Modi again with 'secular' civil code
text_fields
Some of the observations made by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his speech at the closing session of the Platinum Jubilee celebrations of the Rajasthan High Court in Jaipur on Sunday merit note as a reflection of the policy stance of the Union government and the ideological underpinnings of it. He reiterated in Jaipur what he had emphasized earlier in his Independence Day speech at the Red Fort two weeks ago: the need for a 'secular civil code'. In the fitness of the occasion, he added that the Indian judiciary had always emphasized the need for a 'secular' civil code. Although he touched upon many other aspects of judiciary including the progressive views and technologies of the judiciary, the emphasis appeared to be on the civil code itself. The BJP always upholds as its fundamental agenda introduction of a civil code applicable to all communities holding it up as a unified law. Although it advocates unity and homogeneity among the communities as its goal, the real main aim is to end the identity and freedom of religious practice provided to Muslims by their personal law. However, the move from using the Uniform Civil Code to a 'secular civil code' is to theorize this goal in a new idiom and to give it a face of secular concept. Modi and BJP are aiming for two things from this. One is to position themselves as practitioners of secularism. The second is to pose as champions of the sanctity of the Constitution and as its guardians.
The BJP has been using the Constitution to checkmate the main opposition Congress in the wake of the anniversary of the imposition of the Emergency. But one would be prompted to ask since when the BJP/Sangh Parivar camp started being fond of the Indian constitution and secularism to this extent? At every possible opportunity, they portrayed secularism and the constitution as alien concepts derived from foreign/British values. Moreover, the leaders of the Sangh Parivar keep proclaiming that all the foundations of independent India should be dismantled and the nation should be rebuilt on Hindu culture clothing it with a garb of native Bharatiya.
Uniform civil code applicable to all citizens is a directive principle under Article 44 of the Constitution. But it is envisioned as an objective to be achieved. And the generally accepted principle is that the concept should be implemented at the appropriate time read as when those affected are also accept it as ripe to implement. True, the Supreme Court has also on more than one occasion, drawn attention to the need to introduce it. However, the apex court has also observed that introducing it in one go would be unwise. The directive principles are not justiciable either. Modi's comment that a secular civil code will replace religiously based personal laws that divide people is also untenable. For example, if Muslims marry according to their personal law or Hindus according to the Hindu Code applicable to them, or pass inheritance property how is it going to affect other communities? How will that sour the relationship with them?
On another note, does the prime minister himself, who vociferously calls for secularism, uphold the undisputed principle of secularism for the state to stand above religious practices? Leaving aside the offence of the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, where was this secular principle when the new Ram Temple was inaugurated Hindu puja rituals, all presided over by the state? In which secular category of secularism can one place the puja rituals organized for the foundation stone laying and inauguration of the new parliament building, where religion has no role to play?
Separate religious civil codes are cited as dividing the people. But then, during the election campaign in the same Rajasthan where Modi advocated common civil code, was his speech insulting a whole community and branding them responsible for higher birth rates, intended to unite the population? As things stand now, with the political alliance with non-Sangh Parivar partners Telugu Desam and Janata Dal-U in the now-changed political equation, will this 'secular' rhetoric be part of a design to bring in stealth the Uniform Civil Code in the meantime? Or, in the absence of an overwhelming majority, will the stage be set for the elimination of minorities with secular guises, towards the goal of a Hindutva nation? Either way, the forces that wish to maintain India's inclusive ethos must be alert in unity to read and counter the voices that hide the goal of the ruling elite to end the religio-cultural pluralism.
