UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

Prime Minister Narendra Modi advocated for implementing the Uniform Civil Code (UCC), recalling the views of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and K.M. Munshi.

What is UCC?

  • The Uniform Civil Code refers to a single set of laws governing personal matters like marriage, divorce, adoption, inheritance, and succession for all Indian citizens.
  • Mentioned in Article 44 of the Constitution as a Directive Principle of State Policy, it guides the state to strive for a uniform code but is not legally enforceable.

B.R. Ambedkar’s Views on UCC

  • Support for Article 35: Supported UCC in Directive Principles but avoided debating its merits or demerits.
  • Surprise at Opposition: Found it surprising that UCC was deemed impossible in diverse India.
  • Uniformity of Laws: Noted uniform criminal laws existed (e.g., IPC, CrPC) and personal laws had changed historically.
  • Against Religious Exclusivity: Argued laws must address social evils like discrimination and inequality.
  • Example: Cited North-West Frontier Province, where Hindu succession laws applied until 1935, proving flexibility.

K.M. Munshi’s Views on UCC

  • Not Tyrannical: UCC wouldn’t oppress minorities.
  • Equality for Women: Stressed UCC as essential for women’s equality, citing discrimination under Hindu laws.
  • Criticism of Isolationist Views: Urged minorities to accept reforms for national progress.
  • Advanced Countries: Pointed out no nation treats personal laws as sacred barriers to a Civil Code.
  • Religion and Succession: Argued inheritance and succession are social, not core religious, practices.

Mohammad Ismail’s Views on UCC

  • Opposition to UCC: Argued personal laws are integral to religious communities.
  • Regimentation Concerns: Warned UCC could create discontent and harm harmony.
  • Minority Rights: Personal laws reflect community wishes and need no unification.
  • Need for Respect: Religious minorities wouldn’t accept laws interfering with their traditions.

Key Judicial Pronouncements on UCC:

  • 1985 – Shah Bano Case: Upheld a Muslim woman’s right to maintenance; linked UCC to national integration.
  • 1985 – Jorden Diengdeh Case: Highlighted divorce law inconsistencies; called for legal uniformity via UCC.
  • 1995 – Sarla Mudgal Case: Favored UCC, questioning delays, particularly for the Hindu majority.
  • 1996 – Pannalal Bansilal Pitti Case: Supported gradual UCC implementation, respecting India’s pluralism.
  • 2000 – Lily Thomas Case: Emphasized UCC’s role in succession laws.
  • 2003 – John Vallamattom Case: Struck down discriminatory Christian personal law provisions; reiterated UCC’s necessity.
  • 2014 – Shabnam Hashmi Case: Linked secular laws under the Juvenile Justice Act to UCC.
  • 2017 – Shayara Bano Case: Addressed triple talaq, reviving UCC debate while focusing on human rights separately.

Arguments in Favour of UCC

  • Equality Under Law
    • Ensures equal rights for all citizens, aligning with Article 14.
    • Example: Uttarakhand UCC bans polygamy and standardizes marriage age.
  • Empowering Women
    • Addresses gender issues like triple talaq, unequal inheritance, and child marriage (23.3% underage marriages – NFHS-5).
  • Simplifying the Legal System
    • Replaces complex personal laws, reducing judicial backlog and ensuring streamlined justice.
  • National Integration
    • Promotes citizenship over religious identity, fostering unity.
    • Indian Penal Code proves unified laws can work in diverse societies.
  • Modernization and Social Reform
    • Updates outdated practices; addresses LGBTQ+ rights in marriage, adoption, and inheritance.
  • International Alignment
    • Aligns India with global human rights standards (e.g., Turkey, 1926).
    • Could improve India’s standing in the Global Gender Gap Index (currently 129th).

Arguments Against UCC

  • Cultural Preservation
    • Risks eroding India’s diverse heritage (e.g., Khasi tribe’s matrilineal system).
  • Religious Freedom
    • May infringe on Article 25; religion is integral to many communities (84% consider it vital – Pew, 2021).
  • Minority Rights
    • Minorities fear marginalization; UCC may favor majority practices.
    • Example: Opposition to Uttarakhand UCC.
  • Practical Hurdles
    • Difficult to implement in a diverse society; Law Commission (2018) deemed UCC “neither necessary nor desirable.”
  • Federalism Concerns
    • Personal laws are on the Concurrent List; centrally imposed UCC may undermine state autonomy.
  • Economic Impact
    • Significant costs to overhaul the legal system amidst a 47 million case backlog.

Way Forward for UCC

  • Inclusive Dialogue:
    • Consult stakeholders: religious leaders, legal experts, civil society, and communities.
    • Encourage public debates and ensure transparent communication to build consensus.
  • Phased Implementation:
    • Begin with widely accepted reforms like legal marriage age and equal inheritance rights.
    • Gradually address contentious issues to allow adaptation and feedback.
  • Constitutional Safeguards:
    • Protect minority rights and cultural practices.
    • Establish mechanisms for exemptions and grievance redressal.
  • Evidence-Based Reform:
    • Study state-level models like Goa and Uttarakhand’s UCC.
    • Use data to adopt best practices and address challenges.

Leave a Reply