Few sensible people will contest the idea that the decision of the Supreme Court to declare triple talaq unconstitutional was an excellent idea in keeping with the idea of equality enshrined in Article 14. The practice clearly contravened the idea of equality between the sexes. Besides the Muslim Personal Law Board many liberal secularists were apologists for this archaic practice that really ought to have no place in any modern, forward-thinking society.
Educated people who defended the practice failed to ask why any Muslim woman would defend the right to be potentially humiliated and abused by her husband? A marital tie that may have subsisted for decades could be snapped in a matter of seconds. The Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, (BMMA), who was campaigning for its abolition had carried out a survey and discovered that ninety percent of Muslim women were against this practice.
Anyone concerned about the rights of women must concede that it was simply barbaric to permit, even theoretically, a Muslim male with four wives to divorce them all in a matter of minutes by saying talaq talaq talaq one after the other to each one. There were arguments raised that the procedure could even be accomplished by an SMS. After divorcing his four wives by means of an utterance or collective SMS a Muslim man could then, theoretically, marry four different women.
A law banning polygamy now demands our attention, whether as part of a uniform civil code or a standalone legislation. As compared with triple talaq it is likely to meet with far greater resistance. Why is the case?
On the issue of instantaneous triple talaq as many as 26 Islamic nations had outlawed the practice, including neighbouring Pakistan. Reform on the issue of polygamy has been far slower, but is not without precedent. Turkey and Tunisia have both abolished polygamy on theological (and logical) grounds. It has been argued that the Quran explicitly requires that a Muslim man must treat all his wives equally if he takes more than one. It is then argued that this is simply not possible, and therefore ipso facto a Muslim male must have only one wife.
In an interview with Karan Thapar, the lyricist Javed Akhtar expressed the view that introducing a uniform civil code for the entire nation required extensive consultations and could be a long drawn out affair. Mr Akhtar is however in favour of introducing a law that eliminates discrimination against women. There are other such progressive male voices from the Muslim community. Insofar as Muslim women are concerned there is no need to even pose such a question to the vast majority of thinking Muslim women. Why should any woman grant her husband the right to marry another woman whenever he wishes to, when she herself does not have a corresponding right to take on a second husband?
Many in today’s generation may not realise that before 1955 when the Hindu Marriage Act was introduced Hindus too could have as many wives as they chose to. Unlike the case of a Muslim man there was no stipulated limit on the number of wives a Hindu man could keep.
Those who oppose a ban on polygamy cite a recent report by the International Institute for Population Sciences which concludes that polygamy is uncommon in India, including in the Muslim community, so why ruffle feathers unnecessarily? Aren’t the Muslims feeling under siege already?
Let us be clear. It is foolish to argue that a law banning polygamy will victimise the Muslim community. It is the women within the Muslim community in India who are the real victims here and they will breathe a sigh of relief if the new law is introduced. Even if a Muslim man does not take another wife, the mere possibility that he may do so can create great insecurity for his wife.
Will the wider Muslim world see the proposed law as an assault on their religion? These may be exaggerated fears. For one thing Turkey and Tunisia already have a law against polygamy. Despite the animus that Turkey holds towards India and its attempt to project itself as the leader of the Islamic world it will be a clear contradiction in terms for it to oppose such a law. The leadership in the UAE and Saudi Arabia are already making attempts to deradicalize their societies, and they may actually welcome such a move.
The Saudi government has already issued instructions that Mahabharata and Ramayana be taught in schools. The monarchies in the Middle-East may wish to ensure that there is no danger of their being replaced by a radical theocracy or they may have other reasons for becoming more liberal.
There will be silent support for the abolition of polygamy in India from tens of millions of Muslim women in India, but the consequences will be global. According to some estimates the Muslim population across the world is said to be in excess of two billion which means that there are close to a billion Muslim women who live under a medieval, archaic law which permits their husbands to bring in not one or two but as many as three extra wives.
Reform of Muslim personal law in India will embolden hundreds of millions of liberal Muslim women seeking reform in other nations to urge their governments to undertake similar measures. Muslim women across the globe will silently clap that a reform overdue for centuries has finally been introduced in India, a nation that has the distinction of hosting the second largest Muslim population in the world. The abolition of polygamy is the dream and hope of a billion Muslim women across the planet.
Insofar as women’s rights are concerned the abolition of polygamy in India will be a historic development paving the way for other nations to follow suit. Surely this issue is far beyond and above partisan politics and one’s preference or dislike for a particular political party.
(Rajesh Talwar, the author of thirty-nine books spanning multiple genres, has served the United Nations for over two decades across three continents. His most recent book is titled ‘The Boy Who Fought an Empire.’)