Friday, 14 October 2016

Swaraj Abhiyan supports Common Civil Code, an idea that brings together freedom of religion and cultural diversity with equality. We urge the government, the opposition and leaders of all communities to contribute to a dialogue so that the country can move towards this constitutional ideal in a spirit of consensus.
The aspiration for a "uniform", secular personal law for all the citizens of India is expressed in the Directive Principles of our Constitution. This idea is very much in line with the Indian ideal of secularism that permits the state to intervene in religious matters in order to safeguard constitutional values. Unfortunately, all the personal laws whether of Hindus, Muslims or other religious communities, continue to legitimise retrograde customs and practices that discriminate against women. This must not be permitted in a liberal, democratic and civilized society, as the basic legal provisions governing marriage, divorce and property cannot vary for citizen to citizen merely because of their religion.
A common civil code [CCC] is not regulation of religious rituals and customs. It cannot be an imposition of the personal law of the majority community on the rest of the population. It does not involve changes in the personal law of one community. It need not mean doing away with the diversity of customs and practices across and within religious communities. CCC is about common or shared set of norms which regulate legal relationships that must inform all laws about marriage, divorce and property. Thus CCC can take two forms: It may take the form of one law that replaces all the personal laws with the most liberal, fair and non-discriminatory practices drawn from all the existing personal laws. Such a law could leave room for customary practices of different religious and social communities. Alternatively, the CCC could mean leaving the existing personal laws in place, but pruning each of these laws of those provisions that are anti-women and violate the constitutional values. Both these versions merit an open debate and consensus building across all communities.

No comments:

Post a Comment