UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

On August 22^nd, the Supreme Court banned the Islamic practice of triple talaq. It is an archaic custom that was extremely patriarchal in nature and was strongly opposed by women, terming it “regressive”. It violated our fundamental right to equality and has been described by the Supreme Court as “one of the worst forms of marriage dissolution”. In fact, most Muslim majority countries, including our infamous neighbour Pakistan has abolished this system. It has been criticized by various High Courts in the country. Even a petition of over a million Indian Muslims was signed to ban this so called “tradition”. Once the problem had finally been solved, the talk of a uniform civil code started gaining steam again. But are we too early? Or perhaps we should’ve done this a long time ago.

Uniform civil code (UCC) means a system where every person is treated equally, irrespective of their caste, gender and religion. UCC will put an end to personal laws, laws on marriage, inheritance and divorce. Currently it varies from religion to religion.

For example- Hindus consider marriage to be a sacrament, while Muslims see it as an 

obligation. Each religion has different personal laws, but as long as they are within the bounds of the constitution, it can be freely practiced. In fact, personal laws have been elevated to the levels of fundamental rights. Article 26 of the Indian penal code guarantees freedom to "religious denominations or any sect thereof to manage its own affairs in matters of religion". This freedom is not even subject to the `right to equality'. 

That is where the true issue lies. Our country cannot truly be secular unless every religion obeys one Book of Law- the Constitution. Most personal laws of religions have one thing in common. Women get the wrong end of the stick. Most such laws are sexist, biased and patriarchal in nature. We must strive to create a gender neutral society. In the end, most debates about personal law end up being about feminism and women’s rights.

While triple talaq has finally been abolished, Muslim laws still have a lot to work on. Polygamy is still prevalent. Men have the rights to unilateral divorce, but women can move for divorce only on certain specified grounds. Men use this as an excuse to deny women Mehr, which is a dower given by the grooms to the bride for their usage. Both practices are archaic and must be put an end to.

But it is not just Islamic personal law that needs changing. While Hindu personal laws have undergone plenty of improvement over the years, they still have plenty of work cut out for them. On the bright side, now a woman can stake a claim in her parent’s wealth. That being said if a woman dies, her property goes to her husband’s heirs instead of her parents. Whereas, if a man dies, his property goes to his parents instead of his wife. This is in violation of the spirit of equality.

Earlier I mentioned how marriage is a sacrament for them. That is why if the ceremony was not performed using all the correct rituals, it can be deemed null and void. The problem is that every community has a different custom, and often that leads to confusion. Worse, if a woman wishes to divorce on grounds of bigamy, she must prove that both wives were married according to proper rituals, which is a herculean task in itself. After a divorce, if a Hindu woman changes her faith, she forfeits her right to maintenance.

Perhaps the real reason that despite all odds, Hindu laws have progressed over the years is that they neither have a centralised book like the Quran, nor do they have a centralised leader like the pope. There is no one to obstruct change. That is why it is all the more easier to change a law that removes or edits any article that involves religion, to make it more neutral and inclusive to everyone.

Surprisingly, UCC was meant to a fundamental right back during the 1940s. After independence in 1947, the Constituent Assembly got to work framing the next constitution. The Assembly spearheaded by Dr. B R Ambedkar aimed to make a single civil code for all Indians, enabling progress in our society for years to come. However, the country was engulfed in Hindu-Muslim riots at the time. The Congress party lead by the first Prime Minister Pandit Nehru, wanted a secular and populist image for the party.

This lead to UCC being included in a different set of laws called Directive Principle of State Policy. They were meant to act as a set of instruction or guidelines for governments to follow when forming new laws. These directives had no timeframe, no deadline, and were not enforceable by the courts. They were called “non-justiciable” rights. By doing so, the idea of UCC was effectively rendered toothless, in the hopes that one day a government will be willing to risk the fire and try to gradually bring a single code into fruition.

                                                 I believe that time now.

Most people think of UCC and pit Hindus against Muslims. They don’t realise that the heart of the matter lies in the oppression of women in the country and the ideal of freedom and equality for all. Unless people change their mindsets, people of different religions will be pit against each other and no work will ever be done for a progressive society. As long as one community believes it is superior to the other, nothing can be done. Heads of all beliefs must come together to negotiate an effect UCC. For this the government must be responsible and take initiative and display political courage. A UCC will not only end polygamy in Islam, it will also end tax benefits for undivided Hindu families. Another positive side to this is that it can also effectively end the reservation system that has increasingly been used for devious means. A uniform civil code would bring clarity and equality to all. Even the political parties must set aside all differences and work together to create an efficient UCC. A UCC that will focus on human rights and gender equality to end discrimination, bias, and patriarchy.