Myth of Uniformity: Position of Different Laws in India
Dr. Javed Jamil | Clarion India
LET us first examine the concept of uniformity of laws. It is interesting to note that while Hindutva brigade often takes pride in diversity in certain matters such as worship of hundreds of thousands of deities by Hindus and diversity in traditions and cultures in different Hindu populations. But, in matters where Muslims are involved, they immediately jump to the bandwagon of unity. They are arguing as if all the laws within the boundaries of India are the same for all the citizens of the country. The truth, however, is that not only civil laws, which mainly relate to individuals and families, criminal laws and the powers of the states are not uniform. They themselves were never tired of giving the example of Article 370 of the constitution which guaranteed special status to Jammu and Kashmir owing to the special circumstances in which it became part of India and conveniently forget numerous other examples. When they came to power, they abrogated it as part of their on-going movement of opposing Muslims wherever they are and forcing them into submission.
The Constitution of India part XXI includes:
· Article 369 {Temporary power to Parliament to make laws with respect to certain matters in the State List as if they were matters in the Concurrent List}
· Article 370 {Temporary provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir} (abrogated now)
· Article 371 {Special provision with respect to the States of Maharashtra and Gujarat}
o 3.1 Article 371A {Special provision with respect to the State of Nagaland}
o 3.2 Article 371B {Special provision with respect to the State of Assam}
o 3.3 Article 371C {Special provision with respect to the State of Manipur}
o 3.4 Article 371D {Special provision with respect to the State of Andhra Pradesh}
o 3.5 Article 371E {Establishment of Central University in Andhra Pradesh}
o 3.6 Article 371F {Special provision with respect to the State of Sikkim}
o 3.7 Article 371G {Special provision with respect to the State of Mizoram}
o 3.8 Article 371H {Special provision with respect to the State of Arunachal Pradesh}
o 3.9 Article 371I {Special provision with respect to the State of Goa}
All these laws give different rights to different states including Himachal Pradesh, Goa, Andhra Pradesh, Assam and Nagaland. Then, till recently there was Armed Forces Special Powers Act for Tripura. State lawmakers have repealed a controversial law that granted Indian military sweeping powers and shielded security forces from persecution for alleged crimes in the north-eastern state of Tripura for almost two decades.
Despite Hindi being the national language, the language policy of different states, many of them Hindu dominant, is different from many other Hindu dominant states which have Hindi as the main language. In states like Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, hardly any hoardings and billboards in Hindi are seen.
In India, laws related to alcohol vary in different states. The consumption of alcohol is prohibited in Gujarat, Manipur, Bihar (recent) and Nagaland as well as the union territory of Lakshadweep. Kerala government has planned to implement almost full prohibition of hard liquor in a phased manner, which will take 10 years starting from the third quarter of 2014. This is another matter that alcohol can easily be procured despite the ban, and websites giving tips for this are readily available on the Net. All other Indian states permit alcohol consumption but fix a legal drinking age. In some states, the legal drinking age is different for various types of alcoholic beverage.
Interestingly, even laws related to cow slaughter, which has become such a big issue in recent months, are not uniform. There is a lack of uniformity among state laws governing cattle slaughter. Delhi, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh have strictest laws, where the slaughter of cow and its progeny, including bulls and bullocks of all ages, is completely banned. Most states prohibit the slaughter of cows of all ages. However, Assam and West Bengal permit the slaughter of cows of over the ages of 10 and 14 years, respectively. Most states prohibit the slaughter of calves, whether male or female. Karnataka has been banning and legalising cow slaughter depending upon which party is in power. With the exception of Bihar and Rajasthan, where age of a calf is given as below 3 years, the other states have not defined the age of a calf.
Punishments for cow slaughter are also different in different states. In Delhi, Goa, Puducherry, Punjab and Uttar Pradesh violation of state laws on cattle slaughter are cognizable and non-bailable offences while in other states offences are cognizable only. The maximum term of imprisonment also varies: from 6 months to 5 years.
According to an Indian Express report, “states where cow slaughter is legal: Kerala: No restrictions, West Bengal: No restrictions, other northeast states: No ban in Arunachal, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Tripura, Sikkim. In Manipur, Maharaja in 1939 decreed prosecution for cow slaughter, but beef consumed widely.”
Despite demands from several big Muslim leaders, neither the government has come up with any Bill to put a total uniform ban on cow meat in all the states of the country in all its forms, nor has Hindutva brigade demanded it. They are interested only in using this to create communal frenzy and to kill Muslim individuals. They have banned it mainly in those states where Muslims consumed it and were involved in its trading. Even now, most of the beef exporters are non-Muslims.
Even tax policies vary from state to state. The result is that only people living in different states have to pay variable taxes, the prices of the same item are also different in different states. The prices of petrol and diesel are different in Faridabad, Gurgaon and Delhi, all parts of NCR.
Reservation policy in education and jobs is also different for different communities with Scheduled Castes enjoying maximum benefits followed by Other Backward Classes. There have been recurrent demands by various sections to change reservation policy from caste-based to class-basded. There have also been demands to ban reservatrion altogether.
“Fundamental Rights” is a part and parcel of every constitution throughout the world. “Fundamental Rights” implies rights of individuals in matters concerned with themselves, which in extension applies to the families and communities in matters that do not affect others. Nobody has right to enforce their own laws on them. Personal law is something which is purely an internal matter of Muslims, which does not affect other communities in any way. If there are any issues with the way Islamic laws are interpreted and implemented, they have the right and they must discuss it among themselves, and take corrective actions within the parameters of Islam, which provides the most balanced and scientific system of peace at the individual, family and social levels. If certain problems are there, they should take stock of the situation, can benefit from the opinions of different schools of thought within Islam instead of sticking to just one school.
Directive Principles
First, Directive Principles are only guidelines and not enforceable.
Second, Article 44 related to Uniform Civil Code is not the only directive principle not yet enforced. There are many others, which are much more important as they relate to the common masses. For example, there is a directive principle that the State shall work towards reducing economic inequality as well as inequalities in status and opportunities, not only among individuals, but also among groups of people residing in different areas or engaged in different vocations.
Hindutva brigade does never raise this issue because their upper caste Hindu fellows are mostly responsible for the huge and ever increasing economic disparity in the country. And of course, they will not even like the mention of economic inequality between Hindu and Muslim communities, which again is quite big. It also says that “The State should work to prevent concentration of wealth and means of production in a few hands, and try to ensure that ownership and control of the material resources is distributed to best serve the common good”. We have seen that in the Forbes’ List of 100 richest Indians, wealth is concentrated only in the hands of upper caste Hindus, especially Vaishyas. But Hindutva brigade not only does not talk about it but also keeps supporting measures that further accentuate this inequality.
Let us enumerate some of the directive principles and their application.
· Article 38 asks for efforts to develop a model which does not increase economic inequality. And the truth is that successive governments have been doing exactly the opposite with economic inequality reaching dangerous proportions.
· Article 39 asks for providing an adequate means of livelihood to all citizens, equal pay for equal work for men and women, proper working conditions, reduction of the concentration of wealth and means of production from the hands of a few, and distribution of community resources to “subserve” the common good. Again the government policies in the last few decades have been just opposite, and the current BJP government has left even the previous governments far behind in pursuing the corporate agenda.
For several years, I have been demanding introduction of Economic Disparity Index (General Rural-Urban and community to community) in the annual budget. But economic disparity remains the least talked about subject in the polity as well as the media.Articles 41–43 mandate the state to endeavour to secure to all citizens the right to work, a living wage, social security, maternity relief, and a decent standard. These provisions aim at establishing a socialist state but we have been witnessing a rapid privatisation of economy. Article 43 also places upon the State the responsibility of promoting cottage industries, and khadi, handlooms etc. Again, the small scale industry is being purposely strangulated through a coordination between the corporate sector and the Government.
Article 39A requires the State to provide free legal aid to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are available to all citizens irrespective of economic or other disabilities. Justice in the country is becoming costlier and costlier with the legal machinery becoming a big industry. Instead of crimes getting reduced, they are reaching greater heights with every passing day.
Article 43A mandates the State to work towards securing the participation of workers in the management of industries. With the Left movement growing weak, there is none to speak for workers any more.
Article 45 originally mandated the State to provide free and compulsory education to children between the ages of 6 and 14 years. This is perhaps the only directive principle which has attracted attention.
Article 47 commits the State to raise the standard of living and improve public health, and prohibit the consumption of intoxicating drinks and drugs injurious to health. Alcohol industry is growing leaps and bounds. Where prohibition is introduced, the lobbies soon turn it into a failure. The consumption of alcohol and the attendant problems are creating havoc in society with huge rise in crimes including rapes, accidents and other alcohol and drug-related hazards.
The State is also mandated by Article 48 to organise agriculture and animal welfare on modern and scientific lines by improving breeds and prohibiting slaughter of cattle. Again, what has been done cannot be regarded satisfactory.
Article 48A mandates the State to protect the environment and safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country, while Article 49 places an obligation upon the State to ensure the preservation of monuments and objects of national importance. There has been almost total failure on both fronts. With the growing industrialisation and urbanisation, environment and public health are the biggest sufferers.
Article 50 requires the State to ensure the separation of judiciary from executive in public services, in order to ensure judicial independence, and federal legislation has been enacted to achieve this objective. The interference of politics in judiciary is ever on the rise. When retired judges are made governors, the message to the judges goes far and loud: act in favour of the government; and you will have a grand future ahead after retirement.
Interestingly, when it comes to Uniform Civil Code, the prime minister talks of “One Nation, One Law”. But, when the other current issue, that of CAA, comes the law becomes different for Hindus and Muslims. If one is a Muslim, he is not allowed to adopt Indian citizenship, despite the fact that he has chosen India over his native country, which should make India proud rather than becoming hateful towards him/her.
If Muslims want to continue with their personal laws, notwithstanding the need of certain reforms needed to make it more in tune with the letter and spirit of Islam, it is because they have absolute faith in Islam as the guarantor of peace at every level, individual, family and social. We cannot have a compromise on this because compromise would mean accepting either older, distorted versions of other religions, which are not being followed even by their own communities, or accepting the modern principles, which are guided more by the commercial and less by health and peace considerations. Hindu religion in its original form had no system of divorce, because marriage in Hinduism is no agreement or contract like in Islam but an unbreakable bondage in which the girl is donated by the parents to the husband. Older scriptures allow innumerable marriages of man, Krishna had 8 formal wives and several thousand other wives taken in marriage, as claimed by Hindu scholars, to end their captivity.
Some Hindu tribes do also have a custom of women having multiple husbands, a custom which has found proponents in some Hindu scholars of today who find it as the only option considering the declining women/men ratio in population. Hindu women in traditional religion also did not enjoy equal religious rights. Sati Pratha was considered a favoured position that a woman should ideally take at the death of her husband. There was of course no possibility of a divorcee getting married again. Hindus have compromised on most of these positions, and taking clue from Islam, they have allowed divorces and the marriages of divorcees and widows. There was no provision of inheritance to women, and here again they have taken a clue from Islam, the first religion to give women inheritance rights in parents’, children’s as well as husbands’ properties.
As far as the modern systems are concerned, they are totally unacceptable because they regard humans including women as commercial rather than human beings, and all the dos and donts revolve around the interests of the market. Market-controlled feminism has done much greater damage to everyone especially women and children than any other system of the past.
Dr. Javed Jamil is an India-based thinker and writer with over 20 books to his credit. He can be contacted at doctorforu123@yahoo.com
