There are many differences over the idea of one-nation-one-law but it will draw more benefits than multiple laws with conflicting provisions

Should India do away with the concept of personal laws and bring in a Uniform Civil Code for all citizens? Is this the right time for bringing such a law? Supporters say it is already too late, while opponents feel that this is not the time. The idea is a complex one and needs political consensus.

There are many angles involved — legislative, religious, gender, political, and constitutional. Primarily, the issue has become more political than legal. Had the framers of our Constitution not deferred the decision to a later stage it would have become law by now.  Even India’s first Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru did not push through the legislation claiming,"I do not think that at the present moment, the time is ripe for me to try to push it (UCC) through”.  Goa is the only Indian state that has a uniform civil code. The Portuguese Civil Code, 1867 was not altered after India annexed Goa.

The ruling BJP has been batting for a UCC for decades and has included it in its poll manifesto. It was the first to promise a UCC if it came to power.  Most political parties oppose it for their vote bank politics as Muslims oppose the UCC. Today, Narendra Modi has the mandate, the ability, and also the willingness to bring in the UCC. But it will not become a reality unless he builds a political consensus.  He has already achieved the other two core issues — building the Ram temple in Ayodhya and revoking Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir.

The UCC is a secular concept and is above all privacy laws based on religion or caste. The Muslim, Christian, and Parsi communities have their personal laws. The Hindu personal law deals with civil matters of Hindu, Sikh, Jain, and Buddhist religions. At present, there is no one-country-one-law concept in India.

 There is a need to have one law for all sooner or later. It should apply to all religious communities in matters relating to marriage, divorce, adoption, etc. Criminal laws in India are uniform and applicable equally to all, no matter what their religious beliefs are.

The UCC is prevalent in France, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia. However, Kenya, Pakistan, Italy, South Africa, Nigeria, and Greece do not have it.

The debate on UCC has surfaced once again after the Delhi High Court recently that there is a need for it so that the youth of modern India does not suffer from conflicts due to the presence of multiple personal laws.

It is not the first time the Court has given this suggestion. The Supreme Court too had batted for the UCC, pointing out that the founding fathers who framed the Constitution had hoped that the state would bring in such a code. It has made repeated observations on the UCC.

The origin of the UCC dates back to colonial India when the British government submitted its report in 1835 which stressed the need for uniformity in the codification of Indian law. It specifically recommended that the personal laws of Hindus and Muslims be kept outside such codification.

In 1985, in the Shah Bano case, the Supreme Court had observed that the UCC would keep the country as one. In 1995, the Court had directed the government to implement Article 44 of the Constitution in the country. After the Supreme Court verdict outlawing the practice of Triple Talaq among the Muslim community in India in 2019, the debate on UCC came to the surface again. The then Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad told Parliament this year that the government was committed to bringing in the UCC.

 As for gender inequality, there is no denying that personal laws are oppressive towards women. The UCC would provide them equality. This discussion became intense after the Triple Talaq judgment in 2019. Women activists soon started questioning Islamic law.

However, it is not easy to legislate a uniform set of rules due to diversity in India. Many communities and religions, particularly Muslims, fear that the UCC will take away their freedom of the right to religion. Implementing the Uniform Civil Code is a sensitive task, therefore.

Though there are many differences and conflicts in the idea of one-nation-one-law, it will draw more benefits than multiple laws with conflicting provisions. There is every need to build a political consensus and bring the UCC without delay. The Prime Minister should convene an all-party meeting to discuss the issue and arrive at a consensus.

(The writer is a senior journalist. The views expressed are personal.)