158 "Presenting" the PastThe BJP as much as the Sangh Parivar leaders argue that a uniform civil
code is meant to alleviate the gender inequities inherent in the various
personal laws, and whoever opposes it is against equality and dignity. It
is important to note that these are the same people who have not taken an
articulated and unambiguous stand on the caste oppression of untouch-
ability or the biases of the Hindu laws against women. The Shariat Act of
1937 merely declares that all Muslim personal matters such as marriage,
divorce, maintenance, adoption, inheritance, and succession will be gov-
erned by the Shariat, and does not actually codify the Muslim Personal
Law. Although both the Center and the state(s) can legislate on the per-
sonal laws, Article 254 of the Indian constitution stipulates that no state
bill that is "repugnant" to a Central law can come into force without the
president's sanction. The BJP, which is in power in certain states, argues
that there are few Central provisions in Muslim Personal Law, and hence
their state governments could codify the Muslim Personal Law without
any reference to the Center. A former Supreme Court judge's recommen-
dation that the Hindus should set an example by reforming and secular-
izing their own laws, which may inspire the minorities to do the same and
pave the way for a uniform civil code, remains completely unacknowl-
edged by the Hindus.
Even as the Indian civil society was struggling to recognize and deal
with the widespread ramifications of the powerful symbol-based hate pol-
itics of the Sangh Parivar, the latter was modifying the very secular and
democratic foundations of the Indian state. The 2002 Gujarat carnage, an
offshoot of the renewed Ayodhya campaign that was marked by uncon-
scionable failures and active connivance of the Gujarat police and state
machinery, was exactly that. Some of the notorious characteristics of the
Gujarat holocaust included extreme polarization of Hindu and Muslim
communities; exclusionary attitudes that held as though the pain, loss,
and betrayal the Muslims suffered was the concern of that community;
and using the sexual subjugation of women as an instrument of violence.
One shudders at the thought of India having these kinds of social ramifica-
tions and political modifications. Analyzing the underlying structures out
of which the Gujarat-like inhumanity springs, Radhika Desai pins down
a form of capitalist development combined with upper- and middle-caste
and class Hindu assertion and points out that this has been accepted as
the way for India. Although the seeds of this malaise were actually sown
in the 1970s, the 1980s witnessed an acute class and caste polarization in
forms such as the antireservation riots and so forth. When political power
did not reflect social and economic power, successive Congress (I) gov-
ernments foundered on the impossibility of a government in contradic-
tion with civil society. The upper and middle castes and classes expressed
their frustrations on the streets, and the BJP, along with the Sangh Parivar,
made accelerated gains.^37