Instant Islamic divorce in India

Triple talaq ban divides Muslims

Lawmakers have passed a bill to outlaw the centuries-old Muslim practice of instant divorce in India. While conservative Muslim sections slammed the move, liberal groups hailed it. Murali Krishnan reports from New Delhi

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government has finally managed to garner enough support in the upper house of Parliament – Rajya Sabha –  to pass the controversial Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill. The victory for the government was a narrow one, as lawmakers in the upper house supported the bill by 99 votes to 84. The more powerful lower house approved the bill last week.

For over a year, the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) government had been trying to criminalise the practice of "triple talaq", in which the husband utters the word divorce three times in succession to his wife to end the marriage. The bill now requires the approval from President Ram Nath Kovind to become law.

PM Modi lauded the parliament for putting an end to the "archaic and mediaeval practice" and correcting a "historical wrong."

The "triple talaq", or instant divorce, practice has been denounced by rights groups and feminists – Muslims and non-Muslim feminists alike – as a violation of human rights. There have been complaints about Muslim men divorcing their wives over text messages, Skype, emails and phone calls.

Many Muslim-majority countries, including India's neighbours Pakistan and Bangladesh, have already banned "triple talaq". But the practice was permitted in India as the country's constitution allows different religious groups to set their own laws governing matters like marriage, divorce, maintenance and inheritance.

The government first tabled the legislation in the Lok Sabha (lower house of Parliament) in December 2017, following a Supreme Court judgment in August of that year, which ruled that the practice was a violation of the fundamental rights of Muslim women and the basic tenets of Islam. But the ruling BJP party could not pass the bill because it did not have the requisite support in the upper house.

Interference in Muslim customs?

Many Muslim politicians and some opposition parties have denounced the passage of bill. The Indian National Congress, the main opposition party, demanded that the bill be sent to a parliamentary committee for further deliberation and scrutiny.

Critics of the bill say that a three-year jail term for people practicing instant divorce could be misused to target Muslims. "The BJP is interfering in Muslims' domestic issues. It [the bill] demonises Muslim men," said Ghulam Nabi Azad, a Congress party official.

Supporters of the practice argue that the issue has deliberately been made controversial by Modi's BJP. They say that Hindu nationalists want to interfere in Islamic faith and practices with the aim of homogenising India. S. Q. R. Ilayas, a member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), dubbed the bill "very dangerous". "Who will take care of the wives and children once the husband goes to jail?" he questioned.

More on this topic
In submitting this comment, the reader accepts the following terms and conditions: Qantara.de reserves the right to edit or delete comments or not to publish them. This applies in particular to defamatory, racist, personal, or irrelevant comments or comments written in dialects or languages other than English. Comments submitted by readers using fantasy names or intentionally false names will not be published. Qantara.de will not provide information on the telephone. Readers' comments can be found by Google and other search engines.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.

Comments for this article: Triple talaq ban divides Muslims

I wonder why the writer has not mentioned that the practice of triple talaq is not Islamic and how talaq happens in Islam. The only brief mention of this is through someone else's voice. One more paragraph wouldn't have done any harm, especially in highlighting such a crucial difference between customs and text.
Furthermore, there is no mention at all of why the custom has persisted for centuries.

Nadeem09.08.2019 | 11:40 Uhr