This new law imposed upon society, bypassing Parliament or consultation with experts, says that if a man pronounces three divorces at once, it would be considered null and void (i.e. not even a single divorce would be counted) and he would be imprisoned for three years and he would have to financially support his wife during that time. Here are 10 reasons why this law is untenable:
- It is against Islamic law. Although there is a difference in opinion as to whether three divorces pronounced at once would be considered 3 or 1, there is no difference over the fact that at least one divorce would have been pronounced. This new law ordains something that is absolutely against Islamic personal law, and hence an infringement upon our Constitutional rights and privileges.
- If the divorce is not to be implemented, why is the husband being punished? Why is he being imprisoned for three years for a crime that has not been committed at all?
- If the divorced wife lodges a complaint with the police against her husband, and the triple divorce is rendered null and void, would any self-respecting man continue to keep such a woman in her marriage? He was already unhappy with her when he had divorced her, and now you expect him to accept her as his wife even after the police complaint and imprisonment? How absurd!
- Even if the law of the land has not registered the divorce, Islamic law definitely has. If the man and the woman continue to stay together as husband and wife even after the pronouncement of three divorces, it would be considered zina (extra marital relation), which is not only socially unacceptable but also a sin.
- Once the husband is behind bars, how would he financially support his wife?
- If the triple divorce was not registered, he might as well divorce her again and financially support her only during her iddat.
- Islamic law allows the woman to remarry immediately after completing the iddat of 3 months (or completion of pregnancy). If the divorce is not registered, she would still be considered his wife. So she would not be able to marry another man. And since the man who has divorced her won’t take her back, she would not remain married either. She would remain abandoned with no one to take her in his marriage.
- It should also be known that even a single divorce can lead to permanent separation. If the man does not want to retain her in marriage, he can do so with even a single pronouncement of divorce. Arguing that only triple talaq renders a woman a divorcee is not correct. Any divorce, in any community, in any part of the world makes a woman a divorcee and separates her from her husband.
- Saying that the divorcee is a victim is also incorrect. Marriage, in Islam, is a social contract. And like all other contracts, this too can be brought to an end. Islam lays down a systematic procedure for this with a plenty of options for reconciliation and direct remarriage. If a person overrides those options and pronounces triple talaq, he is exhausting all those options in one go. This is why triple talaq is wrong, because he did not give his marriage a second chance. It is not wrong because it victimises anyone.
- The above points refute the ostensible claim that this law is in the interest of women. Once a triple talaq has been pronounced, the woman no longer remains his wife. Any attempts to convict the husband would only compound the problem instead of solving it or providing any succour for the divorced wife.
If the government is indeed concerned about the fate of divorced wives, it should consult the religious scholars on this matter and try to find a way out. Resorting to such ill-conceived ordinances only serves to betray the perverted intentions of this regime.