The constitution we adopted was an emulation of several working constitution of the world. The Constituent assembly had no hesistantion in declaring our Repulic as secular though Secular word was inserted rather late in the preamble of the constitution. The constituion guarantees right to Preach,Practise and Profess a religion of ones choice and freedom of conscience, its a fundamental right if impinged or violated, the aggrived person can move the court by way of writ petition to get approriate remedy.Every fundamental right is subject to reasonable restrictions in keeping with public order, morality, health, contempt of court and incitement to an offence and no fundamental right is unfettered and absolute.under normal circumstances these fundamental rights can be availed of in totality but during emergency they are curtailed considering the political scenario then.
In India any law regulating religion, religious institution, religious conversion and personal laws of religion evokes feelings of intolerance and is construed as something which hurts religious sentiments and the state is unjustly interfering with right to practise ones religion. This sort of perception and contention is misguided and holds no water. Laws ought to keep pace with time and changing circumstances,political scenario, social circumstances and economic developments.The personal laws of hindus, muslims and christians also parsis need to be relooked in the light of modern and contemporary state of affairs bearing in mind its sanctity and relevance in this day and age. Gender justice is a significant issue in human rights jurisprudence in recent times and unfortunately the personal laws dont place men and women on the same footing and at par when it comes to rights relating to property,mode and method of divorce etc.
No nation in the world which professes to be secular has a separate code of laws governing marriage, property and divorce on the basis of religion except for india which reflects our polity in poor light in the international arena. Common Civil Code is a progressive legislation which will seek to remove discrepancies between different personal laws, ensure gender justice and do away with legal complications of sorts. Uniform Civil Code is a constitutional obligation as its part of directive principles of the constitution. However The Common Civil Code we adopt and incorporate must neither be a Hindu dogma imposed on minorities nor a minority scripted treatise thrusted on the majority community but something churned out by way of consenses, discusssion, debate and public dialogue in the right forum. India in order to prepare a draft of it can take a cue from countries who successfully follow Uniform Civil Code in letter and spirit rather than trying to concoct our own draft if we lack the acumen for it.
Uniform Civil Code will be a progressive legislation aiming at polity and civil society based on laws which are just in every respect and flexible to the imperatives of changing times and circumstances in other words a dynamic law not static.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Monday, April 20, 2009
Most favoured nation with Most undeserving neighbour
India has a glorious past, historical importance, cosmopolitan culture and a civilisation based on concepts of tolerance, forebearance and compassion. The expatriates of indian origin excel in countries they have legitimately immigrated to esp U.S.A. the culture of 'Sarva Dharma Sambhav' and 'Vasudaiva Kutumbakam' which means all religions convey the same message and in essence are the same and this world is one family originated on Indian soil which are now regarded as values and virtues of timeless wisdom. However after acquiring freedom from british and the nightmarish and unfortunate two-nation theory propounded by certain power hungry and avaracious opportunists under the garb of crusaders of certain religion has left an indelible mark on the psyche of a certain generation and is an unforgettable event in history.
India chose to be secular whereas pakistan declared itself to be an islamic nation governed by the ordains of islamic scriptures with a functional army, air force and judiciary. It also incorporated certain vestiges and relics of colonial era. Ironically indian muslim population outnumbers pakistan population of muslims. Pakistan's territorial hegemony and unwarranted aggression has led to two wars one in 1965 and another in 1971 in which bangladesh was carved out and separated from it and not to forget the decade old low intensity kargil conflict which India succeeded in warding off the mercenaries and regain its territories. Pakistan has still not learnt its lessons after losing in conventional wars, it takes recourse to proxy wars, so called jehadi missions, fidayeen attacks and covert operations under the guise of liberating kashmir which is integral part of union of India.
Pakistan despite being the fountain head of terrorism and laboratory of islamic extermism has been made to taste its own medicine by being a victim of its home grown terrorism and patronage to such outfits who are unleashing havoc under the garb of retaliation of alleged oppression on muslims which has no reasonable or logical justification. The 26/11 terror attacks perpetrated on Mumbai stirred the conscience of civil society and woke up the political dispensation from the slumber of redundancy of an anti terror law and the soft peddaling approach towards terrorism as it has always tried to link security with vote bank considerations which has made the country bleed every now and then. the lone gun man of 26/11 terror attack has become the most controversial accused in the hisotry of post independence India. The investigation in the matter has been extremely sensitive, high profile and also complicated, as a nation committed to rule of law and abiding by a written constitution he ought be given a fair trial but the media hype, the kind of security given to him, the endeavour to provide him a lawyer of the best kind which is quite difficult considering his nationality is in question, his callousness and brazen nonrepentance for his alleged act sends shockwaves in the minds of right thinking members of a civilised set up. one school of thought advocates his survival and conviction will unearth pakistan's double standards and expose their skeletons in the cupboard and another school of thought preaches he deserves to be bumped off considering the magnitude of the crime he is alleged of, however my conscience says he should be tried speedily without inordinate delays on flimsy grounds, it is an open and shut case, his guilt is likely to be proved beyond reasonable doubt so he deserves to be given the gravest and most stringent punishment prescribed by the doctrine of penology we follow and for political considerations he should not be given any sort of preferential treatment and no mercy should be shown to him on account of his age as its only a perverted mind that can be subjected to such kind of horrific indoctrination. let the truth prevail!
India chose to be secular whereas pakistan declared itself to be an islamic nation governed by the ordains of islamic scriptures with a functional army, air force and judiciary. It also incorporated certain vestiges and relics of colonial era. Ironically indian muslim population outnumbers pakistan population of muslims. Pakistan's territorial hegemony and unwarranted aggression has led to two wars one in 1965 and another in 1971 in which bangladesh was carved out and separated from it and not to forget the decade old low intensity kargil conflict which India succeeded in warding off the mercenaries and regain its territories. Pakistan has still not learnt its lessons after losing in conventional wars, it takes recourse to proxy wars, so called jehadi missions, fidayeen attacks and covert operations under the guise of liberating kashmir which is integral part of union of India.
Pakistan despite being the fountain head of terrorism and laboratory of islamic extermism has been made to taste its own medicine by being a victim of its home grown terrorism and patronage to such outfits who are unleashing havoc under the garb of retaliation of alleged oppression on muslims which has no reasonable or logical justification. The 26/11 terror attacks perpetrated on Mumbai stirred the conscience of civil society and woke up the political dispensation from the slumber of redundancy of an anti terror law and the soft peddaling approach towards terrorism as it has always tried to link security with vote bank considerations which has made the country bleed every now and then. the lone gun man of 26/11 terror attack has become the most controversial accused in the hisotry of post independence India. The investigation in the matter has been extremely sensitive, high profile and also complicated, as a nation committed to rule of law and abiding by a written constitution he ought be given a fair trial but the media hype, the kind of security given to him, the endeavour to provide him a lawyer of the best kind which is quite difficult considering his nationality is in question, his callousness and brazen nonrepentance for his alleged act sends shockwaves in the minds of right thinking members of a civilised set up. one school of thought advocates his survival and conviction will unearth pakistan's double standards and expose their skeletons in the cupboard and another school of thought preaches he deserves to be bumped off considering the magnitude of the crime he is alleged of, however my conscience says he should be tried speedily without inordinate delays on flimsy grounds, it is an open and shut case, his guilt is likely to be proved beyond reasonable doubt so he deserves to be given the gravest and most stringent punishment prescribed by the doctrine of penology we follow and for political considerations he should not be given any sort of preferential treatment and no mercy should be shown to him on account of his age as its only a perverted mind that can be subjected to such kind of horrific indoctrination. let the truth prevail!
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Moral Policing or talibanisation?
Morality is essential in a civil society governed by codes of conduct and ethics which have been handed down by generations together.The concept of morality is open to interpretation and a subjectmatter of debate depending upon the culutral factors which shape and mould the moral aspects of a particular culture may it be occidental or oriental culture.morality is something which needs to be imbibed and inculcated and not forced upon or thrusted upon a set of people out of sanctimoniousness and under the garb of safeguarding traditional values.
Indian civilisation which is known for its tolerance and all-encompassingness has unfortunately degenerated into laboratory of moral policing where self-appointed moral police are on a rampage to dictate terms to the youth in terms of attire they must don, their recreational pursuits, choice of films and conduct of theirs with the opposite sex in public. People are indeed concerned about the decline in moral values and rise of materialism and self-indulgence but the modus operandi used by certain right-wing groups under the guise of a divine entity to perpetrate violence of women, intimidating couples at public places, making a hue and cry about degree and quantum of nudity to be shown in films which is the prerogative of censor board not these so called crusaders.
The moot question is if these moral police want pub culture to be weeded out of the social set up they must strive for a legislation and create awareness about its unwholesome effects on the young generation rather than taking up cudgels and resorting to violence when there has been no provocation from people who have been taking alcohol at pubs, In case a person at a pub behaves irrationally after consuming liquor in excess, the pub bouncer will chuck him out we dont need the services of a moral cops. Couples on account of lack of privacy go to places where they find some serenity and comfort and they are no a menace to society unless they indulge in behaviour which involves obscenity and indecent exposure,blanket ban on films should not be encouraged in a democracy on grounds of alleged hurting of religious sentiments or vulgarity in the film unless the film undergoes litmus test of censor board approval and also avails of remedy of judicial scrutiny.
Moral policing at the end of the day smacks of intolerance and biogotry also parochialism and puritanism. When the political establishment wants to wash its hands of important issues plaguing its polity, it provokes its cadres to make a hue and cry about trivial issues like wardrobe malfunction to draw public attention and garner votes and playing to the gallery.
Indian civilisation which is known for its tolerance and all-encompassingness has unfortunately degenerated into laboratory of moral policing where self-appointed moral police are on a rampage to dictate terms to the youth in terms of attire they must don, their recreational pursuits, choice of films and conduct of theirs with the opposite sex in public. People are indeed concerned about the decline in moral values and rise of materialism and self-indulgence but the modus operandi used by certain right-wing groups under the guise of a divine entity to perpetrate violence of women, intimidating couples at public places, making a hue and cry about degree and quantum of nudity to be shown in films which is the prerogative of censor board not these so called crusaders.
The moot question is if these moral police want pub culture to be weeded out of the social set up they must strive for a legislation and create awareness about its unwholesome effects on the young generation rather than taking up cudgels and resorting to violence when there has been no provocation from people who have been taking alcohol at pubs, In case a person at a pub behaves irrationally after consuming liquor in excess, the pub bouncer will chuck him out we dont need the services of a moral cops. Couples on account of lack of privacy go to places where they find some serenity and comfort and they are no a menace to society unless they indulge in behaviour which involves obscenity and indecent exposure,blanket ban on films should not be encouraged in a democracy on grounds of alleged hurting of religious sentiments or vulgarity in the film unless the film undergoes litmus test of censor board approval and also avails of remedy of judicial scrutiny.
Moral policing at the end of the day smacks of intolerance and biogotry also parochialism and puritanism. When the political establishment wants to wash its hands of important issues plaguing its polity, it provokes its cadres to make a hue and cry about trivial issues like wardrobe malfunction to draw public attention and garner votes and playing to the gallery.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
