Wonders never cease. Suddenly, hard-as-nails maulanas, who had declared that the Shariat was immutable, dismissed the demand for maintenance to divorced wives with a curt “we don’t pay service charges”, and decried the fuss about instant talaq as a non-issue, are endorsing a standard nikahnama which makes talaq conditional, and proclaiming that Islam is a flexible religion, in which the only immutable component is the Koran. It has taken a long time. In 1994, shaken by the 92-93 riots and faced with yet another controversy on the validity of instant talaq, a group of Mumbai Muslims started working on a model nikahnama, or marriage contract. Their aim was to ensure that the wife got the rights guaranteed by the Koran, but denied to her under the Indian version of Muslim Personal Law. They were a diverse lot: an ex-judge, senior lawyers, a qazi, academics and activists, all rooted in their community, two of them even members of the Muslim Personal Law Board. The group took pains to draw upon nikahnamas already existing among various sects, and involve respected ulema in the framing process so that all possible religious objections could be countered. Getting ulema to discuss the Shariat with Muslim women who didn’t wear purdah (except one) wasn’t easy. But the women found the ulema more than co-operative, once they were convinced about the group’s Islamic bona fides. This entire time-consuming and delicate exercise was conducted without the media getting wind of it. Even a single sensational headline on triple talaq would have triggered off a defensive wall, blocking access to the entity the group hoped to reach: the Muslim Personal Law Board. Once the Board publicly endorsed the nikahnama, it would be easier for the qazis, who perform marriages, and the imams, who deliver Friday sermons, to push it. When it was finally ready, the nikahnama was a truly inspiring document, which not only broke the impasse on Muslim Personal Law created by the fallout of the 1985 Shah Bano judgment, but also resolved all contentious issues: polygamy, talaq, mehr and maintenance, without deviating from the Koran. In its long journey to its destination, it had been sent to over 1,000 ulema, approved by the Aligarh-based Fiqah Academy, had its approval challenged, presented wherever Muslim women had converged. All these years, this nikahnama has been discussed at every important meet of the Board at the exhortation of its women members. Yet, when the Board meets on Sunday, the document they will hopefully ratify won’t be the 1994 nikahnama, but one drafted by the Board itself. Why wasn’t the ’94 nikahnama accepted? The reasons range from the dominating presence of women among the framers, to the threats it posed to the prerogatives taken for granted by Muslim men, simply by treating women as the Koran had ordained: as human beings with human rights. Some ulema insisted that instant talaq — howsoever deplorable — remained a valid form of divorce; others feared that delegating to women the right to divorce would make them licentious; yet others declared that the right to marry again could not be made conditional. Then there was the practical difficulty: how could subjects such as divorce and polygamy be discussed while entering into a marriage? The girl’s family could not mention such matters, and the boy’s family never would. Ironically, the one man convinced that the nikahnama’s time had come, was its chief from 2000-2002: Maulana Mujahidul Islam Qasimi. Pessimistic about it being approved by everyone, he advised the group to start using it. But without the Board’s official approval, nobody was ready to bell the cat. How is it then that the Board has itself come out with a nikahnama which includes two of the most controversial points: replacing instant talaq with the phased-out consultative procedure advised by the Koran, and giving women the right to divorce without losing their mehr, albeit through a qazi? The catalysts for this change have been many: the 1998 meeting with the National Commission of Women, of which Syeda Hameed was a member; the spate of judgments upholding the rights of Muslim wives; and last year’s debate over a Uniform Civil Code in which, for the first time, mainstream Muslim men asked for reform. But none of these would have worked had one long awaited development not taken place: the ordinary Muslim woman had at last gained the confidence to be vocal about her rights. Now, the usual suspects have already started making the expected noises against the nikahnama. Even if the Board caves in once again, Muslim women will ensure the retreat won’t last too long.
