Date: March 27, 2024, Wednesday

Time: 9:00 am to 4:40 pm

Venue: Seminar Hall 1, Learning Centre (Central Campus).

Alliance Centre for Criminal Justice Administration and Gender Studies.

EVENT:

The Youth Parliamentary Debate is an academic simulation event that gives students practical insight into India’s legislative procedures, democratic decision-making, and deliberative processes by arguing contemporary social issues and following strict parliamentary protocols. Participants expand their reasoning skills, subject knowledge, and leadership abilities. Such simulations prepare them for future roles as lawmakers advocating impactful reforms and drafting ideal legislation, helping them expand their knowledge horizons beyond academics.

The topic for the parliamentary discussion was the Uniform Civil Code. The participants were divided into three teams, and each team had a Prime Minister (PM), Leader of Opposition (LO), Deputy Prime Minister (DPM), Deputy Leader of Opposition (DLO), Government Whip (GW), Opposition Whip (OW), Government Backbencher (GB), Opposition Backbencher (OB), Government Reply to Speaker (GR), and Opposition Reply to Speaker (OR). Apart from the teams, the event also had Independent Members. The speakers for the youth parliamentary debate were Professor Sarthak Sharma and Professor Rahul Shaw.

The event consisted of three motions, followed by a question hour. The YPD-2024 commenced on the morning of March 27th, 2024, at 9.00 AM with an inaugural ceremony. The ceremony began with an ode to the national anthem, where all students and faculty stood up in respect to the nation. The inaugural ceremony was graced by Dr. Devaiah NG, Program Director for BALLB and BBA LLB in Alliance School of Law, Dr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, and Dr. Amit Bhaskar, the Directors of Alliance Centre for Criminal Justice Administration and Gender Studies. The organizing committee provided an overview of the YPD and briefed everyone on the agenda and rules of procedure, setting the stage for a productive and engaging experience. All the participants took up the roles of different members of parliament and dressed appropriately for the occasion. The participants were enthusiastic throughout the debate and stepped into the shoes of the politicians. The session started at 9.40 AM with the first motion on Succession and Adoption laws under UCC. Members who spoke for the motion highlighted key points, presenting social and logical points backed up by present conditions in which these situations and laws prevailed. They discussed the introduction of UCC in Islamic states, the question of delay in implementing UCC in India, the marriage act for the tribal community in India, and the question of inheritance and succession for homosexual marriages, among other points. Members who spoke against the motion presented a contemporary example of UCC in the USA where the red Indians were left out. They stated that UCC is an election strategy of the ruling party, which was backed by Ambedkar’s view on UCC. The independent speakers highlighted that UCC is not a destination but a whole new journey.

The second motion commenced at 11.05 AM with the topic of Diversity and Personal Laws under UCC. Members who spoke for the motion stated that UCC would help in the self-sustainment of India as a nation and put forward the question of when UCC should be implemented. They also discussed the Sabarimala issue, in which women were denied entry into the temple, among other points. Members who spoke against the motion put forth the point of India being a secular country and the lack of required infrastructure in the nation, which would not help in the complete and effective implementation of UCC. They stated that UCC is against the concept of diversity in India and disregards religious laws, among other points.

After lunch at 1:30 PM, the third motion commenced, with a twist – the judges set the motion themselves. The third motion was: Utility of UCC in Harmonizing Constitutional Provisions with Religious Customs. The government members who were for the motion emphasized how UCC could be important and help in harmonizing the provisions of the constitution with various religious customs. On the other hand, the opposition members disagreed, expressing how UCC would disregard customs and lead to the extinction of religious customs and traditions.

After the third motion, the question hour began. In this round, the government and opposition members of different teams were given a chance to rebut the arguments made by the opponent team in the form of questions. After a team put forth a question, the opposite team was given a chance to answer the question. This round gave the teams a chance to point out the holes in the opposite team’s arguments, thereby strengthening their arguments.

At 4:05 PM, the valedictory ceremony began. During the closing ceremony, both speakers addressed the participants and gave their valuable feedback about the participants’ performance. Dr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey also graced the audience with his presence.

Rithika Cherukat, first year LLB student and a member of the Alliance Centre for Criminal Justice Administration and Gender Studies. She thanked the faculty and student members of the Alliance Centre for Criminal Justice Administration and Gender Studies, without whose efforts this event would not have been possible. Finally, the day ended with the announcement of the winners. The best team was given to the Team Code 2, and the best speakers were Sadqa Shams and Gadusu Reethu, both from BA.LLB third year and from the independent members, the best speaker was Krishna Chaitanya. P, a third year BBA.LLB student