VD Satheesan, the leader of the opposition in the Kerala Assembly, asserted that Congress has a clear position on the uniform civil code (UCC) and challenged the CPM to explain their about-face on the matter. Speaking to reporters, Satheesan asserted that Congress has continuously upheld its position on the UCC and will not change. The party has long opposed the uniformity of personal laws because it threatens the nation’s diversity. “The Congress has a definite position on the Uniform Civil Code. The Congress won’t reverse course on UCC, as the CPM did, Satheesan continued.
Since Marxistt party ideology and former chief minister EMS Nampoothiripad had advocated for UCC in 1987, Satheesan requested that the CPM leadership present an explanation of their party’s position. The CPM is now against the UCC. We are inquiring with the CPM’s top brass as to whether they have revised the stance that EMS had made about the UCC. Satheesan added that the UCC is not required for the nation. It is not a problem that would exclusively impact Muslims.
The CPM had previously supported the implementation of UCC. Namboodiripad, a party mainstay, ignited a political debate in 1984 by denouncing “Shariat.” A campaign against the Muslim Personal Law was launched in 1987 by the Left party, led by EMS, who stressed the value of a comprehensive UCC that applied to all religions.
Divide And Rule
Before the British passed The Shariat Act of 1937, the Hindu laws governed the Bharatiya Muslims. All over Bharat, Muslims of all castes adhered to unwritten local Hindu norms and usages. They were subjected to the 1937 Shariat Act due to a political agreement between the Muslim League, which wanted to woo Muslims away from the Gandhi-led Congress.
All parties involved wanted to separate Hindus and Muslims. The League’s goals were first to isolate Muslims who had become too ingrained with local Hindu practices and customs, then to develop a Hindu-hostile Islamic identity for them, and to open the door for the partition of India.
To maintain their power, the British have always maintained an undercover political strategy that involves dividing Hindus and Muslims. The League leaders who insisted on Sharia law had a covert political goal of dividing the nation and a private economic purpose of avoiding Sharia law by quietly upholding Hindu law to save their property rights.
In order to prepare Indian Muslims for the inevitable division of the country, they first psychologically separated them from Hindu traditions, customs, and laws. Second, they avoided the Islamic Sharia while maintaining the financial clout that the wealthy and influential League leaders had under customary Hindu law. It was a conspiracy against the Muslim populace as well as India and the Hindus.
https://www.newindianexpress.com/opinions/columns/s-gurumurthy/2023/jul/06/1937-shariat-actndashfor-muslims-or-for-jinnah-zamindars-2591883.html#:~:text=In%20just%2010%20years%2C%20the,became%20a%20reality%20in%201947.
Discussion about this post