Jordan Times
By Mohammad Ben Hussein
AMMAN - The Islamist movement on Sunday called on the government to withdraw from the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) on grounds that the treaty will lead to a myriad of social problems in the country.
In a press conference held at the Islamic Action Front (IAF) headquarters in Abdali, Islamist leaders joined hands with women activists in the party to sound the alarm about the possible consequences of CEDAW on the Jordanian family and society in general.
"Families in Jordan face the threat of total collapse under CEDAW," warned the IAF, the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, in a statement distributed during the press conference.
Activists from the IAF's Al Afaf women’s society said they are concerned about a recent Cabinet decision to lift its reservations on paragraph four of Article 15, which gives women freedom of mobility and choice of residence without consent of their husbands or other male family members.
According to IAF activists, the clause contradicts the teachings of Islam, under which authority over women's mobility is in the hands of their husbands if they are married, and in the hands of brothers or fathers if they are single.
"Both husband and wife should approve the choice of accommodation, not the wife alone," said Maisoun Darawseh, an Al Afaf society member.
"States Parties shall accord to women, in civil matters, a legal capacity identical to that of men and the same opportunities to exercise that capacity. In particular, they shall give women equal rights to conclude contracts and to administer property and shall treat them equally in all stages of procedure in courts and tribunals," the article states.
The convention also allows women freedom of mobility: "States Parties shall accord to men and women the same rights with regard to the law relating to the movement of persons and the freedom to choose their residence and domicile."
IAF Secretary General Zaki Bani Rsheid criticised the government for ratifying the agreement without first resorting to a national dialogue.
"The government should have conducted a genuine national dialogue with all segments of society regarding this agreement. They should have dealt with this matter based on its social and future dimensions, not its international and financial dimensions," he said.
He urged the government to launch a notational dialogue on CEDAW, raise public awareness of its contents and amend legislation to grant women their religious rights.
In July 1992, the Kingdom signed the convention, which was ratified and published in the Official Gazette in August 2007 with three reservations related to the citizenship, housing and women's mobility clauses in the Personal Status Law.
Showing posts with label personal status law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label personal status law. Show all posts
Monday, April 27, 2009
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Tunisia: Tunisian women's rights activist Hmida warns against decline in gains
By Jamel Arfaoui for Magharebia in Tunis – 21/04/09
Bochra Bel Haj Hmida is a lawyer, women's rights activist, and former president of the Tunisian Association of Democratic Women. She has been one of the fiercest opponents of she regards as the oppression of Tunisian women regarding inheritance.
Hmida is also responsible for saving dozens of young people from the gallows in 1984, when she met former president Habib Bourguiba and his wife Wassila and convinced the president to issue a pardon.
Magharebia: In statements earlier this year, you warned against the risk of a decline in Tunisian women's gains. Do you still maintain those ideas? Can you tell us about the nature and source of that risk?
Hmida: Like many human rights activists, I believe that we managed to secure significant gains, starting with the Personal Status Code issued half a century ago, as well as all the supporting and complementing laws, along with the rise in the number of educated girls and family planning policies, in addition to all other measures aimed at enhancing women's position in society.
Nonetheless, those gains remain retractable for a number of reasons.
One: the political and cultural position in the region, wherein women are looked at as second-class citizens. Until 2003 (with the Moroccan Moudawana), Tunisia was the only country where women lived under a law that ensured their political rights. Although many Arab laws were amended with regard to personal status or political rights, and though many countries (e.g. Algeria, Egypt, Kuwait, Jordan, Saudi Arabia) ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), laws continued to rely on flagrant discrimination between both genders. As such, Tunisian women enjoy a distinctive, almost unique status, which does not exactly serve to reinforce their rights.
Two: Western policies versus the Arab region, the oppression sustained by the Palestinian people at the hands of the occupation, the US invasion of Iraq, the Western stance toward democratisation, are all factors that breed closed-mindedness among Tunisian men and women, and their chauvinist national sense of belonging at the expense of human values. Women's rights are used as a tool of political and national conflict, as well as a tool to impose identity and disseminate backward thinking within society. Women are always first to pay the price.
Three: the state also has a central role in this regard. It has taken key decisions to improve women's conditions, in response to their developing needs across the numerous domains. Yet, women are still used as a marketing tool abroad, while domestically, the cause of women remains dependent on political agendas and relations with religious groups. Further, when the state harps on the issue of women, it is always by way of propaganda. The state therefore never admits to the discrimination faced by women. On the contrary, the state brags that it has given women their full rights. As such, they take measures discreetly.
Also, there is the state's inconsistent and unsuccessful manner of handling Islam on the political, social and cultural levels, in terms of banning the Hijab (veil), followed by the pulling-the-rug policy (all the concessions along the years from the eighties until recently, like allowing a religious radio station and receiving Sheikh Qaradawi as a religious and political icon). All such policies open the door before further retractions and cast doubts over the legitimacy of women's rights.
Four: the Tunisian media, for more than half a century, has never been a venue for discussing matters and changes of interest to society (such as Radio Mosaique or the Internet). Thus, it cannot hold a candle to the impact of Arab satellite channels, which, though diverse, do not play a positive role in entrenching human values, or a free, multilateral, and calm dialogue.
Magharebia: Tell us about the ground you have gained in the battle for equality in inheritance.
Hmida: The campaign was launched back in 1999. We were aware of the difficulty of the situation. However, we've gained a lot of ground. Most importantly, discussing equality in inheritance is no longer a taboo, but a topic often discussed in newspapers, many public institutions as well as within families, many of whom have chosen to take precautionary measures in order to ensure wives and girls dodge damages. Some books were also released on the topic, such as those by Ali Al Mazghani and by Kalthoum Mazio, conducted by the Association of Tunisian Women for Research and Development (AFTURD).
A law was also passed to exempt endowment contracts from registration fees, to the benefit of husbands, ancestors, and descendents. This had an immediate impact on Tunisians; the state can provide us with the relevant figures. We have also given women in Morocco, Algeria and, to some extent, Egypt the green light to discuss the issue.
Magharebia: Is it true that women were the fiercest opponents of the call for equality in inheritance?
Hmida: This is not an easy question to answer. However, we can just say that reactions are not governed by the conventional intellectual and political criteria. In fact, reactions show that inheritance is purely a matter of interests. We have seen secularists, opponents, and women refuse to sign the petition. We have also seen devout men and constitutional individuals eagerly sign the Democratic Women petition.
Magharebia: What arguments do your opponents cite? How do you respond?
Hmida: The arguments are many. The most significant are Sharia and the clarity of Qur'anic verse, which are always cited by the majority of opponents, who share either political or religious views. Others who rely on wrong and unfruitful political calculations claim that the issue is not a priority and that society is not prepared. The truth is that they know nothing about society or its requirements and aspirations. The argument that I personally see as evidence of ill will is the one that pleads that as long as man is responsible for supporting his family, we cannot call for equality in inheritance. The fact of the matter is that women take part in supporting their families, and that changing the law of inheritance presupposes changes in other laws.
[AFTURD] responded to all those arguments in a booklet entitled "Fifteen Proofs in Support of Gender Equality in Inheritance". Magharebia: Although the Personal Status Code was passed more than fifty years ago, women in Tunisia still suffer from violence. Does that mean that the Code, which sought to modernise society, was a failure?
Hmida: The Code was not a failure. The problem of violence extends far beyond the Code and all laws, which, though important, cannot solve all problems, especially violence against women, a global problem present in all countries, even in those that eliminated all forms of legal and political discrimination, such as Finland. Violence is based on the theory of gender discrimination.
A man is entitled to harass a woman. If a woman harasses a man, she is called "shameless". A man, on the other hand, can attack his wife violently to teach her manners. The opposite would be regarded as strange or disdainful. Society is built on discrimination. Abolishing all forms of discrimination, especially in mentalities, is the only way to end the phenomenon of violence. Women all over the world still have a long way to go.
Magharebia: Why aren't there more Tunisian women in leadership positions in politics, unions, and NGOs, which support your call for gender equality?
Hmida: Tunisia has not made much progress in this area, despite progress in the law. It can be traced back to mentalities, to what we ask of women, and to rivalry in the field of politics. The feminist movement itself was not settled through a feminist perspective, but rather through a political, state-like vision. In my opinion, that situation requires adopting bold measures, such as the principle of quota. Also, enhancing discussions even within women's organisations and within society is important so that women's candidacy and voting for women would not be different from men's candidacy and voting for men. In other words, women are not required to be perfect.
Magharebia: In 2003, you encountered vehement censure from conservatives for taking part in a seminar on the rights of homosexuals. You were accused of defending them while turning a blind eye to women's right to wear the hijab. Would you be prepared at present to take part in a similar seminar? Is it true that you do not support women's right to wear whatever they want, including hijab?
Hmida: First of all, I did not take part in a seminar on the rights of homosexuals. I took part in the European Social Forum, which discussed topics including sexual rights. I participated on the issue of gay rights in the Arab region – law and reality. I explained that the law criminalises sexual relationships between individuals of the same gender, and that Arab societies handle this case very hypocritically. This is indeed similar to those who launched a campaign against me then and on other occasions before, and those who support them.
I further explained my position saying that this choice is part of human rights, and is a question of personal choice and individual freedom. We ought to discuss sex-related questions more openly and scientifically so as to confront sexual violence against women and children, achieve justice in that domain, define what one's rights are, and identify the aggressor and the victim. I am prepared to attend such seminars and to fight in order to put an end to criminalising the voluntary sexual relations between adults and abolish all forms of sexual violence.
Hijab is directly related to this topic since it has to do with a woman's body and society's and man's views of it. In that regard, I am completely against all forms of suppression even if practiced against my opponents. I believe that wearing or rejecting the hijab is a matter of personal freedom. This is how I am basically different from zealous proponents of hijab and those who apply human rights unilaterally, and take advantage of the hijab to serve a political agenda that is totally divorced from a woman's individual rights. Also, the hijab is a sign of disdain of women, who it is believed should be hidden.
Bochra Bel Haj Hmida is a lawyer, women's rights activist, and former president of the Tunisian Association of Democratic Women. She has been one of the fiercest opponents of she regards as the oppression of Tunisian women regarding inheritance.
Hmida is also responsible for saving dozens of young people from the gallows in 1984, when she met former president Habib Bourguiba and his wife Wassila and convinced the president to issue a pardon.
Magharebia: In statements earlier this year, you warned against the risk of a decline in Tunisian women's gains. Do you still maintain those ideas? Can you tell us about the nature and source of that risk?
Hmida: Like many human rights activists, I believe that we managed to secure significant gains, starting with the Personal Status Code issued half a century ago, as well as all the supporting and complementing laws, along with the rise in the number of educated girls and family planning policies, in addition to all other measures aimed at enhancing women's position in society.
Nonetheless, those gains remain retractable for a number of reasons.
One: the political and cultural position in the region, wherein women are looked at as second-class citizens. Until 2003 (with the Moroccan Moudawana), Tunisia was the only country where women lived under a law that ensured their political rights. Although many Arab laws were amended with regard to personal status or political rights, and though many countries (e.g. Algeria, Egypt, Kuwait, Jordan, Saudi Arabia) ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), laws continued to rely on flagrant discrimination between both genders. As such, Tunisian women enjoy a distinctive, almost unique status, which does not exactly serve to reinforce their rights.
Two: Western policies versus the Arab region, the oppression sustained by the Palestinian people at the hands of the occupation, the US invasion of Iraq, the Western stance toward democratisation, are all factors that breed closed-mindedness among Tunisian men and women, and their chauvinist national sense of belonging at the expense of human values. Women's rights are used as a tool of political and national conflict, as well as a tool to impose identity and disseminate backward thinking within society. Women are always first to pay the price.
Three: the state also has a central role in this regard. It has taken key decisions to improve women's conditions, in response to their developing needs across the numerous domains. Yet, women are still used as a marketing tool abroad, while domestically, the cause of women remains dependent on political agendas and relations with religious groups. Further, when the state harps on the issue of women, it is always by way of propaganda. The state therefore never admits to the discrimination faced by women. On the contrary, the state brags that it has given women their full rights. As such, they take measures discreetly.
Also, there is the state's inconsistent and unsuccessful manner of handling Islam on the political, social and cultural levels, in terms of banning the Hijab (veil), followed by the pulling-the-rug policy (all the concessions along the years from the eighties until recently, like allowing a religious radio station and receiving Sheikh Qaradawi as a religious and political icon). All such policies open the door before further retractions and cast doubts over the legitimacy of women's rights.
Four: the Tunisian media, for more than half a century, has never been a venue for discussing matters and changes of interest to society (such as Radio Mosaique or the Internet). Thus, it cannot hold a candle to the impact of Arab satellite channels, which, though diverse, do not play a positive role in entrenching human values, or a free, multilateral, and calm dialogue.
Magharebia: Tell us about the ground you have gained in the battle for equality in inheritance.
Hmida: The campaign was launched back in 1999. We were aware of the difficulty of the situation. However, we've gained a lot of ground. Most importantly, discussing equality in inheritance is no longer a taboo, but a topic often discussed in newspapers, many public institutions as well as within families, many of whom have chosen to take precautionary measures in order to ensure wives and girls dodge damages. Some books were also released on the topic, such as those by Ali Al Mazghani and by Kalthoum Mazio, conducted by the Association of Tunisian Women for Research and Development (AFTURD).
A law was also passed to exempt endowment contracts from registration fees, to the benefit of husbands, ancestors, and descendents. This had an immediate impact on Tunisians; the state can provide us with the relevant figures. We have also given women in Morocco, Algeria and, to some extent, Egypt the green light to discuss the issue.
Magharebia: Is it true that women were the fiercest opponents of the call for equality in inheritance?
Hmida: This is not an easy question to answer. However, we can just say that reactions are not governed by the conventional intellectual and political criteria. In fact, reactions show that inheritance is purely a matter of interests. We have seen secularists, opponents, and women refuse to sign the petition. We have also seen devout men and constitutional individuals eagerly sign the Democratic Women petition.
Magharebia: What arguments do your opponents cite? How do you respond?
Hmida: The arguments are many. The most significant are Sharia and the clarity of Qur'anic verse, which are always cited by the majority of opponents, who share either political or religious views. Others who rely on wrong and unfruitful political calculations claim that the issue is not a priority and that society is not prepared. The truth is that they know nothing about society or its requirements and aspirations. The argument that I personally see as evidence of ill will is the one that pleads that as long as man is responsible for supporting his family, we cannot call for equality in inheritance. The fact of the matter is that women take part in supporting their families, and that changing the law of inheritance presupposes changes in other laws.
[AFTURD] responded to all those arguments in a booklet entitled "Fifteen Proofs in Support of Gender Equality in Inheritance". Magharebia: Although the Personal Status Code was passed more than fifty years ago, women in Tunisia still suffer from violence. Does that mean that the Code, which sought to modernise society, was a failure?
Hmida: The Code was not a failure. The problem of violence extends far beyond the Code and all laws, which, though important, cannot solve all problems, especially violence against women, a global problem present in all countries, even in those that eliminated all forms of legal and political discrimination, such as Finland. Violence is based on the theory of gender discrimination.
A man is entitled to harass a woman. If a woman harasses a man, she is called "shameless". A man, on the other hand, can attack his wife violently to teach her manners. The opposite would be regarded as strange or disdainful. Society is built on discrimination. Abolishing all forms of discrimination, especially in mentalities, is the only way to end the phenomenon of violence. Women all over the world still have a long way to go.
Magharebia: Why aren't there more Tunisian women in leadership positions in politics, unions, and NGOs, which support your call for gender equality?
Hmida: Tunisia has not made much progress in this area, despite progress in the law. It can be traced back to mentalities, to what we ask of women, and to rivalry in the field of politics. The feminist movement itself was not settled through a feminist perspective, but rather through a political, state-like vision. In my opinion, that situation requires adopting bold measures, such as the principle of quota. Also, enhancing discussions even within women's organisations and within society is important so that women's candidacy and voting for women would not be different from men's candidacy and voting for men. In other words, women are not required to be perfect.
Magharebia: In 2003, you encountered vehement censure from conservatives for taking part in a seminar on the rights of homosexuals. You were accused of defending them while turning a blind eye to women's right to wear the hijab. Would you be prepared at present to take part in a similar seminar? Is it true that you do not support women's right to wear whatever they want, including hijab?
Hmida: First of all, I did not take part in a seminar on the rights of homosexuals. I took part in the European Social Forum, which discussed topics including sexual rights. I participated on the issue of gay rights in the Arab region – law and reality. I explained that the law criminalises sexual relationships between individuals of the same gender, and that Arab societies handle this case very hypocritically. This is indeed similar to those who launched a campaign against me then and on other occasions before, and those who support them.
I further explained my position saying that this choice is part of human rights, and is a question of personal choice and individual freedom. We ought to discuss sex-related questions more openly and scientifically so as to confront sexual violence against women and children, achieve justice in that domain, define what one's rights are, and identify the aggressor and the victim. I am prepared to attend such seminars and to fight in order to put an end to criminalising the voluntary sexual relations between adults and abolish all forms of sexual violence.
Hijab is directly related to this topic since it has to do with a woman's body and society's and man's views of it. In that regard, I am completely against all forms of suppression even if practiced against my opponents. I believe that wearing or rejecting the hijab is a matter of personal freedom. This is how I am basically different from zealous proponents of hijab and those who apply human rights unilaterally, and take advantage of the hijab to serve a political agenda that is totally divorced from a woman's individual rights. Also, the hijab is a sign of disdain of women, who it is believed should be hidden.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Bahrain: Tough laws urged to protect women
NINETY-ONE per cent of Bahraini mothers filing for divorce have been physically abused by their husbands, a survey has revealed.
According to the study, 2,165 women out of 2,391 surveyed had been abused after bearing children, while after marriage and before pregnancy it was 152 (6pc) and during the engagement period it was 74 (3pc).
Bahrain Women's Union president Mariam Al Ruwaie said the survey showed there was a strong link between violence against women and personal status.
She called upon the authorities of Bahrain to toughen up the country's laws against those who commit violence against women.
The rights activist pointed out that article 353 of Bahrain's penal code stipulated that whoever raped or had illegitimate sex with a woman would not be punished if the situation was corrected by marriage.
However, she said, such laws allowed abusers to get away with their crimes.
"There is an urgent need to find a legal platform that criminalises abuse," said Ms Al Ruwaie.
"We need to pass a protection against family violence law that has already been presented to parliament, and we need to amend the penal code for stricter punishments."
The survey was conducted by the union at 13 family council centres and law offices in Bahrain.
It revealed that violence against women was ethically and socially acceptable.
It found that in 623 (19pc) cases recorded at the centres and law offices, the wife continued to suffer without getting a divorce while her case remained in the court.
The survey revealed that in such cases 40pc dragged on for less than a year, 32pc for five to eight years, and 2pc for eight to 10 years.
Out of 247 cases filed, 110 (45pc) women were still waiting for a divorce after a year or less. While 102 women (41pc) were still waiting for a divorce after one to three years, and 10 (4pc) after eight to 10 years.
The main reason women asked to be separated from their husbands was in 27pc of cases due to his immoral behaviour.
While in 23pc of cases it was because the husband failed to take proper financial responsibility for his wife and children.
Other reasons were that the woman's husband was psychologically ill or had abandoned her.
Ms Al Ruwaie presented the results of the survey at the United Nations celebration to mark International Women's Day.
The event was held at the Cultural Hall, near the Bahrain National Museum, yesterday and was attended by government officials and representatives of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and members of the media.
Ms Al Ruwaie applauded the co-operation and co-ordination of the government and NGOs on the issue of combating domestic violence.
She said recent steps in this direction included the creation of a committee for domestic violence against women at the Health Ministry, as well as a training programme for the police and Public Prosecution on how to deal with victims of abuse.
Another positive step, she noted, was the Dar Al Aman shelter, which had been established by the Social Development Ministry and was now being run by the Bahrain Sociologists Society.
"However, all these steps are still modest and don't meet the requirements for the escalating problem of violence against women," said Ms Al Ruwaie.
Meanwhile, Ms Al Ruwaie said steps are also needed to protect housemaids from domestic violence.
She said according to 2001 figures (the latest available), there were 29,583 domestic helpers in Bahrain of which 21,291 were women. However, more up to date data on domestic helpers was needed, she said.
"In Bahrain there is a lack of societies or organisations that work for the rights of domestic workers and there are no statistics on abuse cases towards them that have gone to court," she added.
-- Gulf Daily News By REBECCA TORR
According to the study, 2,165 women out of 2,391 surveyed had been abused after bearing children, while after marriage and before pregnancy it was 152 (6pc) and during the engagement period it was 74 (3pc).
Bahrain Women's Union president Mariam Al Ruwaie said the survey showed there was a strong link between violence against women and personal status.
She called upon the authorities of Bahrain to toughen up the country's laws against those who commit violence against women.
The rights activist pointed out that article 353 of Bahrain's penal code stipulated that whoever raped or had illegitimate sex with a woman would not be punished if the situation was corrected by marriage.
However, she said, such laws allowed abusers to get away with their crimes.
"There is an urgent need to find a legal platform that criminalises abuse," said Ms Al Ruwaie.
"We need to pass a protection against family violence law that has already been presented to parliament, and we need to amend the penal code for stricter punishments."
The survey was conducted by the union at 13 family council centres and law offices in Bahrain.
It revealed that violence against women was ethically and socially acceptable.
It found that in 623 (19pc) cases recorded at the centres and law offices, the wife continued to suffer without getting a divorce while her case remained in the court.
The survey revealed that in such cases 40pc dragged on for less than a year, 32pc for five to eight years, and 2pc for eight to 10 years.
Out of 247 cases filed, 110 (45pc) women were still waiting for a divorce after a year or less. While 102 women (41pc) were still waiting for a divorce after one to three years, and 10 (4pc) after eight to 10 years.
The main reason women asked to be separated from their husbands was in 27pc of cases due to his immoral behaviour.
While in 23pc of cases it was because the husband failed to take proper financial responsibility for his wife and children.
Other reasons were that the woman's husband was psychologically ill or had abandoned her.
Ms Al Ruwaie presented the results of the survey at the United Nations celebration to mark International Women's Day.
The event was held at the Cultural Hall, near the Bahrain National Museum, yesterday and was attended by government officials and representatives of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and members of the media.
Ms Al Ruwaie applauded the co-operation and co-ordination of the government and NGOs on the issue of combating domestic violence.
She said recent steps in this direction included the creation of a committee for domestic violence against women at the Health Ministry, as well as a training programme for the police and Public Prosecution on how to deal with victims of abuse.
Another positive step, she noted, was the Dar Al Aman shelter, which had been established by the Social Development Ministry and was now being run by the Bahrain Sociologists Society.
"However, all these steps are still modest and don't meet the requirements for the escalating problem of violence against women," said Ms Al Ruwaie.
Meanwhile, Ms Al Ruwaie said steps are also needed to protect housemaids from domestic violence.
She said according to 2001 figures (the latest available), there were 29,583 domestic helpers in Bahrain of which 21,291 were women. However, more up to date data on domestic helpers was needed, she said.
"In Bahrain there is a lack of societies or organisations that work for the rights of domestic workers and there are no statistics on abuse cases towards them that have gone to court," she added.
-- Gulf Daily News By REBECCA TORR
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Yemen: Laws discriminate against women
Reviewing the legislative system of Yemen for the first time, one gets the impression that the laws are well-drafted and ensure the rights of both men and women. Upon analyzing and dissecting those laws and regulations, one will inevitably realize that certain elements of this system, which regulates private and public relationships, involve a considerable degree of discrimination against women.
This conclusion is supported by the legal teams formed by the National Women's Committee (NWC), which have been working since 2000 to examine Yemeni laws for gender bias.
The NWC wanted to ensure this system complies with the Islamic tenets and principles as the main source of legislation, with the Constitution and with the international conventions ratified by the Republic of Yemen, particularly the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).
The legal review teams came up with proof that there is flagrant discrimination embedded in some provisions, most severely in the Personal Status law, the Nationality law and the Penalty law.
The Personal Status law does not specify an appropriate age of marriage, which as a result, inadvertently permits early marriage among young females – an especially common problem in rural areas. Early marriage in turn affects girls’ ability to continue their education. With early marriage comes early pregnancies, which can cause problems like fistula (a condition that causes incontinence) or even to death during childbirth.
The Personal Status law arbitrates against a wife, as it gives a man the absolute right to polygamy, without provisions mandating that he inform his wife of his plans. The law doesn’t restrict polygamy according to Sharia rule, which stipulates non-harassment, equality and justice among wives. The same law discriminates against divorced women to the same degree when it comes to alimony and child custody.
The Nationality law’s treatment of a Yemeni man's foreign wife and children is different from its treatment of the foreign husband and children of a Yemeni woman.
Moreover, the Penalty law severely undervalues a woman's worth, since the law claims that the blood of a woman is worth only half as much as a man’s. According to this law, a woman, when injured, shall be compensated with half the financial amount given to a man for the same injury. A man's penalty for murdering his wife or any of his female relatives over adultery is mitigated by the law, while the same law says that a female who commits the same act is to be executed.
Around 61 discriminatory provisions have been submitted to the decision-makers since 2001.Last March, the Cabinet of Ministers approved - in principle - some suggested amendments to laws that discriminate against women. However, the Cabinet excluded the provision to define a legal age of marriage in the Personal Status law, on the grounds that it should be amended in the Child Rights law, as proposed by the Higher Council of Childhood.
The Cabinet also excluded the provisions that call for the application of the "quota" system aimed at rejuvenating women’s political participation, under the pretext that this issue is still subject to discussion among different political parties. The Cabinet formed a ministerial committee comprised of the Ministers of Endowments, Justice, and Legal Affairs, in addition to the Chairperson of the National Women's Committee to study, examine and legally redraft certain laws.
Approved by the Cabinet of Ministers, the legal provisions were then referred to the Parliament last year and were put on the agenda for review and discussion. The Parliament circulate the drafted legal amendments on the specialist committees for discussion and opinion before they are discussed and decided upon by the MPs.
Many laws find their way through the Parliament quickly, but for some reason, those laws related to women’s rights are always considered with mistrust and doubt. The proof of this is that the amendments to the Personal Status law were first raised in the early days of the National Women's Committee – back in 1996.
Since that time, this issue has stood still. Ironically, this does not invite suspicion because the nature of the Parliament is still the same, not conducive to change. Nor does it facilitate the improvement of women’s legal status, despite the dialogue initiated with the Parliament and its various committees.
Although there are voices that support women, they are few, separate and not influential. Women hope that the Parliament will spend time on legal amendments which logically shouldn’t be delayed, especially because those provisions were revised by professional jurisprudence specialists. A ray of hope still glimmers when women remember that most of the MPs, if not all, have won due to female voters.
The earlier the Parliament approves those amendments, the more time all of us save. Moreover, such a step would enable the National Women's Committee to proceed to Phase III of the continued Legal Amendments Project, which reacts and adapts to new developments and requirements.
The civil society and women's organizations must play a greater role in terms of mobilization, advocacy, and even pressuring the Parliament to look into and approve those laws. Only then can discrimination against women be eliminated.
Hooria Mashoor is deputy chairperson of the Women National Committee and a strong advocate for women’s rights.
By: Hooria Mashoor, Yemen Times
This conclusion is supported by the legal teams formed by the National Women's Committee (NWC), which have been working since 2000 to examine Yemeni laws for gender bias.
The NWC wanted to ensure this system complies with the Islamic tenets and principles as the main source of legislation, with the Constitution and with the international conventions ratified by the Republic of Yemen, particularly the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).
The legal review teams came up with proof that there is flagrant discrimination embedded in some provisions, most severely in the Personal Status law, the Nationality law and the Penalty law.
The Personal Status law does not specify an appropriate age of marriage, which as a result, inadvertently permits early marriage among young females – an especially common problem in rural areas. Early marriage in turn affects girls’ ability to continue their education. With early marriage comes early pregnancies, which can cause problems like fistula (a condition that causes incontinence) or even to death during childbirth.
The Personal Status law arbitrates against a wife, as it gives a man the absolute right to polygamy, without provisions mandating that he inform his wife of his plans. The law doesn’t restrict polygamy according to Sharia rule, which stipulates non-harassment, equality and justice among wives. The same law discriminates against divorced women to the same degree when it comes to alimony and child custody.
The Nationality law’s treatment of a Yemeni man's foreign wife and children is different from its treatment of the foreign husband and children of a Yemeni woman.
Moreover, the Penalty law severely undervalues a woman's worth, since the law claims that the blood of a woman is worth only half as much as a man’s. According to this law, a woman, when injured, shall be compensated with half the financial amount given to a man for the same injury. A man's penalty for murdering his wife or any of his female relatives over adultery is mitigated by the law, while the same law says that a female who commits the same act is to be executed.
Around 61 discriminatory provisions have been submitted to the decision-makers since 2001.Last March, the Cabinet of Ministers approved - in principle - some suggested amendments to laws that discriminate against women. However, the Cabinet excluded the provision to define a legal age of marriage in the Personal Status law, on the grounds that it should be amended in the Child Rights law, as proposed by the Higher Council of Childhood.
The Cabinet also excluded the provisions that call for the application of the "quota" system aimed at rejuvenating women’s political participation, under the pretext that this issue is still subject to discussion among different political parties. The Cabinet formed a ministerial committee comprised of the Ministers of Endowments, Justice, and Legal Affairs, in addition to the Chairperson of the National Women's Committee to study, examine and legally redraft certain laws.
Approved by the Cabinet of Ministers, the legal provisions were then referred to the Parliament last year and were put on the agenda for review and discussion. The Parliament circulate the drafted legal amendments on the specialist committees for discussion and opinion before they are discussed and decided upon by the MPs.
Many laws find their way through the Parliament quickly, but for some reason, those laws related to women’s rights are always considered with mistrust and doubt. The proof of this is that the amendments to the Personal Status law were first raised in the early days of the National Women's Committee – back in 1996.
Since that time, this issue has stood still. Ironically, this does not invite suspicion because the nature of the Parliament is still the same, not conducive to change. Nor does it facilitate the improvement of women’s legal status, despite the dialogue initiated with the Parliament and its various committees.
Although there are voices that support women, they are few, separate and not influential. Women hope that the Parliament will spend time on legal amendments which logically shouldn’t be delayed, especially because those provisions were revised by professional jurisprudence specialists. A ray of hope still glimmers when women remember that most of the MPs, if not all, have won due to female voters.
The earlier the Parliament approves those amendments, the more time all of us save. Moreover, such a step would enable the National Women's Committee to proceed to Phase III of the continued Legal Amendments Project, which reacts and adapts to new developments and requirements.
The civil society and women's organizations must play a greater role in terms of mobilization, advocacy, and even pressuring the Parliament to look into and approve those laws. Only then can discrimination against women be eliminated.
Hooria Mashoor is deputy chairperson of the Women National Committee and a strong advocate for women’s rights.
By: Hooria Mashoor, Yemen Times
Friday, March 14, 2008
Egypt: New proposals equating a woman's testimony with that of a man
Women have forever been debating their status in the societies in which they live and, naturally, how to improve it. Discussions have been conducted at the highest echelons of government while others merely serve as the fodder for gatherings among women just following the news. The People's Assembly (PA) was the site of the latest high-level give- and-take, with the PA's deputy speaker suggesting that the testimony of just one woman be acknowledged. At present, two women are needed if they are to act as witnesses in a business transaction, whereas one male witness will do.
Zeinab Radwan was not finished. She also advocated that the testimony of non-Muslims in a Muslim's affairs -- in all personal status issues -- be accepted, plus enabling non- Muslims to inherit Muslims and vice versa. The three issues are inherently deep-rooted in society and any overhaul in the status quo is bound to have repercussions across the country and beyond.
Historically, many people, needless to say most of them men, have harboured doubts about Islam's position regarding a woman's self-worth. According to Radwan, a common but erroneous belief is that as a rule, the worth of a woman's testimony is one half of that of a man's. But a survey of all passages in the Quran relating to testimony does not substantiate such an assertion.
Radwan explains that testimony means giving information about a certain person. This involves two stages: bearing the burden of testimony and giving the testimony. As far as bearing the burden of testimony is concerned, a woman can handle such responsibility in all spheres of life.
In other words, a woman can be a witness to an incident of whatever kind. Most Quranic references to witnesses do not make any reference to gender. Some references fully equate the testimony of males and females. One reference in the Quran distinguishes between the witness of a male and a female, mentioned in Surat Al-Baqarah (verse 282):
(O ye who believe! When ye deal with each other, in transactions involving future obligations in a fixed period of time, reduce them to writing. Let a scribe write down faithfully as between the parties: let not the scribe refuse to write: as Allah Has taught him, so let him write. Let him who incurs the liability dictate, but let him fear His Lord Allah, and not diminish aught of what he owes. If they party liable is mentally deficient, or weak, or unable himself to dictate, let his guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her)
According to Radwan, the reason for the variations in the number of male and female witnesses required is given in the same verse. No reference is made to the inferiority or superiority of one gender's witness over the other. The only reason given is to corroborate the female's witness and prevent errors in the perception of business deals. The context of the verse relates to testimony on only financial transactions which are often complex and laden with business jargon. The Arabic term used in this passage, tadillah, literally means "loses the way", "gets confused", "errs". But are females the only gender that may err and need corroboration of their testimony?
Definitely not, but because Islam is keen to protect people's rights, and women at that time were not accustomed to business transactions -- because it was mainly a man's job -- the general rule of testimony in Islamic law is to have two witnesses even if they are both male.
Abdel-Moeti Bayoumi, a member of the Islamic Research Council (IRC), agrees with Radwan, adding that the corroboration of a woman's testimony by another woman who may be present ascertains accuracy and, hence, justice. It would be unreasonable to interpret this requirement as a reflection on the worth of a woman's testimony since it is the only exception discerned from the text of the Quran. This may be one reason why a scholar the likes of El-Tabari could not find any evidence in any primary text (Quran or hadith ) which would exclude women from something more important than testimony, being herself a judge who hears and evaluates the testimony of others.
Bayoumi added that unlike pure acts of worship, which must be observed exactly as taught by the prophet, testimony is a means to an end, ascertaining justice as a major objective of Islamic law. Therefore, it is the duty of a fair judge to be guided by this objective when assessing the worth and credibility of a given testimony regardless of the gender of the witness. "The witness of a female graduate of a business school is certainly far worthier than that of an illiterate person with no education or experience. On issues related to women's affairs, a woman's testimony is accepted even if it is given by only one woman," Bayoumi said.
Concerning a non-Muslim's testimony for or against a Muslim, past jurisprudent Imam Ahmed Ibn-Hanbal allows this when travelling, when a Muslim witness cannot be found. Imam Malik and Imam Shafei, however, do not accept it at all. Radwan argues that Imam Abu-Hanifah adopts the view that a non-Muslim's testimony for or against another non-Muslim is acceptable.
Imam Ibn Taymiyah is of the view that Imam Ahmed's acceptance of the testimony of a non-Muslim applies to all cases of necessity whether one is travelling or not. Therefore, the testimony of a non-Muslim is admissible in case there is no Muslim. If the case at hand is witnessed by two non-Muslim males, then their testimony is accepted. Radwan adds that both the Quran and Sunna do not identify the religion or gender of the witness. They state: "Of whoever you accept as a witness."
Radwan notes that a careful examination of Islamic philosophy on inheritance, as stipulated in the Quran, reveals that Islam takes into account certain considerations that assert the value of equality between people but which has been subjected to an erroneous, biased- focussed reading.
"While women inherit half the share of men in some cases," she explains, "in others they inherit an equal share, and sometimes even double the share of men, or more. Indeed, there are instances in which women are entitled to inherit while men are not."
Both Radwan and Bayoumi agree that Islam has allowed Muslim men to marry a Christian or Jewish woman, thus granting to both man and wife the same rights and duties. Why then should a woman not inherit her husband? Islam would not agree that a wife becomes destitute after her husband's death especially if she is unemployed.
Radwan says those who disagree with her share views based on what they believe to be the inferiority of Christians and Jews to Muslims. "This is totally against what Islam preaches, which is that there is no difference between people on the basis of gender, colour or religion," Radwan said.
Muslim Brotherhood MP Hamdi Zahran Hussein disagrees with Radwan, arguing that Islam does not accord non-Muslim relatives the right to inherit from a Muslim. When a Muslim dies, only his Muslim relatives have the right to inherit according to a predefined process. "If a Muslim would like to give some of his property to his non-Muslim relatives, it would be better if this were done during his lifetime. After death, his estate cannot be distributed to non-Muslims," Hussein said.
Hussein believes that People of the Book (Christians and Jews) are considered non- Muslims. "So, until and unless one believes in one creed of Allah, the Holy Quran is the only book of Islam and that Mohamed is the last messenger of Allah. As such, non- Muslims cannot benefit from an inheritance. But Hussein, seeking the approval of the IRC, left the door open. "If they agree, then I will agree."
Bayoumi said a 32-page paper conducted in this regard states that a woman's testimony is not half to that of a man and that the testimony of non-Muslims for or against a Muslim does not violate Islamic precepts. On the contrary, they coincide fully with Sharia since they preserve the principle of equality between man and woman. Regarding the issue of inheritance, "a Muslim is entitled to inherit a non-Muslim," Bayoumi said. "However, for a non-Muslim to inherit a Muslim will still have to be thoroughly researched before reaching a definite conclusion. Within the next few days a final decision will be reached."
Radwan called the issue of non-Muslims inheriting Muslims debatable.
Zeinab Radwan was not finished. She also advocated that the testimony of non-Muslims in a Muslim's affairs -- in all personal status issues -- be accepted, plus enabling non- Muslims to inherit Muslims and vice versa. The three issues are inherently deep-rooted in society and any overhaul in the status quo is bound to have repercussions across the country and beyond.
Historically, many people, needless to say most of them men, have harboured doubts about Islam's position regarding a woman's self-worth. According to Radwan, a common but erroneous belief is that as a rule, the worth of a woman's testimony is one half of that of a man's. But a survey of all passages in the Quran relating to testimony does not substantiate such an assertion.
Radwan explains that testimony means giving information about a certain person. This involves two stages: bearing the burden of testimony and giving the testimony. As far as bearing the burden of testimony is concerned, a woman can handle such responsibility in all spheres of life.
In other words, a woman can be a witness to an incident of whatever kind. Most Quranic references to witnesses do not make any reference to gender. Some references fully equate the testimony of males and females. One reference in the Quran distinguishes between the witness of a male and a female, mentioned in Surat Al-Baqarah (verse 282):
(O ye who believe! When ye deal with each other, in transactions involving future obligations in a fixed period of time, reduce them to writing. Let a scribe write down faithfully as between the parties: let not the scribe refuse to write: as Allah Has taught him, so let him write. Let him who incurs the liability dictate, but let him fear His Lord Allah, and not diminish aught of what he owes. If they party liable is mentally deficient, or weak, or unable himself to dictate, let his guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her)
According to Radwan, the reason for the variations in the number of male and female witnesses required is given in the same verse. No reference is made to the inferiority or superiority of one gender's witness over the other. The only reason given is to corroborate the female's witness and prevent errors in the perception of business deals. The context of the verse relates to testimony on only financial transactions which are often complex and laden with business jargon. The Arabic term used in this passage, tadillah, literally means "loses the way", "gets confused", "errs". But are females the only gender that may err and need corroboration of their testimony?
Definitely not, but because Islam is keen to protect people's rights, and women at that time were not accustomed to business transactions -- because it was mainly a man's job -- the general rule of testimony in Islamic law is to have two witnesses even if they are both male.
Abdel-Moeti Bayoumi, a member of the Islamic Research Council (IRC), agrees with Radwan, adding that the corroboration of a woman's testimony by another woman who may be present ascertains accuracy and, hence, justice. It would be unreasonable to interpret this requirement as a reflection on the worth of a woman's testimony since it is the only exception discerned from the text of the Quran. This may be one reason why a scholar the likes of El-Tabari could not find any evidence in any primary text (Quran or hadith ) which would exclude women from something more important than testimony, being herself a judge who hears and evaluates the testimony of others.
Bayoumi added that unlike pure acts of worship, which must be observed exactly as taught by the prophet, testimony is a means to an end, ascertaining justice as a major objective of Islamic law. Therefore, it is the duty of a fair judge to be guided by this objective when assessing the worth and credibility of a given testimony regardless of the gender of the witness. "The witness of a female graduate of a business school is certainly far worthier than that of an illiterate person with no education or experience. On issues related to women's affairs, a woman's testimony is accepted even if it is given by only one woman," Bayoumi said.
Concerning a non-Muslim's testimony for or against a Muslim, past jurisprudent Imam Ahmed Ibn-Hanbal allows this when travelling, when a Muslim witness cannot be found. Imam Malik and Imam Shafei, however, do not accept it at all. Radwan argues that Imam Abu-Hanifah adopts the view that a non-Muslim's testimony for or against another non-Muslim is acceptable.
Imam Ibn Taymiyah is of the view that Imam Ahmed's acceptance of the testimony of a non-Muslim applies to all cases of necessity whether one is travelling or not. Therefore, the testimony of a non-Muslim is admissible in case there is no Muslim. If the case at hand is witnessed by two non-Muslim males, then their testimony is accepted. Radwan adds that both the Quran and Sunna do not identify the religion or gender of the witness. They state: "Of whoever you accept as a witness."
Radwan notes that a careful examination of Islamic philosophy on inheritance, as stipulated in the Quran, reveals that Islam takes into account certain considerations that assert the value of equality between people but which has been subjected to an erroneous, biased- focussed reading.
"While women inherit half the share of men in some cases," she explains, "in others they inherit an equal share, and sometimes even double the share of men, or more. Indeed, there are instances in which women are entitled to inherit while men are not."
Both Radwan and Bayoumi agree that Islam has allowed Muslim men to marry a Christian or Jewish woman, thus granting to both man and wife the same rights and duties. Why then should a woman not inherit her husband? Islam would not agree that a wife becomes destitute after her husband's death especially if she is unemployed.
Radwan says those who disagree with her share views based on what they believe to be the inferiority of Christians and Jews to Muslims. "This is totally against what Islam preaches, which is that there is no difference between people on the basis of gender, colour or religion," Radwan said.
Muslim Brotherhood MP Hamdi Zahran Hussein disagrees with Radwan, arguing that Islam does not accord non-Muslim relatives the right to inherit from a Muslim. When a Muslim dies, only his Muslim relatives have the right to inherit according to a predefined process. "If a Muslim would like to give some of his property to his non-Muslim relatives, it would be better if this were done during his lifetime. After death, his estate cannot be distributed to non-Muslims," Hussein said.
Hussein believes that People of the Book (Christians and Jews) are considered non- Muslims. "So, until and unless one believes in one creed of Allah, the Holy Quran is the only book of Islam and that Mohamed is the last messenger of Allah. As such, non- Muslims cannot benefit from an inheritance. But Hussein, seeking the approval of the IRC, left the door open. "If they agree, then I will agree."
Bayoumi said a 32-page paper conducted in this regard states that a woman's testimony is not half to that of a man and that the testimony of non-Muslims for or against a Muslim does not violate Islamic precepts. On the contrary, they coincide fully with Sharia since they preserve the principle of equality between man and woman. Regarding the issue of inheritance, "a Muslim is entitled to inherit a non-Muslim," Bayoumi said. "However, for a non-Muslim to inherit a Muslim will still have to be thoroughly researched before reaching a definite conclusion. Within the next few days a final decision will be reached."
Radwan called the issue of non-Muslims inheriting Muslims debatable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)