’
Arun Kumar K S, High Court lawyer
The government should first put the discussions on UCC in the public domain, and explain what it contains. Effectively, a UCC democratically allocates the same civil laws to every citizen. However, it also goes against the right to religion and it is enforceable by a court of law. The fundamental rights have precedence over the directive principles of the state and Article 44. That means, there should be a consensus from the public, from diverse communities, as they also abide by and get help from their religions and religious-based institutions. So, before a discussion on a bill begins in Parliament, we need a larger public consensus
‘Community voices ’
Nehla Muhammed, college student
In a country like India, where a party like BJP is ruling, the discussions on UCC could be viewed as an infringement on minority rights. The current government has been demonising the Muslim community and, at the same time, portraying Muslim women as helpless. The voices for any reform of the Muslim personal laws should come from within the community, rather than the state forcing it upon them
‘A can of worms’
Malavika Binny, historian
Re-initiating the discussion on UCC is like opening a can of worms, especially against the backdrop of regional elections. While UCC is a necessity for inclusive development, the topic can also plunge the nation into a vortex of religious jingoism. Certain common minimums based on human rights and principles of gender equality have to be agreed on, despite the pluralities of religious customs. But a straight-jacketed code or a one-size-fits-all formula according to the parameters used for the Hindu Undivided Family code would only become yet another stick to strike the minorities with
‘Implement after discussion’
V P Zuhra, president, NISA,
I welcome a secular and gender neutral UCC. It should be implemented to ensure equal rights for all citizens. Not just Muslim women, many communities in our country have personal laws that subjugate women. I heard that a personal bill was submitted in Parliament for a UCC. However, I still don’t know what the bill contains. If it is anything like the triple talaq law, it will ultimately not help the women. The law gives provision for either the wife (the petitioner) or her close relative to withdraw the case. That single provision has worked against women. The UCC bill should be put into public discourse, with elaborate discussions with stakeholders, especially women
‘Involve all communities’
Mathew Kuzhalnadan, MLA, Congress
Indian democracy should be looked at through a diverse, pluralistic lens. In a larger societal context, UCC should not be thrust upon the people. Instead, we should have societal consensus, involving all communities before implementing or codifying such a law
‘Antithesis to our secular pulse’
Sunny M Kapicadu, writer-activist
Ours is diverse country, filled with communities that live in different environments, in a way, different timeframes. Considering the socio-political geography of our country, bringing in a UCC can be called an antithesis to our secular pulse. The move of the BJP government to start with the legal aspects is tinged with fascism that is why the political leaders from that party only talk about ‘saving the Muslim women’ as the main reason for UCC. A call for UCC should and must begin and spread from within the civil society.
‘Amend problematic laws?’
Surya G K, artist
The UCC is against the pluralistic nature of our country. It is a tool to spread communal hatred. Yes, there are issues within Muslim personal laws. Yes, some laws are subjugating women, but no one has looked at the larger context. What a Uniform Civil Code contains, and how it affects other communities and tribes, is never talked about. Wouldn’t it be better to amend the problematic laws after deliberations, rather than implement UCC?”