Posted on 13/07/2023 (GMT 07:00 hrs)
Updated on 14/07/2023 (GMT 18:15 hrs)
As requested by the 22nd Law Commission of India, we have sent our theoretical take on the #Uniform_Civil_Code or #UCC_Controversy to the concerned mail ID. The letter is reproduced below. To engage with this issue, we have pursued long-research work by interrelating the existing, overdetermined variables.
##
To
The Member Secretary,
Law Commission of India,
4th Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan,
Khan Market, New Delhi – 110 003
Sub: Reflections on the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in India from the perspective of Homo Sapiens Sapiens, inhabitants of the no-nation
Dear Mr. Biswal,
We, the undersigned, as homo sapiens sapiens, irreligious/agnostic earthians or cosmosians, species-beings or members of the mānavagotra, inhabitants of the no-nation, theoretically believe in the Uniform Civil Code (Henceforth UCC) in a “moral ought” situation. However, from our standpoint, the understanding of the UCC is totally different from the UCC as anticipated or presupposed by the present non-secular government of India as part of its hidden/latent/covert agenda, i.e., a biased prejudiced notion targeted towards a particular religion, viz., Islam (14.2% of the total Indian population according to 2011 census) without looking at the heterogeneous “Hindu” umbrella.
Without considering the rights of the indigenous people or ‘first nation’ (who are called as “tribes” following the colonial dividing practice as if they are not homo sapiens sapiens despite some of these kowms have been delisted after independence), one cannot bring forth the UCC with immediate effect. Our perspective can be analogically compared with the difference between internationalism and MNC-controlled globalization. Therefore, we are supporting the UCC with a note of dissent.
We have prepared the following white papers (PDFs of the two relevant documents also attached herewith) on this issue of concern with many heterogeneous (self-)contradictory conjectures of the South-East Asian cultural milieu:
In the context of the plural society in the South-East Asian territory in the context of the multiculturalist scenario, we are not fully prepared for such a homogenization process as of yet.
For example, in the case of the Hijab controversy (horns of the dilemma of dress-code), Karnataka, France and Iran have differed in the “choice”-making actions (implying agency) in the determination of rights. What is a tool of protest in India becomes the suppression of women’s rights in Iran or France:
· The Hijab Controversy | Who is Right? | Karnataka | Dhruv Rathee VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 10th February, 2022 ©Dhruv Rathee)
· What Does International Human Rights Law Say About the Hijab Ban? VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 14th February, 2022 ©The Wire)
· What the Iranian anti-hijab protest unveiled VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 9th October, 2022 ©India Today)
The conflicts arising amidst individual and group rights, which exist in a parallel manner to the universal human rights, have to be explored in great detail and resolved through systematic polylogical discourses without pseudological manipulation (deploying the argumentative manipulative procedures like chala or quibbling, jāti or sophisticated refutation, nigrahasthāna or occasion of abusive rebuke) instead of forceful legal intervention in the first place.
If the UCC is brought forth by hook or by crook, it will lead India towards a dystopian Orwellian state, where bulldozing of the “other” voices would be inevitable. Therefore, we are requesting you for Différance: simultaneously differing and deferring the issue of the chaosophical UCC.
If it is implemented in a hectic or impulsive manner right now, it will be as disastrous as the following:
1. DEMONETIZATION:
b) View Sec. IV of this document:
2. NPR-NRC-CAA-DPB:
3. RAM TEMPLE:
The ruling party might forcibly get a positive verdict (without signatures of the Supreme Court bench members except Ranjan Gogoi, who, though he is accused for unresolved sexual harassment case, is now enjoying post-retirement job as a member of the Rajya Sabha for his irrational verdict on the Rama Temple, i.e/, pleasing the Hindutvavadin ruling party) on the Rama Temple from the Supreme Court, but they would cut a sorry figure in the cases of unemployment, inflation, corruption…
4. ARTICLE 370:
After the abrogation of the Article 370 of the Indian Constitution in 2019, it is now under adjudication, probably for re-invoking the said clause regarding the state of Kashmir. The serious issue here is, in this entire territory (including the UTs of J&K, Ladakh, and the states of Uttarakhand, Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh etc.), a major portion is captured by the Chinese imperialist Red (?) army (Line of Actual Control) and Pakistani army (Line of Control) ⤡. It is a matter of regret that the ruling party is mute regarding this state of affairs.
After 3 Years, Article 370 Back In Supreme Court: 10 Points VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 11th July, 2023 ©NDTV)
In conclusion, I hope that the honourable counsel will go through the above-referred white papers before hurriedly implementing the UCC, just before the 2024 Parliamentary Elections because this particular issue needs painstaking research and open dialogues in the public sphere (without suppressing dissenters’ voices).
Hoping for free and just society, keeping in mind the unfathomable diversities of India the imagined nation.
Yours Sincerely,
P. S. We have opened three consecutive discussions on the Academia.edu platform to carry out academic discussion on the matter of UCC (as placed in the broader spectrum of socio-economic and political discursivity) in India:
UPDATE (14/07/2023):
Dear Sir,
In continuation to our previous mail to you dated 13.07.2023, we are hereby putting our vote against the Saffronized version of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in India, which is entirely discriminatory towards the beliefs and practices of a particular religious community, viz., Islam. We stand in favour of the syncretic, secular heritage of our nation and thereby condemn the present ruling party’s Islamophobic, Hindutvavadin agenda.
We are anticipating the Hindutvavadi agenda of the present ruling party when we have witnessed the spectacle of the inauguration of the Central Vista, where Hindu sages (?) are present without any opponents. We also anticipate, after viewing the statue-temple aggressive nationalism of the ruling party, the foregrounding of the imagined, ethnographic Hindutva in the contemporary political scenario.
Comments