The claims were made at an event organized by the Hindu ultranationalist far right. Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav had made several anti-Muslim comments in the past and recently came back to support the need for a uniform civil code. The opposition denounced the statements before the Supreme Court.
Prayagraj () – A judge of the Allahabad High Court, Shekhar Kumar Yadav, said at a conference organized by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad – a far-right Hindu organization – which was held in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh, that “this is the Hindustan, and this country should function according to the will of the majority,” according to videos that circulate on the Internet and have provoked harsh criticism from opposition parties in India.
During the event, which took place on December 8, the judge then criticized some Islamic practices and argued for the need to introduce a Uniform Civil Code (UCC), an issue that has long divided public opinion and political forces of the India.
Opposition parties have urged Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna to take note of the matter. Mahua Moitra, of the Trinamool Congress, and Asaduddin Owaisi, of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen, recalled the importance of the independence and impartiality of the Judiciary. Owaisi highlighted that the Indian Constitution provides for the separation of powers.
“I have no hesitation in saying that this is Hindustan, this country must function according to the wishes of the Bahusankhyaks.” [la mayoría] who live in Hindustan. This is the law. It cannot be said that a Supreme Court judge says it. The law, in fact, works according to the majority. Look at it in the context of family or society. Only what benefits the well-being and happiness of the majority will be accepted,” Yadav said at the meeting, adding that the Uniform Civil Code is not only something defended by far-right organizations such as Vishwa Hindu Parishad or Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. (RSS, a paramilitary group associated with the Hindu ultranationalist Bharatiya Janata Party from which the Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, comes). “I swear that this country must definitely adopt a single law and will adopt it very soon.”
The Uniform Civil Code has long been a workhorse of the BJP, which wants to unify the laws that regulate issues such as marriage, divorce, inheritance and adoption, which are currently regulated differently depending on the religion of belonging.
This is not the first time that Justice Yadava’s statements have received criticism. In 2021, he asked the central government to introduce a law to honor Ram, Krishna, the Ramayana, the Mahabharata, the Bhagavad Gita and other ancient texts that form the basis of the Hindu religion, and also proposed teaching them in schools.
That same year he stated that cows should be protected by the Constitution (because the prosperity of the nation also depends on the well-being of cows which, in his opinion, belong to Indian culture) and their slaughter should be punished by law. This is also an issue that is actually related to the Muslim community, which does not consider cows sacred and therefore, unlike Hindus, trades and consumes beef.
Still in 2021, the judge denied bail to a man accused of converting a woman to Islam, and defended his position by saying that the conversion of a person who is part of the majority community (Hindu) to another religion shows that the country is weak and allows religious fanaticism to take advantage of it.
In another case, involving a man accused of insulting Hindu deities on Facebook (who had been granted bail), Yadav wrote that the posts were an attack on the faith of the majority of India’s population and that if the courts treated these people leniently, there was a risk that they would become inflamed and that their behavior would disturb the harmony of the country.
The opposition has cited various anti-Muslim comments, and is now calling for the judge’s dismissal. However, Kshetriya Sanyojak Brijendra Singh, a VHP member and one of the main organizers of the December 8 event, defended the judge, saying his claims were taken out of context, while the BJP dismissed the matter stating that everyone “has the right to express their personal opinions.”
Add Comment