The issue of the Uniform Civil Code has once again taken centre stage as the Law Commission of India seeks views and ideas from the public and recognised religious organisations. The commission is doing so after getting a reference from the Union Law Ministry. In this context, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, the third-largest party in the Lok Sabha, has put forward a potential solution to the ongoing debate.
In a letter to the Law Commission, the DMK outlines its response, offering a way to navigate the complexities of the UCC. Their approach acknowledges India’s diverse cultural landscape and aims to strike a balance between equality and the preservation of individual customs and religious practices.
The UCC encompasses a wide range of aspects, including marriage, divorce, maintenance after divorce, inheritance, and more. However, the message conveyed by the BJP is that the UCC is far from complex.
The BJP argues that Muslims enjoy certain privileges, such as the ability to practice instant divorce and have multiple wives. This, it alleges, is a result of the ‘Muslim appeasement’ policy of the secular parties. The implementation of a law banning instant Triple Talaq in 2019, brought the BJP a step closer towards its vision of the UCC. The remaining aspect to address is the issue of polygamy. A man is permitted to have four wives under Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Act 1937.
DMK’s solution can effectively tackle polygamy and preserve the diversity of personal laws without necessitating the implementation of a uniform civil law.
Also read: UCC will prevent the ‘Ashraafisation’ of Islam and give Pasmandas a seat at the table
Ambedkar’s assurance
The DMK argues that the State or Union can introduce necessary amendments to personal laws to curb polygamy. The legal framework exists to address this issue — both polygamy and polygyny are already deemed an offence under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code. “In order to prevent social evils like polygamy (which is already an offence under the Indian Penal Code), the State or Union can legislate necessary amendments within personal laws and need not do away with personal laws altogether,” DMK argues.
Section 125 of The Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 which outlines the rules for ‘maintenance’ is another example of a non-religious law that ensures the rights of divorced wives, minor children and parents are protected. These provisions demonstrate that targeted legal measures can effectively address societal concerns without necessitating the abandonment of personal laws altogether.
In considering the implementation of a UCC, it is crucial to reflect on the assurance provided by BR Ambedkar during the Constituent Assembly debate on Article 35 (now 44) which notes that the state shall endeavour for a uniform civil code. Ambedkar’s words, which played a pivotal role in passing the draft, offer valuable insights into the intended scope of the Uniform Civil Code.
“I think they [Muslims] have read rather too much into article 35 (present article 44), which merely proposes that the State shall endeavour to secure a civil code for the citizens of the country. It does not say that after the Code is framed the State shall enforce it upon all citizens merely because they are citizens,” he said. He emphasised that the application of the Code could begin on a voluntary basis, allowing individuals to declare their willingness to be bound by it.
Ambedkar’s cautionary stance underscores the importance of respecting individual autonomy and allowing for a gradual and voluntary adoption of the Uniform Civil Code. The Union Government is actually deviating from the assurance given in the Constituent Assembly, by attempting to impose the UCC on unwilling minorities, disregarding their special identities and eroding the principles of autonomy and voluntary acceptance.
In its response, the DMK highlights their recognition of the protective measures provided by the Constitution under Article 25, freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion, and Article 29, protection of interests of minorities. The party argues that diversity not only strengthens the constitutional framework but also fosters harmony and mutual understanding among citizens.
Also read: How did UCC become a Muslim issue? There’s an invisible apparatus at work
Complexities in Hindu society
The Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) recommends the Uniform Civil Code, stating that it should apply to all citizens within India — “the principles therein laid down are nevertheless fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws.”
This raises concerns as once a UCC is legislated by the Union government, it cannot be varied by the states, even with the assent of the President under Article 254(2) of the Constitution. This limitation disregards the fact that states are closer to the people and have a better understanding of grassroots realities and the needs of their constituents. The DMK argues that personal laws, which come under the concurrent list, also fall under the purview of states.
The DMK has aptly argued that the implementation of a Uniform Civil Code faces significant challenges, even within the Hindu community itself. The party highlighted the example of tribal communities who identify as Hindus but have customs and traditions that diverge from mainstream Hindu practices. The Hindu Succession Act 1956, explicitly exempts Scheduled Tribes who profess Hinduism from its application. Despite court orders, the Union Government has not extended the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act to Scheduled Tribes.
This raises a pertinent question: if uniformity cannot be achieved among practitioners of the Hindu religion, how can it be realistically implemented across diverse religious communities? The DMK’s argument brings attention to the practical complexities and inherent diversity that must be considered when discussing the Uniform Civil Code.
The DMK also stated that “The tribal areas in the states of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram have special protection with regard to aspects of marriage, divorce, and social customs under Schedule VI and Art 371(A) to (J) of the Constitution of India, which cannot be obliterated by way of a Uniform Civil Code.”
DMK argued that it has been a leader in social reforms in India. They have legalised “Suyamariyathai marriages” or self-respect marriages that can be performed without priests. Additionally, the DMK government’s “Samathuvapuram” villages promote peaceful cohabitation among people from all castes. The party recognises the importance of education and enlightenment to challenge oppressive customs and beliefs. Under the leadership of President MK Stalin, it has also inducted trained priests from all castes and genders to break caste hegemony in temples. These progressive reforms demonstrate the DMK’s commitment to social progress and inclusivity.
The union government must consider DMK’s opinion on the Uniform Civil Code.
Dilip Mandal is the former managing editor of India Today Hindi Magazine, and has authored books on media and sociology. He tweets @Profdilipmandal. Views are personal.
(Edited by Theres Sudeep)