How Fake-Secularism in India has created an urgent need for a Uniform Civil Code!

Secularism is the principle of separation of government institutions and the representatives of the state from religious institutions and religious dignitaries. Secularism envisions equal treatment of individuals irrespective of their religious belief and emphasizes the need for laws not influenced by religious beliefs. The term ‘Secularism’ was coined by British writer George Jacob Holyoake in 1851. Holyoake invented the term to describe his views of a social order separate from religious beliefs without undermining them. In political terms, Secularism is seen as a move towards the separation of religion from state affairs and the implementation of a uniform civil code for all its citizens irrespective of their religion.

The constitution of India proclaims the nation to be a Secular Republic. The Indian concept of Secularism establishes equal treatment of all religions and the religious laws to be binding on the state. It also proposes equal participation of the state in all religions. This concept differs from the Western concept of Secularism which clearly establishes the separation of state and religion. As such, Secularism in India is often termed as ‘Pseudo-Secularism’ by the Western World.

Based on this concept of Secularism, there are two civil codes in the country. The Muslims live under the Sharia-based Muslim Personal law, whereas Hindus, Christians, Buddhists and followers of all other religions live under the Common law. Any effort to establish a uniform civil code in India has led to serious opposition from the Muslim minority which fears that such a measure would force the beliefs of the Hindu Majority on them. Supporters of Indian Secularism claim that this form recognizes the cultural difference of the Muslim community from the rest of the country and respects the religious rights of the Muslim men. The opponents of the system argue that the lack of a uniform civil code violates the principle of equal human rights, discriminates Muslim women, allows the subjective interpretation of religious laws by unelected representatives and creates a plurality of unequal citizenship.

In India, Religious laws dictate terms over state laws on matters as important as the minimum age of marriage for girls, divorce, polygamy and inheritance. The state laws apply only if a religious group does not have a definite law on the subject. In case of their existence, the religious laws are implemented over the state laws. Such a stand has allowed some organizations to  try and get Muslim women excluded from the Child Marriage Act, which prohibits the marriage of girls under 18 years of age. Child Marriage, Polygamy, unequal inheritance rights of men and women, which are seen as discrimination against women are granted as religious rights by the Indian concept of Secularism. However, it did not stop the Supreme Court of India from defending the UP government’s decision to sack one of its employees recently for opting for a second marriage during the existence of his first marriage without prior permission.

One of the most controversial incidents on the subject of Secularism occurred in the year 1978 when Shah Bano Begum sued her husband in court demanding maintenance payments after divorce under Section 125 of the Indian Law. The Muslim Personal Law did not require her husband, Mohd. Ahmed Khan to pay any alimony. Shah Bano won the case as well as the appeals to the highest court, and the Supreme Court of India. The Chief Justice of India, Y.V. Chandrachud ruled that no Islamic authoritative text forbade the payment of regular maintenance to ex-wives. The Chief Justice also remarked how the Muslim Personal Law unfairly favored the men and emphasized on the necessity of a Uniform Civil Code in the country. 36 years after, the nation is still divided on the issue.

The Indian stance towards Secularism has attracted severe criticisms from numerous people the world around. Historian Ronald Inden went so far as to say that the Indian secularism aims to appease Muslim leaders without providing benefits to the regular Muslims. Journalist Sadanand Dhume criticized the Indian Secularism to be a fraud and a failure more along the lines of religious appeasement. Women Rights Organizations also criticized this stance as it allows the discrimination of women, which violates the principle of equal human rights. One might also argue why should the Indian Government award special benefits to its citizens on the basis of religion as it currently does to religious minorities. The Indian concept has also faced much criticism on the public funding of religion based schools.

As there is a silver lining to every dark cloud, so does a brighter aspect exist of such a stance by the Indian Constitution towards Secularism. If a religion should emerge in the future, which legalizes the possession and consumption of Marijuana, permits euthanasia and public displays of affection in its religious laws, proper arguments can be raised against the Judiciary should it decide to punish the person concerned as on matters such as these, the Constitution clearly mandates the religious laws should be heeded over the state laws. Aah! How one desires such laws! But under current circumstances, a Uniform Civil Code certainly would be more welcome.