Content deleted Content added
Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Ratnahastin (talk | contribs) Reverted 12 edits by 2409:4060:2E8B:8369:0:0:AA09:3315 (talk) to last revision by DavidBrooks |
||
Line 11:
Personal laws were first framed during the [[British Raj]], mainly for Hindu and Muslim citizens. The British feared opposition from community leaders and refrained from further interfering within this [[Separate spheres|domestic sphere]]. The Indian state of [[Goa]] was separated from [[British Raj|British India]] during the colonial rule in the erstwhile [[Portuguese Goa and Damaon|Portuguese Goa and Daman]], retained a common family law known as the [[Goa civil code]] and thus was the only state in India with a uniform civil code prior to 2024. Following India's independence, [[Hindu code bills]] were introduced which largely codified and reformed personal laws in various sects among [[Indian religions]] like [[Buddhism|Buddhists]], [[Hindus]], [[Jains]] and [[Sikhs]] but they exempted [[Christians]], [[Jews]], [[Muslims]] and [[Parsis]].<ref name="Rina Wiiliams">{{Cite book|author=Rina Verma Williams|title=Postcolonial Politics and Personal Laws|pages=18, 28, 106, 107, 119|publisher=[[Oxford University Press]]|isbn=0-19-568014-6|date=2006}}</ref><ref name="The Wire UCC gender justice">{{cite news |last1=Dasgupta |first1=Sravasti |title=BJP Equates UCC With Gender Justice. But Can It End Discrimination In-Built in Personal Laws? |url=https://thewire.in/women/bjp-ucc-with-gender-justice-discrimination-personal-laws |access-date=6 July 2023 |work=[[The Wire (India)|The Wire]] |date=6 July 2023 |___location=New Delhi |language=en}}</ref>
UCC emerged as a crucial topic of interest in Indian politics following the [[Shah Bano case]] in 1985. The debate arose on the question of making certain laws applicable to all citizens without abridging the fundamental right to practice religious functions. The debate then focused on the [[Muslim Personal Law]], which is partially based on the [[
== History ==
=== British India (1858–1947) ===
{{See also|Hindu personal law|Muslim personal law|Christian personal law}}
The Lex Loci Report of October 1840 emphasised the importance and necessity of uniformity in [[codification (law)|codification]] of Indian law, relating to crimes, evidences and contract but it recommended that [[personal law]]s of Hindus and Muslims should be kept outside such codification.<ref name="Banerjee1984">{{cite book|author=Banerjee|first=Anil Chandra|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7MXExXXb9usC&pg=PA134|title=English Law in India|publisher=Abhinav Publications|year=1984|isbn=978-81-7017-183-6|page=134|access-date=26 September 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170217053133/https://books.google.com/books?id=7MXExXXb9usC&pg=PA134|archive-date=17 February 2017|url-status=live}}</ref> According to their understanding of religious divisions in India, the British separated this sphere which would be governed by religious scriptures and customs of the various communities (Hindus, Muslims, Christians and later [[Parsi]]s).{{sfn|Sarkar|Sarkar|2008|p=2–3}} These laws were applied by the local courts or [[panchayat]]s when dealing with regular cases involving civil disputes between people of the same religion; the State would only intervene in exceptional cases. Thus, the British let the Indian public have the benefit of self-government in their own domestic matters with the Queen
Throughout the country, there was a variation in preference for scriptural or customary laws because in many Hindu and Muslim communities, these were sometimes at conflict;{{sfn|Sarkar|Sarkar|2008|p=2–3}} such instances were present in communities like the [[Jat people|Jats]] and the [[Dravidian people|Dravidians]]. The [[Shudras]], for instance, allowed widow remarriage—completely contrary to the scriptural [[Hindu law]].{{sfn|Sarkar|Sarkar|2008|p=93}} The Hindu laws got preference because of their relative ease in implementation, preference for such a [[Brahmin]]ical system by both British and Indian judges and their fear of opposition from the high caste Hindus.{{sfn|Sarkar|Sarkar|2008|p=93}} The difficulty in investigating each specific practice of any community, case-by-case, made customary laws harder to implement. Towards the end of the nineteenth century, favouring local opinion, the recognition of individual customs and traditions increased.{{sfn|Sarkar|Sarkar|2008|p=263}}
The Muslim Personal law (based on [[Sharia law]]), was not strictly enforced as compared to the Hindu law. It had no uniformity in its application at lower courts and was severely restricted because of bureaucratic procedures. This led to the
==== Legislative reforms ====
Certain Hindu customs prevalent at the time discriminated against women by depriving them of inheritance, remarriage and divorce. Their condition, especially that of [[Widow remarriage|Hindu widows]] and daughters, was poor due to this and other prevalent customs.{{sfn|Chavan|Kidwai|2006|p=87–88}}{{sfn|Chavan|Kidwai|2006|p=94–100}} The British and social reformers like [[Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar]] were instrumental in outlawing such customs by getting reforms passed through [[legislature|legislative processes]].{{sfn|Chavan|Kidwai|2006|p=83–86}} Since the British feared opposition from orthodox community leaders, only the Indian Succession Act 1865, which was also one of the first laws to ensure women's economic security, attempted to shift the personal laws to the realm of [[Civil law (common law)|civil]]. The Indian Marriage Act 1864 had procedures and reforms solely for Christian marriages.{{sfn|Samaddar|2005|p=50–51}}
There were law reforms passed which were beneficial to women like the [[Hindu Widows' Remarriage Act, 1856|Hindu Widow Remarriage Act of 1856]], Married Women's Property Act of 1923 and the [[The Hindu Inheritance (Removal of Disabilities) Act, 1928|Hindu Inheritance (Removal of Disabilities) Act, 1928]], which in a significant move, permitted a Hindu woman's right to property.{{sfn|Chavan|Kidwai|2006|p=87–88}}
Line 39 ⟶ 37:
{{further|Hindu code bills}}
[[File:Jawaharlal Nehru, circa 1925.jpg|thumb|upright=0.9|[[Jawaharlal Nehru]] supported a uniform civil code but he had to face opposition from other leaders]]
The Indian Parliament discussed the report of the Hindu law committee during the 1948–1951 and 1951–1954 sessions. The first Prime Minister of the [[Indian republic]], [[Jawaharlal Nehru]], his supporters and women members wanted a uniform civil code to be implemented.{{sfn|Chavan|Kidwai|2006|p=90, 94–100}} As [[Law minister of India|Law Minister]], [[B. R. Ambedkar]] was in charge of presenting the details of this bill. 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
The Hindu bill itself received much criticism and the main provisions opposed were those concerning monogamy, divorce, abolition of [[coparcenary|coparcenaries]] (women inheriting a shared title) and inheritance to daughters. The first President of the country, [[Rajendra Prasad]], opposed these reforms; others included the [[Indian National Congress|Congress party]] president [[Vallabhbhai Patel]], a few senior members and the Hindu fundamentalists within Indian National Congress.{{sfn|Chavan|Kidwai|2006|p=83–86}}<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Som|first1=Reba|date=1994-02-01|title=Jawaharlal Nehru and the Hindu Code: A Victory of Symbol over Substance?|journal=Modern Asian Studies|volume=28|issue=1|pages=165–194 |publisher=Cambridge University Press|doi=10.1017/S0026749X00011732|jstor=312925|issn=0026-749X}}</ref> 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.{{sfn|Chavan|Kidwai|2006|p=87–88}}
Thus, a lesser version of this bill was passed by the parliament in 1956, in the form of four separate acts, the [[Hindu Marriage Act]], [[Hindu Succession Act, 1956|Succession Act]], [[Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act|Minority and Guardianship Act]] and [[Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (1956)|Adoptions and Maintenance Act]]. It was decided to add the implementation of a uniform civil code in Article 44 of the [[Directive Principles in India|Directive principles of the Constitution]] specifying, "The State shall endeavour to secure for citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India."<ref>{{cite web|last=Purandare|first=Vaibhav|date=8 September 2017|title=How Muslim fears were allayed, and the UCC became a directive principle|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/how-muslim-fears-were-allayed-and-the-ucc-became-a-directive-principle/articleshow/60417611.cms|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170911014209/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/how-muslim-fears-were-allayed-and-the-ucc-became-a-directive-principle/articleshow/60417611.cms|archive-date=11 September 2017|access-date=13 September 2017|website=The Times of India}}</ref> This was opposed by women members like [[Rajkumari Amrit Kaur]] and [[Hansa Mehta]]. According to academic Paula Banerjee, this move was to make sure it would never be addressed.{{sfn|Samaddar|2005|p=56–59}} Aparna Mahanta writes, "failure of the Indian state to provide a uniform civil code, consistent with its democratic secular and socialist declarations, further illustrates the modern state's accommodation of the traditional interests of a patriarchal society".{{sfn|Samaddar|2005|p=56–59}}
=== Later years and Special Marriage Act ===
The Hindu code bill failed to control the prevalent gender discrimination. The law on divorce were framed giving both partners equal voice but majority of its implementation involved those initiated by men. Since the Act applied only to Hindus, women from the other communities remained subordinated. For instance, [[Women in Islam|Muslim women]], under the Muslim Personal Law, could not inherit agricultural land.{{sfn|Samaddar|2005|p=56–59}} Nehru accepted that the bill was not complete and perfect, but was cautious about implementing drastic changes which could stir up specific communities. He agreed that it lacked any substantial reforms but felt it was an "outstanding achievement" of his time.{{sfn|Sarkar|Sarkar|2008|p=480–491}} He had a significant role in getting the Hindu Code bill passed and laid down women-equality as an ideal to be pursued in Indian politics, which was eventually accepted by the previous critics of the bill.{{sfn|Sarkar|Sarkar|2008|p=480–491}} Uniform civil code, for him, was a necessity for the whole country but he did not want it to forced upon any community, especially if they were not ready for such a reform. According to him, such a lack of uniformity was preferable since it would be ineffective if implemented. Thus, his vision of family law uniformity was not applied and was added to the Directive principles of the [[Constitution of India|Constitution]].{{sfn|Sarkar|Sarkar|2008|p=480–491}}
The [[Special Marriage Act, 1954]], provides a form of civil marriage to any citizen irrespective of religion, thus permitting any Indian to have their marriage outside the realm of any specific religious personal law.<ref name="Singh1993"/> The law applied to all of India, except [[Jammu and Kashmir (state)|Jammu and Kashmir]]. In many respects, the act was almost identical to the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, which gives some idea as to how secularised the law regarding Hindus had become. The Special Marriage Act allowed Muslims to marry under it and thereby retain the protections, generally beneficial to Muslim women, that could not be found in the personal law. Under this act polygamy was illegal, and inheritance and succession would be governed by the
== Significance of Shah Bano case ==
Line 66 ⟶ 64:
== Current status and opinions ==
=== Definition of the proposal ===
UCC is meant to replace various laws currently applicable to different communities which are inconsistent with each other.
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. These proposals may not result in much difference to the status of Hindu society, as they have already been applicable on Hindus through [[Hindu code bills|the Hindu Code Bills]] for decades
=== Points of view ===
| |||