By AW Siddiqui
The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2018, popularly known as ‘The Triple Talaq Bill’ has been passed in the BJP lead Parliament. Through this bill, BJP is trying to project itself as a party that protects Muslim Women’s right. But the real intentions appear to be following;
- To secure the votes of the women who have been subjected to ‘triple-talaq’ situation, or those who expect that situation to occur in future.
- To harm Muslim men and women, including those mentioned above.
The 1st intention is obvious and does not need any elaboration.
It’s the 2nd intention that needs to be explored because it looks strategic, and the consequence will be severe on the Muslim population of India. It’s crucial for the Indian Muslims, both females and males, to understand those consequences, and try to stop it becoming a law in its current form.
But before I dwell on the short and long term consequences, let’s look at the background and what the BJP is saying about the purpose of this bill.
Background:
‘Triple-talaq’, or ‘Talaq-e-bidat’ is a form of divorce between husband and wife, which if pronounced by repeating the word talaq three times simultaneously, makes the marriage contract between the two void. This is against the prescribed method of divorce in Islam, but has been practiced by few Muslims.
The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2018, popularly known as ‘The Triple Talaq Bill’ is about ‘Triple-talaq’
As stated in the bill, “The Supreme Court in the matter of Shayara Bano Vs Union of India and others and other connected matters, on 22nd August, 2017, in a majority judgment of 3:2, set aside the practice of talaq-e-biddat (three pronouncements of talaq , at one and the same time) practiced by certain Muslim husbands to divorce their wives.”
According to WIKIPEDIA, “The BJP Government formulated the bill after 100 cases of instant ‘triple talaq’ in India since the Supreme Court judgement in August 2017”. [1]
Assuming above number to be correct, 100 cases in one year, from around 180 million Muslims living in India, is an insignificant number to even bother preparing a bill and having a discussion in the parliament. That is in a country where 5,824 women were burned alive for dowry in year 2008 alone, despite stringent laws against it. [2]
So why BJP is so adamant to get the bill through without making the modifications demanded by the opposition parties and Women Rights Activists, and asking for “urgent” legislation. What is the urgency here? Is it 2019 parliamentary elections? What is the real purpose?
The purpose, as stipulated in the bill is as follows;
“to protect the rights of married Muslim women and to prohibit divorce by pronouncing talaq by their husbands”
But is that really the purpose?
Using the argument that 5,824 women were burned alive for dowry in year 2008 despite stringent laws against it, the bill is not going to help the purpose stipulated as far as the outcome is concerned.
The people objecting to the bill see the purpose to be criminalising the husband (“punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years”) for something which has no effect, because pronouncement of his talaq-talaq-talaq has already been made void.
People with common sense have not been able to understand the criminalising part, because there should not be anything left to criminalise, if a husband can’t use 'triple-talaq' to divorce his wife.
It’s like a man who goes to a tree with a chain saw and says ‘hey tree I want you to fall down’, but the tree stands. So he starts his chain saw and cuts the tree - and tree falls.
But if the chain saw has been taken away from the man, the tree is not going to fall, regardless of how many times he tells the tree to fall.
So what’s the point of criminalising the man when his chain saw has been taken away, and then putting him in jail for three years?
With the man in jail, who will water the tree? No water for the tree, and the tree may die – not fall but die. Who is responsible here for the death of the tree? The man, or the guy who put the man in jail.
And because it’s not making any sense, one tends to think if there is something sinister here?
A point to note is that the Petition that triggered the formation of this bill was initiated by the Muslim Rashtriya Manch, an organisation affiliated to Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).
What are the possible consequences if this bill is passed by the Upper House?
Think of a possible scenarios if the bill is passed by the Upper House (Rajya Sabha) and becomes law;
A husband pronounces ‘triple-talaq’ but, according to the law, noting happens. It has no effect. The wife, after laughing hysterically, stays in husband’s rented apartment and goes around doing her normal chores. But she is unhappy with the husband’s behaviour and lodges a complaint with the police – just to teach a bit of lesson to her husband, not realising the consequences that are about to materialise.
Police arrests the husband, and presents him to the court. Court sends the husband, a clerk with three children, to jail for 3 years, and asks him to pay a Rs 50,000 fine.
Husband has zero bank balance, can’t pay the fine, and thrown in jail.
His salary stops, and there is no one to support his wife and children. Children can’t pay school fees and the wife can’t provide food or pay the rent. Wife, like many others under Modi Sarkar, can’t find a job and is forced to beg - or worst. Kids had to beg with her to generate adequate money to survive.
Three years later, husband comes out of jail, and the world has changed for him. He is bankrupt and can’t find another job – no one likes to give job to a convict. His wife and kids are nowhere to be seen. They have either perished or moved on to something else.
Five lives destroyed, or degraded permanently, due to this bill. Not just the woman this bill supposedly aim to protect, but five, including the woman.
Above scenario presents a short term possibility coming out of this bill. Let’s see what could be the long term consequences.
Cases similar to above scenario will grow - slowly but steadily - and people will start talking. They will talk about how a ‘triple-talaq’ law ruined a well to do person. These talks, once reached to certain level, will make young Muslim men hesitant to get married – like what is already happening in the Western countries. This tendency will create a significant proportion of unmarried men and women, leading to another set of social problems such as prostitution, extra-marital relationships, and increase in domestic violence. It will also increase physical and mental health problems among the Muslim population.
That could well be the BJP/RSS’ plan for the Indian Muslims?
Is there a need for this bill?
For BJP/RSS; ‘yes’, but for the rest of the country; ‘not really’.
Shayara Bano Vs Union of India case judgement has already created the law that ‘triple-talaq’ is invalid. This case effectively eliminates the need of this bill.
With no possibility of ‘triple talaq’, the usual legal course, as stipulated in Islam will take its course – a step-by-step process for divorce, which many believe is the best out there.
Also, in Islam, marriage is a contract, and a formal document called ‘niqahnama’ is often signed by the husband and the wife (or their legal representatives) before a marriage takes place. Women have the right to add conditions in ‘niqahnama’ to protect themselves against any foreseeable adverse situations. For example; they can put a condition/clause that the husband can’t use ‘triple-talaq’ to divorce her, or will provide additional support amount if a divorce occurs.
There are already provisions in Islam to deal with talaq and to protect women’s rights. It’s just that its proper implementation does not exist, mainly due to social, cultural and educational reasons. Codification of those provisions should take care of the problem.
The Law of Unintended Consequences warns that an intervention in a complex system tends to create unanticipated and often undesirable outcomes. I am sure that the concerned people of India (outside of vote politics) will be keeping a close watch on how this bill evolves in order to protect the interest of Muslim women and men. The rush into demonetisation two years ago and the promotion that it will solve black money problem should be a warning that not every change delivers the expected outcome, and can make the existing situation worst.
Should the bill be modified before it’s presented to the Upper House?
Modifications were suggested by many MPs during the debate on this bill but BJP remained adamant to push it through in its current form. This stubbornness has made many suspicious of BJP’s ulterior motive.
Following changes should make most of the parties satisfied with the bill;
- Remove the imprisonment part from the bill.
- Monetary fine part can be left in there. The fine amount should be based on the financial situation of the husband, and capped to certain figure. This may work as deterrence.
- Provisions of free legal support to wife by the government during court proceedings.
- Provision of free marriage counselling for husband and wife.
- Recognition of 'niqahnama' as a contract in case proceedings.
- Codify Islamic process and steps for talaq.
References:
[1] The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Muslim_Women_(Protection_of_Rights_on_Marriage)_Bill,_2017
[2] Bride burning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_burning
