| Is the High Court High? |
28 July 2003
|
India's Supreme Court Plays with Fire
The courts have done it again by over-reaching their authority, but this time it happened in India. A
Christian priest wanted to leave some property to charity, but under Indian law, a Christian with close
living relatives may not do this. Other religions are bound by other laws. The Indian Supreme Court
struck down the law and suggested that a common civil code would improve Indian national integration.
Fortunately, the Indian constitution permits the practice of any religion, and while it may seem like
discrimination, the court was wrong in its decision and is being dangerously provocative.
Religion is one of India's biggest social challenges. And the tolerance embodied in the constitution is the
only workable solution. However, it does result in people being treated differently according to their
faith. Islam permits a man to have four wives. Christianity requires monogamy. In India, it is legal for a
Muslim to marry more than once, but such an arrangement is not permitted for Christians under Indian
law. This is not discrimination, though. It is a matter of political compromise and wisdom.
If a Christian feels like taking a second spouse, it is in violation of doctrine to act on that desire. It is an
unChristian act. And, logically, no true Christian would want to do so. Conversely, charging interest in
business is commonplace -- credit cards came from a Christian society. For a Muslim to do so violates the
teachings of the Koran. No true Muslim would do so. Yet for the Christian, there is no religious objection
to it.
India is a mass of contradictions, and this clumsy, unequal-yet-equitable accommodation of differing and
sometimes hostile faiths is the only way to keep a lid on the sectarian difficulties that lie just below the
surface. Any legal system rests on a moral code, either explicitly or implicitly, because of the concept of
justice. Laws are worth having when they promote justice, which has some cultural differences around
the edges.
The court, though, in arguing for a common civil code, has threatened this delicate arrangement. In the
name of uniformity, the court has stirred up the hornet's nest or religion. Millions died in the partition of
Indian and Pakistan, which stemmed from religious differences. The court is playing with that kind of fire.
Perhaps the solution is a single religion for India, one in which judges who threaten the lives of millions
for the sake of uniformity are sacrificed to the god of Reason.