fatwa, two more articles

A reprehensible "verdict" from hindu

"The fatwa of the Islamic seminary, Darul Uloom Deoband, asking a Muslim woman, who was allegedly raped by her father-in-law, not to live with her husband calls into question the fundamental principles of human dignity and freedom enshrined in the Constitution. By invoking antiquated religious codes, the fatwa in effect punishes the victim, Imrana of Muzaffarnagar, and provides an escape route to the alleged offender, Ali Mohammed, who is currently in police custody. Quite astonishingly, the religious edict allowed rape, one of the most heinous crimes, to annul a legally valid 10-year-old marriage. Actually, the muftis of Deoband asked Imrana to live with her father-in-law, citing the Shariat in support of their decree. Imrana's husband, Noor Ilahi, wants to continue to live with her, but the muftis of the religious seminary have thrown the Shariat at them. The societal pressures on her are such that she has stated she would abide by the "religious laws" even if the fatwa has no force in law. Indeed, Imrana is now being prodded to withdraw the rape complaint and to dilute the charge to "molestation" so that she does not have to separate from her husband and their five children."

Imrana and fatwa: This cruelty must stop from indian express(this one is really well written)

"the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has stated that the woman’s life could be in danger if she continues to live with her husband in defiance of the fatwa. One wonders whether the Taliban has taken over our country.
Let us be clear that the real issue in Imrana’s case is not about the enactment of an Uniform Civil Code."
...
"Suppose a law were passed in our country on the lines of the fatwa — namely that a woman who is raped by her father-in-law cannot upon pain of sanction be permitted to live with her husband even though the couple are keen to continue the marriage. Such a law would be struck down within minutes as unconstitutional. Can it make any difference if this kind of law is characterised as the personal law of a religion?"
...
"Take the case of Sati. This pernicious practice of burning or burying alive the widow along with the body of her deceased husband was justified by some on the ground that it formed an important part of Hindu religious traditions and was an ancient practice hallowed by time. Nonetheless, Parliament passed the Commission of Sati (Prevention Act) 1987 which prohibits and criminalises the practice of Sati and its glorification. The constitutionality of the Act was challenged and was rejected by the Supreme Court."
...
"The fatwa should not provide a pretext for the defamation of Islam. Nor should criticism of the fatwa be mischievously construed as an attack on that enlightened religion, any more than condemnation of Sati could be regarded as an attack on Hinduism. Religion as such has nothing to do with the crucial issue in Imrana’s case which is the horrendous violation of her basic human rights."