which propagates the implementation of Uniform Civil Code & non BJP parties like UPA, SP who are against the implementation.
By the 42nd 1976, India was declared as a secular nation. The UPA govt had maintained in Parliament that it would not touch this subject. The BJP on the other hand kept the UCC in its 2014 election manifesto. The BJP & RSS have long demanded it & cited the example of Goa. Since coming to power BJP government has not made any move towards enacting UCC. After the Supreme Court latest statement, Law minister D. V. Sadananda Gowda said that the code is in the national interest but made no specific promises on its enactment.
Article 44 of constitution of India lays down an important directive principle of state policy namely that The state shall endeavor to secure for its citizen, a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India.
However as clarified by Article 37, the directive principle are not enforceable by any court, although they are fundamental in the governance of country.
Today citizen of India are governed by different personal law based on religion, caste, community etc. Under the present sets of law, Hindu's are bounded by law to practice monogamy whereas muslim's are not. Similarly Hindu's have a comprehension enactment of adoption, this concept is not recognized by personal laws of Christians and Parsis.
In 1985 the case of Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum popularly known as Shah Bano Case. In this case Shah Bano claimed against her husband for not giving maintenance to her under the section 125 of Code Of Criminal Procedure. After she was given triple Talaaq from him. The court ruled in her favour. Shah Bano was entitled to maintenance from her ex-husband under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (with an upper limit of Rs. 500 a month) like any other Indian woman. The judgment was not the first granting a divorced Muslim woman maintenance under Section 125. But a voluble orthodoxy deemed the verdict an attack on Islam.
The Congress Government, panicky in an election year, caved in under the pressure of the orthodoxy. It enacted the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. The most controversial provision of the Act was that it gave a Muslim woman the right to maintenance for the period of iddat (about three months) after the divorce, and shifted the onus of maintaining her to her relatives or the Wakf Board. The Act was seen as discriminatory as it denied divorced Muslim women the right to basic maintenance which women of other faiths had recourse to under secular law.
The Bharatiya Janata Party saw it as `appeasement' of the minority community and discriminatory to non-Muslim men, because they were still bound to pay maintenance under Section 125, Cr. PC. However, lawyers who have seen the Act in operation say that there is good reason to take another look at the Act. It contains provisions which have left it open to liberal interpretation. Flavia Agnes, a Mumbai-based lawyer, says that liberal interpretation has not been wanting. Clause A in Section 3 (1) of the Act says that a divorced woman shall be entitled to "a reasonable and fair provision and maintenance to be made and paid to her within the iddat period by her former husband.'' The injunction that `a reasonable and fair provision is made' and `maintenance paid' leaves enough scope for gender-sensitive judgments.
If a Common Civil Code is enacted and enforced:
It world help and accelerate national integration;
Overlapping provisions of law could be avoided;
Litigation due to personal law world decrease;
Sense of oneness and the national spirit would be roused, and
The country would emerge with new force and power to face any odds finally defeating the communal and the divisionist forces.
Israel, Japan, France and Russia are strong today because of their sense of oneness which we have yet to develop and propagate.
India has set before itself the ideal of a secular society and in that context achievement of a uniform civil code becomes all the more desirable such a code will do away with diversity in matrimonial laws, simplify the Indian legal system and make Indian society more homogeneous. It will de-link law from religion which is a very desirable objective to achieve in a secular and socialist pattern of society. It will create a national identity and will help in containing fissiparous tendencies in the country .The uniform civil code will contain uniform provisions applicable to every one and based on social justice and gender equality in family matters.
According to the Committee on the Status of Women in India : "The continuance of various personal laws which accept discrimination between men and women violate the fundamental rights and the Preamble to the Constitution which promises to secure to all citizens "equality of status, and is against the spirit of natural integration". The Committee recommended expeditious implementation of the constitutional directive in Art 44 by adopting a Uniform Civil Code.
The fundamental problem is that UCC has never been tried in a heterogeneous country like ours which is splitted into 80:20 ratio. All around the world either the society is homogeneous or not the civil law ignored the sensibilities of the minorities & imposed the will of majorities
Uniform civil code is necessary for our development as citizens. And the development of our country as a whole. The best, and the most strong reason to get this up and running should be the fact that we get rid of all gender discriminating laws, and send a blow to the patriarchal nature of our society. This can only be achieved if our politicians commit to uniting our society, and disregard threats by secessionist forces, override hard-liners and implement it with the full backing of our judicial system. I know, it is easier said than done, and these do not guarantee to get rid of the strong discriminatory nature that we are now used to, but its a strong positive step.
So we should implement it because:-
a. The constitution demands it.
b. Laws applicable with respect to religiosity are extremely subjective and prone to be exploited by people who would exploit.
c. Religiously motivated laws are almost all discriminatory to women.
d. Gives other majority religion members one less thing to hate-rant about.
e. Lessens the burden(legal) of being a minority.
f. Streamlines the legal system.
g. The laws of our land are not made to please any specific religion.
So we should implement it because:-
a. The constitution demands it.
b. Laws applicable with respect to religiosity are extremely subjective and prone to be exploited by people who would exploit.
c. Religiously motivated laws are almost all discriminatory to women.
d. Gives other majority religion members one less thing to hate-rant about.
e. Lessens the burden(legal) of being a minority.
f. Streamlines the legal system.
g. The laws of our land are not made to please any specific religion.
