top of page

In Conversation with: Gutam Bhatia

Gautam Bhatia is a Delhi-based advocate. A graduate of NLSIU in 2011, and subsequently one of the recipients of the Rhodes Scholarship of the same year, Gautam is one of the pioneers of bringing together philosophy and Indian Constitutional Law in his widely read blog, Indian Constitutional Law and Philosophy. The primary focus of the blog is on Part III of the Constitution. In 2015, he released his book, Offend, Shock, or Disturb: Freedom of Speech under the Indian Constitution, which is a comprehensive examination of free speech under the Indian Constitution. It explores Indian free speech jurisprudence from a doctrinal, comparative, and philosophical perspective.

We recently interviewed him recently on the issue of triple talaq. Read on to hear his insights.

A - What ​is ​your ​opinion ​on ​the ​triple ​talaq ​verdict? ​In ​particular, ​what do ​you ​think ​of ​the ​criticisms ​that ​it ​is ​being ​used ​as ​a ​weapon against ​minorities ​spearheaded ​by ​the ​far-right ​rather ​than influencing ​any ​real ​shift ​in ​gender ​rights? ​Do ​you ​think ​it ​has created ​any ​new ​change?

G - I think it's far too early to tell. A lot will depend upon its implementation - and to what extent it serves as a tool of empowerment for Muslim women. In general, the issue of the UCC has always been weaponised by some groups to attack minorities - but I don't think that obviates the very real need for gender-just personal laws, whether uniform or not.

A - Recent ​developments ​have ​seen ​discussions ​on ​‘love ​jihad’ ​and ‘uniform ​civil ​code’ ​making ​contradictory ​claims ​- ​one ​is ​suggesting that ​cross-religious ​relationships ​should ​not ​be ​allowed ​whereas ​the other ​is ​implying ​that ​we ​should ​be ​raising ​beyond ​religion ​- ​yet ​both are ​being ​used ​within ​a ​majoritarian ​public ​discourse ​to ​attack ​the muslim ​community. ​What ​are ​you ​thoughts ​on ​this?

G - "Love jihad" is a bogey - you're right when you say that it is a tool in the majoritarian discourse. UCC, in my view, is a lot more complicated - as I've pointed out in my answer above. I think there are strong arguments for a UCC that are grounded in a liberal - or even left-wing - vision of constitutional republicanism, the idea that there shouldn't be any dark spaces, closed off to the application of constitutional norms. With something like the UCC, the devil is always in the detail, and I think that it depends entirely on the content of a proposed UCC. There can be versions of the UCC that impose majoritarian norms on the community as a whole, but there can be versions which consciously do not.

A - For ​the ​benefit ​of ​the ​readers, ​can ​you ​tell ​us ​what ​the ​is ​standing ​of personal ​laws ​in ​India ​with ​regards ​to ​constitutional ​protection ​in light ​of ​this ​judgment?

G - This judgment does not change the pre-existing position, which is that uncodified personal laws cannot be challenged on the ground that they violate fundamental rights.

A - If ​could ​see ​one ​shift ​or ​change ​in ​the ​Indian ​legal ​system, ​what would it be?

G - Less deference to the government in civil rights cases, especially cases involving free speech.

Thank you to Guatam for taking the time to speak with us. Follow him on Twitter and view his website.

If you liked this post, share it & follow us.

  • Instagram - Black Circle
  • Facebook - Black Circle
  • Twitter - Black Circle

Related Posts:

bottom of page