Why India isn't ready for a Uniform Civil Code

This post isn’t going to make me very popular with the progressive Indian crowd. I don’t blame them. A Uniform Civil Code (UCC) for India will mean that there will be only one civil law for all religions and for all people. As of now for example, Muslims have a separate marriage law and Christians have a separate inheritance law. The Indian Constitution states that the government should try and ensure that over time, there is just one law for everyone. Mind we’re not talking about Criminal law which is the same for everyone. Just Civil law.

I used to be a big believer in a Uniform Civil code for India too, until I began to see things differently and began to understand why India has survived as a Democracy for so long against all odds. I’ve come to realize that people don’t like their identities to be subsumed by a larger identity – especially when they feel threatened.

Image Credit: Adam Foster | Codefor

India's diversity is its strength
India's diversity is its strength

All over the world we see people struggling to maintain their identity – to differentiate themselves from a larger identity that they feel threatens their own. The Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, the Uighurs (or Uyghurs) in China, the Tibetan population, and too many others to list here. These movements are worldwide. Even countries with uniform and homogeneous cultures have separatist movements. The French for example, fiercely protect their language and identity and the Danish people will pay immigrants to leave if they can’t integrate culturally.

Given all these movements, it’s nothing short of a miracle that India which has 1,576 languages (according to the 1991 census), and a dizzying multitude of races has managed to survive so long without being split apart several times over. The main reason for this is the fact that India doesn’t try and integrate everything by force. It just lets things be. Force begets force.

India doesn’t believe in coercion. It accepts everything and everyone. It doesn’t try and control. Many people claim that India’s weakness is that it doesn’t take anything too seriously. They are wrong. It isn’t weakness. It’s strength.

I can’t help but quote from the Tao Teh Ching here – it’s so apt that it might have been written for India:


When government is lazy and blunt
The people are kind and honest;
When government is efficient and severe
The people are discontented and deceitful.

and

Those who lead people by following the Tao
don’t use weapons to enforce their will.
Using force always leads to unseen troubles.

and finally

Why are the people rebellious?
Because the rulers interfere too much.
Therefore they are rebellious.

As things stand right now in India, most people don’t feel threatened by a government that is chill with everything. No one takes anything too seriously. There are fights and battles, but the disturbance they cause is relatively small. As of now, I feel that the imposition of a Uniform Civil Code by force will make people feel threatened.

It goes against the grain of India to make things uniform. India is a mass of contradictions. Each state is like a separate country – a bit like the European Union rather than the US, with each having its own culture, and language. Even the Chief Justice of India has commented on how the Uniform Civil Code is a sensitive issue.

India has found stability because of its contradictions. Instead of trying to resolve contradictions, we let them thrive side by side. Destroying those contradictions and bringing everything in line with logic, may be a pretty ideal, but it will be the end of India as we know it.

What’s your take?

[poll id=”12″]

What do you think of this post?
  • Agree (10)
  • You're an asshole (5)
  • Don't Agree but Interesting (3)

9 thoughts on “Why India isn't ready for a Uniform Civil Code”

  1. I’m currently doing a course on South Asian law and the UCC has been much discussed topic. Your take on the UCC is excellent, I completely agree that a UCC would take away India from Indian law. It would be great to see more people being plurality conscious and realizing that uniformity exists in these varied personal too, if they just look at the substantive law and not the Hindu/Muslim/Parsi labels they’d realize that much is the same across these personal laws.

    Reply

  2. @Sherry
    Thanks! There is a problem though when certain aspects of personal law are grotesquely unfair such as inheritance issues etc.

    It’s a balance and one that isn’t easy to maintain. Let’s see where the whole thing goes.

    Reply

  3. i do not agree with you , it is laws like those ( article 370 and no uniform law for all people ) that does not make india strong , tell me one thing then why did our constitutional father said "equal before law ( read everyone)" they could have said that no it is only for the hindus and different for other people , isnt democracy mean "equality" , so how do you explain the Shah Bano case
    ( was that not violation of the constitution ) because of laws like that , there are anit secular parties in india ( i am member of BJP , that party is not secular ) . I feel that our founding fathers and the present UPA govt are hipocrate , i mean on one hand they talk about "amm admi " and onthe other hand they allow religion based quota ,is there any logic behind that , i think not

    Reply

    • In reply to abhijeet

      You're right. The constitution does provide equality before the law, and in Criminal cases equality exists.

      Moreover, any couple can choose to get married under the special marriage act (1954) like my wife and I did and obtain perfect freedom under a secular law. They choose to get married under a different law and the problems arise because of this.

      So what we have here is a case where people want to get married under their own customs. As adults, they do that with full knowledge of what they're getting into. If they don't like the laws, the can always choose to be equal. Like a saying goes, you can take a horse to the water, but you can't make it drink.

      Reply

  4. 2+ years late :)

    <<> —its a “mess” as of today.

    put UCC in, and all such people as im a dalit, im a minority etc goes away from politicians. they cant mess around as they do now with the dalits, minority majority etc.

    if UCC was there, probably would not be a Gujjar agitation(example). i mean, who in their right minds wants to be last in a line! blows my mind

    Reply

  5. Very well said n explained i hope that the supporter for ucl(uniform civil law) read d lines n ndrstnd d effect n actions if govt wants to hold it shldnt support ucl.

    Reply

  6. UCC doesn’t interfere with ritual of any religion rather try to take best from every religion and then make sure that everyone is treated in same manner according to constitution irrespective of gis gender or religion or customs. Moreover the cases of polygamy and triple talaque can not go hand in hand with development if you see social fabric of India. Earlier yes, population was not that high and everything was manageable hence it was maintained but doesn’t mean it would continue forever.

    Reply

Leave a Comment