Uniform Civil Code
Following India's independence, Hindu code bills were introduced which largely codified and reformed personal laws in various sects among Indian religions like Buddhists, Hindus, Jains and Sikhs but they exempted Christians, Jews, Muslims and Parsis.
The debate arose on the question of making certain laws applicable to all citizens without abridging the fundamental right to practice religious functions.
[6] Many opposition parties and BJP's allies from the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) have opposed the Uniform Civil Code, especially from Northeast India, claiming that it will go against the "idea of India" and will end special privileges of tribal communities after renewed calls by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in June 2023 about implementing a UCC.
Women, mainly in northern and western India, often were restrained from property inheritance and dowry settlements, both of which the Sharia provides.
[16] The call for equal rights for women was only at its initial stages in India at that time and the reluctance of the British government further deterred the passing of such reforms.
The women's organisations demanded a uniform civil code to replace the existing personal laws, basing it on the Karachi Congress resolution which guaranteed gender-equality.
The committee concluded that it was time of a uniform civil code, which would give equal rights to women keeping with the modern trends of society but their focus was primarily on reforming the Hindu law in accordance with the scriptures.
The committee reviewed the 1937 Act and recommended a civil code of marriage and succession; it was set up again in 1944 and send its report to the Indian Parliament in 1947.
The first Prime Minister of the Indian republic, Jawaharlal Nehru, his supporters and women members wanted a uniform civil code to be implemented.
It was found that the orthodox Hindu laws were pertaining only to a specific school and tradition because monogamy, divorce and the widow's right to inherit property were present in the Shashtras.
[18][25] The women members of the parliament, who previously supported this, in a significant political move reversed their position and backed the Hindu law reform; they feared allying with the fundamentalists would cause a further setback to their rights.
The law on divorce were framed giving both partners equal voice but majority of its implementation involved those initiated by men.
[29] The frequent conflict between secular and religious authorities over the issue of uniform civil code eventually decreased, until the 1985 Shah Bano case.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Shah Bano in 1985 under the "maintenance of wives, children and parents" provision (Section 125) of the All India Criminal Code, which applied to all citizens irrespective of religion.
[15] According to them, the judiciary recommending a uniform civil code was evidence that Hindu values would be imposed over every Indian.
[15] Rajiv Gandhi's Congress government, which previously had the support of Muslim minorities, lost the local elections in December 1985 because of its endorsement of the Supreme Court's decision.
The Congress reversed its previous position and supported this bill while the Hindu right, the Left, Muslim liberals and women's organisations strongly opposed it.
"[31] The politicisation led to argument having two major sides: the Congress and Muslim conservatives versus the Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Parsis, and the Left.
[1] The proposals in UCC include monogamy, equal rights for son and daughter over inheritance of paternal property, and gender and religion neutral laws with regards to will, charity, divinity, guardianship and sharing of custody.
[32] The debate for a uniform civil code, with its diverse implications and concerning secularism in the country, is one of the most controversial issues in twenty-first century Indian politics.
[33] The major problems for implementing it are the country's diversity and religious laws, which not only differ sect-wise, but also by community, caste and region.
[33] In the country, demanding a uniform civil code can be seen negatively by religious authorities and secular sections of society because of identity politics.
[38] In October 2015, the Supreme Court of India asserted the need for a uniform civil code and said: "This cannot be accepted, otherwise every religion will say it has a right to decide various issues as a matter of its personal law.
[39] On 30 November 2016, British Indian intellectual Tufail Ahmad unveiled a 12-point draft proposal, citing no effort by the government since 1950.
The Law Commission of India stated on 31 August 2018, that a uniform civil code is "neither necessary nor desirable at this stage" in a 185-page consultation paper, adding that secularism cannot contradict the plurality prevalent in the country.
[40][41] On 14 June 2023, the 22nd Law Commission of India requested input from religious organizations and the general public regarding the matter of implementing a Uniform Civil Code (UCC).
They consider the abolition of religious laws to be against secularism, and the UCC as a means for BJP to target Muslims under the pretense of progressivism.
[44][45] Legal expert and rights groups suggest amending gender discriminatory laws, rather than implementing a uniform civil code.
[48][49] UCC had been included in BJP's manifesto for the 1998 and 2019 elections, and was even proposed for introduction in the Parliament for the first time in November 2019 by Narayan Lal Panchariya.
The Nagaland Transparency, Public Rights Advocacy and Direct-Action Organisation opposed the idea of the UCC, saying it will erode local customs and traditions of tribes.
