MUSLIM WOMEN IN INDIA: The Rise of All
India Muslim Women Personal Law Board
By R. Upadhyay
Whenever talk revolves around gender
equality, women’s right or their empowerment
people are found to be indifferent toward 70
million Muslim women in India who have been
facing the most humiliating aspect of their
lives like polygamy and divorce. They are
compelled to bear this pang of social
humiliation for centuries under the water
tight compartment of Shariat (Islamic law).
A number of Muslim-majority countries like
Turkey, Morocco and Indonasia have already
reformed this medieval law and allowed much
freedom to their women citizens befitting
the rapidly changing social environment all
over the world. However, the diehard Mullhas
in the name of Muslim identity still
maintain that Shariat is a permanent
ingredient of Islam which is not subject to
any scrutiny. Therefore, Muslim women
owing to the deeper and different layer of
discrimination under this law are more
vulnerable than their counterparts in other
religions. In the absence of
any law to protect their rights under the
provision of gender equality in the
constitution the larger majority of them are
destined to the fate of ‘Gudiya’ and ‘Imrana’.
Erosion of Muslim Women’s right in India
as pointed out in ‘The study of Muslim women
in India –“Inching towards Equality”
suggested that “Muslim Personal Law as
practiced in India contravenes the
Convention on the Elimination of All forms
of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in
several respect”. Article 5(a) of the CEDAW
asks all states to take appropriate measures
for “elimination of prejudices and customary
and other practices which are based on the
idea of the inferiority or superiority of
either of the sexes or on stereotype rules
for men and women”.
India ratified the CEDAW in 1993 but
declared its reservation on this particular
article on the plea of its conformity with
its policy of non-interference in the
personal affairs of any community without
its initiative and consent.
Although larger majority
of Muslim women are silent due to suppressed
state of mind and educational backwardness,
a section of educated women in the community
is found to be expressing views against the
stand of the Islamists. In conformity with
the provision of gender equality in the
Indian Constitution, articles of CEDAW and
commonly understood basic spirit of
equality and justice for women in Islam they
maintain that Muslim
Personal Laws as practiced in India are
against these provisions and have come
forward in exploring the possibilities to
bring about progressive changes in the
customary practice of Shariat.
Sayeda Saiyidain Hameed, convener of the
Muslim Women’s forum in her article
“Adultery in Islam” dated September 13, 2002
maintained that “Islam does not sanction the
punishment of stoning to death for
adultery”. She has quoted Surah 17, Al Isra
verse 32 and Surah 24 Al Nur, verse 2 to
prove her point.
Disgusted with the
indifference of the democratic institutions
towards their cause some of the Muslim women
activists took initiative to fight for their
cause and formed a separate All India
Muslim Women Personal Law Board (AIMWPLB)
parallel to All India Muslim Personal Law
Board (AIMPLB) in February 2005 with Shaista
Ambar as President, Parveen Abidi General
Secretary, thirteen-member executive
committee, 42 members and 22-member advisory
committee. With main focus on resolving the
marital problems like divorce, maintenance
and desertion of wives by husbands, the
avowed objectives of the board include
employment generation for women, marriage of
destitute girls, equal rights to the
daughters in ancestral properties etc.
Parveen Abidi maintained that “Muslim women
are doubly disadvantaged as the Maulanas
never come to the rescue of harassed,
divorced or victimized women while the
administration refuses to interfere terming
it a religious matter” (India Together dated
21 September 2006).
AIMPLB refused to recognize the separate
personal law board for Muslim women and its
senior member Maulana Sajjad Nomani termed
its formation as a ‘joke’. However, AIMWPLB
is not ready to back out of its commitment.
In fact it refused to accept the fatwa of
Darul Uloom Deoband annulling the marriage
of Imrana who was raped by her father-in-law
and supported the victim in her legal battle
in which the accused was convicted for ten
years imprisonment by the district court.
Demanding separate mosque for women AIMWPLB
has even released a separate Nikahnama
(Marriage deed) on March 16, 2008 which
rejects divorce through SMS, e-mail or phone
and also recognized the right of the Muslim
women to seek divorce (Khula) are the
guidelines for marriage under the Shariat
for bride and groom. The key issues of new
Nikahnama are as under:
Triple talaq said in one
go will not be acceptable
Talaq to be spaced out
over a period of 3 months
Talaq not to be allowed
via phone or SMS
New Nikahnama insists on
free will for the girl in case of nikah
Talaq cannot be given
under the influence of alcohol
Talaq given to pregnant
woman should be considered illegal
Although, in absence of
some effective and assertive leadership the
voice of AIMWPLB is
yet to jerk the conscience of the community
or to draw due attention of political class
or media, the issue has at least attracted
the people believing in the concept of
gender equality. Since AIMWPLB is facing the
challenge mainly from AIMPLB, All India
Ulema Councils and the Maulanas, the
leadership in the women board needs the
support of the masses so that they could put
pressure on the political class in the
contry to initiate dialogue with them. As
the board is fighting on the basis of the
gender equality provision of Indian
constitution it should also initiate a
dilogue with the government for
implementation of article 44 of the
constittution regarding uniform Civil Code
in the country. A Supreme Court order in
October 2007 has made the registration of
marriages mandatory for all and this could
be another rallying point for the Muslim
women.
Much publicised
introduction of Women’s Reservation Bill in
Rajya Sabha is an attempt for empowerment of
women but it is doubtful that Mullhas would
allow their women to derive its benefit by
reforming the Shariat.
The historical surrender of state power to
the pressure of Islamists in Shahbano case
in mid nineteen eighties
by amending the constitution and
neutalising the Supreme Court judgment was a
signal of its helplessness towards the cause
of Muslim women. In fact the
state power owing to the mutual profit game
between Mullhas and the vote-seeking
political class is indifferent towards a
sizeable section of its citizens simply on
the plea that it is committed to the
principle of non-interference in the
personal laws of any community.
Now the time has come for the Muslim women
to come forward and put pressure on the
government for intervention in the
anti-women laws of Shariat. Once they take
the lead the non-Muslim organisations in the
country would also support their cause for
social evolution in conformity with the
changing global scenario.