भारत के संविधान का अनुच्छेद 44 समान नागरिक संहिता को राज्य के नीति निदेशक तत्वों में गिनता है। भाजपा मानती है कि जब तक भारत समान नागरिक संहिता नहीं अपनाता तब तक लैंगिक समानता नहीं आ सकती, जो सभी महिलाओं के अधिकारों की रक्षा करे, और भाजपा समान नागरिक संहिता का मसौदा बनाने के अपने रुख़ को दोहराती है, जो श्रेष्ठ परंपराओं से लेकर उन्हें आधुनिक समय के अनुरूप बनाए।

The 2019 manifesto's commitment is narrower than it is usually reported. It does not promise to enact a uniform civil code; it says the party "reiterates its stand to draft a Uniform Civil Code, drawing upon the best traditions and harmonizing them with the modern times."

Even on that narrower reading, the term produced nothing. The Ministry of Law and Justice answered a direct question in the Lok Sabha on 20 December 2024, six months after the term ended, and its answers are worth quoting exactly.

On central direction: "No such guidelines were issued by the Government of India to State Governments for implementing the uniform civil code."

On the drafting work: the proposal was referred to the 21st Law Commission, which "issued a consultation paper… for wider discussions. However, no Report on the subject was submitted by them." The 22nd Law Commission then "vide Public Notice dated 14.06.2023 decided again to solicit views and ideas of the public at large and recognised religious organisations over the subject. The term of the 22nd LCI has ended without submitting any Report on the subject."

Two commissions, two rounds of public consultation, no report from either. There is no draft uniform civil code at the national level, and the government has not published one of its own.

The constitutional position the ministry sets out explains part of why. "Personal laws relate to Entry 5 of List-III- Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution, and hence, the States are empowered to legislate upon them", and the answer adds that district and regional councils under the Sixth Schedule can make laws on matters including inheritance. A state can legislate a code for itself, as Uttarakhand has done, without the Centre drafting one. That is a real development, but it is not the promise: the manifesto undertook that the party would draft the code, not that a state might.

This is a legislative promise, so there is no scheme to audit and no expenditure to verify. On the record as it stands at the end of the term the promise belonged to, nothing was drafted, no guidance was issued and no commission reported. Our verdict is not supported.