THE Law Commission of India initiating a fresh consultation process on Uniform Civil Code (UCC) comes at a time when the entire world is waking up to the need for having a common judicial system for respective countries, even while celebrating diversity in all its shades. Particularly for the democracies like India, which celebrate diversity and accomodates various faiths, it has become necessary to have in place the legal mechanism that will apply uniformly to all sections of society. Article 44 of the Constitution of India states clearly, “The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India.” Given this fact, in India, UCC has so far remained the unrealised Constitutional expectation. In fact, rising above the inundating arguments in favour and against the UCC from religious quarters, a look at the Constituent Assembly Debates of the year 1948 reveals that the stalwarts like ‘Bharat Ratna’ Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar, K M Munshi, and Alladi Krishnaswamy Ayyar had supported the UCC. These giants had underlined the need for having a uniform legal mechanism and a common measure of agreement in place to deal with differential systems of inheritance and other matters. They had stated unequivocally that the UCC aimed at amity.

 

Sadly, despite the wisdom of these titans, some quarters have been making the implementation of Article 44 of the Constitution of India a political issue, instead of understanding the noble ideals of amity. Those crying hoarse every now and then with allegations of Constitutional values being in danger, have been the ones opposing the Uniform Civil Code. This is very surprising. It exposes their political doublespeak and selectivism about Constitutional values. In opposing the idea of Uniform Civil Code, these so-called champions of Constitutional values, are opposing the spirit of national integration fostered through the Constitution itself. Already, there are various laws that have common applicability to all the Indian citizens irrespective of the community or social group which they belong to. These include the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Negotiable Instruments Act etc to name a few. As was pointed out by Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar, the only major issues of contention in relation to debate between those favouring personal laws and those supporting the UCC were marriage and succession. Over the years, new laws have come into place and some have evolved on the basis of case laws, and their applicability is not discriminatory in nature. Besides, the personal laws rooted in religious beliefs obviously do not have provisions to deal with new challenges arising out of technological advancements. For instance, how effectively can laws rooted in religious beliefs deal with cyber frauds? Cyber world did not exist when personal laws rooted in religious beliefs came into being. The UCC will remove this inadequacy.

 

One needs to understand that the personal laws with religious roots were born in an era that was marked by quest for power with ambitions for territorial expansionism. This quest often led to conflicts, wars, violence, bloodshed followed by the powerful ruling the weak. The ruler of the time often introduced or presented newer norms as provisions applicable to the ruled. These norms were treated as laws gradually. When someone else dominated a territory, some of such norms were reversed or abandoned or new ones were introduced. So, in effect, laws were codes of life defined by the ruler’s interpretation and understanding of how to discipline a society. Over the centuries, with several geopolitical and socio-cultural changes and the all-pervading processes of democracy and globalisation dominating the world scene, various transactions among humans including cultural, economic, and legal have undergone sea-change. In such an era, the Uniform Civil Code comes as a tool to liberate masses from isolationist ideas of norms and laws. It aims at amity and not discord. Hence, everyone in favour of amity and Constitutional principles must support it with open heart. Every system of law matures by drawing principles from other systems that keep protection of human virtues above religioius tenets. In case of India, various laws have elements of wisdom drawn from Roman, British and other systems. Any system that is self-contained compromises with the elements of growth and social evolution.

 

If the UCC comes into force, it will also address some issues particularly relating to women. If women enter into inter-faith marriage, there has to be common law under the Constitution of India to protect their rights. Else, due to marriage being inter-faith, there will be legal complications when it comes to settling issues relating to rights of women. Besides, the present-day modern society as a whole must consider that young India does not believe in stringent religious tenets. They want religion to evolve, be time-relevant without losing the sense of responsibility. They also want law to outgrow religious influences for better social consolidation and national integration, without compromising on values. Should we, as a nation, deprive the youngsters of this opportunity to live by common principles of human norms of justice? The answer to this question may not be difficult if political and religious beliefs are kept aside in favour of common democratic openness. Instead of separate and sporadic evolution of laws, it will be better to have systematic evolution by way of having in place the UCC.