The Uniform Civil Code is a Divergence from India’s Pluralism and Religious Tolerance

The Uniform Civil Code

The Uniform Civil Code is a Divergence from India’s Pluralism and Religious Tolerance. The Uniform Civil Code, which governs all citizens of India if implemented, aims to replace the personal laws that are based on the scriptures and traditions of different religious communities in the nation.

A uniform civil code is to be implemented over the entire country of India, according to Article 44 of the Indian Constitution. By implementing the Uniform Civil Code, all personal religious laws would be suppressed, and a uniform personal law would be created to control areas such as marriage, divorce, inheritance, and other matters.

This rule must be the same for everyone, regardless of caste, creed, or color, and it cannot include personal laws related to any religion or culture.

A set of uniform laws will apply to all people under a unified civil code. Hindus and Muslims currently have various personal laws, for instance. Personal law governs marriages and divorce, inheritance, and succession.

During the Shah Bano case in 1985, the uniform civil code became a flashpoint in Indian politics. The Supreme Court had ruled Bano, a Muslim lady, should receive alimony from her ex-spouse. The court had made a uniform statement in the context of that judgment.

The earliest personal laws were created during the British Raj, mostly for Muslims and Hindus. The British resisted further meddling in this domestic matter out of concern for community leaders’ objections.

This has undoubtedly been the subject of the most recent disputes and debates. While a sizable portion of citizens support it, a sizable portion also express their overall unease with the concept.

The move’s proponents argue fiercely that the existence of several personal rules breeds uncertainty and makes it difficult to navigate society. People who disagree with it bring out several problems with the idea and then make numerous arguments against it. Today, we’ll talk about a few of these arguments.

It is fairly absurd to expect people from different cultures and traditions to follow the same laws based on a consistent system in India.

The claim is supported by India’s pride in maintaining its integrity despite diversity. We must respect the personal preferences and rules of every minority community to preserve variety. That is what has allowed this country to have such a long period of co-existence despite several communal and ethnic clashes.

Whether violating personal laws is permissible or not is the question we must ask ourselves. Additionally, as we approach this problem, we should be realistic.

The impracticality of this issue stems from the 14.2% Muslim population in India, where any attempt to apply to UCC has been met with fierce rejection. Therefore, forcing the majority of Hindu viewpoints on them is unfair to them.

The founding fathers’ promise of a secular India is what the minority is clamoring for today. When deciding on the UCC and abrogation of personal law, the government must take into account the sentiments of the minority community.

Infringement of Personal and Religious Laws

The Muslim community is highly opposed to the government’s action, and they all claim that UCC would dangerously breach their personal laws and cause irreparable harm to their community and its laws.

The idea of incorporating all personal laws into one uniform code will violate the fundamental elements of most minority religions’ personal laws, according to a compelling argument against the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code.

The minority community asks a very important question: Is it the government’s job to decide which laws need to be changed and which laws properly suit the framework of the UCC? They genuinely ask a pretty thoughtful question.

The current administration must create a code that is acceptable to all the communities to completely adopt a functioning Uniform Civil Code, but this is an impossible task and is best left to the imagination.

The government intends to fully dissolve it because every community passionately opposes any interference with their own laws, no matter how minor.

In addition, if the government wanted to repeal legislation, it would have to prove that doing so would promote good governance and uphold fundamental human rights. Although decades have gone by since it was first proposed, the implementation of UCC would attempt to bring about unwanted changes and will give rise to an extensive amount of misunderstanding.

We are all well aware of the strategies the present administration employs just before elections. The notion of winning elections at the expense of rendering a nation with already precarious security challenges would only add fuel to the fire.

As the largest democracy in the world, we have more urgent problems than the UCC. There is a large percentage of unemployed people, the economy is struggling, religious intolerance is widespread, and there are occasional conflicts between different communities and ethnic groups.

The present situation in Manipur is one such example of ethnic violence. The current administration is attempting to please the majority population for their short-term goals rather than searching for ways to keep the country unified and follow the principles of secularism laid down by our founding fathers.

Click Here for more on UCC

Click Here for more on Geopolitics