‘One nation, one law’ is a necessity and the sooner the Uniform Civil Code comes, the better, though it is a sensitive issue and should be handled delicately by having more public debates and discussions

Will Prime Minister Narendra Modi go for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC), particularly after being prompted by the Supreme Court (SC) last week?

Right now several of the religious communities in India follow their own personal laws. Under the UCC, all personal religious laws in the country, including marriage, divorce, property rights, inheritance and maintenance will be brought under a secular umbrella in a unified way.

The apex court batted for the UCC, pointing out that the founding fathers who framed the Constitution had hoped that the State would bring in such a code.

Justice Deepak Gupta said, “Though Hindu laws were codified in the year 1956, there has been no attempt to frame a Uniform Civil Code applicable to all citizens of the country despite exhortations. A belief seems to have gained ground that it is for the Muslim community to take a lead in the matter of reforms of their personal law. No community is likely to bell the cat by making gratuitous concessions on this issue. It is the State which is charged with the duty of securing a Uniform Civil Code for the citizens of the country and, unquestionably, it has the legislative competence to do so.”

Citing the case of Goa, where a UCC is applicable to all, regardless of religion, except while protecting certain limited rights, the court asked why the Centre has not brought an UCC as yet.  

 The SC’s observation has strengthened the Modi Government’s resolve to bring the UCC, which is part of the core agenda of the Sangh Parivar. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has also managed to nuance its narrative by adding the issue of gender equality.

 The BJP’s argument is that though Hindu laws were codified in 1956, there is no law applicable to all citizens of the country even after seven decades of Independence.

India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, while defending the introduction of the Hindu Code Bill in Parliament in 1954, said, “I do not think that at the present moment the time is ripe in India for me to try to push it through.” Today Modi has the mandate and the ability as well as willingness to bring the UCC for the benefit of the country. 

 Taking advantage of the weak and divided Opposition, the Prime Minister has already pushed through two controversial Bills in Parliament, the Triple Talaq and the abrogation of Article 370, in his second term despite not having a majority in the Rajya Sabha. The Ram temple issue is in court.

Though the Law Commission in its report last year said that the UCC is “neither necessary nor desirable at this stage”, the party promised to bring the UCC in its 2019 manifesto.

However, the immediate priority of the Government is to deal with the economic situation and Kashmir. There is trouble in the Northeast on the National Register of Citizens (NRC).

Then there are elections to three State Assemblies, Maharashtra, Haryana and Jharkhand soon. Therefore, the work on the UCC could be taken up after that.  

 Supporters of the UCC argue that it is long overdue. The issue was discussed during the Constituent Assembly debates where BR Ambedkar was batting for it, but many Constituent Assembly members shot it down. Thus it was added to Part IV of the Constitution as one of the Directive Principles of State policy.

Second, Modi’s vision of a New India is also a young India with 65 per cent of the population under the age of 25 years. These young people are influenced by global views and would appreciate the UCC. Third, it would promote national integration as it would provide one law for all citizens. Fourth, it would provide gender justice. 

The opponents point out that the Muslims perceive the UCC as an encroachment on their religious freedom, even though some of the Islamic countries have adopted a common law for all. They also note that there is no consensus on the issue.

 However, today, the issue is more political than legal and each time the subject comes up, there is a heated debate from both its supporters and opponents. As for political parties, there is no consensus and most of them use it for vote bank politics.

The Congress wants a political consensus while the Samajwadi Party has accused the BJP of doing it for Muslim votes. On the other hand, the BJP’s ally, the Janata Dal-United (JD-U), has diplomatically asked for consultation with all stakeholders. The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) wants reforms across all religions and the Nationalist Congress Party wants discussions on a broader spectrum. While the All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen (AIMIM) is opposed to it, the Shiv Sena supports it. So where is the consensus?

 However, there is merit in having one law for all.  One can understand the stand of the Muslims but the Congress and other political parties should not play politics in bringing uniformity in laws. In the 80s, even the late Rajiv Gandhi had explored the possibility of introducing a voluntary civil code.

“One nation, one law” is a necessity and the sooner the UCC comes, the better, though it is a sensitive issue and should be handled delicately by having more public debates and discussions to bring about a consensus. 

(The writer is a senior journalist)