UCC and Islam: Why it is being opposed by a section of the Muslim community in India

The Uniform Civil Code is a proposal based upon Article 44 of the Indian Constitution, that aims to establish a uniform system for personal matters related to all citizens of India. Currently, in India, there is a different legal framework under personal laws based on religious scriptures’ interpretations of matters such as religion, caste, and gender. Under the Uniform Civil Code (UCC), uniform provisions will be proposed for marital cases, divorce-related cases, inheritance cases, adoption cases, and matters related to sustenance and support, which will apply to all citizens of India. This is considered a necessary suggestion for the progress and governance of any secular nation. For many years, there has been a debate on whether the UCC can be considered an appropriate civil code for a country where people of various castes, tribes, and religions reside. On 27 June, while addressing BJP functionaries, Prime Minister Narendra Modi drew the nation’s attention to the UCC saying one home cannot have two sets of laws. The issue has sparked a debate surrounding its compatibility with Sharia Law, which is considered a mandatory legal system within the Muslim community. Sharia Law encompasses rules derived from the interpretation of the Quran and narrations attributed to Prophet Muhammad, covering both civil and penal codes. The All-India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) opposes the UCC, asserting that Sharia Law should exclusively govern Muslims in any state. However, I argue that the UCC is not contrary to the Islamic Creed and should be implemented in every secular state. Living in an Islamic state is not a requirement for being a Muslim The Quran emphasizes the equality of all human beings and distinguishes them based on their righteousness (49/13). While it does provide instructions for a set of civil and penal laws to be followed by Muslim society, it specifically assigns this responsibility to the Prophet alone and does not authorise others to participate in the complex task of proclaiming true guidance and establishing an Islamic State (09/33). Indeed, the noble companions of the Prophet stood by him in every difficult situation and were commanded to assist him in his mission with sincerity for establishing the Islamic state (24/54-55). Islam began with Prophet Muhammad’s proclamation in Mecca, and over the course of 23 years, it was completed through the efforts of Prophet Muhammad and his noble companions. During the Prophet’s final years, he is said to have been visited by the Angel Gabriel, who asked him a series of five questions regarding Al-Islam, Al-Eman, and Al-Ehsan. In response, the Prophet provided clarifications without emphasizing the establishment of an Islamic state as an integral part of the Islamic creed ( USC-MSA Vol. 1, Book 2, Hadith 48). Throughout the Quran, whenever a verse appears to support the establishment of an Islamic state, it is important to consider the context in which it was revealed. These verses often addressed specific circumstances and situations during the time of Prophet Muhammad and the early Muslim community only. They provided guidance for governing and organizing the community in a particular historical context. It is also reported in a narration that it suffices for a person to become successful if they believe in One God, offer obligatory prayers, observe fasting in the month of Ramadan, and pay the due charity. ( USC-MSA Vol. 1, Book 2, Hadith 46). In the entirety of the Quran and the narrations, it is understood that living in an Islamic State or following the obligatory commands in the Islamic State is not a requirement for being a Muslim. The Quran has clarified it twice that to become successful, one must believe in God, perform righteous deeds and have faith on the Day of Judgment (02/62, 05/69). Muslims in both Muslim and non-Muslim States do not necessarily follow the Sharia Law Sharia Law encompasses not only civil affairs but also penal codes, which may involve severe punishments such as amputation of hands for theft and stoning to death for committing adultery. Many Muslims living in Muslim states, including Pakistan, Tunisia, and Turkey, do not adhere to Sharia Law. Meanwhile, Muslims living in non-Muslim states have been implementing the laws of the state in civil and penal codes. How would the AIMPLB justify categorizing them as insincere because they are not adhering to Sharia Law? Instead, they have chosen to abide by the civil and penal laws of the state in their daily lives. In fact, Muslims living in India have never followed the Sharia law in criminal matters and instead have followed the Indian Penal Code (IPC), like any other fellow citizen of their’s belonging to other religious communities. In contrast to this selective approach, the Quran provides examples of people who insincerely follow only certain parts of the Book for their convenience (02/85). As I stated above, living in a Muslim state and adhering to Sharia Law is not a requirement for being a Muslim. Instead, the key criterion for being a good Muslim is a sincere faith in God and the performance of ordained rituals, including prayers and fasting. Every Muslim is aware of this condition, which is why they can live happily in both Muslim and non-Muslim states without practising Sharia Law. We have also witnessed the radicalization of groups like ISIS and the Taliban, who sought to implement Sharia Law but displayed extreme cruelty towards non-Muslims, non-practising Muslims, and women. Many Muslims have recognised and acknowledged that such acts of cruelty are not representative of Islam. Improbability of AIMPLB The AIMPLB is a self-proclaimed organisation that has not consulted the Muslim population regarding their governance in civil matters. In a democratic state, any organisation participating in the civil lives of its citizens should have the support of democratically elected representatives. Every Muslim should raise objections as to why this non-governmental organization is interfering in their civil affairs without their consent. Even when a Muslim is living in an Islamic state, they are expected to reject authority in cases of disagreement and refer back to the Quran and the Prophet’s sunnah (04/59). In conclusion, the AIMPLB has no authority to judge and decide on the adoption of the UCC for Indian Muslims. Will UCC benefit Indian citizens? The opposition to the UCC is essentially an opposition to the unity, integrity, and sovereignty of the country, which has proven to be an obstacle to the development of the nation in the past and will continue to be so in the future. Therefore, the UCC can be considered a proper civil code for the country. I myself am a Muslim, and after studying all the renowned books of Islam, I have come to the conclusion that the UCC is indeed the better civil code for Muslims of Indian origin. It will provide guidance to life within this nation under the laws created by the intellectual class of this nation and allows for changes in laws according to time and circumstances. The author is a nationalist Indian Muslim, a student of Philosophy and a researcher in the Quran and Islamic theology, having in-depth knowledge in Islam. Views expressed are personal. Read all the Latest News, Trending News, Cricket News, Bollywood News, India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.