LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     23 May 2012

Your mp discussed marriage laws amendment bill in parliament

We read / discussed all comments from various sections of readers here. Now here is crest of discussion on Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill 2010 straight from your parliament only for yours truly.


Decide yourself are your MP’s on your side otherwise write to them with your views
J
 


Rising divorce rates are a reality in India
but some MPs are still calling it a western concept. They suggest mending it rather than ending it” .


Two weeks ago when the Rajya Sabha took up for discussion a Bill seeking the inclusion of "irretrievable breakdown of marriage" as grounds for divorce, the debate shone a light on our MPs' views on women, marriage and "Indian culture", some of which seem to belong to another century. The Marriage Laws (amendment) Bill, 2010, introduced by law minister Salman Khursheed saw three days of debate in the Upper House. The debate however did not conclude and an amended version will now be reintroduced. To be fair, the primary objection of many MPs was on the grounds that if divorce is made easier vulnerable women could be driven to destitution since financial safeguards for women are not codified in law but left to the discretion of judges.


"Effectively, if you put irretrievable breakdown without a financial support as a ground [for divorce], the inevitable consequence is going to be - as mostly women are the sufferers of a matrimonial breakdown - that once a husband uses [this] for a divorce, courts give conventional and very conservative maintenance amounts, " Leader of the Opposition and BJP MP Arun Jaitley said, leading the debate.


CPM MP Tapan Sen pointed out that unpaid domestic work was not recognised as valuable work, and, hence, women were treated as unequal. Until they are treated as financial equals of men, liberalising divorce was a bad idea, Sen said.
But as the DMK's Kanimozhi who supported the Bill pointed out, "Everybody seems to have assumed that no woman would want a divorce; in a marriage, no woman would want freedom; no woman cares for her liberty; no woman really bothers about how she is being treated. " Trinamool Congress MP Sukhendu Sekhar Roy also agreed that women were becoming more self-reliant and "no longer want to live at the mercy of their husbands", among the few voices that acknowledged the agency of women.


Far more problematic, though, was the argument of several MPs that divorce was "Western" and should be made more difficult. Jaitley was followed by his party colleague Najma Heptullah who began by saying "the Indian ethos is on family building, not on family breaking". Heptullah spent the next several minutes narrating long-winded personal anecdotes about the various weddings she had witnessed as well as stories from her own marriage to explain how things were now changing, women were becoming more independent and "so, naturally, there are differences within the families."


To explain the dangers of importing "Western" concepts, Heptullah turned to semantics: in English, she said, the word used was "daughter-in-law - kanoon ki beti", while in
India, a daughter-in-law was considered to be a daughter. While Heptullah made several substantive points about protection for vulnerable women, she went on to insist, "I don't think there is anything that is really irretrievable. Anything can be retrieved. "


BSP MP Brajesh Pathak insisted that Indian marriages were the happiest in the world and did not understand the need for the amendment. Moreover, the amendment would encourage "Western culture", he said. Men who had grown up in Western culture and were tempted by the bright lights of
Delhi, Mumbai and Lucknow would hurry to divorce their wives, he added. Pathak reiterated several times in his speech that when a woman gets married in India, she accepts her husband to be her Lord.



BJP MP Maya Singh criticized the government for expecting judges to give justice to women especially in rural areas, but went on to suggest that the government instead of bringing in this Bill, study why marriages were breaking up in the first place. She said that the Bill would encourage the "tendency of divorce".


Joining the "Save Indian Marriage" chorus was MP Achuthan of the CPI who said in his speech "In
India, the rate of divorce is increasing alarmingly. We have to do something to cement the bond of marriage as an institution. This proposed amendment on the contrary encourages divorce. "


Calling it "cultural suicide" that was influenced by "s*x and lust" BJP MP Rama Jois told the House, "I celebrated the golden jubilee of my marriage last year. In our culture, it is like this that the s*xual desire decreases but the relationship between husband and wife increases. " Jois warned that "the present legislation increases the desire to get divorce and ultimately it is ruinous to the family which is regarded as the fundamental unit of our society. "


Congress MP from Goa Shantaram Naik went for the cheap laugh, joking about marriages being made in "gardens and cinema halls" rather than heaven these days, quoting Hindi film song lyrics. "Shaadi se pehle kuch kuch hota hai aur shaadi ke baad kuch nahi hota hai, " Naik said, thoroughly amused by his own joke. Naik went on to express doubts over
whether TV serials led to divorce but supported the Bill.


By far the most shocking argument though came from Samajwadi Party MP Jaya Bachchan. Towards the end of a fairly meandering speech, Bachchan said, "I cannot imagine [how] a man and women who have a mentally or physically challenged child can ask for a divorce. I think they should never ask for a divorce... I think if a couple, despite having a child like this, asks for a divorce, they should be punished. They must be punished by not giving them divorce. "

 

Que. to Admin sahib:
Sire itna bold discussion toh mai bhi nahi karta yaha LCI mein fir meri hi post kyu delete kartey hai aap baar baar 



Learning

 7 Replies

bhima balla (none)     23 May 2012

The very same people it looks like are the ones who are responsible for the current state. Why? The Indian culture, hindu culture is not reflected in our laws.How can we expect any compatibility with laws when laws are alien to Indian culture. The entire act must be put under the microscope. MPs indeed are living in a different era. It is also interesting to note that male MPs still think women see husbands as lords and are still dependent on them for survival. Such medieval thinking and ignorance needs to be reeducated?

bhima balla (none)     23 May 2012

The problem is:

1) Hindu marriage act is not based on hindu principles.

2) The law makers looked at alien concepts an incorporated them because the British 'masters' told them so.

3) Being alien to our culture we have no idea how to fix problems arising out of the same and hence look again and again to the 'masters' for solutions. In other words we are not only imitating alien culture but also imitating their solution. It is like reverse engineering-it looks, feels etc like original.But since the concepts are not there even the flaws are copied.For solutions again they have to look at modifications in the original!

Rather a comprehensive review based on hindu ethos, hindu experience and hindu culture may solve the problems. Hindu culture is live and let live. It is of a balanced nature. It is based on the way things work-not the way we want it to work -which is the western way!

But the question is how many of them want, know and can incorporate the hindu culture and knowledge? British have told Indians that they are weak, stupid, barbarian, uncultured etc and they have to look to them to learn.This is firmly engrained in the population either consciously or subconsciously.

 Under Hinduism Women were equal -equal not in the sense that all fingers are equal-but in the sense they were considered as important as man in their own way. In other words they held their own.  The western concept of 'equal' is to break the fingers and make them equal!!! And our lawmakers want to look up to that? India has smart and intelligent people. We have to get not just educated, intelligent and smart people but those who have wisdom. Wisdom seems missing!

Women can attain 'equality' by being responsible for themselves and their family. No man would throw away a good woman-unless he is a fool! In that case she doesn't need him!

Vishwa (translator)     23 May 2012

Thank you Tajobs, for providing this cross-section of views. Incredible amount of bull**** All this makes me think we would be better off with an enlightened dictatorship rather than parliamentary democracy.

Nadeem Qureshi (Advocate/ nadeemqureshi1@gmail.com)     23 May 2012

agree with Mr. Vishwa


(Guest)

All MPs,MLAs give exam every five year but the stupid people(citizen of India) pass them.

It is not their mistake it is our mistake that we choose such educated/goondas leaders.

Gopal Krishna (Executive)     24 May 2012

OVER INTEREFERENCE OF POLICE AND LAWYERS ARE THE ROOT CAUSE FOR BREAK-UP OF MARRIAGES. ONCE UPON A TIME THERE WERE JOINT FAMILIES AND IF ANY MISTAKE DID BY EITHER BOY OR GIRL THE ELDERS USED TO SETTLE AND SOLVE THE PROBLEM. Simple eg every day we see in news (which is true) whenever a PROSTITUTE BROKER may be female or male  WAS CAUGHT BY POLICE, PLENTY OF YOUNG GIRLS ARE COMING IN FRONT OF MEDIA IN MASKS SAYING THIS AND THAT. Such girls who are are already habitutated for a IRRESPONSIBLE & LAZY LIFE  i.e. simple Having Sex and Getting Money for thier LUXRY needs.  DO YOU THINK SUCH GIRLS CAN CHANGE THEIR ATTITUDE AFTER THEIR MARRIAGE, absolutly NO then the best opportunity for the GIRLS AND HER PARENTS. Go to Police Station, call the boy for negotiation ( exortion of Mony by the way of settlement) if the girls mother or grand mother not satisfied then approach A ILLWICKED PROFEESIONAL (LAWYER)  and register the case.

 

OUR HN'BLE MP'S ( NAME SAKE PEOPLE'S REPRESENTATIVES ) AND HIGH LEVEL BUREAUCRATS & PROFESSIONALS DON'T KNOW THE PAIN OF THEIR ACTS because as of NOW NO CASE WAS REGISTERED AGAINST ANY M.P., MLA, MLC, HIGH LEVEL BUREAUCRAT OR A  PROFESSIONAL.

So they will simply prepare such laws and leave them on general public.

That's the reason small small countires developed a lot in the last 5 decades but we are still like this. OUR HN'BLE FINANCE MINISTER ONCE SAID INDIA IS 02ND LARGEST GOWING ECONOMY IN THE WORLD BUT IN INDIA YOU CAN SEE HUMAN BEINGS ALONG WITH DOGS STILLF IGHTING FOR THE THROWN FOOD WASTE FROM THE HOTELS.

 

Ahmet History (none)     11 July 2012

Learned sirs and ladies of this august audience.

 

I would like to know from your learned selves, what will be the status once  a divorce is granted by the court, and the ex spouse (male) re marries under the amended Hindu Marriage act or Special Marriage act. Then does the ex spouse have the same right ? Since the new spouse already has the right on the marital home (and that the ex wife has not demanded any right in the marital home). 

Presumption for the above premise is that the divorce was applied by Mutual Consent.

 

Do advise please.

Regards

Ahmet.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Related Threads


Loading