Re: [IAC#RG] DRAFT response for UCC questionaire

Dear Shri Rajinder Dalvi,

There is not much we seem to agree about. You feel that the constitution is man made to enslave men, whereas in my view the constitution  is as sacred as the Gita, the Qouran ,the Bible , or any other religious scripture. The religious scriptures in my view have not been  made by God. Else there would not have been so many of them, and at conflict with each other. The scriptures ( Qouran, Bible, and to some extent th Vedas) demand blind obedience to archaic laws, which serve no useful purpose in this time and age. They were understandable in the dark middle ages. But in light of changing circumstances, the scriptures too have to evolve in consonance with changing circumstances. This is not happening.The constitution can and does change in accordance with the requirement of the day and the people, but the scriptures are too rigid. For me our constitution takes precedence over any religious book- none of them have been created by God.

 

Coming to UCC, in a secular society, there has to be one law for all citizens. All religions have ancient laws which have no relevance today- notwithstanding your support for Triple Talaq, and Polygamy, which sounds  Zakir Naiks script.

I am for Uniform Civil Code, with changes made in all religious laws to bring them up to todays requirements.

With best wishes and regards

Anad S Gangoli

 

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 11:40 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Munish

Mr. Dalvi, a very grassroots worker, has proposed a stimulating and provocative draft reply for UCC. IMHO he has given a pucca political reply to a politically mischievous and polarising questionnaire.

BTW, how would you, and other highly educated / intellectuals on this list reply to the Law Commission's questionnaire ?

Sarbajit

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Dr. Munish Raizada <pedia333@gmail.com> wrote:

Shri RP Dalvi's justifications on polygamy and triple talaq do not deserve any comment. He is living in medieval era. We shouldn't forget that these practices put women in vulnerable situation when it comes to human rights.

On Nov 3, 2016 8:45 PM, "Rajinder Dalvi" <rajinder.dalvi@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Shri Anand Gangoli

You will surely agree that Islam is one of the fastest spreading religion in history of this planet. At the same time Hinduism has always managed to survive for millenia by adapting and absorbing.

So it is better that all TRUE HINDUS seize the opportunity given by Law Commission to incorporate certain essential elements from Islam into Hindustani Law while simultaneously rejecting out some weakening Christo-Communist elements inserted by Nehru-Gandhi, ie. Hindu Code.

It is quite wrong to say that polygamy and polyandry are unequal per se. For instance after a major war where the bulk of the nation's young men have been wiped out (think USSR after WW-II) would you deny the numerous surviving womenfolk the right to derive sexual pleasure through marriage, or would you say let there be free sex and the children all be bastards not knowing their father, or would you propose that 2 out of 3 women should become prostitutes / concubines?

In the case of Polyandry, you are well aware of the sex-imbalance in India. No amount of legislation or enforcement can stamp out this menace. Polyandry is a time tasted social device for this situation.

Triple Talaq - the only people who benefit are lawyers, judges and police. In Islamic states justice is swift, sure and  effective. The remedy to the evil of Tripple Talaq, lies in periodically amending CrPC and not in tampering with personal law.

The Constitution is a man-made document meant to enslave men. The Vedas, Koran are God's words to liberate mankind.

With best wishes

RP Dalvi

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Anand Gangoli <anandgangoli22@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Shri Rajinder Dalvi ,

I disagree with some of the opinions expressed in your e mail, particularly where you have supported (or at least accepted/tolerated ) polygamy, polyandry and triple talaq.

The way I look at these issues is as follows. The Constitution assures its citizens of religious freedom, and also fundamental rights. When the religious freedom is in conflict with fundamental rights , particularly that of equality, which should take precedence ?  Polygamy violates the right of equality- the man can have more than one wife, but the woman can not. So Polygomy should go.Similarly, Polyandry also violates the right of equality- the man can have only one wife, whereas the woman can have more than one. So Polyandry should also go. The same problem with  triple talaq. The man has the right to triple talaq, but not the woman. Triple talaq should go unless the woman also has a similar right. There are other issues, like the weightage given to a man.s testimony as witness as compared to a woman's, surely that is not equality.The Shariat law consistently violates the right of equality between men and women. In my view, the right to equality takes precedence over the right to freedom of religion. There might be errors in drafting of the questionnaire ( I am no lawyer, and accept your opinion), but a bad law remains a bad law regardless. Would you support  death sentence for apostates (as  specified in the Shariat) because you support religious freedom.

There are ill conceived/ obsolete laws in all religions. There is a need to correct these, and have a UCC for all communities. Most countries have the same law for all citizens. It should be the same in India, which is a secular country. The laws of all religions need to be rationalized to be consistent with the fundamental rights under our constitution. Doesn't our Constitution take precedence over all religious scriptures? I am convinced that it does.

Regards

Anand S Gangoli

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Rajinder Dalvi <rajinder.dalvi@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear all

I am attaching below a first draft response to key clauses of Law Commission on Uniform Civil Code.

Law Commission of India

Questionnaire on Uniform Civil Code

1. Are you aware that Article 44 of the Constitution of India provides that "the State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India"?

a.    Yes

b.    No

YES

In your view, does this matter require any further initiatives?

Yes, it requires a final judicial pronouncement from the Supreme Court. The clear meaning of this clause ("endeavour") is that this principle is an unattainable goal and hence directionary, and thereby unenforceable, in nature. This principle first requires that States like J&K be incorporated within the territory of India.  For instance, there is already a common civil code in the State of Goa based on Portugese law. It is not clear if the Hon'ble Commission is suggesting that this Civil Code for Goa be extended throughout the territory of India or if the Civil Code of Goa shall be scrapped ?  It is also not clear how any Uniform Civil Code will be applied to certain states of India (eg. J&K, the North-East etc.) without a referendum on the issue and if the Hon'ble Commission proposes that the Uniform Code can be applied in a piecemeal fashion.

4. Will uniform civil code or codification of personal law and customary practices ensure gender equality?

a.    Yes

b.    No

This is an exceptionally poorly worded question. The Hindu Bahujan Raksha Dal questions the competence of the fools who have drafted this query requiring a single answer to a compound query. Accordingly, under the Roman maxim "Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" we are caused to reply as NO.

 

5. Should the uniform civil code be optional?

a.    Yes

b.    No

 

YES. The State cannot, and must not, interfere with the religious practices of its people.

 

6.    Should the following practices be banned and regulated?

a.    Polygamy (Banned/ Regulated)

b.    Polyandry (Banned/ Regulated)

c.    Similar customary practices such as Maitri-karaar (friendship deed) et al. (Banned/ Regulated)

 

6a: NO, this is a religious practice and out of scope of UCC legislation

6b. NO, this is a religious practice and out of scope of UCC legislation

6c. YES, Maitri Karar (and its variants) must be banned because it is a civil contract and hence amenable to UCC legislation.

 

7.    Should the practice of triple talaq be

a.    Abolished in toto.

b.    Retained the custom

c.    Retained with suitable amendments

 

We again criticise the poorly drafted query. We say Triple Talaq must be RETAINED and its benefits EXTENDED to all COMMUNITIES:

Triple Talaq is an Islamic  religious practice. It is highly beneficial and practical for all parties concerned. The alternative to 'Triple Talaq' are protracted, expensive and traumatic judicial proceedings where the only beneficiaries are the lawyers and judges. There is already a universal secular marriage law and divorce law in India (Special Marriage Act) for those who opt for it, and there is no bar for Muslims to marry and divorce under this act. Solemnisation / Registration of marriages under Special Marriage Act rules out Triple Talaq divorces.

 

8.    Do you think that steps should be taken to ensure that Hindu women are better able to exercise their right to property, which is often bequeathed to sons under customary practices?

a.    Yes, Hindu women must be made aware of this right and measures should be taken to ensure that women, under pressure from family do not forego their property.

b.    No there are adequate protections in the existing law.

c.    Legal provisions will not help in what is primarily a cultural practice, steps have to be taken so sensitise the society instead.

 

YES. We suggest that the entire gender insensitive and biased Hindu Code of 1955-56 era should be scrapped in its entireity.

 

9.    Do you agree that the two-year period of wait for finalising divorce violates Christian women's right to equality?

a.    Yes, it should be made uniform across all marriages

b.    No. This period is sufficient and in-keeping with religious sentiments.

 

YES: It is a very sound principle, gender friendly, and should be made uniform across all marriages. Furthermore, many religions believe that marriage being a sacrament does not permit any divorce.

 

10.    Do you agree that there should be a uniform age of consent for marriage across all personal laws and customary practices?

a.    Yes.

b.    No, customary laws locate this age at the attainment of puberty.

c.    The prevailing system of recognising 'voidable' marriages is sufficient.

YES : Furthermore, we say that the minimum statutory age for marriage in all communities should be kept at 25 years for males and 21 years for women, and there must be compulsory registration of marriages to be done within 30 days.

 

11.    Do you agree that all the religious denominations should have the common grounds for divorce?

a.    Yes

b.    No, cultural difference must be preserved.

c.    No, but there should be the same grounds for divorce available for men and women within personal law.

 

C. but there should be the same grounds for divorce available for men and women within personal law, except when it leads to some anomaly.

 

12.    Would uniform civil code aid in addressing the problem of denial of maintenance or insufficient maintenance to women upon divorce?

a.    Yes

b.    No

Give reasons:

 

NO: This aspect should be addressed under the Criminal Code and maintenance should be provided by the socialist State directly under section 125 CrPC or otherwise.

 

13. How can compulsory registration of marriages be implemented better?

 

There is no law of India requiring compulsory registration of marriages. To implement compulsory registration of Hindu marriages, the entire Hindu Code of 1955-56 era should be scrapped / repealed as these are biased and gender unfriendly.

 

 

14. What measures should we take to protect couples who enter into inter-religion and inter-caste marriages?

 

Mandate as follows:-

A)   that all such marriages be registered under Special Marriages Act

B)   that Registrants under Special Marriages Act  be given all the benefits in law available to Scheduled Castes.

 

 

15. Would uniform civil code infringe an individual's right to freedom of religion?

a.    Yes

b.    No

Give reasons:    .

YES:

1)    Many religions permit polygamy, polyandry etc which are social-cultural devices devised to propagate their religions through "breeding".

 

2)    The Hindu religion permits upto 4 wives per male. This should be retained in law.

 

3)    The Hindu religion permits Kulin marriages per male. This should be retained in law

 

4)    Since the details of any proposed UCC are not circulated, it is unfair and unreasonable to solicit queries on this issue without complete transparency.

 

5)    It seems the Law Commission is behaving in a highly biased manner by circulating such poorly designed, opaque and skewed questionnaires, and that too only among the educated elite.

 

16. What measures should be taken to sensitize the society towards a common code or codification of personal law?

Remarks:

There are a whole slew of measures we could suggest, if we were convinced that the Law Commission is serious and honest. But first, the Law Commission may clarify if it proposes to achieve a common code or whether it merely proposes to codify personal laws. To this end We strongly propose and suggest that all personal laws, and especially the entire Hindu Code of 1955-56 era be scrapped / repealed.

 

Please provide us with your name, contact number and address.

 

UNADDRESSED clauses:

2. The various religious denominations are governed by personal laws and customary practices in India on matters of family law, should the UCC include all or some of these subjects?

Marriage

3

   Divorce

4

   Adoption

5

   Guardianship and Child custody

6

   Maintenance

7

   Successions and

8

   Inheritance

a.    Yes, it should include all these

b.    No, it should exclude__

c.    It should further include_

3. Do you agree that the existing personal laws and customary practices need codification and would benefit the people?

a.    Yes

b.    No

c.    Personal laws and customary practices should be replaced by a uniform code

d.    Personal laws and customary practices should be codified to bring them in line with fundamental rights.

 

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in