Arguments have ended in the Supreme Court of India, over the validity of the Triple Talaq System in India. Supreme Court may deliver its judgement at any time, at its discretion. Discussing the triple talaq in this blog post will not in any way be a comment on the matter which is sub judice, Hence, we shall try to have a look into some issues and solutions connected to the Triple Talaq case. During the hearing of the case, the All INdia Muslim Personal Law Board has submitted affidavits which contain, inter alia, the following two views:--
The AIMPLB said qazis and imams will inform the wife that she can exclude the husband’s right to give instant triple talaq.
The affidavit said social boycott will help decrease the incidents of divorce.
Personal views of ybrao-a-donkey, which are not intended to be imposed on others:
Who will oversee that the qazis and imams inform the wife that she can exclude the husband's right to give instant triple talaq? Does AIMPLB have any statutory authority to issue instructions to the qazis and imams? Does AIMPLB have any powers to punish qazis and imams who fail to inform the prospective wives about their rights? Ans: Apparently not.
Does the AIMPLB have any right / statutory authority / legal powers to impose and enforce social boycott on those who indulge in triple talaq? Ans: Apparently not.
RELATED LINKS
Click here to go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_India_Muslim_Personal_Law_Board .
Click here to go to http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-ready-to-ban-triple-talaq-in-one-sitting-aimplb-2447682.
Click here to go to http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/supreme-court-has-to-decide-whether-triple-talaq-is-unconstitutional-mukul-rohatgi/articleshow/58825758.cms.
According to the information available on the Wikipedia.org, AIMPLB is only a private, non-governmental organisation. It is not clear, under which statute it has been registered, as an entity. Here are some quotes from Wikipedia, about the status of AIMPLB:
"...AIMPLB is a private body working to protect Muslim personal laws, liaise with and influence the Government of India and guide the general public about crucial issues. The board has a working committee of 51 ulama representing various schools of thought. In addition to this, it also has a general body of 201 persons of ulama as well as laymen, including about 25 women. ..."
"... However, some of the Shias and Muslim feminists have formed their own separate boards, the All India Shia Personal Law Board and the All India Muslim Women's Personal Law Board, respectively but have failed to win any significant support from the Muslims or the government. ..."
"... The diktats and rules of All India Muslim Personal Law Board does not apply to Shia and Ahmadiyya Muslims in India. Ahmadis were not allowed to sit on the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, which is widely regarded in India as representative of Muslims in the country as most Muslims don't consider the Ahmadis as Muslims.
"...The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) is a non-government organisation constituted in 1973 to adopt suitable strategies for the protection and continued applicability of Muslim Personal Law in India, most importantly, the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act of 1937, providing for the application of the Islamic Law Code of Shariat to Muslims in India in personal affairs. Some Muslims followed Hindu customs before 1937. The Act applies to all matters of personal law except such successions. ..."
Question: Is India, not a Secular country
Ans., a personal view of yb-a-donkey: India is definitely a secular country. From the purest definition of the word 'secular', we have to infer that State shall not have anything to do with relgions of its Citizens. It also implies that there should be only one law for all social matters. May be a Uniform Civil Code, or any other law, by whatever name it may be called. By enacting the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act of 1937 the British Rulers seem to have tried to DIVIDE AND RULE THE COUNTRY. While it is true that non-Hindus cannot be forced to follow Hindu Customs, there is nothing wrong in insisting that all the Citizens follow a Secular law applicable to everybody equally. After the bifurcation of India in 1947, by creating Pakistan, India ought to have, at the first available opportunity, annuled the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act of 1937. Reason: Such laws are not conducive to a secular country.
By helping in the formation of the AIMPLB in 1973, Mrs. Indira Gandhi, seems to have, for her Vote Bank Politics, botched up and created further cleavages in a secular State. She should have, undauntedly, resolutely, firmly, replaced all Religious personal laws with a Secular Code. The Secular Code, ought to have been got designed with the help of a Board consisting of Secular Lawyers, Sitting and Retired Judges, Bureaucrats, and other Secular Intellectuals.
Heinous practices followed in India, in the name of social boycotts
Social boycotts in India, in vogue for the last several Centuries, have caused incalculable damage to the social fabric of India and tortured poorer and weaker Sections of the Society in extremely grievous ways. This monstracity is irrespective of the religions and castes. Even today, there are some Indian villages where dalits are not being allowed by Upper Caste persons, to draw drinking water from common wells.
Allowing social boycotts tantamounts to perpetration of cruelty on Weaker Sections. Reason: Influential Persons in the Society will take / have taken the custom into their hands, and Rule of the Law will be a casualty.
The sufferings of Muslim Women, owing to denial of Human Rights, Natural Justice and Equity by Clerics, Kazis, Maulvis, Imams, Mullahs
The sufferings are too many. They cannot be solved just by social boycott of a few people. Serious Diseases need serious treatments. Balms and Ointments cannot cure them. Secular codes, Secular Administrations, Secular Enforcements, Secular Supervisions, Secular adjudications alone can ameliorate the ailments such as triple talaqs.
Someday, we may have to abolish or discontinue or dismantle the system of Marriage itself. True Total Socialism alone can help in that final goal.
Vocabulary help
sub judice/sʌb ˈdʒuːdɪsi,sʊb ˈjuːdɪkeɪ/ adjective : under judicial consideration and therefore prohibited from public discussion elsewhere.
boycott/ˈbɔɪkɒt/ verb : withdraw from commercial or social relations with (a country, organization, or person) as a punishment or protest. noun: a punitive ban on relations with other bodies, cooperation with a policy, or the handling of goods.
Source: net.
botch/bɒtʃ/ noun: a bungled task. Verb. 1. botch up - make a mess of, destroy or ruin; "I botched the dinner and we had to eat out"; "the pianist screwed up the difficult passage in the second movement"
Source: www.thefreedictionary.com/botch+up
cleavage/ˈkliːvɪdʒ/ noun: a sharp division; a split. The hollow between a woman's breasts when supported, especially as exposed by a low-cut garment.
Undaunted: 1. undismayed; not discouraged; not forced to abandon purpose or effort: undaunted by failure. 2. undiminished in courage or valor; not giving way to fear; intrepid: Although outnumbered, he was undaunted.
grievous/ˈɡriːvəs/ adjective: (of something bad) very severe or serious.
To come back and continue adding / deleting / modiying. सशेष. ఇంకా ఉంద.
No comments:
Post a Comment
ఘోరమైన విమర్శలకు కూడ స్వాగతం, జవాబులు ఇవ్వబడతాయి. Harsh Criticism is also welcome.