yeah except they literally are being consulted- vidhi has been meeting with lawyers,activists, representatives from all these embattled communities. Youre the one insisting that things are otherwise with no evidence. The MPs might be crass- but they vote for progressive stuff over and over again. Chandrachud speaks fancy english and has fancy degrees and then does what he did with ayodhya. Cope.

You’re the bigot. You assume that tribals cannot speak for themselves or that Muslim people need protection from an ngo putting together a draft . You’re the one who assumes that it they do speak up - no one will listen to them. You’re the one assuming these embattled communities don’t know how to advocate for themselves.

What is the implication ? That vidhi would falsely imprison people and force them to consult on their UCC draft ? Are you literally inside this world ?

You’re assuming bigoted things about how helpless and vulnerable these women are and how they cannot speak for themselves and they need to parrot your talking point to prove their freedom. Wake up dude.

I bet you think courts are the most progressive limb of the government in India. You probably think Chandrachud of Harvard law are better than uneducated elected representatives in parliament. If you actually studied history you’d know that from land reforms to anti dowry laws to atrocities legislation you’d know that the legislature has always been the more progressive limb of the government and the courts have always been more conservative. Despite your assumptions about different classes of people.

Haha because you can’t find them doesn’t mean they weren’t made offers. Every Rhodes scholar from my university has opted to stay abroad. I can think of very few who actually returned , Gautam, arghya, Sudhir. That’s about it. And folks who do come back should be recognised for choosing country over money.

It’s quite common in graduate school applications to claim that you deserve a scholarship because you’ll help the country and contribute to it when you come back. Very few people actually follow through on that promise.

McKinsey means slogging on someone else's time for almost no recognition. He came back to grab lots of power and money not to join the Narmada Bachao Andolan. That may make him more street smart than other Rhodes scholars but it is not a sacrifice. It is like investing in your own start up instead of joining a multinational company.

It's not that hard to get in if you have the right kind of privilege. It's not easy either. You have to check the right boxes but if you are street smart and privileged, you can do it. Especially if you are not too fussy about the truth although I don't want to assume that he is like other Rhodes scholars in this respect.

You’re just assuming shit n put in evidence. If they make a draft - oh they weren’t diverse enough. If they do include diverse people in consultations - oh maybe these people are being forced ( what?), and if they are not being forced ( cause how would they even be forced ?) - oh it’s just a farce and not real.

You’re assuming mal intent when there’s absolutely no need to. Understand that vidhi is not the government - they don’t have to do any of this but they are doing a consultative process because they want to advocate for these groups. Go ahead man call Akkai or flavia Agnes or any of the number of people they’ve called over the last few months and consulted and ask them. Don’t just fling mud because you have some bone to pick with vidhi.

Anyone can make baseless allegations - maybe you’re actually 2pac and you’re alive and you’re writing this stuff from the dark side of the moon - maybe you’re the zodiac killer - see how easy that was ?

Do you even realize the kind of opportunity arghya gave up? He was a Rhodes scholar. When you're that- your first day at university you get job offers from places like McKinsey. Name for me please other rhodes scholars who came back and did as much for india as he did? They all stay there- because its the easy thing to do. He didnt come back because he couldnt do anything better- he came back because he wanted to actually do something that mattered.

That degree buys you the red carpet treatment- because- newsflash- its hard to actually get in and do that stuff. whatever his less successful classmates may say. Contacts or no- hes built something you and people who hate on him could never.

the folks in vidhi consultations? yeah. They were free to not attend. this is not majoritarian politics when it specifically takes away religious rights for hindus as well. Gay marriage is not legal in hinduism. gender just UCC like what vidhi has prescribed would make it legal. This is much more complex than you want it to be. I wonder why? Who benefits from making this an us v them, minority v majority issue? It cannot be women and LGBTQ people who are oppressed by religious bigots in their communities no?

heres ID insights state of aadhar report: https://www.idinsight.org/project/state-of-aadhaar-initiative-2016-2018/

The truth is much more complicated than platitudes. 87% of the rural respondents to their survey approved of linking aadhar to the delivery of welfare services. something like 83% of respondents opened bank accounts using either paper aadhar or ekyc. only 0.8% to 2.2% of PDS beneficiaries were excluded because of aadhar and that number is actually likely to go down as enrollment gets better. this is the last year the study was conducted in- for all we know in 2023 the situation might be significantly better. Are things perfect? no. There were in 2018 significantly more errors in aadhar data than in voter ID. but thats stuff that can be fixed without throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

This is financial inclusion of poor people. Despite what your woke theory folks told you the real world is much more complicated. Every piece ive read on how aadhar will be terrible and invade privacy and lead to surveillance has been written from a purely theoretical stand point. Where are the complaints and the writ petitions and cases that are flowing from all this unlawful surveillance?

Policy stuff is complicated- its easy to follow a dogmatic talking point rather than actually following the evidence. This is the kind of stuff vidhi is trying to build capacity in. Not twitter catchphrases.

You can’t say do your research when you can’t back up your argument . I have done my research - all I see is over zealous government officers in the first few months of Aadhar requiring it and then being set right by the government. There is no proof that Aadhar has been used to surveil people in a systematic manner , nor that it’s a cumbersome burden on the poor. The evidence on the latter point actually goes the other way. Folks who had trouble navigating the bureaucracy because of lack of paper ID now can because they have Aadhar.

You can’t just tell people to “ do your research” when you fail to do the same . You’re making an argument - have the courage to either back it up with evidence or admit you’re parroting some talking point based in no empirical evidence.

Such a great sacrifice to be a privileged man, waited on hand and foot and using an Oxford degree to talk over people in India. Many privileged Indian men just can't cut it abroad. That degree buys red carpet treatment in colonial India. His own classmates will tell you that his work is superficial and has always been. He rides on contacts and the colonial thinking that makes people assume that he must be right.

For your information Majority hindu will also be affected due to Uniform civil code as various at various different place have different customs for marriage even for their festival so due to ucc they would be asked to do same customs. But so called leftist wont understand that Uniform civil in long run is good for all country so as to unify everyone

Actually, there have been several alarming pieces of development about aadhar data leak, being sold to private parties and being used to deny people basic rights who lack the necessary access to update/change/correct it. So it is not as if the issues that had been raised lack relevance. However, I do agree with the crux of your argument otherwise.

Comparing NIRF ranks (most bogus ranking system) and LLMs?? Let me guess you are in 2nd year. If not, still very juvenile. How is this even a featured answer! If I have done tax law LLM I can not argue with a constitution law LLM guy? I have done no LLM and yet have all rights to argue. Degree is no protection against insanity and dumbness. Not saying that this guy is, but just saying why so superficial? So if the Arghya would have been from a NIRF rank 20 college would his opinion matter less? Why is this comment featured!

Dude at this point arghya couldnt do anything to make yall happy. If he sat on his hands and did nothing for the next year- yall would chew him out for being so privileged he didnt need to do anything. a review of the constitution is a pretty mild thing to support and something all political factions have supported at different times.

The only mediocre person here is you. NUJS does not really need your validation, nor anyone from Legally India. As for comparing credentials, you are comparing a practitioner with someone who has never set foot inside a courtroom. Only rank idiots would do that. It's up to you whether you wish to be included in the group. You are the one who believes that the OP posted it to make it about law schools. What kind of a megalomaniac would think about that in a discussion about a constitutional change and basic structure?

You need to find a better argument than trying to cancel people and outrage immediately. This is embarrassing. The ad hominem is silly. And I’m convinced it’s because you all can’t defend yourselves any other way.

UCC draft - the team vidhi put together might’ve been more diverse - but it also had a bunch of queer people in it and people whose caste names are not so easily decipherable. Further - these people talked to organisations of Muslim women and organisations of tribal / Dalit people. They put together what looks like a decent draft that tries to attempt gender equality . And since publishing the draft - they have been consulting with people who represent rape victims and Dalit people and trans gender people and Muslim women - all of them - to improve the draft. This is how actual work is done.

Are you fine with women having less rights than men in our society ? Are you fine with a small body of religious fundamentalists deciding what rights girls across the country have ?Because if you make a UCC unspeakable that is what you’re supporting.

Religious law of any kind should be anathema in a modern secular society. You are not on the side of the angels on this one - you’re on the side of those who seek to oppress through religion.

What’s that ? The Muslim community should change the laws themselves ? We’ll we don’t have separate legislatures in this country because we still are a country. And I get that the Muslim middle class feels embattled but they had 75 years to modernise, and you still see little kids being married off into essentially forced servitude. You see unequal access to resources , land or education, between men and women. And you see a clinging to fundamentalism that would actually be out of place in a Muslim majority country. You can’t bring up sacchar committee only when it’s convenient to you. Why are Muslims poorly educated ? Because the strongest factor in whether a kid will make it through school is whether the mom is educated enough to teach him at home. That doesn’t happen because of religious bigotry within the community and clinging to “traditional”. No Education > no job> poverty> disenfranchisement.

We don’t say only disabled people can make laws for disabled people or only caste Hindus make laws for caste Hindus. Caste Hindus actually we’re forced by anti caste movements to change their laws a fair bit - which is why that community does better in education and employment. You cannot build prosperity on inequality.

We recognise that the state has an overarching interest in letting these laws be created through a free exchange of ideas, that elected representatives don’t just serve their vote banks but their constituency. This is all basic constitutional law stuff.

If you want some sort of superlegislature for communities that feel embattled - you’re the one who is the authoritarian and a bigot.

I don’t like the bjp. I’ve never voted for them and never will. But the fact that you all drag the left to such a cowardly position when it’s the left that should be and has been fighting for womens rights and for the constitution really pisses me off. Be better.

Araghya is well known - he started vidhi with congress government . In states with congress government they’ll work with congress. They’re technocrats who will work with anyone to do something they might think is good. Rather than take their ball home and refuse to play like children. If they manage to make the bjp back a gender just Ucc- I don’t at the end of the day care about the optics of it.

People dislike them because Aadhar. But tell me did any of the stories about how Aadhar will be used to spy on people come true ? Where is the big brother state I was promised ? Where is the invasion of privacy I was warned about ? Aadhar is boring. It just made stuff more convenient and it gave many poor people their first form of government ID.

If you were really worried about privacy you’d take on big tech instead of a national ID system.

That aside - vidhi employs largely left wing policy folks - no bigots - no one from the RSS at all. The farthest thing from that. But because they don’t do this whole crap on Twitter you equate them with RSS. Go ahead find a material link between vidhi folks and RSS - I dare you.

Make better arguments. It saddens me that this is the level of political discourse in the country. The left is not serving the people if it reduces itself to this woke crap

LOL. Your goddess Indira changed it and inserted Socialist and Secular. The word Socialist definitely has no place in the Constitution. Neither Secular, because what the Constitution envisages is Pluralism not Secularism. The technically correct word is Plurinationalist, which a few countries have mentioned in their constitutions.

The remarks against Arghya/Vidhi are baseless and comical. When J Sai Deepak makes the same argument you people praise him. Then why target Arghya? No doubt borne out of resentment for NLSIU. Some points to rebut all of you:

ACADEMIC CREDENTIALS:Arghya is from NLSIU with a DPhil from Oxford (in Constitutional Law). Arghya is also a Rhodes scholar and NLSIU gold medalist. The person criticising him is from NUJS with an LLM from King's College London (in Tax Law). Even if I assume parity between NLSIU (NIRF rank 1) and NUJS (NIRF rank 4), or Oxford (QS rank 2) and KCL (QS rank 15), a person with a DPhil/PhD in Constitutional Law is unquestionably superior to an LLM in Tax Law when it comes to matters of constitutional law.

ENDORSEMENTS:

Fali Nariman has praised Arghya's book. You will see his quote on the cover. Need I say more?

IDEOLOGY:

Everyone is free to have an ideology. We are not a communist country like China and North Korea. Also, is Fali Nariman pro-BJP as per your logic? Finally, show me ONE place where Arghya/Vidhi has endorsed the BJP. Yes, Vidhi drafted a version of the UCC and has supported it in newspapers. So what? Since when is UCC = BJP? The Constitution mandates it (in the DPSP) and the Supreme Court has also said we should have it. A Muslim judge like AS Ahmadi has supported UCC.

MERITS OF THE ARGUMENT

Finally, and most importantly, the Constitution indeed needs a review. The Vajpayee government set up an excellent committee to review the working of the Constitution. It pointed to legitimate problems like a backlog of judges, lack of police and administrative reforms, etc. The Committee was headed by a very respected judge (Venkatachaliah) had distinguished people from all backgrounds, like BP Jeevan Reddy, RS Sarkaria Soli Sorabjee, PA Sangma, CR Irani, Abid Hussain etc. I quote from the report:

" During the last two decades and more, there was a persistent demand in the civil society – from some NGOs, academics, constitutional scholars and others – that the working of the Constitution be subjected to a comprehensive review. Several books and a large number of articles and research papers devoted to the theme of constitutional review and reforms were published (some of these have been listed in the bibliographies annexed to Consultation Papers and were taken fully into account and used by the Commission in its study and deliberations) and many seminars and conferences organised in different parts of the country."

So why single out Arghya?

Just objectively stating what they said and you can make your judgements from the links below. But one thing I cannot understand is why does Arghya's book cover have a Union Jack superimposed on top of the Constitution? I think it's in poor taste. The Constitution drafters were guided by Indian sensibilities and inspired more by the US Ireland and France than the UK.

I sincerely hope Arghya does not endorse the Hindu nationalist viewpoint that we need to "de-colonise" the Constitution to reflect "Indian civilisational values".

https://www.amazon.in/Colonial-Constitution-Arghya-Sengupta/dp/9353451922

https://www.telegraphindia.com/opinion/a-second-look-queries-on-the-constitution-should-not-be-vilified/cid/1967473

https://twitter.com/ashish_nujs/status/1703856832354435445