The narrowness of Muslim personal law: practices of legal harmonization in a Delhi family court

C. Larouche, Katherine Lemons
{"title":"The narrowness of Muslim personal law: practices of legal harmonization in a Delhi family court","authors":"C. Larouche, Katherine Lemons","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2020.1840770","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Postcolonial Indian politics have been punctuated by major debates about Muslim personal law: the law and case precedent that applies to Muslims in matters of marriage, divorce, adoption, succession, and inheritance. These debates ask whether gender equality for members of all religious communities can be achieved in a religiously differentiated legal system. While some argue that a uniform civil code would be the critical mechanism to protect women’s rights, we suggest that Muslim personal law in fact plays a marginal role in family courts, where shared statutes already hold a much more significant place. Based on a mixed-methods analysis of cases from a New Delhi Family court, we demonstrate that Muslim women almost exclusively file cases under common, non-religious laws, and that the few cases filed specifically under Muslim personal law are often adjudicated on the basis of a combination of laws rather than on Muslim law alone. Yet, our findings also confirm that Muslims are only marginally present in state courts, and mostly use other means to adjudicate family disputes. This situation pushes against the idea that the “harmonization” of religious personal laws is sufficient to understand the legal complexities confronting minority women.","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2020.1840770","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract Postcolonial Indian politics have been punctuated by major debates about Muslim personal law: the law and case precedent that applies to Muslims in matters of marriage, divorce, adoption, succession, and inheritance. These debates ask whether gender equality for members of all religious communities can be achieved in a religiously differentiated legal system. While some argue that a uniform civil code would be the critical mechanism to protect women’s rights, we suggest that Muslim personal law in fact plays a marginal role in family courts, where shared statutes already hold a much more significant place. Based on a mixed-methods analysis of cases from a New Delhi Family court, we demonstrate that Muslim women almost exclusively file cases under common, non-religious laws, and that the few cases filed specifically under Muslim personal law are often adjudicated on the basis of a combination of laws rather than on Muslim law alone. Yet, our findings also confirm that Muslims are only marginally present in state courts, and mostly use other means to adjudicate family disputes. This situation pushes against the idea that the “harmonization” of religious personal laws is sufficient to understand the legal complexities confronting minority women.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
穆斯林属人法的狭隘性:德里一家家事法庭的法律协调实践
后殖民时期的印度政治一直被关于穆斯林属人法的重大辩论所打断:穆斯林在结婚、离婚、收养、继承和继承等问题上适用的法律和判例。这些辩论的问题是,在一个有宗教差别的法律体系中,所有宗教团体成员的性别平等能否实现。虽然有些人认为,统一的民法典将是保护妇女权利的关键机制,但我们认为,穆斯林的属人法实际上在家庭法庭中起着边缘作用,在家庭法庭中,共同的成文法已经占据了更重要的地位。基于对新德里家庭法院案件的混合方法分析,我们证明了穆斯林妇女几乎完全根据普通的非宗教法律提起诉讼,并且少数专门根据穆斯林属人法提起诉讼的案件往往根据组合法律而不是单独根据穆斯林法进行裁决。然而,我们的调查结果也证实,穆斯林在州法院只占少数,而且大多使用其他方式来裁决家庭纠纷。这种情况与宗教属人法的“协调”足以理解少数民族妇女面临的法律复杂性的想法背道而驰。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: As the pioneering journal in this field The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law (JLP) has a long history of publishing leading scholarship in the area of legal anthropology and legal pluralism and is the only international journal dedicated to the analysis of legal pluralism. It is a refereed scholarly journal with a genuinely global reach, publishing both empirical and theoretical contributions from a variety of disciplines, including (but not restricted to) Anthropology, Legal Studies, Development Studies and interdisciplinary studies. The JLP is devoted to scholarly writing and works that further current debates in the field of legal pluralism and to disseminating new and emerging findings from fieldwork. The Journal welcomes papers that make original contributions to understanding any aspect of legal pluralism and unofficial law, anywhere in the world, both in historic and contemporary contexts. We invite high-quality, original submissions that engage with this purpose.
期刊最新文献
Construing the transformed property paradigm of South Africa’s water law: new opportunities presented by legal pluralism? Wait, what are we fighting about? – Kelsen, Ehrlich and the reconciliation of normative jurisprudence and sociology of law Interview article: water movements’ defense of the right to water. From the European arena to the Dutch exception Scientific versus folk legal pluralism An exploration of legal pluralism, power and custom in South Africa. A conversation with Aninka Claassens
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1