AIPPM, AGENDA: DELIBERATION ON IMPLEMENTATION OF

UCC WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON UTTARAKHAND UCC AND

GOAN UCC.

TGIMUN 2025
 LETTER FROM THE EB
Dear Prospective Members,
On behalf of the Executive Board, we extend a warm welcome and
congratulate you on your selection to the All India Political Parties Meet
(AIPPM) at TGI MUN 2025.
This simulation demands more than standard debate—it calls for sharp
political insight, strategic thinking, and a deep understanding of ideology-
driven decision-making. We are not seeking recycled positions or textbook
solutions. Instead, we expect original, pragmatic ideas that remain true to
the political character you represent.
This guide is intentionally broad—it is meant to direct, not define, your
research. Your preparation should go beyond the obvious. Think critically,
analyze deeply, and always ground your arguments in political realism.
Please note: mobile phones are prohibited, and internet use during
committee is strictly banned. Violation of these rules will result in
immediate suspension.
We look forward to witnessing your intellect and strategy in action.
Best regards,
Executive Board
AIPPM, TGI MUN 2025
 WHAT IS AIPPM
•Delegates:
•Students take on roles representing different politicitians from
different political parties , mimicking the diversity found in real-life
politics.
•Sessions:
•Depending on the conference sessions are held to discuss issues,
propose laws, and vote on resolutions, just like in Parliament. In TGI
MUN it will be divided across 2 days.
•Committees:
•Specific groups focus on different topics, such as finance or social
welfare, similar to how real parliamentary committees operate.
 RULES OF PROCEDURE [ROP]

 1. Concept Origin: The All India Political Parties Meet (AIPPM) reflects India's political realities, enabling delegates
to understand policy-making processes and the challenges faced by modern political parties.
 2. Roll Call: The chairperson calls each portfolio. Delegates respond with “present”. There is no concept of abstain
in AIPPM
 3. Formal Session: The Chairperson guides discussions, allowing one delegate to speak at a time. Delegates can
motion to begin a formal session.
 4. Opening Statement: The opening statement starts formal debate, where delegates state their positions. Each
delegate has 90 seconds to speak according to the discretion of the EB. The OS is exhaustive list.
 5. Moderated Caucus: This motion allows focused debate on specific topics. Delegates must specify total time and
individual speaking durations. Points can be submitted via a chit if a delegate does not speak.
 6. Unmoderated Caucus: This motion allows delegates to discuss drafting resolutions or committee status without
formal rules. Delegates can propose it by raising a motion to suspend formal debate for a specified time.
FORMAT OF SUBSTANTIVE CHITS
 POINTS

 1. Point of Parliamentary Enquiry: Delegates can use this to clarify the committee's status or rules, such
as asking if more speakers are accepted.

 2. Point of Personal Privilege: This point addresses personal matters, like requesting a delegate to repeat
a point or asking to be excused from the committee.

 3. Point of Order: Delegates raise this to highlight factual inaccuracies in speeches. For example,
questioning statements like “The delegate mentioned that fundamental rights lay in Article 100 of the
Indian Constitution” (They lay in Article 12 – 35)

 4. Point of Information: Delegates use this to ask questions about another delegate's speech. They can
ask follow-up questions if the initial answer is unsatisfactory [As per the discretion of the EB].
ASKING QUESTIONS VIA CHIT
 RIGHT TO REPLY AND PRESS CONFERENCE
 Right to Reply: Delegates may raise a right to reply if offensive remarks are made
against them or their portfolio. The Executive Board and Secretariat will address these
issues. Misuse of this tool will lead to strict action.

 Press Conference: This aspect of the conference is to test the knowledge and depth of
research conducted by the delegates. As such, the questions in this conference could
range from matters of party policy, the agenda itself, or any controversial actions or
speeches by the respective nations of the delegates.
 VALID SOURCES OF INFORMATION

For this committee, strictly no sources such as Private Newspapers or Media will be accepted as citations
Only valid govt sources or UN sources and PTI and PIB shall be regarded as valid. AI use is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED.

You may use newspapers or media for research but DON’T quote them as sources in committee.
 RESEARCH AID
Historical Background
Before and During British Rule in India
In India, there are many different religions like Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, and others. Each religion has its
own rules about family life – such as how people get married, how they get divorced, who gets property after
someone dies, and so on. These are called personal laws. These laws were followed for many, many years and
came from religious books and traditions.
In the year 1772, when the British East India Company was ruling some parts of India, they made a new plan
called the Hastings Plan. This plan set up courts to solve problems and settle fights. But the British said that, for
personal matters like marriage or inheritance, Indian people should still follow their own religious rules. So:
Hindus followed Hindu law, explained by Pandits (Hindu scholars),
Muslims followed Islamic law, explained by Maulavis (Muslim scholars).
The British did this because they wanted to rule India without upsetting people. They thought if they let people
follow their own religions, it would be easier to govern and they wouldn’t face much protest or spend too much
money.
Later, in 1833, the British passed a new law called the Government of India Act (also called the Charter Act). This
law helped the British create one big law-making group for all of India. They wanted to organize and simplify
Indian laws. But even after this, they did not change religious personal laws, so people could still follow their own
religion’s rules for family matters.
 RESEARCH AID
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
In 1840, the First Law Commission submitted the Lex Loci Report, recommending that English law be applied as the general law of the land, except for
Hindus and Muslims in rural areas. This led to major codified laws like the Indian Penal Code (1860), and the Evidence and Contract Acts (1872), all
based on English Common Law.
However, applying religious personal laws led to confusion and inconsistency due to conflicting scriptures and differences between scripture and actual
practice. Over time, customary laws gained legal recognition due to public demand.
Religious personal laws often discriminated against women, denying them rights to inheritance, remarriage, and divorce. Reforms began through British
laws and Indian social reformers, leading to acts such as:
Indian Majority Act (1875)
Hindu Inheritance Acts (1928, 1929)
Child Marriage Act (1929)
Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act (1937)
In contrast, the British largely avoided reforming Muslim personal laws, fearing unrest. Some laws passed in this context include:
Mussalman Waqf Validating Act (1913)
Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act (1937)
Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act (1939)
Christian personal laws were governed by both statutory laws and canon law, with key acts like:
Indian Christian Marriage Act (1872)
Indian Divorce Act (1869)
 RESEARCH AID
Recent Developments on Uniform Civil Code (UCC)
Nearly a decade later, in 2014, the debate on the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) was rekindled when the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)
included it in their election manifesto. The Congress and several opposition parties clearly expressed their opposition, stating that the
adoption of the UCC would be "criminalized" and would restrict Muslims from practicing their religion and enjoying their rights as
mentioned in their personal laws.
Even parties that were usually supportive of a Uniform Civil Code opposed the BJP’s suggestion, stating that it is inherently
discriminatory in nature. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board accused the government of trying to introduce it under the pretext
of promoting gender equality, particularly through its opposition to triple talaq in the Supreme Court. The BJP rejected these claims
and declared its intent to move forward with its original plans.
On June 14, 2023, the Law Commission of India issued a public notice inviting opinions and comments on the UCC. This came after
a five-year gap since the 21st Law Commission had released a consultation paper on the same issue in August 2018. The new
notification stated that, considering the relevance and importance of the subject, as well as court orders related to it, the 22nd Law
Commission of India found it necessary to revisit the topic.

The Commission’s notice invited public views and ideas, and also recognized religious organizations regarding the UCC. The Law
Commission of India has received an overwhelming response from citizens across the country and stated that it will hold panel
discussions and debates among all stakeholders. According to sources, over 1 crore responses have been received by the law panel on
the UCC.
 LEGALITIES AND CASE LAWS
1) Shah Bano Case (Mohammed Ahmed Khan vs. Shah Bano 2) Mary Roy vs. State of Kerala
Begum) In this case, the question argued before the Supreme
Popularly known as the Shah Bano case; for the first time, the Court was that certain provisions of the Travancore
Supreme Court directed the Parliament to create a Uniform Civil Christian Succession Act, 1916, were unconstitutional
Code in the year 1985 for this case, in which a needy Muslim under Article 14. Under these provisions, on the death of
woman claimed for maintenance from her husband under Section an intestate, his widow was entitled to have only a life
125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure after she was given triple interest terminable at her death or remarriage and his
talaq by her former husband. The Supreme Court held that the daughter. This unfairly discriminated against Syrian
Muslim woman has a right to get maintenance from her husband Christian women in Kerala by granting them a smaller
under Section 125. The Court also held that Article 44 of the share of their family’s property compared to men. A
Constitution has remained a dead letter. The then Chief Justice of further important argument was that the Travancore Act
India Y. V. Chandrachud observed that, "A common civil code will had been superseded by the Indian Succession Act, 1925.
help the cause of national integration by removing disparate The Supreme Court avoided examining the question
loyalties to law which have conflicting ideologies.” After this whether gender inequality in matters of succession and
decision, nationwide discussions, meetings, and agitation were held. inheritance violated Article 14, but nevertheless, ruled
The then Rajiv Gandhi led Government overturned the Shah Bano that the Travancore Act had been superseded by the
case decision by way of Muslim Women (Right to Protection on Indian Succession Act. Mary Roy has been characterized
Divorce) Act, 1986 which curtailed the right of a Muslim woman as a “momentous" decision in the direction of ensuring
for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal gender equality in the matter of succession.
Procedure.
 LEGALITIES AND CASE LAWS
(BRIEFLY)

3) Sarla Mudgal vs. Union of India

4) John Vallamattom vs. Union of India
This case addressed Hindu men converting to Islam to marry again
A Christian priest challenged Section 118 of the
without divorcing their first wife, thereby bypassing Hindu personal
Indian Succession Act, 1925, which restricted
law, which prohibits bigamy. The Supreme Court ruled such
Christians from donating property for religious
conversions invalid if done solely to practice polygamy. It held that
or charitable purposes within 12 months of
one cannot escape Hindu Marriage Act by conversion. The Court
death, unless with legal notice. The Supreme
also directed the government to work towards a Uniform Civil Code
Court struck it down, declaring it discriminatory
(UCC). However, in Lily Thomas vs. Union of India, the Court
and violative of Articles 14 and 25 of the
clarified that Directive Principles (like UCC) are not legally
Constitution.
enforceable.
 PRESENT STATUS OF THE CIVIL LAWS IN INDIA

India follows both personal laws based on religion and secular civil laws.
•Hindu Personal Laws are codified under four Acts (1955–1956) and apply to Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, and
Buddhists.
•Muslim Personal Law is based on religious texts but recognized through Acts like the Shariat
Application Act (1937) and the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act (1939).
•Christian Personal Laws are governed by the Indian Christian Marriage Act (1872).
•Secular Laws like the Special Marriage Act (1954) and Guardians and Wards Act (1890) apply
regardless of religion.
•Exceptions exist under Article 371 for states like Assam, Nagaland, and Mizoram due to cultural
differences.
• Goa and Uttarakhand currently have a Uniform Civil Code (UCC)
MERITS OF UCC (RESEARCH AID)

The Uniform Civil Code is seen as an important step toward achieving national unity. India is a diverse
country with people from many religions, castes, and cultures, often having different laws and practices.
These differences sometimes lead to divisions, separatist ideas, and communal tensions.
The UCC would apply to everyone equally, regardless of religion, caste, gender, or region. It would bring
common rules for marriage, divorce, inheritance, adoption, and guardianship, ensuring equality and fairness
for all citizens.
Though Article 44 of the Constitution talks about the UCC, it is not enforceable by courts. However, Article
37 states that these principles are important for the country’s governance and it is the duty of the
government to make laws based on them.
Even after over 75 years of independence, the government has not fully acted on this constitutional goal.
Many political parties argue that enforcing Article 44 would violate Article 25, which gives the freedom to
practice any religion.
But there is a counter-argument: Article 25(2) clearly says that this freedom does not stop the government
from making laws to regulate or restrict religious practices, especially when it comes to social reform and
equality.
DEMERITS OF UCC (RESEARCH AID)

There has been strong criticism of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC), especially from minority and tribal communities,
who fear that imposing a single civil code could harm the social fabric of India and undermine their religious and
cultural rights. Many believe that the UCC, especially when pushed by groups like the Sangh Parivar, may force the
customs of the majority on minorities. This is seen as a violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 25 and
26 of the Constitution, which ensure freedom of religion and the right to manage religious affairs. Religious scholars
argue that personal laws are sacred and of divine origin, and should not be interfered with by the State. These customs
have existed for centuries and changing them could hurt religious sentiments and cause mistrust. Moreover, many unfair
practices come from incorrect codification of laws rather than true religious teachings. Goa is the only Indian state
governed by Portuguese family laws, and Goan marriages automatically follow the ‘Communion of Assets’ system unless
a special contract is signed to opt out. The UCC has also raised serious concerns in the northeast, where tribal
communities are protected under constitutional provisions like Article 371A for Nagaland, Article 371G for Mizoram,
and the Sixth Schedule for states like Meghalaya, Assam, and Tripura. These regions have unique religious and cultural
practices that are constitutionally safeguarded, and leaders across Mizoram, Nagaland, and Meghalaya have opposed the
UCC, passing official resolutions against its implementation. They argue that the UCC could disrupt their traditional
customs and weaken the identity of tribal groups. Leaders such as the Chief Ministers of Mizoram and Meghalaya have
stated that imposing a UCC goes against the id ea of unity in diversity and could damage the peaceful coexistence
of different communities in India.
RULES TO BE FOLLOWED
AIPPM Committee Rules
Sloganeering will be permitted only at specific times and strictly at the discretion of the Executive Board. Mobile
phone usage, internet access, and use of AI tools are strictly prohibited during committee sessions. Delegates
planning to rely on digital notes are expected to carry printed copies of their research, as phone usage under any
circumstance will not be allowed. Cross-talk during the proceedings is not acceptable and will attract penalties. All
delegates must maintain mutual respect—personal remarks or insults will lead to immediate and strict action,
including disqualification from the conference.
Timeliness is mandatory. Delegates arriving late by even 5 minutes will be gagged for 10 minutes. On repetition,
0.25 points will be deducted per instance from the final evaluation. Each delegate must send a minimum of 4
POI chits and at least 1 substantive chit by the end of two days. Failure to meet this requirement will result in a
score of zero for each missing chit, which will be included in your average.
AWARDS
1st Place would be Best Member (65%)
2nd Place would be High Commendation (60%)
3rd Place would be Special Mention (50%)
4th Place would be Honourable Mention (45%)

As you may have noticed there is no fake award called verbal mention. If you truly deserve an award
you get it on the stage with a certificate. Awards will not be given on committee standards but only on
meeting the set threshold. (Multiple members may be awarded with a single award on meeting
threshold and an award maybe cancelled if none meet set threshold)

For the members outside the MUNSOC there is a separate award called Rising Delegate.
CONTACT (AVOID CALLING, DROP A TEXT (WHATSAPP) IF NEED ARISES)

Samarth S Athreya (Chairperson): +91 9148557559

Sai Rishikesh (Co Chairperson) : +91 9880932285
Pranava Sharma (Co Chairperson) : +91 8762208967