Do you really take the argument of confused seriously? If separate muslim law is the reason for what happened in that village, Hindu women shouldn’t be facing any abuses. So, Uniform civil code is a fake Hindutva propaganda.
I don’t think that the crime of rape happened because of MPL but the treatment of the women after the rape is because of that. Her not being able to live with the husband even though the husband wants her to stay with him is sad.
Even Hindu women suffer and there are hindu laws that discriminate against women. Even those laws will have to be done away with.
Uniform Civil Code does not mean Hindu law to me.
As for discrimination against women, it happens even in countries that have UCL. The difference is of degree.
The panchayats are no doubt like what you said. Everywhere it is the same story. Look at the recent incident of a dalit victim. It was ordered by the panchaat.
In this particular case I thought that the idea that the woman cannot live with her husband once raped came from the islamic justice aspect. Correct me if I am wrong and I will take out the islamic justice tag from the post.
[…] Regarding the Imrana case and as Polite Indian feels that it was a flaw of Islamic laws, i have this (These are the words of Dr. Zafarul-Islam Khan) In this particular case, we had two problems. One: the media deliberately distorted the verdict of a village council (panchayat) as “Shariat Panchayat” which was a lie and caused a lot of uproar and problems here because that verdict ordered the alleged victim to marry her father-in-law: a patently wrong and insulting advice. The other problem was with the Hanafi fiqh which surfaced because of this incident. In some of their old books it is said that even zina (rape) is like marraige and it invalidates the marriage of a son whose wife is “raped” by his own father. This interpretation is peculiar to the Hanafi fiqh where a crime (haram) is considered enough to invilidate a solid contract like marriage while in the Quran the words used are “la tankihoo ma nakaha aabaokum” where “nakaha” can mean only marriage and not a crime like rape whose perpetrator has to be punished if the crime is proved. This problem with the Hanafi fiqh will not go away as our mutis and scholars are very rigid. But at the same time people from their own ranks have called for ijtihad in such matter where no clear text from the Quran or Hadith supports such a view. Ulama of other masalik have spoken out against this opinion. […]
[…] Polite Indian wants to have a sane discussion on the “Uniform Civil Code” issue. I thought I will put forward my views here. Since I am addressing everyone including the Hindutva goons here, I cannot have what Polite Indian refers to as sane debate. I will use my usual Hindutva bashing style to put forward my views. […]