Time to bring Uniform Civil Code to arrive at normative uniformity under a single order

The right to education is “subject to the manner as the state may, by law, determine”. Schools are run by rules and regulations, and set curriculum to be followed by one and all.There is increase in literacy rate and there is widespread awareness about education across the spectrum. Education is about awakening intelligence, critical thinking, reflection and reform. Whereas there is evidence of social prosperity even among the socio-economically weaker section of the society, but those restrictive with the patriarchal, orthodox, identity mindsets lagged behind. The recent hijab controversy, however, gives an opportunity to reflect, in the 75th year of independence, about equality and liberty rights provided by the constitution toall the citizens of India. According to Article 14 of the constitution,the state provides equality to all before the law and the rights regulates the relationship between the state and the citizen. It prohibits the state any discrimination against citizens”on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, placeof birth and any ofthem”. The affirmative actions have shown results of social mobility but promotional or communal quotas normatively not justified interfered with equality. General and reserve categorisationcreates identity divide, abuse of creamy layer, concessions to minority institutions and vote bank politics, degraded public education institutions and increase of private institutions. These factors mar the desired aim of equality,and also dilute the vision of social justice.

Liberty gives freedom rights through Article 19 but with “reasonable restrictions” that vary with the freedom in question, and are not absolute in our rule-based democratic society. Article 25 gives rights to “freedom of conscience and …. to profess, practice and propagate religion” essential to a religion, as determined by constitution rather than a religious group. But the rights to religious freedom ends with modern democratic secular principles, limiting the external regulation of religion.Indian secularism is neither neutral to religions like US, nor indifferent, but promotes co-existence of religions(positive secularism). Unfortunately,secularism is reduced to empty rhetoric since religion is used even by self-proclaimed secularists. In relation to religious freedom, separate personal family laws for different religious groups for reasons of unequal gender norms have long been criticized. They are undemocratic. The personal laws are made by the singular source of authority, Parliament. Article 44 calls on the state to move towards the creation of uniform civil code to do away the asymmetry. The asymmetric, caste or religion based affirmative measures need to be addressed.All the state-funded educational institutions should have common rules and regulations and curriculum. Assam has stopped State funding to institutions imparting only religious education. Each individual above casteor creed has one value, therefore, any measure should not be seen through minority - majority divide. It is time to bring uniform civil code to arrive at normative uniformity under a single order wherein differential rights have no legitimacy.The faith-based ideas and religious beliefs may be incorporated as content but without legitimacy. It will help diffuse separative ego and identity, uphold equality and enhance a sense of common nationality. When talking of rights, it is imperative to be conscious of duties as a citizen to uphold and promote harmony, unity and integrity of India, by transcending religion, linguistic, regional and sectorial diversities. The courts have the power toevaluate what is essential and what is non-essential,thereby the power to rationalize. Courts thus rationalise, reform and do not allow misrepresentation of religion while upholdingthe rule of lawand remindingcitizens of their fundamental rights.The court verdict on the hijab controversy needstobe accepted by all and sundry for individual,social and national prosperity.

(The writer is a Delhi-based consultant surgeon. The views expressed are personal.)