Theme -National Integration
DUMP 1--Nehru on national unity
DUMP 1--Nehru on national unity
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU was an apostle of humanity, peace and amity. But his emphasis on national integration and communal harmony is an aspect always to be remembered and transmitted from one generation to the other. Nehru laid the foundation of independent India on the pillars of democracy, socialism, secularism and peaceful co-existence. He thought of India as a whole and always insisted that the people should think of the country's problems in a national perspective.
Nehru's dream of independent India was very clear. He once declared, "the one thing that should be obvious to all of us is that there is no group in India, no party, no religious community, which can prosper if India does not prosper. If India goes down, we go down, all of us... But if it is well with India, if India lives as a vital, free country, then it is well with all of us, to whatever community or religion we belong."
Jawaharlal's vision of Indian unity was not a mere abstract idea. Addressing the opening session of the National Integration Conference in New Delhi on September 28, 1961, he reminded the audience, "we in India, as in the rest of the world too, are passing through a period of the greatest transformation in history. It is not surprising that in the course of this transformation things happen which are not always to our liking. So I do not look upon these matters, annoying and irritating as they are, as things which are frightening. They have to occur and in fact, the way they are occurring is an indication that we are marching ahead and that all the suppressed urges in us are coming up and we are fighting the evils which come in our way." In a broadcast to the nation on March 26, 1964 he said, "ever since the distant past it has been the proud privilege of the people of India to live in harmony with one another. That has been the basis of India's culture. Long ago the Buddha taught us this lesson. From the days of Asoka, 2300 years ago, this aspect of our thought has been repeatedly declared and practised. In our own day Mahatma Gandhi laid great stress on it and indeed lost his life because he put emphasis on communal goodwill and harmony. We have, therefore, a precious heritage to keep up and we cannot allow ourselves to act contrary to it."
Communal harmony
Nehru's approach to communal amity is very much relevant in today's communally-surcharged society. He felt aggrieved to see communal conflicts which destroy social harmony and strove his utmost to remove fanaticism which leads to communal strife. He cautioned the people: "we must be on our guard against the disruptive tendencies in the country which raise their heads whenever an occasion offers itself. Among these tendencies are some which come under the name of communalism — politics under some religious garb, one religious group being incited to hate another religious group."
Speaking about nationalism Nehru said, "nationalism does not mean Hindu nationalism, Muslim nationalism or Sikh nationalism. As soon as you speak of Hindu, Sikh or Muslim, you do not speak for India. Each person has to ask himself the question: what do I want to make of India — one country, one nation or 10, 20 or 25 nations, a fragmented and divided nation without any strength or endurance, ready to break to pieces at the slightest shock? Each person has to answer this question. Separateness has always been the weakness of India. Fissiparous tendencies, whether they belong to Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians or others, are very dangerous and wrong. They belong to petty and backward minds. No one who understands the spirit of the times can think in terms of communalism."
Great men are not always good men. But Nehru was a rare combination of both greatness and goodness. Arnold Toynbee, the world famous historian, has aptly called him "one of the noblest works of God's creation." Jawaharlal said, "I lay stress on the unity of India, not merely the political unity which we have achieved but something far deeper, the emotional unity, the integration of our minds and hearts, the suppression of feelings of separatism."
Lessons of history
As a historian Jawaharlal analysed the causes of the rise and fall of civilisations. He was aware of the causes of India's downfall as well. Speaking at Trichur in December 1955, he pointed out, "we have before us lessons of history. We have seen how repeatedly in spite of our many virtues and our great abilities we have fallen in the race of nations, and because of this lack of unity amongst us the entire community of India has been separated into castes and creeds which do not pull together. Therefore, I lay stress everywhere on the unity of India and on our need to fight communalism, provincialism, separatism and casteism."
Remembering Nehru is to remember his message on national unity and integration. He said, "the main thing we have to keep in mind is the emotional integration of India... We have to build up this great country into a mighty nation, mighty not in the ordinary sense of the word, that is, having great armies and all that, but mighty in thought, mighty in action, mighty in culture and mighty in its peaceful service of humanity."
source- http://www.thehindu.com/thehindu/op/2002/11/12/stories/2002111200020200.htm
DUMP--2
DUMP--2
Sports should be an integral part of our everyday life. Some people think that sports is important only for physical well-being, I feel sports is important for overall development of an individual.
“We are a large and diverse nation. Sports can be a great means of national integration,
DUMP--3
Raj Bhasha (Hindi) played an important role in national integration, and according to the official language Policy, implementation of Hindi was a must in all Central government offices.
DUMP--4
The best contribution of Indian cinema, Hindi cinema in particular, has been the one it has made to the national integration - and that, too, without sloganeering. I'll give you an example. At a restaurant in Delhi some years ago, I heard a girl with a fine voice singing Hindi film songs with perfect diction. After my dinner I met her and complimented her, speaking in Hindi. She gave me a blank look. A man who was singing with her said, "Sir, she can't speak Hindi." It turned out that the girl was from Mizoram and that she had learnt Hindi songs by listening to tapes
DUMP--5
Uniform civil code & national integration
THE ISSUE of the uniform civil code has been shaken out of its dormancy by the Supreme Court once again. Last month, in the course of striking down as unconstitutional sec.118 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, Chief Justice V.N. Khare observed that it was "a matter of regret that Article 44 of the Constitution has not been given effect to." It is surprising that such statements should emanate from the highest court of the country when it is well known that the prerogative of deciding what laws are good for the country rests with the executive.
Article 37 of the Constitution makes it very clear that the provisions contained in the Directive Principles of State Policy are not enforceable by any court of law and therefore, the courts have no jurisdiction over them.
Emboldened by the pronouncements of the Supreme Court, the BJP has called for a national debate on a uniform civil code. It wants the Law Commission to "identify fair and equitable ingredients" from the personal laws of the Hindus, Muslims, Christians and Parsis and formulate a common code. Assuming a common code is possible, the competence of the Law Commission to frame such a code can be questioned on the basis of it not being represented by members from the minority communities who are also acknowledged experts in their respective personal laws.
The talk of a uniform civil code, in the absence of uniformity in most of the other laws prevailing in the country, is absurd. It may be surprising to know that even the Criminal Procedure Code and the Civil Procedure Code are not uniform throughout the country as they have been amended and modified by various State Governments. To quote another example, sec.118 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 was struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional for being unfair to the Christians. Yet Hindu Undivided Families continue to enjoy tax benefits in India which are not available to the other communities. Why don't the supporters of a uniform civil code call for a uniform fiscal code?
Sheer diversity
A comparative study of the personal laws of the Hindus, Muslims and other minorities will reveal that the sheer diversity of these laws, coupled with the dogmatic zeal with which they are adhered to, cannot permit uniformity of any sort. In fact, the heterogeneity of the Hindu law itself is such that even the possibility of a uniform Hindu code is ruled out. Talking of marriage alone, under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, marriages may be solemnised in accordance with the rites and ceremonies of a variety of people who come under the definition of a `Hindu.' For instance, according to the saptapadi form of marriage, followed mostly in northern India, the marriage is complete and binding when the bridegroom and the bride take seven steps in front of the sacred fire.
On the other hand in the south suyamariyathai and seerthiruththa forms of marriage are followed. Under these forms a marriage is valid if the parties to the marriage declare in the presence of relatives that they are marrying each other or if they garland each other or if they put a ring on each other's finger or if the bridegroom ties a thali around the neck of the bride. Also, for a marriage to be valid under Hindu law it has to be solemnised in accordance with the customary rites and ceremonies of at least one of the parties. Thus, if a Jain marries a Buddhist by performing the rites of a Sikh the marriage is void (See Sakuntala v Nilakantha 1972, Mah LR 31).
In so far as the Muslim law is concerned though there are no elaborate rites or ceremonies, there exist some differences between the Sunni and Shia marriages. Under the Sunni law the proposal (ijab) of marriage and it acceptance (qubool) should be made in the presence of two witnesses along with a nikahnama in which the terms of marriage such as dower and its mode of payment, etc., are incorporated. But under the Shia law no witnesses are required to solemnise a marriage. The Shia law also allows a temporary marriage called muta, whereas for the Sunnis muta is strictly prohibited.
Therefore, it has to be asked if it is possible to reconcile these divergent laws of the Hindus and Muslims and formulate a uniform code that is acceptable to both the communities to say nothing about the Christians and the Parsis. Let alone the minorities, the first to oppose such a common code will be the Hindus. Nevertheless, one wonders how the unity and integrity of the country will be affected if Hindus, Muslims, Christians and Parsis or for that matter any other people marry, divorce and inherit in accordance with their respective personal laws.
The fact is, neither does India require nor is it possible or practicable to have a uniform civil code governing all the communities. India already has optional civil code in the form of the Special Marriages Act, 1954. This Act read with other similar Acts such as the Indian Succession Act, 1925 provides an excellent legal framework for all matters of marriage, divorce, maintenance and succession for those who wish to avoid religion-based laws.