PUCL Gujarat’s Letter to Chairperson, UCC Committee
By PUCL Gujarat
(Editorial Note: There are diverse perspectives rooted in a human rights framework on the proposal for a UCC. We will carry other perspectives as well in the following issues to encourage a debate on the same)
To, Justice (Retd.) Ranjana Prakash Desai
Chairperson, Uniform Civil Code (UCC) Committe
Government of Gujarat,
Gandhinagar
Subject: Concerns and Recommendations on the Uniform Civil Code (UCC)
Respected Madam,
We write on behalf of PUCL Gujarat, the state chapter of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, one of India’s largest civil liberties and human rights organizations. Founded in 1976 by Jayaprakash Narayan and other eminent personalities, PUCL has worked for over four decades to uphold civil liberties and promote a just and democratic society.
First and foremost, we wish to express our serious reservations on the manner in which UCC is being conceived, the highly inadequate process of consultation with stakeholders and the absence of a draft that should have captured and furthered the journey towards gender justice and equal rights thus far.We believe that a UCCas just having uniform laws will not result in women getting equal rights or in wiping out the discrimination inherent, in various degrees, in these laws. This is because uniformity per se does not mean equality and cannot be equated with equality and justice for women.
The Gujarat Context:
Gujarat’s has a rich cultural and religious diversity and has well known in the country and world. The state’s demographic composition—predominantly Hindu (88.57%), with a significant Muslim minority (9.67%), the other microminorities viz Jains (0.96%), Christians (0.52%),Sikhs (0.10%), and Parsis (0.02%);and the Adivasis (14.75%)—reflects a deep plurality of traditions, customs, and legal practices that cannot be homogenized under a single code.
Hindu communities like Patidars, Kolis, and Dalits,alongside Muslim groups such as the Shia and Sunni, have long followed unique customs in marriage, inheritance, and religious observances. Gujarat’s Adivasis, including Bhils and Gamits,follow customary laws that govern social and familial structures, distinct from mainstream legal frameworks. The Jains and Christians also have specific religious and legal traditions that shape their identities. Many NTDNT communities follow oral traditions and customary dispute resolution mechanisms that are deeply rooted in their social structures. Their marriage customs often differ from mainstream legal frameworks, allowing for community-specific arrangements that respect individual choices.
Geographically, the cultural landscape of Gujarat varies widely—from the tribal traditions in Dang to the coastal heritage of Kharwas and the pastoral lifestyles of Rabaris in Saurashtra. Imposing a uniform code disregards these diverse lived realities and threatens the autonomy of communities in maintaining their heritage. A UCC, rather than emphasizing equality, risks erasing cultural identities, creating legal alienation, and deepening social tensions.
Hence, we urge our following concerns:
- Discrepancy in the Process of Forming the UCC and the absence of a draft code/policy note:
The drafting process of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) has been neither transparent nor inclusive, failing to engage in meaningful consultations with religious communities, ethnic groups, women’s organizations, LGBTQIA++ individuals, and legal experts from diverse backgrounds. Marginalized voices, particularly those from Adivasi, Dalit, Muslim, and other minority communities, have been largely sidelined in discussions about legal reforms that directly impact them.
It is imperative that the Government or the UCC committee it has appointed comes out with a position paper which will be circulated for comments, criticisms and observations by various groups. The UCC committee has been hurriedly holding meetings which are accessible to only a few organized groups, thus excluding the vast majority of marginalized communities and groups. Without a draft UCC or policy note the entire exercise is nothing but a hypothetical response which can only lead to voluminous submissions based on real or imagined fears or advantages of a UCC.
Despite the 21st and 22nd Law Commissions’ detailed reports and recommendations stating that the implementation of the UCC is not necessary at this time, the government has proceeded with the idea without due consideration. Instead of presenting a clear proposed draft, the government has arbitrarily invited viewpoints and suggestions, making the consultation process superficial and inadequate. This approach has created unnecessary fear and tension among various communities, fueling misinformation and speculation.
Furthermore, the only available reference, the Uttarakhand UCC, has already faced severe criticism and legal challenges in the High Court due to its impractical and patriarchal framework. Its shortcomings highlight the dangers of enforcing a one-size-fits-all legal system that disregards the lived realities of different communities.
The rushed and exclusionary approach to the UCC’s formulation raises serious concerns about its intent and impact. Instead of imposing a uniform code, the focus should be on strengthening existing legal frameworks that respect India’s diverse cultural, religious, and social traditions.
- Impact on Gender Justice and Social Equity:
While gender justice is a crucial objective, reforms must be community-led and contextually informed. A uniform approach to legal reform may overlook the specific socio-economic challenges faced by women in different communities, especially those from marginalized backgrounds. Strengthening existing gender-just provisions within personal laws, rather than enforcing a uniform code, would be a more effective and equitable approach. Moreover, this exercise should not be a missed opportunity to recognize the rights of the LGBTQ+ community, particularly their right to reside together with legal recognition. Any legal reform must be inclusive and address the concerns of all marginalized gender identities to truly advance social equity.
- Uniformity Itself Is Dangerous
The very idea of uniformity in personal laws is inherently dangerous, as it disregards the diverse social, cultural, and religious practices that have evolved over centuries. India’s legal system has always recognized this diversity, ensuring that different communities retain their distinct traditions while upholding fundamental rights. Imposing a uniformity in legal framework through the UCC threatens to erase this plurality, forcing marginalized communities into a rigid structure that does not align with their lived realities.
For Adivasi, NT-DNT, Dalit, and minority communities, personal laws are not just legal instruments but integral to their social identity and governance structures. Many of these groups follow progressive and community-driven traditions that ensure social cohesion and protect the rights of women. A uniform code, by its very nature, disregards these nuances, leading to legal alienation and weakening indigenous systems that have long ensured social justice to a significant extent.
Moreover, uniformity in law often results in majoritarian dominance, where the customs of the most powerful groups become the default standard, suppressing the rights of marginalized communities. This contradicts the very principles of democracy, pluralism, and social justice that India upholds.
Rather than enforcing uniformity, legal reforms should focus on strengthening community rights, ensuring gender justice within existing frameworks, and fostering social harmony without erasing cultural identities. The push for UCC, without proper consultation and recognition of India’s diversity, risks becoming an instrument of exclusion rather than inclusion.
- Against the Dr. B R Ambedkar vision of caste annihilation and his position in Constitutional Assembly (CA):
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar advocated for inter-caste marriages as a tool for annihilating caste. Many states support inter-caste marriages through financial incentives and legal protection. However, the Uttarakhand UCC, the only reference for a UCC as of now, have provisions that make inter-caste marriages and live-in relationships more difficult by subjecting them to a uniform legal framework, which may not provide adequate social and economic safeguards. Rather, such provisions invade their privacy and put their lives at risk in a caste-ridden and patriarchal society.
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s observation in CA suggests that the implementation of a uniform civil code should begin as a voluntary process, allowing individuals to choose whether to be governed by it. His reference to the Shariat Act of 1937 highlights that legal reforms can be introduced gradually, respecting individual agency and community dynamics.
- Risk of Majoritarian Bias
In a diverse country like India, the idea of uniformity often results in the dominant community’s customs becoming the default law, marginalizing the practices of minority religions, tribal groups, and other marginalized communities. A plural legal system already exists in India, and forcing uniformity could lead to the imposition of majoritarian values on historically marginalized groups.
- Contradiction in Uniformity: A Fragmented Approach to the UCC
The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is intended for the entire country, yet different states are drafting their own versions, making the very concept of “uniformity” inconsistent. Article 44 of the Indian Constitution states, “The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India.” However, the article only encourages the State (as nation) to work towards a UCC; and it does not mandate its compulsory implementation.
If the UCC is truly meant to establish uniformity, it cannot have state-wise variations. A fragmented approach, where different states introduce their own versions, contradicts the very principle of a “uniform” code. Furthermore, there is no constitutional requirement to impose the UCC universally on all citizens. Instead, Parliament could consider an opt-in model, allowing individuals to voluntarily adopt the UCC rather than imposing it unilaterally.
- Gender Justice and the Evolving Stance on UCC
The women’s movement in India has shifted from an initial demand for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) to a more nuanced approach focused on legal reforms within personal laws and new legislation ensuring gender justice across communities. It emphasized that uniformity does not guarantee equality and that uniformity in legal framework overlooks the diverse realities of women and marginalized groups. Given the evolving stance of the women’s movement, the dominant position has shifted from a singular demand for a UCC to a more nuanced approach, focusing on legal reforms and new legislation to achieve gender justice across communities. There have been reforms suggested by reputed feminist organizations on the secular Special Marriage Act too, with a view to eliminate all provisions that are antithetical to the principle of equality, and to ensure privacy, dignity and protection to those who wish to exercise their right to intimate choices that transcend caste, religion and gender binary. The government should recognize this instead of framing an unconstitutional legal framework that is harmful to society. We urge the committee to peruse the submission made to Law Commission of India, 2018, by the Forum Against Oppression of Women, Bombay, which proposes amendments to Special Marriage Act and other legislation (on inheritance, adoption etc.) to strengthen equality, and eliminate all remnants of discrimination.
Recommendations:
For all the reasons delineated above we believe that imposition of uniformity and hence the UCC, can be counterproductive, and can lead to violation of the fundamental rights of diverse communities and groups in society. The inspiration to enact a UCC derived from a Directive Principle cannot override the fundamental right to freedom of religion and belief, which are most likely to be violated in this case. Furthermore, the state-wise enactment of UCCs could lead to an anomalous situation of different states having contradictory codes, which is highly undesirable. It is pertinent to note that the Uttarakhand UCC had exempted the Scheduled Tribe communities from the purview of the UCC that was enacted in the state. The Government of Gujarat has not made this explicitly clear in any of its notifications in the public domain. The diverse communities across the state have cultural beliefs, norms, customs and practices (just as the Adivasis do) – with varying extents of adherence to gender and social justice. So, if an exception can be made for Adivasis on this ground, there is no reason why the same consideration and cultural sensitivity cannot be extended to other communities too.
Transparent and Inclusive Consultation Process: Establish a broad-based consultation mechanism involving representatives from all affected communities, including religious scholars, legal experts, civil society organizations, and grassroots activists.
Ensure that discussions are held at multiple levels, from local communities to national platforms, before any legislative action is taken.
The UCC Committee must first propose a draft for public review. After considering the suggestions received, a revised and finalized draft should be published in the public domain for further feedback.
Let similar drafts following extensive and intensive consultations from all states that desire to bring about a UCC form the inputs towards a national process.
This is likely to take two years or more, given the diversity of communities and cultures in our country. Only after this comprehensive consultative process should it be presented in Parliament for debate and approval.