THE Supreme Court has issued an order giving religious minority communities the right to legally adopt children. It is a welcome step although clashing with personal law. So far, Muslims, Christians, Parsis and Jews could only be guardians, not legal parents of adopted children. Consequently, the adopted children could not inherit property. Only biological parents could exercise their rights over their children. Under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act amended in 2006, adopted children have the same rights as biological children. And now that applies to all minority communities in the country. It has been emphasized that civil laws and the rights they provide override personal law. One may think that it is a move towards a uniform civil code. The majority of Muslims had been against such a code as the tenets of their religion make their community hidebound. Political parties are chary of going against minority sentiments because of the vote bank they represent in elections. The setting aside of the Supreme Court ruling in the Shah Bano case was an extreme example. Historically women in minority communities are at a disadvantage in property rights and matters of marriage, divorce and maintenance.
It is argued that instead of imposing a court order, it would be more effective to introduce internal reform in Muslim society. The clash between a uniform civil code and personal law is less important than an enlightened attitude to specific issues. Can the Supreme Court cut through prejudice with legislation? Can uniformity be ensured among all minority communities? It is heartening that the focus on minorities has now extended from Muslims to other such communities.
