Sensitivity. Nothing irks me as much as a violation of human rights.

Thursday, July 07, 2005

Shah Bano - After 27 years



After the last posting, when some readers wanted to know who Shah Bano is, I bitterly realised that many haven't heard about this case. I consider the event to be immensely important to our Post-Independence History, I thought I'll open the old wounds.

Shah Bano, a 62 year old Muslim woman and mother of five from Indore, Madhya Pradesh was divorced by her husband in 1978. The Muslim personal law allows the husband to do this without his wife's agreement. She tried to get maintenance through Indian court system, and seven years later her case reached the Supreme Court. Maintenance is an area of the law that falls under the personal codes, and Muslim law does not entitle women to ongoign maintenance. A divorced Muslim woman is entitled to her mehr, which is a payment to her from her husband at the time of marriage, and three months of maintenance. Following that, her family and community may help to support her.

When Shah Bano's case reached the Supreme Court in 1985, the court ruled in favour of the estranged woman and ordered her husband to pay her maintenance. The controversy and subsequently the riot erupted. The whole of Islamic community thought this was an injustice and the Judge -who was a 'Hindu'- adding a statement along with the verdict that 'the time has come to take a good look at common civil code to avoid such dilemmas' made them enraged.

The dilemma actually was passed onto Rajiv Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India. He was just back from a huge scar left on him because of the Delhi riots that killed more than 3000 sikhs. He didn't want to rub another minority community on the wrong. But in order to overrule the Supreme Court verdict, a bill with two third majority in parliament is required. Rajiv Gandhi, using his mammoth majority of 401/508 MPs, passed Muslim Women's bill that overruled the Supreme Court rule and brought in Sharia to contitution. According to this bill, a Muslim man divorcing his wife does not have to pay any maintenance other than the regulatory three months alimony prescribed by Islam.

The riots subsided but the controversy continues. This brought in a huge divide between the Hindus and Muslims and especially the radical right-wing BJP which was already on the rise due to its Ram Temple campaign gained huge inroads into the enraged Hindu bastion in North India.

For more on the case and specific legal details, visit Shah Bano page from University of Cicinnati site site.

2 Comments:

Blogger brihaspati said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

8 July 2005 at 20:20

 
Blogger brihaspati said...

It is hard to imagine that the shah-bano case is not known to many Indians in contemporary India.

This is another instance of Congressmen being pseudo-secularists. I am tired of the Muslims arguing that they are treated as second-rate citizens or that the Hindu majority is imposing on them just because a Judge ruled in a fair and ethical manner.

People get over it. I am all for Secularism and to expect Secularism to evolve into a common civil code which guarantees uniform basic human rights to all citizens - right to free-speech, marital, political, sexual and relegious orientations, is only fair. This is natural law. To learn more about natural law, I would suggest people read Thomas Paine's " The Rights of Man".

Bad spelling made me delete the previous post.

8 July 2005 at 20:22

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home