AS in one country, one law.
Very cute. Who can disagree with that? But the devil, as they say, is in the details.
Here is an excerpt from a recent interview with Palkhivala, arguably the man who knows the most about Indian Constitution.
" As regards a Uniform Civil Code, it is the ideal which
India should enact. There can be equally no doubt that in
trying to reach the ideal at this stage, the country runs
a greater risk of being disintegrated.
First, the minorities like the Muslims would think that
it is an attempt to make them subject to the rules and
regulations which apply to Hindus.
Secondly, even among Hindus the same jurisprudence does
not apply to the entire community because there are some
who are governed by the Mitakshara school, and others who
are governed by the Dayabhaga school. Clear proof of
usage will outweigh the written text of the law.
Thirdly, even in one community you will not be able to
have a Uniform Civil Code. How can you have such a Code
for all the communities at one stroke?
It was impossible to have one or two states enact a
Uniform Civil Code as was envisaged, some time earlier,
to be done in Gujarat and Maharashtra. It would be very
difficult to do so for the whole country."
So, other than getting some ignoramuses worked up, all the talk about Uniform Civil Code is just hot air.
Dipy. |
