Muslim women are disfavored by Islamic laws (image courtesy: The Hindu)
Bhartiya Mahila Muslim Andolan (BMMA, or the Indian Muslim Women's Movement) is a leading non-governmental organization working for the welfare of Muslim women across India. Recently, the BMMA released a draft law to ensure equality and justice for Muslim women by incorporating reforms into Muslim personal laws, which governs marriage, divorce, inheritance, and other non-criminal issues among Muslims in India.
However, there is no codified Muslim Personal Law under which an Indian court can decide such disputes.. There are As of now, the British colonial-era laws protect Islamic clerics' authority to decide cases of marriage and divorce among Indian Muslims. It means that in the absence of a codified Muslim Personal Law, an Indian court has no say in these matters. Muslim Personal Laws written by the British colonial rulers before India became independence in 1947. Under those laws, Indian clerics can decide cases of marriage, divorce, inheritance, and other such issues affecting Muslim women. It means each Islamic cleric in India is practically akin to the country's Supreme Court.
Muslim women are treated inequitably under Muslim Personal Laws, as a husband can unilaterally divorce a wife, or give her no alimony after divorce. A judgment by the Supreme Court of India to correct the situation in 1986 by granting destitute Muslim woman Shah Bano alimony was met with countrywide protests by Muslims who saw it anti-Islamic. The then-secular government of Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi surrendered before the Islamic fundamentalists, enacting a law in favor of Islam and quashing the Supreme Court judgment.
The BMMA is trying to get the Indian government to enact a law that could be more humane to Muslim women. As part of this attempt, it has drafted a "Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act." But an Indian media report on the behind-the-scenes work in preparing the proposed law reveals a Muslim mindset which could prevent the Indian government from enacting the proposed Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act, or passing a Uniform Civil Code for all citizens.
Following are excerpts from the media report, which appeared in leading secular daily The Hindu:
Social Worker Noorjehan Safia Niaz: "[Educated] Middle Class Muslims Kept Saying: Don't Tamper Too Much With The Shariat [Sharia]; They Have Well-Off Families And Education To Fall Back On"
"Will the Muslim personal law make polygamy illegal?
SUPPORT OUR WORK
"When the Bhartiya Mahila Muslim Andolan started working on codifying Muslim personal law, they weren't sure whether to ban polygamy, or make it conditional. Senior lawyers pointed out that despite bigamy being an offence, Hindu men continued to take a second wife. These women didn't enjoy the status of a wife, whereas even the fourth wife of a Muslim man had that status.
"But the final draft of the new [proposed] 'Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act', released in Mumbai on June 18, makes polygamy illegal. How come? 'That's what Muslim women wanted,' says Noorjehan Safia Niaz, co-founder of the BMMA. 'We played the Devil's Advocate with them, asking them wasn't a second wife necessary if the first couldn't conceive, for example. Their reply always was: No. No second wife. No woman should have to share her husband with another woman.'
"Of the seven years taken to arrive at this draft, two were spent talking to Muslim women, most of them poor, uneducated and living in ghettos. It was these women who were desperate for a change, urging the BMMA to 'quickly change the law, get us justice.' But the middle class, supposed to be the pioneer for reform, left Noorjehan disillusioned. A U.S.-returned Muslim in Hyderabad baulked at the BMMA's proposal to make 18 and 21 the minimum age of marriage for women and men respectively. 'It should be 18 for both,' she suggested. Muslim male lawyers in Karnataka saw nothing wrong in a 13-year-old getting married as long as she had reached puberty.
"But in the side streets of Bhopal [a city in central state of Madhya Pradesh], uneducated Muslim women suggested 21 and 25 instead. 'Our daughters graduate at 21,' they pointed out. 'Middle class Muslims kept saying: Don't tamper too much with the shariat [Sharia]. They have well-off families and education to fall back on; the unjust decisions of qazis [Islamic judges] don't affect them much,' explains Noorjehan."
Muslim Men Told Social Workers: "You Are Wearing A Sari, You Haven't Covered Your Head, You Aren't Wearing A Burqa — So You Aren't Muslim"
"What kept the BMMA going was the response of poor women. Consultations with these women were held across 10 states where the BMMA has been working, training paralegal workers as arbitrators and providing legal aid. Men would attend their public meetings, and a few would invariably object to their attire ('you are wearing a sari, you haven't covered your head, you aren't wearing a burqa — so you aren't Muslim'), or to their lack of qualifications ('you are not aalims [religious scholars]'). One man in Ranchi who objected vociferously to everything, later told Noorjehan, 'I agree with everything you say, but if I don't object, I can't face my jamaat [local religious group/society].' The BMMA took a decision not to consult the All India Personal Law Board and the religious organizations. 'They have shown they don't want change.'
"The starting point of this long process was the condition of poor Muslim women, victims of the un-Islamic and unjust decisions of maulanas and qazis [Islamic scholars and Islamic judges]. The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act 1937 has no specific provisions to be followed, leaving every qazi free to rule as per their understanding of the Sharia. The Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act 1939 lays down grounds on which a woman can approach the court [for divorce], but few can afford to do so.
"Because of this, reformists such as the late [reformist scholar] Asghar Ali Engineer campaigned for years for the need to codify Muslim personal Law as per Koranic injunctions, which grant women more rights than any other religion does. All Islamic countries have put in place modern personal laws. But in India, the move has always been resisted on three grounds: 1. The Sharia can't be touched; it is divine. 2. It will be impossible to decide which of the four schools of Islamic jurisprudence should be followed in codification. 3. This will be the first step towards enacting a Uniform Civil Code (UCC).
"As Engineer never tired of explaining, the Sharia is based on the Koran, it is not the Koran. In India, the Shariat Act was drafted and enacted by the British. The BMMA worked with Engineer on its draft, choosing to base it on the Koran itself. The draft contains verses from the Koran to back its provisions."
"The Draft [Law] Makes Many Common Practices Illegal, Including Underage Marriage; Unilateral, Oral And Instant Talaq [Divorce]; Making The Woman Give Up Her Mehr (Dower) And Halala..."
"Thus, to decide the minimum age of marriage, the Koranic injunction of 'maturity' of the spouses was interpreted as emotional maturity in addition to physical. 'Besides, in Islam, marriage is a contract, and a contract can only be between two adults,' says Noorjehan.
"The draft makes many common practices illegal, including underage marriage; unilateral, oral and instant talaq [divorce]; making the woman give up her mehr (dower) and halala, the practice by which you remarry your divorced wife only after she consummates her marriage with another man and is then divorced by him. 'This [practice of Halala] has no mention in the Koran, it's become a prostitution racket in places like Lucknow,' says Noorjehan.
"Is this the right time to release this draft, given the new government's emphasis on the UCC? [Noorjehan says:] 'We oppose the UCC. But we also want to know, when will the right time come to get justice for women? Twenty years back, we were asked to wait as the Babri Masjid was demolished [by extremist Hindus], the community was under attack. Aren't women part of the community? Ten years back we were told the Gujarat pogrom [anti-Muslim riots of 2002] had taken place. Can these leaders give us a guarantee that 10 years later, there will be a really secular government, and the community won't be under attack?
"'Secondly, who decides this hierarchy of issues? Let's tackle all issues: discrimination, security and also women's rights. Besides, how many of these leaders have worked on these other issues at the grassroots level? It is groups like us who have done so, tried to get the Sachar Committee recommendations [for uplifting Muslims in India] implemented and also campaigned against Modi.' Noorjehan knows it will take the efforts of many groups to get the government to accept the draft. 'Let the community debate our draft first. At any rate, for us, the process was as important as the result.'"
Source: Thehindu.com (India), June 29, 2014. The original English of the report has been lightly edited for clarity and standardization.
