17 August, 2022


MMDA – The Bat In The Belfry: Popular Fallacy Or Collective Delusion

By Ruwan Laknath Jayakody and Faizer Shaheid

The Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act (MMDA), No. 13 of 1951, has rightfully come under fire lately for being patriarchal, and in relation to certain issues such as child marriage, even reprehensible. The patriarchy is so deeply rooted that no female is entitled to become a Quazi or a Registrar of Marriages. It gets even worse with further issues pertaining to underage marriage and the lack of written consent of/from the bride in a marriage.

Although the pressure for change has mounted only recently, the issue itself is nothing new. Many have claimed that Sri Lanka is caving into pressure applied by the United Nations. However, the issues have been taken up from nearly 50 years ago. It is well documented that one Dr. H.M.Z. Farouque led a committee for reforms in the 1970s, and a committee led by one Dr. Shahabdeen was set up in the 1990s to look into the shortfalls. More recently, the committee led by retired Supreme Court Judge, Justice President’s Counsel (PC) Saleem Marsoof, is on the verge of finalizing and presenting its report on reforms to the MMDA, supposedly on May 21 this year.

This article seeks to deal with Sections 1 to 26 of the MMDA and address some of the issues from a legal standpoint.

The Applicability of the Law

Section 2 of the Act (Section 16 too is linked to this) holds that the provisions of the MMDA apply solely to Muslims living in the country. This provision coupled with the fact that the Marriage Registration Ordinance in its preamble provides an exemption in the case of Muslim marriages, means that all Muslims wishing to enter into marriage are not afforded any choice with regard to the applicability of the law. The application of an Act of such a nature and of such intended purpose cannot be of an involuntary nature in terms of its application.

That said, it is a generally held opinion among certain lawyers who also happen to be Muslims (the authors spoke to Attorney-at-Law Noordeen Mohamed Shaheid) that Muslims marrying fellow Muslims (a marriage between two Muslims) can only do so under the MMDA and must compulsorily be registered under the MMDA. They hold that Muslims marrying non-Muslims however have one alternate albeit unattractive option afforded to them. This is that they can marry under the Marriage Registration Ordinance subject to one condition, the condition being that one has to declare oneself in the eyes of the mosque and the Muslim clergy as an apostate. They claim that marrying under any other law is not permitted unless such a person openly declares himself/herself to be apostate. According to them, in the event a fellow citizen objects to an attempt by a Muslim to marry a non-Muslim under the said Ordinance, the Muslim in question has no other option other than to marry under the MMDA. However, a certain other section of the legal community who also happen to be Muslims (the authors spoke to M.U.M. Ali Sabry PC) opine that a Muslim has a choice with regard to the applicability of the law in that s/he can choose to marry a Muslim or a non-Muslim under the MMDA or the Ordinance and therefore that the marrying under the Muslim personal law is only optional. Can two Muslims marry under the Ordinance?

How it applies voluntarily the authors cannot comprehend, as the language used in both enactments is fairly clear in that the marriages of and contracted among Muslims are regulated by the MMDA. Perhaps it is possible that the courtrooms have interpreted the law differently.

In the absence of laws governing religious conversions or anti-conversion, except in the instances of bigamy and polygamy (see the provisions in the Penal Code in this regard {Section 362B of which deals with bigamy} and the Supreme Court’s decision in Natalie Abeysundere v Christopher Abeysundere and Another which overruled the Privy Council’s ruling in Attorney General v Reid), a question arises over what is the exact nature of the conversion that takes place when a non-Muslim enters into a marriage with a Muslim or vice-versa. By virtue of Section 2 of the Act, does the non-Muslim entering into a marriage (where the registration is considered valid in law) with a Muslim automatically become a Muslim in the eyes of the law while retaining one’s non-Islamic faith on a purely personal level or is it to be understood that for all intents and purposes one is seen as having converted to Islam in both the law (legally speaking) and/or in one’s private capacity. In the case of a marriage contracted under the said Act, can a non-Muslim married to a Muslim, remain in the letter of the law, a non-Muslim? Article 10 of the Constitution recognizes the freedom of thought, conscience and religion while the right to equality provision in Article 12 guarantees freedom from discrimination on the basis of religion. Furthermore, Article 14(1)(e) allows for the manifestation of one’s religion or belief. These Articles found in the supreme law of the land, despite the exemption provided for personal laws under Article 16(1), can be considered as being violated due to the provision in Section 2.

The Strange Case of the Male Muslim Quazi

From Section 3 onwards, till Section 27, all references in the Act with regard to the Registrar-General who is also the Chairman of The Muslim Marriage and Divorce Advisory Board, the Deputy Registrar General, the Assistant Registrar General, the District Registrars, the Additional District Registrars, the members of The Muslim Marriage and Divorce Advisory Board, the Registrars of Muslim Marriages, the special registrars, the walis (custodian of the bride), the Quazis (a judge with regard to marriage and divorce related matters), the temporary Quazis, the special Quazis and the Board of Quazis, are in relation to them being ‘male’ Muslims. This is patriarchy at its worst. Once again the constitutionally enshrined right to equality and non-discrimination, the latter in this case on the grounds of one’s sex, applies. Also, Article 14(1)(g) provides for the freedom to engage in any lawful occupation or profession. Not just men but females too who are deemed to possess merit in relation to their capability with regard to carrying out of the functions of these offices must be permitted by law to do so.

Under Islamic principles, the general conception is that women are not entitled to be judges or leaders. The citation is obtained from the scriptures, and in particular a hadith as narrated by Imam Bukhari (4425) that reads, ‘It was narrated by Abu Bakrah that when the Messenger of Allah had heard that the people of Persia had appointed the daughter of Chosroes II as their ruler, he had said that, “No people will ever prosper who appoint a woman in charge of their affairs”.’

This is supported in Verse 228 of Surah Al-Baqarah in the Quran, ‘but men have a degree (of responsibility) over them’. Scholars have indicated other verses that support this stand. However, there have been other scholars who have debated the authenticity of the said hadith and claim that the verse has been misinterpreted. They claim that Abu Bakrah made the hadith at a time when he had participated in the Battle of the Camel where Aisha was the commander of the army. Had the hadith been legitimate, he would not have participated under her leadership, they claim. The scholars also argue that that Verse 228 of Surah Al-Baqarah does not claim the superiority of men over women, but rather speaks of the responsibility to protect women.

Further to this, there are citations of the wives of the prophet being in eminent positions, such as that of Khadijah who was a successful business person for whom even the prophet had worked for. Furthermore, the prophet had consulted his wife, Umm Salama prior to signing the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, and she was also present during the signing. Other citations include a hadith in Sunan Abu Dawood where the prophet allowed a female to lead a prayer where the mu’addhin was a male.

“Umm Waraqah wanted to accompany the prophet to the Battle of Badr, but the prophet told her to stay in her home.” Further in this hadith it is said that the prophet used to visit her in her home. He appointed a person to give adhan for her and he told her to lead the prayer for the people of her house. Abdur Rahman ibn/bin Khallad (the reporter of this hadith) said that, “I saw her mu’addhin who was a very old man.”

It is of more relevance that Verse 71 of the Surah At-Tawbah refers to equality of men and women in being guardians of one another: “The believers, both men and women, they are guardians, confidants, and helpers of one another…”.

If one were to review the history of Islam, even during the time of the prophet, women were known to have played prominent roles in leadership. Hind bint Utbah is the daughter of Utbah Bin Rabi’ah and wife of Abu Sufyan ibn Habh and mother of Mu’aviyah. She along with her father, husband and son were all prominent leaders. Her role, together with that of Asma’ Bint Abu Bakr, was instrumental in the victory of the Muslims in the Battle of Yarmouk where the Muslims were greatly outnumbered by the Romans.

Aisha, one of the wives of the prophet also played a prominent role throughout the life of the prophet and even after. Yet, there were no qualms or complaints against her leadership in the Battle of the Camel. Therefore, it is rather abhorrent to claim that women are forbidden to take up positions of leadership in Islam, Muslim societies and any other society for that matter.

The Fit Quazi

Beyond Section 8 of the Act, in relation to various appointments of persons made under the Act, there are several mentions made of the use of criteria such as “fit and proper” and in the case of the appointments of Quazis, the prerequisite being that the person be “of good character and position and of suitable attainments”, which form the basis for such appointments. These notions while being both, ambiguous and vague, are also wholly insufficient and unsuited for the purpose. Above all, a thorough knowledge of the applicable and relevant laws of the land in this regard is a must.

Overfamiliarity with one’s denizens that may result from lengthy stays within one area, creates a propensity for abuses of power to occur. Therefore, it is urged that the Judicial Service Commission considers the transfers of Quazis. Whether they should be annual or otherwise (another timeframe) can be left at the discretion of the Commission. This is applied in relation to other positions in the country such as grama niladharis and divisional secretaries among others including members of the minor judiciary (magistrates and judges among them).

The Registration of Marriage

Following Part I of the Act which dealt with preliminary matters (which began with Section 3 and ended with Section 15), comes Part II which deals with the registration of marriages.

Regarding the matter of causing the registration of a marriage, as dealt with under Section 17(2) of the Act, the wali, usually a representative of the bride, signs on her behalf. However, the law does not expressly call for the bride’s consent through a signature. Her supposed consent is communicated by the wali, who is usually her father or her paternal grandfather. The only instance where the signature of the bride is required is if the wali is someone other than her father or her paternal grandfather, in which case, a declaration must be adduced.

The authors suggest that a female too should be allowed to be a wali. However, in the event that the dispensing of the services of the wali is not considered by the law and policymakers, it can be suggested that if the bride requires a wali, so too shall the bridegroom be required to have one. If it must be that the bride requires a wali, it would ideally be suited if the bridegroom too is represented by a wali. If it sounds unfair, then it is unfair for the bride too.

The wali, whether s/he be a member of the bride’s immediate family (a blood relative) or a distant relation, whether required by the Muslim law governing the particular sect to which the bride belongs to or not, cannot be understood to legally constitute a substitute for the bride under any circumstance. Under no circumstances should another be permitted to substitute for the bride in a marriage. The marriage is between two persons, legal, forming a part of a binding contract, where both parties must have expressly expressed their desire to spend their lives together as a family. The bride not only has to provide in person both, verbal (mere verbal consent communicated via someone other than the bride will not suffice) and written consent to the marriage with the bridegroom but also has to mandatorily place one’s signature on the relevant documents before witnesses (again only if the bride consents).

One may once again interpret Verse 71 of Surah At-Tawbah in this light: ‘The believers, both men and women, they are guardians, confidants, and helpers of one another…’. Men and women are ‘wali, or in plural, ‘auliya’ of one another.

The Hanafi school of thought recognizes that a marriage can take place without a wali. The idea is that the marriage of a free and sane adult woman is possible without the approval of a guardian provided that the one she is marrying is a legal and suited match to her.

It is also reported in Sahih Al-Bukhari (7:67) where the prophet said that, “A matron should not be given in marriage except after consulting her; and a virgin should not be given in marriage except after her permission.” The people asked, “O allah’s apostle! How can we know her permission?.” He said, “Her silence (indicates her permission).”

However, going by this hadith, a woman can communicate her lack of consent by expressly stating her lack of desire for the marriage. The problem is, under the MMDA, the entire process of registration takes place without the bride. Hence, there is no way of identifying whether the bride approves or disapproves of the marriage.

Section 17 (2) of the Act is also linked to Section 47(2), the latter which deals with cases where a Quazi may inquire into and deal with any complaint made against a wali by a woman or on behalf of a woman, when it is perceived that the said wali has unreasonably withheld his consent to the said woman’s marriage. Once again it must be reiterated that the position of the authors is that adult females of sound {medico-legally} mind too can be walis. The question to be raised here however is what would happen to the woman if the wali were to unreasonably give his/her consent. This is precisely why it is insisted upon that the bride be (made) an equal partner in terms of participation in the processes involved with entering into the bond and contract of marriage and the bride’s legal role be thus recognized in the relevant provisions of the laws.

As far as Section 18(3) is concerned, the prescribed fee which is to be paid in the form of stamps, could be supplied by the bridegroom or the bride or by both parties.

In Islamic precepts however, the iddah period is recognized in law. Verse 228 of Surah Al-Baqarah states: ‘And divorced women shall wait (as regards their marriage) for three menstrual periods’. For those who don’t have menstrual periods due to being either too young or too old, Verse 4 of Surah At-Talaq reads: “And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the ‘Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses (i.e. they are still immature) their Iddah is three months likewise…’”

However, this imposes a question mark on the status of the iddah of a man upon divorce. The general consensus in Islam is there is not. This is the religious ruling despite being contrary to human rights.

The iddat period mentioned in Section 22, which is applicable only to women (applicable following the spouse’s death or following divorce; the time period varies), from a human rights perspective constitutes a case of cultural relativism (aside to the many instances of such in the Act) and aside to this can be considered as a violation of the freedom of thought, conscience and religion (in the case of religion, interpretation of religious texts, as to their sacred and profane nature, is a subjective matter), and the right to equality and non-discrimination (on the basis of religion and sex), Article 14(1)(c) which enshrines the freedom of association, the previously mentioned Article 14(1)(e), Article 14(1)(f) to enjoy and promote by oneself and/or with others, one’s culture, and also the freedom of movement as guaranteed in Article 14(1)(h).

The Marriageable Girl Child

Section 23 of the Act does not set a minimum age of marriage for a girl. It imposes a restriction at the age of 12 years, where the girl child can be married off by the wali without the consent of a Quazi. This is a violation of a multitude of rights including sexual and reproductive rights, marriage and family, education, health, social security, an adequate standard of living, choice, liberty and freedom from child labour, to name just a few.

It is even worse that the age restriction is nothing more than a restriction, as the MMDA continues stating that if the girl is below the age of 12 years, she may be married off with the consent of a Quazi. The description of Section 23 reads “Marriage of girl who has not attained the age of twelve not to be registered without Quazi’s permission.”, while the provision in Section 23 stipulates that this is applicable “Notwithstanding anything in section 17.” All that is required then for the marriage of a girl below 12 years of age is for the Quazi for the area in which the girl in question resides, to conduct such inquiry as he may deem necessary, prior to authorizing the said marriage. Therefore, although unlikely to happen, it is quite possible under this law for a father or any other person with the entitlement of a wali to dispense of their toddler daughters who can barely crawl to another.

Of course, in Sri Lanka this is unlikely to happen. The lack of exact, precise and current statistics proves to be an unworthy indication of whether or not the practice exists in the country, but the law should not even contain the slightest hint of the possibility of such a situation arising. The practice of marrying off younger girls was a common practice in the past even in Sri Lanka, and continues as a practice in India and even in some of the Middle Eastern countries, where the father holds absolute control of and over his daughters. More often, the daughters are given in marriage to rich old men who tend to help a family from their financial predicaments. For a girl, this could be an equivalent to bonded labour where a child is sold into slavery as chattel.

Furthermore, Section 363 of the Penal Code recognizes as a criminal offence (statutory rape) sexual intercourse with an unmarried female below the age of 16 years, regardless of whether the said female consented or not. However, it also serves an exception to the rule if the female was above the age of 12 years and married under Muslim law. Incidentally, this provision also serves as a reminder that marital rape too must be criminalized. It is highly recommended that the minimum age of marriage for both, males and females, must be set at 18 years, without exceptions in the general and in the personal laws.

With regard to the minimum age of marriage, many scholars have proffered that Islam does not prescribe a minimum age of marriage and therefore the law should not either. They often cite the case of Aisha who was claimed to be merely nine years of age when the prophet consummated her marriage. This is derived from a hadith of Sahih Bukhari referenced in 3896: ‘Narrated Hisham’s father: Khadijah died three years before the prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consummated that marriage when she was nine years old.’

This among others has been cited as evidence of the prophet’s marriage to Aisha being lower than ordinary. However, there have been various misconceptions about her age, and it is possible that the hadith is inaccurate. It has been a topic of extensive debate over the years, considering that she had married the prophet nine years prior to his demise and quoted over 2200 hadiths, the latter being taken as indicative of her level of intellect, along with many other reasons that have been cited as examples to prove wrong the age of her marriage. The issue remains contentious.

However, the fact that Islam does not prescribe an age of marriage does not necessary mean it prohibits prescribing a minimum age of marriage. In various verses in the Quran, it is mentioned that the male and female must reach their age of full strength, and in other verses it speaks of the age of marriage as being the age of sound judgement.

Verse 22 of Surah Al-Haj states that, “We bring you out as a child, and then [We develop you] that you may reach your [time of] maturity”. Maturity in this case has been interpreted to mean the age of puberty by some scholars, while others have claimed that this refers to an age where a girl is wise enough to make decisions.

The Surah An-Nisa which speaks on the topic of women, in Verse 25, speaks of the marrying of a “young woman” and not a girl. The reference to a “woman” in this verse is indicatory of the fact that the female should have attained an age where she is capable of making firm and wise decisions for herself.

However, Verse 4 of Surah At-Talaq, may once more be of significance and has been referenced to justify child marriage in Islam. The Verse is on the iddah period for a woman upon divorce, but it also makes reference to women who have not menstruated. The verse is as follows: “And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women – if you doubt, then their period is three months, and [also for] those who have not menstruated. And for those who are pregnant, their term is until they give birth. And whoever fears allah – he will make for him of his matter ease”. This Verse can also be interpreted to mean that it covers women who have failed to menstruate in their lives, or barren women.

Bigamy and Polygamy

It is set down in Section 24(1) that if a married male Muslim living with or maintaining one or more wives intends to contract another marriage, at least 30 days prior to contracting the said marriage, the first person to whom he should give notice with regard to his intention is to the Quazi of the area in which he resides and to the Quazi or Quazis of the area in which his wife resides or each of his wives reside and to the Quazi for the area in which the wife-to-be resides. Rightfully, if one condones bigamy and polygamy, it is to the existing wife or wives that initial notice must be given before anyone else. Females are not afforded the same privilege afforded males and therefore in that sense this constitutes a violation of equality and non-discrimination.

Polygamy is justified as according to the Quran in Verse 2 of Surah An-Niaa: “And if you fear that you may not be just to the orphans, then you may marry whom you please of the women: two, and three, and four. But if you fear you will not be fair, then only one, or what your right hand possesses. This is best that you do not face financial hardship.”

Neither the Quran nor the Sunnah appears to provide evidence regarding the requirement of consent of the first wife in the marriage of a subsequent wife. Therefore, it is derived through ijma that there is no requirement of the consent of the first wife in Islam.


The authors will address matters pertaining to Section 27 of the Act and onwards in the next article on the subject. It is important to realize that when one marries another human being, it is a human being that one marries and not a religion or a culture (baggage), although religion and culture may be integral aspects, components or parts of the marriage equation. The latter however does not amount to the sum of the parts. On a concluding note, based on the above analysis of the Sections of the Act and the provisions, the said law in its present garb is highly repressive of the inalienable sovereignty afforded to all including females and the right to self-determination of all including females in relation to and with regard to the integrity of one’s terra firma and terra incognita, of one’s body and mind, both of which compose the realm of the ‘personal and the private’.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 2

    Women’s point of view.


    Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great. (34)

    • 7

      Ruwan Laknath Jayakody and Faizer Shaheid

      RE: MMDA

      (299 Words)

      “The Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act (MMDA), No. 13 of 1951,…. has ….The patriarchy is so deeply rooted that no female is entitled to become a Quazi or a Registrar of Marriages. It gets even worse with further issues pertaining to underage marriage and the lack of written consent of/from the bride in a marriage.”

      Has the situation changed today?

      Do the Ulama still lack knowledge today as they did 1,200 years ago?

      Are the masses still ignorant today as they were 1,200 years ago?

      Are the philosophers still knowledgeable today, as they were knowledgeable 1,200 years ago?

      Please read up on Al-Kindi ans Ibn Rushd Averroes, from 1,200 to 900 years ago.

      Rushd Only the learned can understand the “Precious Book”, The Quran, the Book of knowledge. The learned are the Philosophers.

      The Theologians, Ulama are litertalists, do not understand, because they are not learned. All your narration about the deficiencies of the Ulama have been observed 1,000 years and only the philosophers can.

      So what did the Ulama do? Get the authorities to burn the Philosophy books. This happened to Ibn Rushd’s books.

      Unfortunately only a fraction of the Muslim men, understand the real issues and the knowledge contained in the “Precious Book”, the Quran, per Ibn Rushd.

      Al-Kindi, accused the Hanabalites and other traditionalists, of graft and social ambition. For they assume the posture of genuine seekers of truth, he writes, “simply defend.the positions of pre-eminence on society, as a means of gaining ascendancy or trafficking in religion:whereas they are devoid of religion altogether”

      This description perfectly fits the current Ulama of ACJU, and Muslim girls and women should be included as well for protection, without being treated like chattel, as per the Ulama of ACJU.

    • 6


      For an argument sake, let us accept men are in charge of women. But what about women’s point of view?

      Did you read the conclusion? The debate will be interesting if you can argue with religious quotes that can justify this archiac practices what the outsiders see as cruelty to women.

    • 7


      Only men say:

      “Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women).”

      It appears Allah too is a male who pronounce on all matters relating to women’s life and death.

      Did Allah ban the (ordination) appointment of Muslim female as Imam Khatib, Mullah, Ulama, Ayatollah, ….. ?

    • 7

      Shows the mindset (very thick at that) created by the Rizwi Mufti ilk!

      Any comments Izeth?

    • 5

      Sura 4:34 doesn’t say that all men are superior to all women. If it is interpreted that way, it will be disrespectful to the Quran. For instance Shaffana Shiad’s and Hassana Issadeen’s knowledge on MMDA and Islamic law is far superior to most of the quazies. See Sunday Island page 3. It says women head all major high courts in India. This Sura has to be interpreted as some men are superior to some women and it follows that some women are superior to some men. Superiority of men (in the family) are conditional on whether they maintain women.In large ​number of families, men don’t maintain women. In the poorer or richer class, women are contributing to the house hold.Number of working Muslim women, number of house maids etc tells us that men are not maintaining women. Most of the husbands live in dowry houses. Men have to provide cooked food. How many do that. Above are only few examples to show that are not maintaining women and therefore
      Sura 4:34 is not applicable due to no. of reasons. We need to take the verse in Sura Thawba as relevant today. Latter Sura came after 4:34 also.
      Even ACJU quotes this Sura to justify their stand on female quazies. This article and one by Reeza Hamid show that ACJU’s arguments are based on unacceptable premises.

  • 6

    A well written and researched article. It is time that those involved in these reforms stopped the stalling and quickly submitted the report, so that the new reforms that will be put into place and Sri Lankan Muslim women can be given their rights, and take a prominent role in society, to help other Muslims, and have equal rights for all Sri Lankan girls, so that no child will be forced in undesirable marriages, that will deprive them of their childhood. This has been dragging on for too long, and it seems some Muslim women and men are hesitant to do the only decent thing to safeguard little girls. Do not bow down to external pressures, and do not be influenced by primitive laws that some Islamic nations seem unable to let go, and also trying to interfere in our country. One nation in particular does not even allow their women to drive. Sri Lankan Muslims are unique and do not have to adhere to stone age rules and regulations – our culture here is vastly different to others, and despite the many different religion, we should all have the same rules when it comes to women, their rights, and the safety of our children. That is how civilization works.

  • 0

    We know who wants this law reformed now and why. A large number of muslims do not want it reviewed now. You attempt will fail as the election is going to be held soon in this country. This topic will come a hot topic.

    Thank you for your hard work for money.

    • 6

      It is simple to trash an article saying it is funded. This is a well researched article and facts are stubborn. When you can’t dispute facts, you start blaming and shaming without any basis.

  • 7

    Islam in no way promotes child marriages. Your reference to Surah at- talaq, verse 4: And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women – if you doubt, then their period is three months, and [also for] those who have not menstruated. And for those who are pregnant, their term is until they give birth. And whoever fears Allah – He will make for him of his matter ease” does not depict that Islam promotes Child marriages. In actual fact it’s reference is to those women who do not menstruate in clock work timely cycles.

    Your statement that it is a significant evidence that contradicts the fact that no man is permitted to have sexual relations/ intercourse with a girl who hasnt reached puberty. The verse you referred to was stating on the ‘Iddah’ (waiting) period for a woman who has been recently divorced. A girl who hasnt reached puberty, in your statement technically will not be considered a divorcee as the marriage will be considered null and void, thus it would amount to an annulment and not a divorce. This is due to the reason that any marriage that has not been consummated will be considered null and void and amount to an annulment, and when you refer this to the Islamic principle that no man is allowed to have sexual intercourse with a girl before she reaches puberty, it evidently points out that this verse does not deal or refers to a child who hasnt reached puberty.

    I’ve pointed this out because this may cause unnecessary misconceptions and may confuse those who don’t understand of course that your statement was mainly based on your view and not an islamic or shariah ruling.

    Peace :)

  • 7

    Thank you Ruwan Laknath Jayakody and Faizer Shaheid for the informative article. Yet another example of religions hijacked to further the vested interests of powerful sections.

    MMDA is totally imperfect and must be withdrawn. Lankan Muslims have a chance can set an example to the whole world. Muslim MPs please come out of your shell t least here.

    “………..The practice of marrying off younger girls was a common practice in the past even in Sri Lanka, and continues as a practice in India and even in some of the Middle Eastern countries, where the father holds absolute control of and over his daughters…….”
    Very true but recent law changes prohibit this practice.

    “…….. More often, the daughters are given in marriage to rich old men who tend to help a family from their financial predicaments. For a girl, this could be an equivalent to bonded labour where a child is sold into slavery as chattel.”
    Illustrates the disgusting side of such marriages.

    MMDA must be repealed.

  • 5

    Excellent article. puts things in perspective. What is surprising is how the insecure reactionary sections of the community try to deprive women of the rights which Islam has given them, including the capacity to contract marriage at their own discretion. To bring in a certain relative as a marriage guardian to approve the marriage of a grown up woman is tantamount to saying that she’s a minor and doesn’t have a head of her own. What I’m surprised is how even some of our more vocal Muslim women have not taken offense at this requirement unless of course they themselves feel not mentally equipped to make this choice and are insecure by nature. That’s too bad, because such an attitude certainly does not come from Islam. See: http://asiffhussein.com/2015/04/02/freedom-of-marital-choice-in-islam/

  • 0

    I cannot understand why some non-Muslim showing their crocodile tears regarding MMDA and Muslims affairs when 1000 of abuses of their women are there for which they keep silent. They are lickers and paid agents of their colonial masters trying to uphold their Masters Law. But they should remember few hundreds of years back, their masters copied from Islam and brought laws like inheritance of women etc. In fact they were treating women like their slaves before. Unless you understand thoroughly Quran and Hadith don’t poke your stinking mouth with twisted version of Islam given by your masters.

    Islam under the Prophet Muhammed has not only empathized with the crying voice of the despair and exploitation of woman but has taken momentous measures blustering all opposition, to alleviate her lot and strengthen her in realistic terms. Woman had found herself begging and crawling in front of her male master, with her heart-wrenching pleas for justice remaining unheard and unaddressed. Islam had changed this forever. Islam had pulled the woman out of her embarrassing position and had lifted her from her servitude to man to being her own master. Islam had turned her from a beggar to a rightful taker and a strong stakeholder. Islam had addressed her complaints as per divine ordinance even before she complained. Islam had found for her, her lost identity and had acquainted her with her real status and significance. Islam had presented to woman, her individuality and pride, her respect and rights as gifted by God. Under Islam woman regained her respect and her rights. Islam transformed woman from being a non-entity to a confident individual and brought back to woman her glory. Prophet Muhammad was and remains the unrivaled champion of a woman.

    • 7

      Just seen this because “Latest Comments” told me that comment had appeared.

      Why not study it to appreciate that not every non-Muslim is trying to destroy your way of life.

      Islam may have made all those contributions in the past, but now you must face up to new situations. You are far too dogmatic, and over-assertive. Try to understand multi-culturalism as something positive, although that has almost become a term to avoid now because too many things have been done in its name.

      • 0


        Although you are not directly referring to me, it was your response to my comment. I am not saying every non-Muslim is trying to destroy our way of life but why they want to poke their mouth in Islamic jurisprudence and teaching of Quran. There are enough scholars and educated Muslim arguing for and against reforming MMDA. Don’t you thing they are more fitter than non-Muslims. If you see the comments on most of the article regarding Muslims and Islam, you can see outright degraded, filthy, hatred comments by non-Muslim in keeping with their western masters propaganda. My view is it is wholesome anybody Muslims or non-Muslims giving their opinion on any subject but it should be within the boundary of healthy arguments. This article is good but with many flaws and misinterpretation. That is because the writer have only the webpage knowledge so some misinterpretations included in it.

        I am not dogmatic and over-assertive. This Mufti Rizwi is holding to some Islamic hadith which are misinterpreted. They say Quran is for all ages so definitely MMDA laws can be reformed. If by law, only can marry at 16 years or over, it’s hold good. Raising to 18 years not a big issue.

        You say, “get mixed up with LGBTQ issues etc.” Most probably he belongs to that clique.

        • 2

          You say that the article is good. Therefore these authors are not trying to be nasty.

          When you say that you see flaws and misinterpretation, you may be right. Or it may be that you should start giving fresh thought to some of those issues.

          Most MMDA issues I can keep off – but not age of marriage. But, of course, there, you have already agreed with me, in a separate comment.

          Another concern for me is the sustainability of life on Planet Earth. Realistically, we have no other home, although Stephen Hawking (have you seen him on Youtube, incidentally: if you haven’t it will be a shock – but not ultimately an unpleasant one. He cannot do anything with that body of his: talk, write, move hands even, and yet he communicates). Anyway, he seriously thinks that we will soon make this planet uninhabitable, and so humans will have to migrate to some other planet.

          In such a situation, when President Erdogan of Turkey (or some Buddhist monks!) urge the multiplication of population, I’m concerned. In Sri Lanka we are SUPPOSED to have free everything (and some basic services heavily subsidised), so if Muslims have too many children, it is a burden imposed on all others. Reforming MMDA may automatically solve that problem.

          I whole-heartedly agree with you that guys like me understand little of Islam, and not try to teach YOU how to live.

          • 0


            You say you can keep off but not age of marriage and you say if Muslims have too many children, it is a burden imposed on all others. That means if Muslims have too many children it will be burden to Government and Sinhalese racist who thinks Muslims will become more. This is the propaganda carried out by western media and fed into organization like BBS, Wiranto etc. If this is your fear, we cannot expect fair judgement from you. Stephen Hawking was referring over industrialization, carbon emission and made made holocaust that will make this planet inhabitable not particularly over population. So you think Sinhalese have to go to other planets if Muslim overpopulate Sri Lanka. Don’t worry Sinhala_man such things will never happen here and I am giving below two reasons for you to loose that fear.

            If you take the Sri Lankan population census over 50 years ago and now it will be the same, that is Sinhalese little over 75% and Muslims around 8%. This shows population balance is there.

            I can guarantee you that if you go around Sri Lanka and do research at which age Muslims give their daughter in marriage you will find over 16 and never before puberty. There can be girls given in marriage around 15 but it will be a negligible amount. Nowadays there are good access to free education. All parents expect their children at least to pass advance level and by that time they will be over sixteen and if they go for higher education over 25. So rest in peace.

    • 4

      Ralli Ameen

      “I cannot understand why some non-Muslim showing their crocodile tears regarding MMDA and Muslims affairs when 1000 of abuses of their women are there for which they keep silent.”

      It is an IQ problem and critical thinking problem, that you are suffering from.

      This is the problem most Ulama suffer as per the great Islamic Jurist and Philosophers such as Ibn Rushd.

      Just check up on the GMAT scores of Saudi Arabian graduates. They are at the bottom of the world. Is it because they are Wahhabi and follow Satan, Iblis, as er the Hadith of Najd?

      The reason is because they are literalists.

      As Citizens, most of not all want theur citizens treated equally, including women. The country went through the 30 -year war because the Para-Sinhala did not want to treat the Para-Tamils equally as citizens.

  • 8

    Dear Asiff Hussein,

    I’ve followed the link that you had provided and find that it is a good article by you which shows that you have been consistently working towards emancipating women in your community. This is how it should be; we’re on this planet for a short while, and we must allow OTHER LIFE FORMS to co-exist with us. Of course we put humans first, then narrow it to Sri Lankans etc. Finally it comes down to looking after our individual selves, but without harming others.

    This is the second wonderful article by Ruwan Laknath Jayakody that I have commented on. I saw it a few days ago, but didn’t immediately comment because I felt inadequate. It is so well researched, and what was I going to contribute with my amateurishness?

    He has been joined here by Faizer Shaheid, which is also good, because our upbringing decides so much, and how can we possibly understand all about a Muslim way of looking at life? We should not intrude or interfere.

    Please continue your good work, but remember that there’ll always be those who try to derail what you are trying to do by bringing in irrelevancies. We must keep issues separate. What I mean by that (again! I said it in relation to Ruwan’s first article!) Ruwan’s hair-style detracts. The article is so well written, but it would attract more readers if there wasn’t this “hippy-style” photograph with long hair to put them off.

    And then in some people’s minds, this very necessary reform will get mixed up with LGBTQ issues etc. All associated issues then get hobbled because of individual reader’s “prejudices” on one!

  • 2

    Thank you Ruwan Laknath Jayakody and Faizer Shaheid for a well researched article. However, having said that I find that having a separate marriage law for Muslims is totally unnecessary in Sri Lanka. Supposing we have a Mormon community that believes in polygamy and demands own laws to exercise that right. The fundamental tenet in Muslim laws are the alleged divine message that stated “No people will ever prosper who appoint a woman in charge of their affairs”. Our claim to fame is that of having the world’s first woman leader in Mrs. Bandaranaike and we did prosper. Today several prosperous countries have women leaders.

    • 3

      Dear Sylvia Haik,

      I agree that there should be more women in public life, but that is not happening in Sri Lanka. True, that Mrs B. made it to the top before any other in the world, but the fact is that today even the women in Sri Lanka don’t exercise their votes in such a way as to get their gender in to key positions.


      Isn’t almost every woman there one who got in on the basis of belonging to a political family? This is part of the problems that beset us: we don’t vote for policies or even issues. We vote for families. Very few votes are cast for people across community boundaries.

      If I have three votes at an election, I look for a decent Tamil or a Muslim to vote for. I don’t usually “look for a woman”; why should I? Even my wife seems always to vote for men! I certainly encourage HER to vote for a woman!

      I still respect Chandrika because at least she married outside caste, and appears to have a mind of her own. And she’s not racist.

      This is the last line of text in that Wikipedia article that I have quoted; there are lists of women who got elected for you to study:

      “The progress of women in Sri Lankan politics, however, has stagnated as expectations are higher for their representation in Parliament.”

  • 2

    @Ralli Ameen,

    You have said, ” If by law, only can marry at 16 years or over, it’s hold good. Raising to 18 years not a big issue.”

    Fine. Please work to achieve definite goals of this sort.

    I know that many things being said by us Non-Muslims on these subjects are couched in unacceptable language, but can’t you also avoid such intemperate writing as: “outright degraded, filthy, hatred comments by non-Muslim in keeping with their western masters propaganda”?

    Ruwan Laknath has written so well that there can be no basis for saying this: ‘“get mixed up with LGBTQ issues etc.” Most probably he belongs to that clique.’ I was saying it would help if he looked more “normal”. Many problems for Muslims would disappear if you, of your own volition, decided to attire yourself more in keeping with being people living on this island. You don’t have to compromise of matters of principle for that!

    • 0

      I am returning to a point that I raised earlier with you.
      Don’t yo agree that what is referred to by the writers is in fact “outright degraded, filthy, hatred comments by non-Muslim in keeping with their western masters propaganda”? (The Western master’s propaganda part is often ignored by us as we seldom realize that what we consume as world news is part of a deadly imperialist agenda.)
      Had there been no co-writer who is Sinhalese You can imagine as much as I can the volume and intensity of communal venom that would have been spat in the name of speaking up for the oppressed Muslim woman.

      You mean well, but there is need for all of us to be understanding about the feelings of people subjected to unfair attack.

      • 1

        Yes, SJ. I was wondering whether you would feel that I have ignored your well-meant and and intelligent caution.

        My intention is to warn before it is too late. Despair and discontent are surfacing among the Sinhalese again. Too often in the past it has found release in attacks on minorities.

        “Western Masters”? Trump is worse than anything that we’ve had before. More elections to come in those countries. I feel that we’ve got to ask ourselves how much of what we are doing and saying is going to help neo-Nazis to come in to governments in those countries.

        Let me hope that my worst prognostications prove unfounded.

        • 0

          I have too often heard ‘educated’ Sinhalese running down in public the Muslims and naming them the ‘real enemy’ of Sinhala Buddhism.
          They repeat a lot of anti-Muslim myth readily accessible on the Internet at dedicated websites.

          The pity is that the Tamil nationalists are doing it too, some in the hope of warming up to their potential patrons in the West; some to get close to Sinhala Buddist idealogues.

          These are sensitive matters and progressive Muslims need much deserved support.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 5 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.