Al Haqeeqa
by Muslim Mirror Staff
Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, one of the largest Islamic organization in the country, expressed its concerns over the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC), warning that it could pose a serious threat to the fabric and harmony of Indian society.
The organization has urged the Law Commission of India to maintain its previous stance on the UCC and instead recommends the amendment of Family and Personal Laws.
The Uniform Civil Code, a contentious and long-debated issue, seeks to replace personal laws based on religious practices with a common set of civil laws applicable to all citizens irrespective of their faith.
Proponents of the UCC argue that it will promote gender equality and streamline legal processes, whereas opponents, including Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, assert that it might undermine the country’s concept of ‘unity in diversity.’
Jamaat-e-Islami Hind fears that implementing a Uniform Civil Code could lead to the polarization of different religious communities in the country. The organization emphasizes that unity in diversity has been one of India’s defining features and warns against taking any actions that might jeopardize this delicate balance.
Moreover, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind raises concerns about the time frame for consultations and proposals related to the UCC, questioning the rushed approach taken by the authorities. The organization argues that such a complex and sensitive matter requires in-depth and thorough deliberations, taking into account the diversity of Indian society.
In a press release, Jamat e Islami also refers to the recommendations made by the 21st Law Commission between 2016 and 2018, which stated that a Uniform Civil Code was unnecessary and undesirable in India’s context of diversity and pluralism.
It further highlights that the recent reintroduction of the UCC by the Law Commission seems surprising and has caused confusion regarding its interpretation and implications.
Jamaat-e-Islami Hind stresses that the UCC proposal contains numerous ambiguities, making it extremely challenging to provide a fair and comprehensive opinion. They assert that such complexities might lead to unintended consequences and potential violations of individual rights and religious freedoms.
