There was relief among sections of of the Muslim community, especially women, over the Centre’s Ordinance to criminalise instant tripe divorce, but there was no surprise since the move was anticipated. After the Rajya Sabha failed to consider the Muslims Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, because of ruckus in the House, the Modi Government was expected to take the Ordinance route, having assured Muslim women of its commitment to end the practice. The Lok Sabha had already passed the Bill.
The opposition to the Ordinance was also expected. The usual suspect, ranging from Muslim clerics to a clutch of ‘secular’ parties, flayed the move on various grounds. These ranged from interfering in personal laws of the minority community to being excessively harsh on Muslim men to being designed to deliberately harass and intimidate the minority community. None of these critics saw in the Ordinance a measure to tackle a social menace — which instant triple divorce really is. Within the ruling coalition, there has been broad agreement in favour of the Ordinance and a subsequent Act, but some like the Janata Dal (United) have expressed dissent, saying that larger consultations ought to be held on matters relating to personal laws.
Here lies the catch. There is a problem if one assumes that instant triple divorce is a ‘personal’ issue for the Muslims that is covered under the Muslim Personal Law. But that matter has been actually laid to rest with the Supreme Court having pronounced the practice as unconstitutional. The court took all factors in consideration, including the argument that the issue related to religious laws of the minority community — protection of which is guaranteed by the Constitution. The court had in a majority verdict determined that, neither was instant triple divorce part of the religious laws nor was it in consonance with the Fundamental Rights that citizens of the country are entitled to.
That done, the Government was duty-bound to bring in a legislation to concretise the apex court’s order. If there is no law to regulate instant triple divorce which has been deemed unconstitutional, where is the relief for the victims? Remember, even Fatwas and khap panchayats have been declared unconstitutional, but they still continue to exist because authorities have no laws to enforce against them.
Despite their aggressive advocacy against a law that tackles instant triple divorce, hardline voices within the Muslim community are aware of the growing sentiment from within against the practice. Therefore, they have sought to course-correct, but in meaningless ways. For instance, they acknowledge that instant triple device is unacceptable, but are opposed to a law to curb it through criminalising the offence. They have claimed that opposition to the practice from within is a strong enough tool to contain it. They are wrong, and are only seeking to buy time. For decades, the system prevalent in the community, with clerics calling upon to deliver justice in such cases, has failed to address the grievances of the victims. In fact, many cases of instant triple divorce being issued by Muslim men to their wives, through telephone messaging services etc, have been reported even after the apes court declared the practice as unconstitutional. In itself, this indicated the unwillingness of the religious leaders to abide by the court’s verdict.
Several objections were raised by opponents to the legislation’s provisions. In sum, the objections were on grounds that the penal provisions were harsh to Muslim men, that the victims would be left worse off with such a law, because they would be left uncared for financially in case their offending-husband landed in jail, and that the prisons could be misused to ‘teach’ men a lesson. The Ordinance has taken care of these apprehensions. One, only the victim or her close relatives can file a police complaint on the matter — shutting the doors on various other ‘interested’ parties such as rights activists etc. Two, the magistrate will have the authority to grant bail to the husband, but only after hearing the wife’s version. Three, there will opportunities for reconciliation. And four, measures to provide subsistence allowance to the victim has been incorporated.
Parties aligned against the Government have alleged that the Modi Government was indulging in politics. Even if that is taken as a true allegation, the opponents are doing the same. The calculation is simple: Women men constitute a larger voter population than Muslim women. Muslim clerics have the ability to swing sizeable sections of voters one way or the other. Opposition parties, which are loathe to surrender their minority support to the other— the Congress, the Samajwadi Party and the Bahujan Samaj Party, for instance, are all vying for the Muslim votes in Uttar Pradesh, while the Left and Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress is battling it out in West Bengal for minority support — are doing everything within their means to keep the clerics in good humour. Admittedly, the BJP doesn’t have to lose sleep on this count, because the minority community’s electoral support to it is minimal — though by its Ordinance and earlier robust support to the rights of Muslim women, it can at least hope for greater support from Indian Muslim women in the coming electoral battles.
The issue is beyond politics, though. The demand that similar reforms must be undertaken in other religious communities so as to dispel the impression that the Modi Government was targeting the Muslims, is well taken. But that is already a work in progress, with the courts intervening — such as on the entry of women in the sanctum sanctorum of certain temples, which were out of bounds for women of a certain age. Besides, several personal laws of the Hindu community, for instance, had been codified within a decade of the country gaining independence.
Discussion about this post