Amar, Akbar and Antony were playing a modified version of the ancient game of chess. A rich businessman, who saw them happily engrossed in their activity, offered them a packet containing a gift. The game ended in a draw. Amar claimed that he had a right to receive the gift as he played alone while Akbar and Antony played as a team.

What ensued was a physical fight in which the stronger and older Amar vanquished the duo. The victorious Amar opened the packet to find that it was empty. Of course, this pleased Akbar and Antony, though their friendship was destroyed forever. Just then the businessman returned to the scene and pitied them for their pathetic condition.

They had only themselves to blame for their plight. They should have known what the packet contained. And they should have reached an agreement on the formula to be adopted if the game ended in a draw. That was the last time they played the game.

Like the businessman who offered the boys a gift, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has offered the nation what he calls a Uniform Civil Code. Modi’s UCC is a mystery wrapped in an enigma. Yet, he has been able to stoke the flames of a division among the political parties. And that is exactly what he wants as Modi prepares for the next elections in states like Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.

Modi asked, a bit rhetorically, how a family could manage itself if every member followed his own likes and dislikes. He was trying to explain the need for a UCC for the nation.

In doing so, what he forgets is that he has completed nine years as Prime Minister without feeling the need for a UCC, although it was one of the core demands of the Bharatiya Janata Party and its forerunner, the Bharatiya Jan Sangh. The BJP’s own A B Vajpayee also completed a full term as Prime Minister.

In fact, the 21st Law Commission of India studied the issue threadbare and came to the conclusion that the UCC, though desirable, was not necessary, as it would disrupt national harmony. No, it did not unilaterally decide against the concept.

The Commission sought the opinion of a cross section of the people and studied it before reaching the conclusion. Of course, this decision put paid to the government’s plan to enact a UCC and thereby complete the fulfilment of all the three core promises of the BJP, the two others being construction of a magnificent temple at Ayodhya and abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution.

Never the one to take No for a No, the Modi government has seemingly put pressure on the new Law Commission to study afresh the issue of a UCC. It has already swung into action and sought the opinion of the stakeholders like religious communities and caste-based groups.

Modi’s announcement has already stirred the blood of some Opposition parties and Muslim groups. During the last parliamentary election, he campaigned extensively against Triple Talaq.

For starters, Triple Talaq is the process of divorce under Sharia Law (Islamic law) where a husband can divorce his wife by pronouncing 'Talaq' three times. This is also called oral talaq. The lack of a UCC did not prevent Modi from enacting a law to criminalise triple talaq.

In fact, the first thing he did after getting re-elected in 2019 was to introduce the triple talaq law. The irony is that a person, who can be accused of “desertion” of his legally-wedded wife, took the lead in enacting the triple talaq law, which was an exercise in futility. 

How many people have been convicted under this law since its hasty enactment in 2019? If I say hardly anyone, my readers would be surprised to know this.

Many people think that the UCC is all about Muslims. No, it is not. For instance, already many Adivasi communities have expressed their anguish over the Centre’s move to introduce a UCC. This is because they enjoy certain rights vis-a-vis marriage, inheritance, adoption, guardianship, maintenance etc.

Adivasis or aborigines traditionally do not own land. They access common land, live and cultivate there. The land will always remain their common property. They cannot sell or mortgage their property. The moment the BJP heard that the adivasis, whom it calls Vanvasis, are against the UCC, it issued a clarification that the UCC would not be imposed on them.

A significant number of the tribals are Christian by faith. There are reports that they, too, would be excluded from the UCC, though no party official is ready to confirm it. That the BJP is worried about the adivasi support was obvious from the way it reacted to an incident where a party functionary urinated on a tribal youth in Sidhi district in Madhya Pradesh.

Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan went out of the way to invite the tribal youth to his house where he washed his feet. Not only that, Chouhan also fed him with his own hands and unconditionally apologised to him. He was also given a compensation of Rs 7 lakh.

Since the state is going to polls in December this year, the Chief Minister did not want to antagonise the Scheduled Tribes who form a sizeable population in districts like Sidhi, Satna and Shahdol. Already, the tribals are cut up with the BJP over the incidents in Manipur.

Tribals are not the only ones to be affected by the UCC. Take the case of Hindus. They are governed by the Hindu personal law. The Hindu Undivided Family gets some tax benefits, which are not applicable to other communities. In some Hindu communities like the Nairs in Kerala, the matrilineal system is followed. The children of a woman also get equal share in the property of her father.

In the case of Muslim women, they do not get an equal share in the property of their parents. Of course, they get a share in the property of their spouses. These are all complicated issues. What does the government stand for? Ideally, the government should prepare and publish a draft UCC so that people can study and make their comments.

Modi is not prepared for that. What Modi wants is polarisation on religious lines which he knows will benefit the BJP. In the last Assembly election in Uttar Pradesh, Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath openly said that the contest was between 80 percent and 20 percent. For him, 80 percent represented the Hindu votes and 20 percent the non-Hindu votes.

That is the kind of scenario that the BJP expects to create in the country. Ayodhya lost its potential to garner votes. Building a temple is no big deal in India. A former IPS officer of Patna Kishore Kunal is now busy constructing the world’s largest temple in the state. He was the one who rebuilt the Hanuman mandir near Patna Junction. Today, it is the tallest structure in the area.

Yes, the UCC can polarise the voters. Many Muslim organisations have come out against it. The Muslim Personal Law is in many respects more egalitarian. Under the law, marriage is a contract, not a sacrament unlike in the case of Hindus and Christians.

Divorce is easier for a Muslim than for a Hindu or a Christian. What the BJP often campaigns is one aspect of the Muslim law under which a man can marry up to four women. Polygamy is more common among Hindus than among Muslims. 

Polygamy and polyandry were common among Hindus but that has become a thing of the past. When film stars Dharmendra and Hema Malini wanted to marry each other, they converted to Islam as Dharmendra had a wife and family at that time. As a rule, most Muslim men are so poor that they cannot afford to have even one wife.

Today all penal laws are common. Whether a theft is committed by a Hindu or a Muslim or a Christian or a Sikh, he will be punished under the relevant provision of the Indian Penal Code. Under the Sharia law, the person’s hand would be cut off.

There are Supreme Court rulings under which if a personal law is in conflict with the common law, the latter will prevail. Under the Sharia law, a Muslim can have up to four wives but if he is a government employee, he can have only one wife. If he is found to be in a polygamous relationship, he is bound to lose his job.

Under the Travancore Succession Act, a Christian woman was entitled to either a share equal to her brother's share in the property of her father, who died without writing a will, or Rs 5,000 (Five Thousand) whichever  was lower. If a sister fought with her brother for an equal share of their father’s property, he could get away by paying her the paltry amount.

When Mary Roy, mother of writer Arundhati Roy, challenged the law in the Supreme Court, the court gave a verdict in her favour. Today, a Christian woman has equal rights on her father’s property as her male siblings. This happened even without a Uniform Civil Code. What this underlines is that even personal laws have been undergoing a change. There is a demand that the common law for marriages should be amended to make divorce easier, especially when the divorce proceedings are not challenged by one party.

The need for a UCC is mentioned in the Directive Principles of the Constitution. Those who want UCC urgently forget some other Directive Principles. Take the case of a Directive Principle which enjoins upon the state to minimise disparity in wealth. After Modi came to power in 2014, the assets of Adani and Ambani have increased manifold. 

As a result, the wealthiest 10 percent own more than 72 percent of wealth, and the top 5 percent own nearly 62 percent of the total wealth, which is higher than the pre-pandemic years (2018-19), and the top 1 percent own more than 13 times the wealth owned by the bottom half of the society.

What has Modi and his government done to ensure that there is no concentration of wealth in the hands of a few? Far from that, he has been doing everything possible to help his wealthy friends to acquire more and more assets. Even at the cost of the public exchequer!

There is another directive principle which asks the government to promote what is called the scientific temper. Jawaharlal Nehru wrote extensively on what is called the scientific temper in his books and letters to the chief ministers.

For Nehru, science was not merely an individual’s search for truth but it should be an integral part of one’s thinking and action. He was more interested in the social consequences of science than science itself. Science has made it possible to view traditional beliefs in a new light based on facts. What has Modi & Co. been doing in this regard? How does installing Shengol in the new Parliament House square with the Directive Principle of promoting the scientific temper?

Or, for that matter, bringing a planeload of Hindu Sanyasis from Tamil Nadu at state cost to take part in the “consecration” of the new Parliament building. I can bet that they would never have taken part in any of the elections held since 1952 when the adult franchise was introduced.

There are, in fact, many other directive principles which are overlooked while stressing the importance of having a UCC. Nothing prevents the judiciary and Parliament from exercising their authority to make laws or to interpret laws so that personal laws cannot prevail when they clash with common laws. 

For instance, in divorce cases, the children’s welfare should get pre-eminence, not the right of the man or woman to marry again. There is a  popular saying about a man who rushes to buy a rope to tie the calf when he hears that a bullock has "delivered". Most Opposition parties are behaving like this man. Let me see the BJP’s UCC so that I can critique it. Why rush for the rope or fight like Amar, Akbar and Antony?

ajphilip@gmail.com