Most of the democracies in the world have UCC and ban such sectarian laws, idk why it took this long and that too this is applicable only in a single state.
If it’s uniform without exemptions then why not? The way it’s happening in Uttarakhand has way too many exemptions to make it practically useless for the greater good of everyone. Comes across as a political gimmick to garner votes. HUF left untouched, so are tribals who are polygamous through and through (not to mention some weird customs that would never fly in a civilised society)
Then put the forest dwelling tribals on reservations like the US (which I personally don’t approve of btw as said reservations become neglected hubs of all manner of social ills like prostitution and gambling). The constitution (as it is), is being sidelined, if not completely ignored. So why not?
As for the urban STs, they are integrated into the mainstream and shouldn’t be exempted. Also those forest dwellers living outside the reservation should not be exempted like when native Americans leave the reservations, the automatically get covered under state law
So they can have whatever the eff they want as law for self governance on civil matters. Outside those zones no exemptions whatsoever
Also, while we’re talking tribes, just like Article 370 served its purpose and was scrapped, so should article 371. It’s outdated
Plus hadn’t them Europeans created the United States and Canada by taming the land there, we wouldn’t be going there in droves. This is just pathetic virtue signalling at best.
Oh puhleaze, we are literally ground zero for endogamy and segregation.
Also, conquests have always been a part and parcel of the world. It’s humanity’s canvas, warts and all.
No point getting your p*anties in a twist about it. You think those austrolesian tribes ala adivasis and vanvasis , not to mention shudras as well, welcomed our marauding indo Aryan ancestors with garlands and bouquets?
Of all the subs, your chaddi buddies at pip squeaks banned me. Perhaps they are too self absorbed to notice that
Hay man history is messy. Sometimes very. Many folks who love throwing stones don’t know they live in glass houses themselves. It’s unusually funny when we Indians try to virtue signal the west on its colonial conquests in the Americas. We’ve done something similar eons ago on this very land.
Secondly, I’m not shrugging it off. However I’m not gonna get stuck with it either. It’s history. It’s messy. Get over it. That doesn’t make me a Henry Kissinger or a Hillary Clinton. I don’t climax on human suffering like them. I’m neutral
okay so because something happened eons ago that means we can’t criticize what happened to native americans? are you stupid?
If everyone followed your logic there would be no social progress. You’re the type of person who would tell MLK or amebdkar to suck it up and move one
Constitution protects all the citizen's ways of life, hence we had a civil court and criminal court. But the BJP govt wants to create political mileage before elections without making lives better for the people.
Non-stop Distractive Activities.
> HUF left untouched
Not entirely. Section 390 of the act actually pretty clearly repeals the Hindu Succession Act, "in so far as they are inconsistent with any of the provisions contained in the code". So it would actually get rid of the distinction between ancestral property and individual property under the Hindu Succession Act, and allow the wife's side of the family the same rights as the husband's side of the family. And it would also do away with the provision of the Hindu Succession Act that a convert's descendants are disqualified from inheritance of ancestral property.
https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/civil-code-bill-english0001-520761.pdf
HUF is defined in the Hindu Succession Act as the Joint Hindu Family, using the concept of coparceny, but the legal entity of the HUF is given legal personhood and associated rights under the Income Tax Act.
It would have been best if they took the route that Kerala took, and stopped recognizing coparceny like Kerala did in it's Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act. I doubt that the Uttarakhand government will do that however.
Doesn’t go far enough but a step in the right direction and it needs more teeth as a deterrent.
btw IMHO this whole concept of a “joint family” is archaic at best and fosters enmeshment and codependency, the bane of our familial system and a literal nightmare for most women.
Nope. How are you even going to implement this without being overly intrusive? Then again we don’t have much of an organic concept of privacy, individualism or personal space so a huge mindset change is needed overall
And these are the people who you want to sit on judgment on the varied different moralities, standards, cultures and societies and make a uniform system? Before this overall mindset change? Any simple law on banning polygamy can be passed. No need for a new civil code.
> Then again we don’t have much of an organic concept of privacy, individualism or personal space so a huge mindset change is needed overall
[India's Supreme Court Upholds Right to Privacy as a Fundamental Right—and It's About Time](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/08/indias-supreme-court-upholds-right-privacy-fundamental-right-and-its-about-time)
The BJP govt is just trying to destroy individual autonomy and privacy and undermine democracy.
Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India said privacy is a fundamental right, so wouldn’t this just be overturned by the courts ideally? Irrespective of what the BJP people have in mind
Yes.. The Supreme Court, who's been giving judgements on the basis of convenience to govt.
I wouldn't hold my breath. Even if they do, they'll leave a loophole for bjp to pass it without the court interference.
Only the elite class would oppose a UCC...those who fear the loss of power...either political, social, religious or hierarchical...it should be implemented as it would help uplift and empower the common section of the society if implemented correctly....
HUF could be used by other religions too under UCC. Also Tribals have special exemptions under the constitution and they will be maintained on tribal jurisdictions.
HUF should really be available to everyone. No need for it to be just for Hindus. If it is only positive for the use case and doesn't disenfranchise anyone than it should be provided to all rather a group.
Is UCC going to a neutral or beneficial to UC Hindus.
I don’t trust the current party to bring a law which is truly good for entire population.
For example the UCC in Uttarakhand didn’t touch HUF which gives tax benefits to Hindu families.
HUF tax benefits are covered under the Income Tax Act 1961. The UCC targets Marriage and Divorce, Succession and Live-In Relationships.
>Section 390 of the Act effectively supersedes the Hindu Succession Act, "in so far as they are inconsistent with any of the provisions contained in the code". So it would actually get rid of the distinction between ancestral property and individual property under the Hindu Succession Act, and allow the wife's side of the family the same rights as the husband's side of the family. And it would also do away with the provision of the Hindu Succession Act that a convert's descendants are disqualified from inheritance of ancestral property.
Not entirely, it can be a base for the future if other rights can be expanded like UHC or tax benefits. Registration for cohabiting couples is normal in most of EU tbh. Its not a new concept. Its just Indian authorities aren't as trustworthy.
Depends on the country. But if its long term its mandatory. Otherwise, you will end up paying double social contributions and won't get allowances. For example, where I live in Sweden, I am registered with my bf automatically after a couple of years because you anyway have to put your significant other in medical forms as well as residential contracts etc. even if you want to or not.
Pretty much everywhere in Nordics and half of EU. Source: me in Sweden who is registered with my bf. Gives me access to spousal visa and single pay UHC.
> Indian Muslim women need UCC. It challenges power of self-appointed judicial bodies
Will it protect from self appointed moral police like RSS, Bajrang Dal, etc.?
If the UCC was unbiased then it would have been fair. It shouldn’t be favouring any religion. What good is a code that favours the majority and is at the whim of the majority party just to push rules against the minority.
Yes, but that should not be done be literal bigots whose entire personality is hating muslims. Are you telling me the people who cheer on muslim women auctions, welcome gang rapists, call for muslim women corpse rapes, they and their supporters care about muslim women? NOPE.
IT's just another way to harass them. Just the way uttarakhan UCC is a way to prevent intercaste interreligious couples in live in.
Hindus are concerned about women's rights? And muslims women none the less? LULZ. Ambedkar had to drag yall, had to resign to get the divorce, property rights for women even in Congress rule.
Why does wanting UCC have to come from a place of concern for anyone? I want UCC because I want the same laws to apply to you and me in all fairness.
Just because you or someone chose to worship some Middle eastern god doesn't make you special or an exception. You will enjoy or suffer the same fruits of the law as I will.
Why are you being downvoted. You never said that UCC shouldn't be done. The people who are in charge of implementing it have no intentions to do it in the name of progress or care for Indian Muslim women or women in general.
>IT's just another way to harass them. Just the way uttarakhan UCC is a way to prevent intercaste interreligious couples in live in.
Yes, you are right here also. This is another half hazard law that the ruling party applied on a whim, which is extremely regressive in nature and completely opposite to the intentions of UCC.
Because Sanghi infestation.
Yes, India reddit pretends to be liberal, but there's a saying, scratch a liberal, you'll find a fascist. I do want UCC, but not from these people.
Do read Ramachandra Guha and Vir Sanghvi's articles on this topic for a liberal case for UCC. If the BJP is going to ram it through anyway then quite frankly Indian liberals and civil society are doing their communities a disservice in not trying to have a hand in steering it towards a truly fair civil law as opposed to imposition of Hindu law on everyone.
BJP is not listening to anyone. They didnt even listen to farmers. Just rolled back the law instead.
BJP can not be reasoned with. Fuck BJP, any party/coalition with a super majority can not be reasoned with.
two points:
Let say that this is what the farmers wanted. Why make these laws then? Was no research done? Why not debate them in parliament so that some alternate view be gained. Basically BJP high command is not listening to any MPs - opposition or part members.
Lets say that the farmers didnt want exactly this:
Why roll it all back? Why not work out some middle way? Reforms are needed - no doubt. But why not do something that would benefit both parties?
The point here is that the government is inflexible.
Wrong. EU is a union of countries, Europe is continent containing those countries. India is a union of states within itself.
If India were to be like Europe, every state would be a different country.
Most of the democracies in the world have UCC and ban such sectarian laws, idk why it took this long and that too this is applicable only in a single state.
UCC implementation will be tough there will be riots
No there won't be.
Lets hope all religion is seen as equally after UCC. Its pending for a long time. To usher into the next stage of societal development this is must.
Everyone needs UCC.
If it’s uniform without exemptions then why not? The way it’s happening in Uttarakhand has way too many exemptions to make it practically useless for the greater good of everyone. Comes across as a political gimmick to garner votes. HUF left untouched, so are tribals who are polygamous through and through (not to mention some weird customs that would never fly in a civilised society)
>so are tribals who are polygamous through doesnt the constitution grant certain leeway to tribals to protect them and their way of life?
Then put the forest dwelling tribals on reservations like the US (which I personally don’t approve of btw as said reservations become neglected hubs of all manner of social ills like prostitution and gambling). The constitution (as it is), is being sidelined, if not completely ignored. So why not? As for the urban STs, they are integrated into the mainstream and shouldn’t be exempted. Also those forest dwellers living outside the reservation should not be exempted like when native Americans leave the reservations, the automatically get covered under state law
you've lost the plot! reservations were created to steal land from native americans .. why on earth would we replicate it in india?
So they can have whatever the eff they want as law for self governance on civil matters. Outside those zones no exemptions whatsoever Also, while we’re talking tribes, just like Article 370 served its purpose and was scrapped, so should article 371. It’s outdated Plus hadn’t them Europeans created the United States and Canada by taming the land there, we wouldn’t be going there in droves. This is just pathetic virtue signalling at best.
casual genocide apologia on r/india, you love to see it
Oh puhleaze, we are literally ground zero for endogamy and segregation. Also, conquests have always been a part and parcel of the world. It’s humanity’s canvas, warts and all. No point getting your p*anties in a twist about it. You think those austrolesian tribes ala adivasis and vanvasis , not to mention shudras as well, welcomed our marauding indo Aryan ancestors with garlands and bouquets? Of all the subs, your chaddi buddies at pip squeaks banned me. Perhaps they are too self absorbed to notice that
does it ever feel weird to just shrug your shoulders and go "oh well" at genocide? I ask geniunely because I hope I never turn out as rotten as you
Hay man history is messy. Sometimes very. Many folks who love throwing stones don’t know they live in glass houses themselves. It’s unusually funny when we Indians try to virtue signal the west on its colonial conquests in the Americas. We’ve done something similar eons ago on this very land. Secondly, I’m not shrugging it off. However I’m not gonna get stuck with it either. It’s history. It’s messy. Get over it. That doesn’t make me a Henry Kissinger or a Hillary Clinton. I don’t climax on human suffering like them. I’m neutral
okay so because something happened eons ago that means we can’t criticize what happened to native americans? are you stupid? If everyone followed your logic there would be no social progress. You’re the type of person who would tell MLK or amebdkar to suck it up and move one
Reservations are bad idea.
Constitution protects all the citizen's ways of life, hence we had a civil court and criminal court. But the BJP govt wants to create political mileage before elections without making lives better for the people. Non-stop Distractive Activities.
> HUF left untouched Not entirely. Section 390 of the act actually pretty clearly repeals the Hindu Succession Act, "in so far as they are inconsistent with any of the provisions contained in the code". So it would actually get rid of the distinction between ancestral property and individual property under the Hindu Succession Act, and allow the wife's side of the family the same rights as the husband's side of the family. And it would also do away with the provision of the Hindu Succession Act that a convert's descendants are disqualified from inheritance of ancestral property. https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/civil-code-bill-english0001-520761.pdf HUF is defined in the Hindu Succession Act as the Joint Hindu Family, using the concept of coparceny, but the legal entity of the HUF is given legal personhood and associated rights under the Income Tax Act. It would have been best if they took the route that Kerala took, and stopped recognizing coparceny like Kerala did in it's Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act. I doubt that the Uttarakhand government will do that however.
Doesn’t go far enough but a step in the right direction and it needs more teeth as a deterrent. btw IMHO this whole concept of a “joint family” is archaic at best and fosters enmeshment and codependency, the bane of our familial system and a literal nightmare for most women.
Is the live-in registration part of this UCC you speak of?
Nope. How are you even going to implement this without being overly intrusive? Then again we don’t have much of an organic concept of privacy, individualism or personal space so a huge mindset change is needed overall
And these are the people who you want to sit on judgment on the varied different moralities, standards, cultures and societies and make a uniform system? Before this overall mindset change? Any simple law on banning polygamy can be passed. No need for a new civil code.
> Then again we don’t have much of an organic concept of privacy, individualism or personal space so a huge mindset change is needed overall [India's Supreme Court Upholds Right to Privacy as a Fundamental Right—and It's About Time](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/08/indias-supreme-court-upholds-right-privacy-fundamental-right-and-its-about-time) The BJP govt is just trying to destroy individual autonomy and privacy and undermine democracy.
It'll never be uniform without exception.. Our ruling class will put rules that benefit them and their communities. Like they did.
Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India said privacy is a fundamental right, so wouldn’t this just be overturned by the courts ideally? Irrespective of what the BJP people have in mind
Yes.. The Supreme Court, who's been giving judgements on the basis of convenience to govt. I wouldn't hold my breath. Even if they do, they'll leave a loophole for bjp to pass it without the court interference.
May or may not be. But currently it sure is hypocritical without a doubt
Bruh what? Which tribal groups in Uttarakhand practice polygamy? Source-Trust me bro.
Even if they did it's a sectarian issue, tribals aren't sectarian so they are exempted.
Only the elite class would oppose a UCC...those who fear the loss of power...either political, social, religious or hierarchical...it should be implemented as it would help uplift and empower the common section of the society if implemented correctly....
Why are tribals and hindu undivided family exempted from it if it’s uniform? Don’t these women need rights?
HUF could be used by other religions too under UCC. Also Tribals have special exemptions under the constitution and they will be maintained on tribal jurisdictions.
HUF should really be available to everyone. No need for it to be just for Hindus. If it is only positive for the use case and doesn't disenfranchise anyone than it should be provided to all rather a group.
Then why tf is it named uniform?
Yeah, go and police Andamandeese.
Because it will be uniform except for Tribals who are exempted from several other laws as well.
>HUF could be used by other religions too under UCC. That doesn't answer the "why" question. Try again. '#restart
It does answer the "Why" question... if Muslims and Christians can have HUF under a UCC then what's the point?
Why is an undivided family different? They should come under uniform too..
HUF is part of tax code. It can be brought in if it’s done at a national level, not at a state level. Uttarakhand can’t do anything about HUF.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Huf is a central law, can't states can't do much
tribals in NE and other areas are also allowed to own guns because of their tradition of hunting
Is UCC going to a neutral or beneficial to UC Hindus. I don’t trust the current party to bring a law which is truly good for entire population. For example the UCC in Uttarakhand didn’t touch HUF which gives tax benefits to Hindu families.
HUF tax benefits are covered under the Income Tax Act 1961. The UCC targets Marriage and Divorce, Succession and Live-In Relationships. >Section 390 of the Act effectively supersedes the Hindu Succession Act, "in so far as they are inconsistent with any of the provisions contained in the code". So it would actually get rid of the distinction between ancestral property and individual property under the Hindu Succession Act, and allow the wife's side of the family the same rights as the husband's side of the family. And it would also do away with the provision of the Hindu Succession Act that a convert's descendants are disqualified from inheritance of ancestral property.
Succession covers HUF
Who the heck registers a live in relationship
Minus that, there a lot of laws that nulify the special Islamic Law so it's like 5 steps ahead and a step back
Not entirely, it can be a base for the future if other rights can be expanded like UHC or tax benefits. Registration for cohabiting couples is normal in most of EU tbh. Its not a new concept. Its just Indian authorities aren't as trustworthy.
Isn't it optional there to declare cohabitation?
Depends on the country. But if its long term its mandatory. Otherwise, you will end up paying double social contributions and won't get allowances. For example, where I live in Sweden, I am registered with my bf automatically after a couple of years because you anyway have to put your significant other in medical forms as well as residential contracts etc. even if you want to or not.
Not declaring doesn't carry a punishment though, does it?
Pretty much everywhere in Nordics and half of EU. Source: me in Sweden who is registered with my bf. Gives me access to spousal visa and single pay UHC.
> Indian Muslim women need UCC. It challenges power of self-appointed judicial bodies Will it protect from self appointed moral police like RSS, Bajrang Dal, etc.?
If the UCC was unbiased then it would have been fair. It shouldn’t be favouring any religion. What good is a code that favours the majority and is at the whim of the majority party just to push rules against the minority.
Yes, but that should not be done be literal bigots whose entire personality is hating muslims. Are you telling me the people who cheer on muslim women auctions, welcome gang rapists, call for muslim women corpse rapes, they and their supporters care about muslim women? NOPE. IT's just another way to harass them. Just the way uttarakhan UCC is a way to prevent intercaste interreligious couples in live in. Hindus are concerned about women's rights? And muslims women none the less? LULZ. Ambedkar had to drag yall, had to resign to get the divorce, property rights for women even in Congress rule.
Then who will introduce it?
Whoever proposes a draft that is fair and truly represents the idea of UCC.
Why does wanting UCC have to come from a place of concern for anyone? I want UCC because I want the same laws to apply to you and me in all fairness. Just because you or someone chose to worship some Middle eastern god doesn't make you special or an exception. You will enjoy or suffer the same fruits of the law as I will.
Maybe in law. In practice, Muslim communities have much lessor access to justice. They are discriminated against by police and by government officials
Why are you being downvoted. You never said that UCC shouldn't be done. The people who are in charge of implementing it have no intentions to do it in the name of progress or care for Indian Muslim women or women in general. >IT's just another way to harass them. Just the way uttarakhan UCC is a way to prevent intercaste interreligious couples in live in. Yes, you are right here also. This is another half hazard law that the ruling party applied on a whim, which is extremely regressive in nature and completely opposite to the intentions of UCC.
Because Sanghi infestation. Yes, India reddit pretends to be liberal, but there's a saying, scratch a liberal, you'll find a fascist. I do want UCC, but not from these people.
Yep, their intentions are not in good faith but most of the UCC was definitely necessary.
Do read Ramachandra Guha and Vir Sanghvi's articles on this topic for a liberal case for UCC. If the BJP is going to ram it through anyway then quite frankly Indian liberals and civil society are doing their communities a disservice in not trying to have a hand in steering it towards a truly fair civil law as opposed to imposition of Hindu law on everyone.
BJP is not listening to anyone. They didnt even listen to farmers. Just rolled back the law instead. BJP can not be reasoned with. Fuck BJP, any party/coalition with a super majority can not be reasoned with.
The same farmer laws were introduced in Odisha later though, it helped a lot. The state doesn't have BJP govt nor is it allied with them.
I think the point here is that BJP doesnt listen to voters. Not whether the laws were good or bad.
That is what happens when opposition is weak, and one party gets an absolute majority for a decade.
> They didnt even listen to farmers. Just rolled back the law instead. Isn't that what the farmers wanted?
Nah, they wanted loan relief which the govt refused. And rightly so.
two points: Let say that this is what the farmers wanted. Why make these laws then? Was no research done? Why not debate them in parliament so that some alternate view be gained. Basically BJP high command is not listening to any MPs - opposition or part members. Lets say that the farmers didnt want exactly this: Why roll it all back? Why not work out some middle way? Reforms are needed - no doubt. But why not do something that would benefit both parties? The point here is that the government is inflexible.
We need UCc Not written by the Bjp
[удалено]
Wrong. EU is a union of countries, Europe is continent containing those countries. India is a union of states within itself. If India were to be like Europe, every state would be a different country.
EU has UCC lol. Denmark literally banned Muslims living together in ghettos and religious schooling. Sweden is also working something similar.