The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a proposed legal framework in India that aims to standardise personal laws for all citizens, irrespective of their religion, gender, or sexual orientation. Presently, personal laws in India are governed by the religious scriptures of various communities and are distinct from public law. These personal laws encompass a range of issues, including marriage, divorce, inheritance, adoption, and maintenance. The UCC seeks to replace these disparate personal laws with a uniform code that applies equally to all citizens.
Implementing UCC in India was first discussed during the drafting of the Indian Constitution in 1946. During the Constituent Assembly debates in the Constituent Assembly, which convened for drafting and framing the Constitution of India, various objections were raised against UCC before it was incorporated through Article 35, which read as: “The State shall endeavour to secure for citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India.” During the debate, motions were introduced for including provisos to Article 35, providing that any group, section or community or people shall not be obliged to give up its own personal law in case UCC is enforced and that the personal law of any community, which is guaranteed by the statute, shall not be changed except with the previous approval of the community. However, the UCC was added as Article 35 of the draft Constitution of India and later on incorporated as a part of the Directive Principles of State Policy in part IV of the Constitution of India as Article 44.
Despite the inclusion of the UCC in the Indian Constitution as a directive principle, its implementation was repeatedly deferred by the ruling parties. Citing concerns that the UCC could be divisive and potentially harm the sentiments of minority groups, politicians continually postponed its enactment, claiming that the time is not yet ripe for such a measure. As a result, the UCC languished on the back burner, and its potential was unrealised due to a lack of political will. The BJP has long been a proponent of implementing the UCC, dating back to its origins as the Bhartiya Jan Sangh. Dr Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, a prominent ideologue of the party, famously championed the slogan “Ek Vidhan, Ek Nishan, Ek Pradhan,” which translates to “one country, one constitution, one flag, one head.” As per BJP, this slogan intends to promote national unity and integrity. A massive mandate in the 2014 elections paved the way for BJP to realise its objective. First, Article 370 of the Constitution, which granted special status to Jammu and Kashmir, was abrogated on 5 August 2019, achieving the goal of “Ek Nishan, Ek Pradhan.” Now, with the UCC in the pipeline, the BJP is poised to fulfil its vision of “Ek Vidhan.”
However, the Prime Minister’s endorsement of the UCC has elicited reactions which have now become a political norm in India. As anticipated, supporters of the BJP have championed the UCC, while political opponents have vehemently criticised it without fully comprehending its true intent and historical context. Nonetheless, an outright rejection of a UCC is myopic. Critics of the UCC have argued that PM is attempting to gain an advantage in the 2024 elections by implementing the UCC. However, these objections are based on flimsy grounds, as UCC was a key component of the BJP’s manifesto in the 2019 elections, and the party received a massive mandate from the electorate to implement its policies, including the UCC. Even the debate that it is against minorities is not supported by the history behind incorporating Article 35 of the draft Constitution. Until 1935, the North-West Frontier Province followed Hindu Law, including in matters of succession. In 1939, the Central Legislature abrogated the application of Hindu Law to Muslims in the province and applied Shariat Law. Similarly, in other parts of India, such as the United Provinces, Central Provinces, and Bombay, Muslims were largely governed by Hindu Law until 1937, when the Legislature passed an enactment applying Shariat Law. In regions that now form part of the southern Indian state of Kerala, the Marumakkathayam Law, a matriarchal form of law, applied to both Hindus and Muslims. To overcome this ambiguity in the applicability of personal laws, during the drafting of the Constitution of India, Article 35 proposed a UCC for all citizens but did not mandate its enforcement. The enforcement of UCC was left for future parliaments.
The UCC, a constitutional directive principle, is championed by the founders of contemporary India and epitomises equality. It is not a civil code favouring the majority Hindu population or a law standardising culture, beliefs, or customs. It is an idea whose time has come as envisaged by the framers of our Constitution. Despite being aware that personal laws frequently discriminate against women in matrimonial disputes and inheritance rights, certain political parties are opposing the UCC for the sake of it. A major political party released a statement that reservations to women in Lok Sabha should be given before the implementation of UCC. However, the short-sightedness of such a political statement is evident from the fact that UCC offers India’s female population a chance to reshape the discourse on equality in inheritance and succession rights, which can never be achieved merely by reserving seats for women in Lok Sabha. One strong reason why India needs a UCC now more than ever is that it promotes gender equality and women’s rights. A well-drafted UCC would be a significant step towards achieving gender equality and empowering women in India and further safeguard the equality of all citizens while preserving religious freedom.
Rather than dismissing the UCC at the threshold, opponents must seize this opportunity and participate in discussions on its specifics. The Constituent Assembly, responsible for drafting the Constitution, consisted of members such as B.R. Ambedkar, K.M. Munshi and Alladi Krishnaswamy Ayyar, who favoured the reformation of the society by adopting UCC. Even the Muslim representatives who wished to retain personal laws never rejected the idea of UCC in toto.
In conclusion, Article 44 in Part IV of the Indian Constitution, which calls for the state to endeavour to secure a UCC for its citizens, represents a constitutional aspiration of the people of India. The implementation of UCC is an issue worthy of conscientious consideration and thoughtful reflection and should be treated as one by recognising its true intent and value rather than opposing it on capricious or ill-informed grounds.
Akhilesh Dubey is an Advocate and Solicitor practising in Mumbai and Delhi.
