UCC Debate: Why PM Modi’s Push Aligns with Ambedkar’s Vision, Not Congress’s Rhetoric?

Paromita Das

GG News Bureau

New Delhi, 16^th August. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent call for the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC), from the ramparts of the Red Fort on the occasion of Independence Day, has reignited a long-standing debate in Bharat. The statement was made in the presence of India’s Chief Justice (CJI), DY Chandrachud. Prime Minister Modi pointed out that there is currently a communal civil code that discriminates against people, and a huge portion of the public believes the same.

He stated that rules that divide the country communally and encourage inequality have no place in modern society, and that a secular civil code is necessary to bridge this gap. “I believe that the country urgently requires a secular civil code. We have lived 75 years under the communal civil code. We will now have to adopt the secular code. Only then can we be free from religious discrimination. “This will also eliminate the sense of alienation among the general public,” the Prime Minister stated.

https://x.com/pushkardhami/status/1823956588388139298

This article delves into why PM Modi’s call for the UCC is a reaffirmation of Ambedkar’s vision, not a betrayal of it.

Congress’s Accusations: A Misplaced Argument

The Congress party’s recent contention that PM Modi’s call for the UCC is an insult to Ambedkar is a classic case of political rhetoric that distorts historical facts. By arguing that advocating for the UCC disrespects Ambedkar, the Congress is conveniently overlooking Ambedkar’s own words and intentions.

The accusation also reflects a broader pattern of appeasement politics that has been a hallmark of Congress leadership from Jawaharlal Nehru to Rahul Gandhi. The reluctance to implement the UCC has often been justified under the guise of protecting minority rights, but in reality, it has perpetuated a system of legal inequality that Ambedkar sought to dismantle.

Why Did PM Modi Mention the Uniform Civil Code (UCC)?

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent emphasis on the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) from the Red Fort is a calculated move that reflects the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) long-standing commitment to this contentious issue. The UCC, which aims to establish a uniform set of laws governing non-criminal civil matters such as marriage, divorce, property, and inheritance for all citizens regardless of religion, has been a significant part of the BJP’s electoral manifesto. However, it wasn’t always a priority for the party.

The BJP’s Historical Commitment to UCC

The BJP first introduced the UCC into its manifesto in 1989, following the controversial Shah Bano case. The Supreme Court’s 1986 verdict in favor of Shah Bano, a Muslim woman seeking alimony, was reversed by the then-Rajiv Gandhi-led Congress government under pressure from Islamic orthodoxy. This reversal prompted the BJP to champion the UCC as a measure to ensure gender justice and uniformity in civil laws across all religions.

Before the BJP’s foundation in 1980, its predecessor, the Jana Sangh, had already advocated for the UCC. The shift to making the UCC a central issue came after recognizing the need for legal uniformity, which the party views as a crucial step towards national integration and the realization of a cohesive Bharatiya identity.

PM Modi’s Strategic Mention of UCC

PM Modi’s decision to bring up the UCC in a high-profile address is not just a reaffirmation of the BJP’s commitment but also a signal to the electorate ahead of the upcoming general elections. By emphasizing the UCC, Modi aims to consolidate the party’s support base, particularly among Hindus who see the UCC as a step towards equality and national unity. The implementation of the UCC by the BJP-led government in Uttarakhand, following Modi’s directive, serves as a precursor to potential nationwide legislation.

Opposition and Controversy

Predictably, PM Modi’s remarks have sparked backlash from the Congress and other opposition parties. Veteran Congress leader Jairam Ramesh accused Modi of maligning the legacy of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the principal architect of the Bharatiya Constitution. Ramesh’s criticism hinges on the claim that Modi’s characterization of existing personal laws as “communal” undermines Ambedkar’s work, particularly his efforts to reform Hindu personal laws in the 1950s. These reforms were staunchly opposed by the RSS and Jana Sangh, the ideological precursors to the BJP.

https://x.com/Jairam_Ramesh/status/1823972063671193905

Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera further alleged that Modi’s comments are an attack on the Constitution and the principles laid down by Ambedkar. Khera also questioned Modi’s commitment to protecting the rights of minorities, particularly Hindus in Bangladesh, highlighting the complex interplay between domestic policy and international concerns in Modi’s rhetoric.

Dr. Ambedkar’s Vision and the UCC

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, revered as the father of the Bharatiya Constitution, was a staunch advocate of equality and justice. He believed that the legal system should not be fragmented by religious and personal laws that discriminate against individuals based on their religion, caste, or gender. Ambedkar envisioned a legal framework where all citizens would be subject to the same civil laws, regardless of their religious affiliations. This vision was in line with the constitutional promise of equality before the law and non-discrimination.

During the drafting of the Constitution, Ambedkar argued for a Uniform Civil Code that would replace the diverse personal laws governing marriage, divorce, inheritance, and other civil matters with a single, unified legal framework. He believed that personal laws, rooted in religious traditions, often perpetuated inequalities, particularly against women. The UCC was seen by Ambedkar as a necessary step towards achieving social justice and gender equality in a newly independent Bharat.

Pandit Nehru’s Opposition and Congress’s Muslim Appeasement

However, the push for a Uniform Civil Code faced significant resistance, most notably from Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of Bharat, and other leaders within the Congress party. Nehru, while personally inclined towards modernizing Bharat’s legal system, chose to defer the implementation of the UCC due to political considerations. He feared that imposing a uniform code might alienate the Muslim community, which was still reeling from the trauma of Partition and the subsequent communal tensions.

Nehru’s reluctance to pursue the UCC was seen by many as a strategic move to maintain the fragile unity of the nation. However, critics argue that this decision was a form of Muslim appeasement, as the Congress party sought to retain its support among the Muslim electorate. The Congress’s reluctance to challenge the Muslim Personal Law, which governed civil matters for Muslims, was perceived as a concession to religious conservatism.

Muslim Personal Law, A ‘Communal Civil Code’

The term “communal civil code” has been used by proponents of the UCC to describe the existence of separate personal laws for different religious communities. The argument is that having distinct legal systems for different communities based on religion perpetuates communal divisions and undermines the principle of legal equality enshrined in the Constitution.

Muslim Personal Law, which governs civil matters such as marriage, divorce, and inheritance for Muslims, has been at the center of this debate. Critics argue that these laws are not only discriminatory against women but also inconsistent with the constitutional mandate of equality before the law. The Shah Bano case of 1986, where the Supreme Court awarded alimony to a divorced Muslim woman, only to have the verdict overturned by the Congress government under pressure from conservative Muslim clerics, is often cited as an example of this inconsistency. The Congress’s reversal of the Shah Bano judgment was seen as a capitulation to communal pressures, further cementing the notion of Muslim appeasement.

Personal Law vs. the Constitution

The Bharatiya Constitution, in its Preamble and various articles, guarantees equality and non-discrimination to all citizens. Article 44 of the Directive Principles of State Policy explicitly states that the state shall endeavor to secure a Uniform Civil Code for all citizens. However, the continued existence of personal laws based on religion has led to a situation where different communities are governed by different legal standards.

This fragmentation of the legal system is seen by many as contrary to the constitutional promise of equality. Personal laws, particularly those that are discriminatory in nature, are viewed as being at odds with the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. The argument is that as long as personal laws exist, true legal equality cannot be achieved, and the principles of secularism and justice are compromised.

Conclusion:

In the ongoing debate over the Uniform Civil Code, it’s essential to distinguish between political posturing and genuine commitment to constitutional values. PM Modi’s advocacy for the UCC is not an affront to Dr. Ambedkar’s legacy; rather, it is an effort to realize the egalitarian principles that Ambedkar championed. The Congress party’s attempt to paint the UCC as “communal” is a continuation of a flawed narrative that prioritizes appeasement over equality. In my opinion, implementing the UCC is a necessary step toward creating a more just and unified Bharat, where all citizens are treated equally under the law. It’s time to move beyond the politics of division and work towards a future that honors Ambedkar’s vision of true equality.