Much has been said about Quaid’s vision of Pakistan but unfortunately, less has been done to steer the land of the pious towards the path conceived for it by its founder. One of the biggest reasons behind Quaid’s trepidation over the idea of a united India was his fear that the rights of the Muslim minority would remain unprotected. A much detailed understanding of Quaid’s role during the movement for independence can depict him as an advocate of the rights of oppressed classes. He advocated the rights of “oppressed” Indians in British India, he cherished the political rights of a Muslim minority when he feared that they might get “oppressed” by a hostile majority. Had he lived in the state he founded, he would have done the same for the rights of minorities living in this country.
There are more than 4 million Christians living within the borders of Pakistan. It is surreal to believe that a minority of this handsome size wouldn’t depend on the state to make laws for them governing their social life. The Christian marriage and divorce acts are the ones that were promulgated during the colonial rule: Christian Divorce Act 1869, and Christian Marriage Act 1872. Section 10 of the former act elaborates upon the procedure for the dissolution of marriage. The benighted law gives the male partner no option except to accuse his wife of adultery in order to file for divorce. This roughshod law also requires to nominate a person as “respondent” with whom his wife has allegedly committed adultery unless he names her as a prostitute.
The only relief was given in section 7 of the act, which allows the court to act nearly upon the principles of English Divorce Courts. This section was struck down by Federal Laws (Revision and Declaration) Ordinance, 1981; only to be restored by a decision of Lahore High Court in 2017. While marriage is a social contract and there always remains a possibility of its dissolution in the case of abuse of this contract by any party, efforts should be made to make the process easy less tiresome rather than making it convoluted and obscure.
There always exist more dignified reasons for divorce than accuse the female partner of adultery. The Matrimonial Clauses Act, 1973 in England specifies “unreasonable behavior” as one of the reasons available to file for divorce. The Indian Parliament, although falling short of justifying the Indian claim of being a secular republic, has also taken a positive step and amended the act in 2001. Although section 7 of the act has been omitted, section 10 has been amended in a way that it gives both the parties among other “cruelty” as a reason for divorce if that has caused a “reasonable apprehension” in the mind of the petitioner that the continuation of the marital contact can be “injurious or harmful” to him or her. Moreover, the insertion of Section 10-A gives both partners the right to file for divorce by mutual consent.
The Pakistani state has worked to replace old laws and bring them in conformity with the standards of modern times e.g. The Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 and the Hindu Marriage Act, 2017. An effort to update the decrepit law of Christian divorce in the form of Christian Marriage and Divorce Bill 2019 has become lost owing to feuds between two ministries: Human Rights and Law and Justice. A rift also exists between conservative Catholic clergy, which argues that the law shouldn’t be changed in light of Christian religious instructions (although no objection was made by Christian clergy on the Act prior to 1981) and a group led by Bishop Peter Jacob which is in favor of progressive laws.
It is now the duty of both aforementioned ministries to not balk when the process has almost been completed and already approved by the federal cabinet in August 2019. The Ministry of Human Rights can play the role of an arbitrator in order to negotiate the terms of the bill between progressive elements and conservative clergy. It is the duty of the state to ensconce minorities by catering to their needs and the efficacy of any parliament depends upon its ability to aptly answer the needs of an ever-changing and evolving world. To sum up: shredding off this discriminatory and outdated law as early as possible is a Hobson’s choice for Pakistan.
The writer is a graduate from the Forman Christian College University with majors in Psychology and Political Science.