The announcement by the 22nd Law Commission that it was reopening the subject of the need to enact a Uniform Civil Code because it believes the matter to be of great “relevance and importance,” because among other things, it has been the subject of “various court orders.” By asking stakeholders to submit their views on the matter, the Law Commission has reopened the entirely political debate, giving the hard pressed Narendra Modi regime a shot in the arm.
The question is why did the Modi regime need the Law Commission to reopen the controversial subject? Why does the Modi regime scuttle around seeking legitimacy from the judiciary and the Law Commission on an issue that is already on the political table?
It points to spiralling anxiety and deepening apprehension that the fight back from the Congress, especially in Karnataka as well as in other opposition ruled states against the Modi regime is rapidly gathering momentum. There is concern that the most treasured tools for mobilising the extreme Hindu right crafted by Modi after his takeover of the Bharatiya Janata Party are no longer as effective.
Announcing the date for the inauguration of the nearly completed Ram Mandir in Ayodhya may not be enough to offset the dejection that has overtaken the BJP after its defeat in Karnataka. The newly installed Congress regime is speeding ahead with dismantling the curtain walls that the BJP began constructing in Karnataka by announcing it would revise the changes that the BJP had introduced in school text books, on cow slaughter and against religious conversion. Since all these measures have been welcomed instead of sparking off vehement opposition, Modi and his mastermind Amit Shah are sensing trouble.
The Law Commission’s announcement is timely. It opens up the political arena to a renewed confrontation over why the Uniform Civil Code should not be enacted to serve as the foundation of a new and transformed India. Pushed to the edge to find a cause that will rally the dejected extreme Hindu right, the Modi regime has dug out the unfilled promise to enact a Uniform Civil Code. In 2018, the 21st Law Commission had concluded that UCC “is neither necessary nor desirable at this stage.” In a 185-page consultation paper on the subject, the commission had emphasised that secularism could not contradict the plurality prevalent in the country. “Cultural diversity cannot be compromised to the extent that our urge for uniformity itself becomes a reason for threat to the territorial integrity of the nation,” it had said.
In 2017, Upendra Baxi, a distinguished legal scholar, had said “It is a sad mistake to think UCC is all about Hindu- Muslim relations and identities”. He had questioned, as have other experts, “Do we know enough about the personal law of various tribal communities from which the UCC may choose? Do we know enough about the religious personal law of other Indian communities?”
In 1996, Atal Behari Vajpayee, a founder of BJP and its most distinguished leader had called for a debate on UCC. He had also pointed out that Muslim personal law was progressive, as it required the bride to give her consent to the marriage. During the discussion in Parliament, former prime minister Narasimha Rao had asked what would happen to the practice of uncles and nieces marrying each other, as they do in the then undivided state of Andhra Pradesh if a UCC was enacted that would trample the culture, convention and practices of the diversity within Hindu communities.
There were four big transformational changes that Modi promised in 2013 as he campaigned hard to woo Indian voters. The four changes he promised were construction of a Ram Mandir in Ayodhya on the site of the demolished Babri Masjid, abrogation of the special status of Kashmir, a Uniform Civil Code and an amended Citizenship Act that would identify and exclude illegal intruders and cleanse India of Muslim infiltrators and the threat they embodied to the Hindu majority on the one hand and as potential terrorists and recruits for anti-India forces.
Of these, Modi sadly has managed to get only two done. He got the Supreme Court to hand over the demolished Babri Masjid site to Ram Lalla Virajman for his exclusive use, but only in 2019. And in his second term he pushed through Parliament the abrogation of Article 370 and Article 35A thereby ending Kashmir’s special status, its own constitution and its own flag.
On the other two promises, Modi failed. His regime tried to force implementation of CAA and NRC and then buckled under pressure as spontaneous protests erupted across the country, the pandemic occurred and he had lost the momentum on a move that was designed to split citizens along the lines of religious identity.
And he has failed to change personal law in India. The UCC is a mirage. With less than a year left for the 2024 Lok Sabha election, Modi and his master strategists are mistaken if they believe that UCC alone will rejuvenate the dejected extreme Hindu right. Raising the UCC as a banner now is a pathetic plea for support and a fresh mandate in 2024 to do what he failed to get done in 10 years.
In politics, there is nothing worse than losing the initiative. Once lost, it is gone for ever. Having campaigned hard to project himself as the only leader in India by inserting himself as the face of the BJP in state elections, Modi lost in Karanataka. This nailed his image as a faltering leader.
The loss of face is now beginning to haunt the BJP. In a Facebook video that has gone viral, Neha Singh Rathore laments that “Saheboya,” who deserves the choicest abuse, has failed to deliver on promises he made 9 years ago. The homespun lyric and tune is a scathing indictment on broken promises of the Modi regime.
Her list includes the Rs 15 lakh direct cash transfer to every Indian’s bank account, employment to one crore youth every year, guarantees that farmer incomes would go up two and half times, dues to sugarcane growers would be paid; she left out the promise that terrorism would be wiped out so that "no country will dare to look at India with bad intention." Rathore is one of the many voices that are demanding explanations on why the promised transformation has not happened under Modi’s leadership. The Law Commission’s move can be easily interpreted as a rescue measure by a cornered establishment.
ENDS
