The BJP and its political allies have argued for decades that India needs to replace the various religious laws governing marriage and inheritance — especially for Muslims — with a single national law. The party this week began a campaign to gradually reform these laws state by state. At least two other states ruled by the Bharatiya Janata Party have begun the process of passing similar legislation.
Uttarakhand, where the Beatles meditated and practiced yoga in the 1960s, has become the first Indian state to do so, sparking a heated debate in India where critics warn the new measure amounts to state interference in individual freedoms and privacy.
While many Indians, including opponents of the ruling party, agree that a new progressive legal code is needed to achieve equality and reform the country's complex religious and customary laws, many have been surprised by the existence of strict rules governing couples living in the same household. Inside the 740-page Uttarakhand law.
The new law will establish a registrar's office that will issue certificates to couples living at home who will have to report the beginning and end of their relationships. Under these rules, the registrar can summon spouses for further information before issuing a certificate and even reject their applications.
Neighbors can also report resident spouses who are suspected of not having the necessary certificates. If any applicants are found to be under 21 years of age, the Registrar will inform their parents through the local police.
Experts and activists have expressed ambivalence about the coercive aspects of the new law, such as strict penalties for providing false information and failing to file within 30 days of receiving notice from the registrar, saying this contradicts the supposedly progressive direction of the legislation. They also worry that nosy neighbors will engage in more surveillance and “snitching.”
The new law remains silent on the issue of direct relationships that are not between men and women.
Many in India particularly objected to the mandatory registration requirement for resident spouses and pointed out that registration of spouses remains voluntary. Mary E. John, an independent researcher based in Bengaluru, said the legislation would have encouraged people to invade the privacy of others and make “deviant” those who choose live-in relationships rather than traditional marriage. Many unmarried couples have trouble renting apartments.
“The idea that people in society can police each other is horrific. Women are the first to be affected,” John said. “Instead of offering more freedom, this UCC will lead to more surveillance.”
The rules specifically exclude live-in relationships in which one partner misrepresents their identity, which critics claim is a clear reference to the Hindu nationalist obsession with so-called “love jihad,” in which Muslim men seduce Hindu women with the aim of converting them. .
The global law has been a major item on the BJP's agenda, along with revoking Muslim-majority Kashmir's special constitutional status and building a regional government. A Hindu temple on the ruins of a destroyed mosque in Ayodhya. Hindu nationalists see this As a response to the privileges granted to minorities, especially Muslims, under the Indian Constitution.
Supporters of the law say it prohibits polygamy, protects women from men who hide their marital status or seek to forcibly convert them, and protects the inheritance rights of children born out of wedlock. But Muslims insist there is sectarian bias, pointing out that while many of their customs are targeted, indigenous tribes are excluded on the grounds of preserving their traditions.
On Tuesday, with national elections just months away, Uttarakhand Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami introduced the bill in the Uttarakhand Parliament amid loud chants of “Jai Shri Ram,” or victory for Lord Ram, raised by his colleagues. Bharatiya Janata Party MPs.
“It gives us great pride that Uttarakhand has become the first state to enact the Uniform Civil Code,” Dhami wrote in a letter. Share X. “This is not just a coincidence but a golden opportunity for the state to show the rest of the country the path towards equality and uniformity.”
But the live side of the code has also received its share of ridicule. In the Times of India, a cartoon depicted a bureaucrat sitting in bed with a couple telling them to do “biometrics first, biology later.” Some Indian users on the website From his public life.
While newspaper editorials measured their words by warning about the law's “potential to encourage vigilantism,” one veteran columnist and talk show host went further. He drew parallels with Afghanistan under Taliban rule in an article posted online.
