[I. <<“Also, the Congress could tell the nation why there was complete support for the Bill in the Lok Sabha and against it in the Rajya Sabha.">>
Compare this with: <<***The Congress had last week repeatedly urged the government to refer the bill to a standing committee for review when it came up in the Lok Sabha*** [emphasis added]. It has been careful to underline that it strongly backs any move to abolish the triple talaq, but wants provisions to be strengthened to effectively safeguard the interests of women.>> (Source: < https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/government-opposition-spar-in-rajya-sabha-over-triple-talaq-bill/articleshow/62352101.cms >.) Any comment is superfluous. II. Also relevant in this context: <<"***The reason why it should not be referred (to select committee) is that when the practice was declared unconstitutional, 2 of the judges held it as unfair and used their extraordinary power to suspend it for 6 months, which expire on February 22*** [emphasis added]. Judges said, 'We are now suspending it for 6 months and we beseech all parties, therefore within this period come out with apt legislation.' So, there is an urgency that country expects from Parliament. Legislature must act with sense of responsibility," Jaitley stressed. ***Congress leader and senior advocate Kapil Sibal debunked Jaitley's claim, pointing out that the BJP leader was quoting from the minority judgment penned by former CJI J S Khehar and Justice Abdul Nazeer. Triple talaq was declared unconstitutional by 3:2 majority*** [emphasis added]. "He (Arun Jaitley) referred to judgement of SC, I want to correct the record because I appeared in the case on behalf of Muslim Personal Law Board. What he said was in context of the minority judgement," Sibal told deputy chairman PJ Kurien, who was presiding over the proceedings.>> (Source: < https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/government-opposition-spar-in-rajya-sabha-over-triple-talaq-bill/articleshow/62352101.cms >.) ***So, another blatant lie was used as the *only* alibi for refusing to refer the Bill to a Select Committee.*** Because of this refusal to refer the Bill to the Parliamentary Standing Committee and then to a Select Committee, the Bill has, for now, failed to make its way through the Rajya Sabha. III. <<Prasad added that the government, however, would not accept any suggestion that would change the Bill drastically. “No suggestion designed ***to kill the soul of this bill*** [emphasis added] will not be acceptable (sic). Also, we will not accept continued humiliating of triple talaq victims. It is Narendra Modi government not Rajiv Gandhi government that buckles under pressure,” the minister said.>> Being a cognizable offence, anybody, just anybody, can file a complaint and the police can arrest a man right away even on its own on the mere presumption that the offence has been committed. The remedial measures, if any, would follow only thereafer. And, not to forget, India is notorious for custodial torture (ref., e.g.: < https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/08/20/getting-away-torture-india> and < https://www.hrw.org/report/2016/12/19/bound-brotherhood/indias-failure-end-killings-police-custody>) and has not yet ratified the UN Convention Against Torture (ref.: < https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/india-among-9-nations-that-havent-ratified-un-convention-against-torture/298749 >). ***So, whether actually applied or not, if enacted, it'll make every Muslim man feel vulnerable. And, thereby, his family members as well. Wife not necessarily excluded.*** ***And, that provision to make every Muslim man feel vulnerable appears to be the very "soul" of the Bill that Prasad is referring to and reiterating his determination not to dilute!*** (Ref.: <<The matter of ring-fencing penal provisions in the Bill has become the bone of contention between the ruling BJP and the Opposition. The proposed law, passed by the Lok Sabha, makes talaq-e-biddat or instant triple talaq a “cognizable and non-bailable offence” and has provisions of “imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and fine” for any Muslim man ...>>) IV. <<The minister alleged that the Congress’s demand for referring it to a Select Committee was an excuse to delay the bill.>> The subject Supreme Court judgement already invalidates instant triple talaq as a valid form of divorce by a Muslim husband. So, in the event of an instant triple talaq, the marriage stands undissolved. Any attempt to divest the concerned wife of her matrimonial rights can very well be, at least in the interim, dealt with under the Domestic Violence Act (Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code). In fact, the Ministry of Women and Child Development did question the very necessity of any new law precisely on this ground: <<The WCD Ministry questioned the need for separate legislation, arguing that divorce by triple talaq amounted to cruelty and hence, fell within the purview of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.>> (Source: < http://indianexpress.com/article/india/why-is-a-new-law-needed-for-triple-talaq-asked-wcd-ministry-4986137/ >.) And, at the end, the Bill failed to make its way through the Rajya Sabha with even an NDA constituent, Telugu Desam Party, and the BJP-"friendly" AIADMK and Biju Janata Dal, refusing to budge from the demand to refer the Bill to a Select Committee, in unison with the Congress and other opposition parties. Thus, the pretended urgency is just that, a pretension to cloak its nefarious intentions. V. Finally: <<“Let me ask a question to the Congress. Is it under the grip of deeply fundamental and conservative elements of the Muslim society for vote bank? Gender justice has no importance at all for them?” he asked.>> Provided below a short list of a few illustrative examples of the BJP's record on "gender justice". A. (Modi on Muslim women as Gujarat Chief Minister.) 'No relief camps for producing kids, remarks Modi', dtd. Sept. 9 2002, at < https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/No-relief-camps-for-producing-kids-remarks-Modi/articleshow/21695855.cms> and 'Should We Run Relief Camps? Open Child Producing Centres?' at < https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/should-we-run-relief-camps-open-child-producing-centres/217398 >. B. (Modi on Shashi Tharoor's wife.) 'Narendra Modi calls Shashi Tharoor's wife '50-crore-rupee girlfriend'' at < https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Narendra-Modi-calls-Shashi-Tharoors-wife-50-crore-rupee-girlfriend/articleshow/17008278.cms >. C. 'Yogi Adityanath's Men Telling Hindus To Rape Dead Muslim Women Is Beyond Shocking' at < https://www.indiatimes.com/news/india/yogi-adityanaths-men-telling-hindus-to-rape-dead-muslim-women-is-beyond-shocking-230679.html >. D. (N.C. Chatterjee, the Hindu Mahasabha leader, and S.P. Mokerjee, the would-be founding President of the BJS, BJP's earlier avatar, on reforms of Hindu family law) 'Nehru And The Hindu Code Bill' at < https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/nehru-and-the-hindu-code-bill/221000 >. E. (Leading BJP figures vis-a-vis Sati) 'Women's groups to move court over Sati verdict' at < http://www.thehindu.com/2004/04/06/stories/2004040605880500.htm>. F. (Yogi Adityanath's claim that women who acquire male traits turn into demons or ‘rakshasas’ and hence need protection, for their own good and for the good of the society) 'They Need Protection, Not Independence: How CM Yogi Views Women' at < https://www.thequint.com/news/politics/yogi-adityanath-views-on-women-uttar-pradesh-chief-minister >. G. 'Manohar Lal Khattar, who blamed women for India's rising rapes, is new Haryana CM' at < https://scroll.in/article/684700/manohar-lal-khattar-who-blamed-women-for-indias-rising-rapes-is-new-haryana-cm >. H. (Modi deserted his own married wife and doesn't give her divorce. Keeps her under surveillance.) i. < http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/no-passport-for-narendra-modis-wife-as-she-has-no-marriage-certificate/article7855384.ece >. ii. < http://www.thehindu.com/elections/loksabha2014/modi-declares-himself-as-married/article5893332.ece >. iii. 'I AM THE PM’S WIFE, AND I FEAR FOR MY LIFE' at < http://punemirror.indiatimes.com/news/india//articleshow/45264158.cms>. iv. 'Jashodaben Modi: why is the Indian prime minister's wife trying to shake off her security detail?' at < https://www.theguardian.com/politics/shortcuts/2014/nov/26/why-is-indias-first-lady-trying-to-shake-off-her-security-detail- >.] I/II. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/triple-talaq-bill-bjp-rajya-sabha-congress-modi-ravi-shankar-prasad-rahul-gandhi-congress-muslims-5014648/ Triple talaq: Open to Congress suggestions if ‘reasonable’, says Ravi Shankar Prasad Prasad maintained that the government wanted a debate because it would have given an opportunity for it to explain its position. “Also, the Congress could tell the nation why there was complete support for the Bill in the Lok Sabha and against it in the Rajya Sabha." Written by Liz Mathew | New Delhi | Updated: January 7, 2018 7:35 am Union law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad. (Express photo by Anil Sharma) A day after the Winter session of Parliament ended in a stalemate over the triple talaq Bill in the Rajya Sabha, the government on Saturday said it was willing to “consider any reasonable and constructive suggestions from the Congress party or any other party”. However, the suggestion cannot be one that is “designed to kill the soul of the Bill”, Union Minister of Law and Justice Ravi Shankar Prasad told The Sunday Express. Prasad also appealed to Congress Parliamentary Party leader Sonia Gandhi to become the “facilitator” for the “historic and transformative change” without playing “vote bank politics”. He said: “It’s a golden opportunity for her (Sonia Gandhi) to undo the sins of her husband.” “The government is willing to consider any reasonable and constructive suggestions from anyone or Congress party with an open mind. But if the suggestion means that we should de-criminalise the instant divorce, it will not be acceptable,” Prasad said. “The Congress needs to understand that from Shah Bano to Shayara Bano, much water has flown and it was a historic opportunity for them to atone for the sin they committed in 1986, when even the meagre maintenance amount of Rs 125 given to Shah Bano by the Supreme Court was overturned by the Congress government with (former Prime Minister) Rajiv Gandhi commanding full majority in the Lok Sabha,” Prasad said. READ | Instant triple talaq Bill deferred, penal clauses offer room for give-and-take The minister added that the Congress’s suggestion to form a corpus for victims of triple talaq would not be acceptable because it would be discriminatory. “It amounts to incentivising the deviant husband to commit triple talaq with impunity and then telling the wife to go and beg before the government. In a secular country like India, how can you give a corpus only for women victims of one community? That will be discriminatory. The Congress party should understand what kind of an argument it makes,”he said, adding that Asaduddin Owaisi of the MIM had also made the same demand in the Lok Sabha. READ | BJP has no concern for Muslim women, says Ashok Gehlot “Let me ask a question to the Congress. Is it under the grip of deeply fundamental and conservative elements of the Muslim society for vote bank? Gender justice has no importance at all for them?” he asked. The Winter session of Parliament concluded on Friday with the fate of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, which seeks to criminalise instant triple talaq, remaining in limbo. The matter of ring-fencing penal provisions in the Bill has become the bone of contention between the ruling BJP and the Opposition. The proposed law, passed by the Lok Sabha, makes talaq-e-biddat or instant triple talaq a “cognizable and non-bailable offence” and has provisions of “imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and fine” for any Muslim man who divorces his wife by uttering talaq three times in quick succession. It also provides for subsistence allowance to Muslim women and custody of minor children as “may be determined by the magistrate”. Although the main Opposition Congress backed the Bill in the Lok Sabha, the party insisted that it be referred to a Select Committee, arguing that criminalisation of instant triple talaq would be inappropriate. The BJP has alleged that the Congress had adopted “double standards” on the Bill. Opposition Parties Insist On Select Committee For Triple Talaq Bill Prasad added that the government, however, would not accept any suggestion that would change the Bill drastically. “No suggestion designed to kill the soul of this bill will not be acceptable. Also, we will not accept continued humiliating of triple talaq victims. It is Narendra Modi government not Rajiv Gandhi government that buckles under pressure,” the minister said. The Supreme Court had in 1985 ordered that divorced Shah Bano be given alimony by her former husband, but the judgment was opposed by Muslim clerics. The then Congress government led by Rajiv Gandhi had overturned the court’s ruling, a move criticised as minority appeasement. “I would like to appeal to Sonia Gandhi, will she become a facilitator of this historic and transforming change or would she let what happened during Shah Bano — a vote bank politics — dominate the Congress?” Prasad asked. The minister argued the BJP-led government had gone ahead with the Bill as hundreds of Muslim women, including victims of triple talaq, had met him and others. “They asked me, ‘Why is there a three-year sentencing, why not more? You need to understand our and pain and agony’. Let me make it clear, the proposed punishment is a deterrent.” Prasad maintained that the government wanted a debate because it would have given an opportunity for it to explain its position. “Also, the Congress could tell the nation why there was complete support for the Bill in the Lok Sabha and against it in the Rajya Sabha. After all, its a three-and-a-half clause bill. It does not need rocket science.” The minister alleged that the Congress’s demand for referring it to a Select Committee was an excuse to delay the bill. “It was raised as an alibi to delay the Bill. Day after day, in spite of the Supreme Court judgment (that had declared the practice as void) Muslim women are humiliated with triple talaq.” II. A. (Letter from FAOW to members of the Rajya Sabha) To All Members of Rajya Sabha, We, the undersigned women’s organisations from across the country, appeal to you to read some of the problems with the proposed ” Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017” which will come up for discussion soon. The discussion in the Lok Sabha was very short nor was there any serious attempt to involve women’s organisations in the drafting of the Bill. We would like to point out that the Bill may have noble intentions of supporting Muslim women, but will instead harm them as it will dilute the rights guaranteed to them under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA) 2005. THIS IS HOW THE BILL FAILS TO PROVIDE PROTECTION TO WOMEN: 1. Chapter III , which is titled as “Protection Of Rights Of Married Muslim Women,” provides that woman will be entitled to get subsistence allowance for herself , children, as well as custody of children. It is important to note that it refers to “subsistence allowance” but does not elaborate how that subsistence allowance will to be calculated. Not only that but the mere word subsistence deprives women basic dignity, denying her well established rights as specified under PWDVA 2005. On the other hand, PWDVA 2005, section 20 speaks of monetary reliefs. It is stated within it that “monetary relief granted under this section shall be adequate, fair and reasonable and consistent with the standard of living to which the aggrieved person is accustomed.” 2. There is no provision made for place of residence or physical protection under this bill. As opposed to this PWDVA 2005 provides under section 19, Residence orders, provision not only for residence but also for physical protection. Thus, this section too in the above referred bill nullifies rights ensured by PWDVA 2005 3. Chapter II Section 4 provides for punishment to husband who pronounces simultaneous triple talaq, without any consideration of how the “subsistence” allowance can be procured from him by the affected wife. Invalidation of instant triple talaq means the marriage is in fact valid and the husband and wife should continue as if no divorce has been pronounced, in such situation, sending the husband to jail amounts to giving validity to the same act of instant triple talaq, which leads to break down of marriage, achieving result exactly opposite of what Supreme Court ruled. We, the undersigned, appeal to you to rise to “PROTECT WOMEN’S RIGHTS” and do not deprive women of their well fought dignity and rights. We appeal to you to vote against this above referred Bill. The Government instead must provide resources to implement PWDVA 2005 effectively and thus “PROTECT RIGHTS OF WOMEN” from all communities. Signed: Forum against Oppression of Women, Mumbai Forum Against Oppression of Women, Bombay 29, Bhatia Bhuvan, Babrekar Marg, Gokhale Road, Dadar (West) Bombay -4000 28 B. (Online petition to Vice President, India M. Venkaiah Naidu; Maneka Gandhi, Minister, WCD and Rahul Gandhi, President, Indian National Congress) We, citizens concerned with gender justice and minority rights are deeply disturbed with the manner in which a Bill criminalising instant Triple Talaq, was introduced and passed in the Lok Sabha on 28th Dec, 2017 (The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017) The Bill aims to protect the rights of Muslim women, but we believe, it will cause more harm to them if it is passed in its present form. We urge you to call for consultations from a wide section of people working with Muslim women so that the aim of securing gender justice is truly achieved. Our concern with the current Bill: a. It has many contradictions and anomalies. b. It pushes Muslim women into a new statute which will incarcerate their husbands. c. It gives power to a third person to file a criminal charge, which can be extremely dangerous. d. It does not specify the time period for the case to be concluded. e. It does not specify who will provide sustenance to the woman when her husband is in jail. Utterance of the words “talaq” three times has been invalidated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in August, 2017, which means that her marriage remains intact. Since the marriage is intact, Muslim women, like all other women, have a recourse in law both criminal (S. 498A of IPC – cruelty to wives) and civil (the Protection of Women Domestic Violence Act, (PWDVA) 2005 which secures the rights of all women facing domestic violence to maintenance, residence, protection from violence and to custody of their children). We believe that Muslim women must take recourse to these two laws to protect their rights. We, the undersigned, urge that the Bill should be sent to a select committee to discuss its pros and cons in the true spirit of democracy. Adv. Flavia Agnes, Women’s Rights Lawyer, Founder of Majlis Prof. (Dr) Faizan Mustafa, Vice-Chancellor, NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad Prof. Abusaleh Shariff, Chair, Maulana Azad Urdu University, Hyderabad Prof. S Parasuraman, Director, Tata Institute of Social Sciences Ms. Uzma Naheed, Director, Iqra Foundation, Vice President, All India Muslim Majlis-e Mushawrat, Former member, Muslim Personal Law Board Adv. Irfan Engineer, Director, Centre for Study of Society and Secularism Ms. Audrey D’mello, Director, Majlis Legal Centre Ms. Sujata Lawhande and Ms. Mumtaz Shaikh, CORO for Literacy, Mumbai Prof. Apooranand, Delhi University Dr. Nasreen Fazalbhoy, Retd Reader, Mumbai University Prof. Farrukh Waris, Retd. Vice Principal, Burhani College, Mumbai Prof. Farida Lambay, Retired, Nirmala Niketan, Mumbai Prof. Shahida Murtaza, Women Education, Maulana Azad Urdu University, Hyderabad Dr. Vibhuti Patel, Chairperson & Professor, Advanced Centre for Women's Studies, School of Development Studies, Mumbai Sr. Noella de Souza, President, Indian Christian Women's Movement Maulana Shoaib Koti, Iqra Darul Qaza Mufti Inamullah Mazahiri, Chief Qazi, Al Hira Darul Qaza Prof. Tanika Sarkar, Historian, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi Prof. Sumit Sarkar, Professor of History, University of Delhi Nasiruddin Haider Khan, Journalist, Lucknow This petition will be delivered to: Vice President, India M. Venkaiah Naidu Minister, WCD Maneka Gandhi President, Indian National Congress Rahul Gandhi (Source: < https://www.change.org/p/the-bill-criminalising-instant-triple-talaq-is-against-gender-justice >.) C. (Call from Bebaak Collective, an Intervenor in the SC Pleading for Abolition of (Instant) Triple Talaq: 'Stop Criminalising!': 'Have Wider Consultations!') STOP CRIMINALISING TRIPLETALAQ: PUNITIVE ACTION IS NOT DETERRENCE Appeal for a wider consultation with women’s groups for gender-just family laws The government has tabled a Bill titled Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage), 2017, on the first day in this winter session of the Parliament. This Bill proposes to make the practice of triple talaq a criminal offence, leading to imprisonment of husband who pronounces instant talaq.Created in the name of safeguarding women’s rights, this problematicBill fails in its primary mission,and is instead designed to be another tool by which to criminalise Muslim men by making the practice of triple talaq a criminal offence, leading to imprisonment. We would like to state at the outset that Bebaak Collective, along with other women’s groups of this country, are opposed to this arbitrary and repressive move. If this law is passed, then it is going to adversely affect Muslim women and children, whose survival is at stake. That this step has been hurriedly taken without inviting the opinion of women’s rights groups and other civil society stakeholders involved in the issue is cause for further concern. Why no criminalisation? • There is no rationale to criminalise the practice of talaq-e-biddat. Using penal actions leading to imprisonment to discourage the practice of triple talaq will not help in getting justice for women. When a woman reports a complaint about triple talaq, she wants to continue staying in matrimonial home and draw financial support from her marital home. Imprisoning the husband will deprive her of both, making her and her children even more vulnerable. • Since marriage is a civil contract between two adult persons, the procedures to be followed on its breakdown should also be of civil nature. We do not believe in retributive justice, which emphasises punitive measures instead of the ensuring the rights of women. It is essential to think of civil redressal mechanisms and reparative justice to ensure that Muslim women are able to negotiate for their rights both within and outside of marriage. • The Bill is limited to triple talaq and is not addressing related issues of polygamy, the practice of halala and other issues of discriminations faced by women in marriage and family.We believe that piecemeal legislations will not address larger issues of subordination of women within patriarchal structures.The penal action to discourage the practice of instant triple talaq is a myopic view as it leaves many other issues of economic and social security of women unaddressed. In addition, in our present conjuncture, the move to imprison Muslim men will add to the prevailing insecurity and alienation of the Muslim community. Family and community members might create undue pressures on the woman not to report against her husband. • Criminalisation of instant triple talaq will further stifle the voices of Muslim women instead of offering them avenues for justice. Our effort — as women’s groups and the government — should be to strengthen the negotiating capacities of women bystrengthening their economic and social rights.In any case, if there is a need for criminal intervention e.g.’ in cases of domestic violence, or when triple talaq is construed as violence, in such cases, the aggrieved woman can use the existing provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. These two legal options for women encompass both criminal and civil provisions. Appeal for broader consultation on the proposed Bill about tripletalaq Overtime, social movements have stressed that law/policy making by the government should be developed in the spirit of a democratic, participatory and transparent process with a view to incorporate the lived experiences of the affected sections of society. More recent legislations, like the Protection of Women against Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 and the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 are results of long struggle of the women’s movements. All these laws or amendments were preceded by and benefitted from wide consultations with the civil society and affected sections, where voices and experiences of women and marginalised groups were heard , and legislations formulated accordingly to promote gender equality. Our appeal to the Members of the Parliament is not to hastily pass this legislation but to reflect on the repercussions of the same, through meaningful consultations with a broad range of stakeholders, particularly with women’s groups. Underlying Principles: As a secular democratic country, all laws in India (whether personal or not) must be tested against the Constitutional mandate. If there is a contradiction, then the principles of equality must prevail. Arbitrariness and discrimination cannot be permitted on the grounds that a particular practice or law is an essential or non-essential part of religion. Since all the Personal Laws are discriminatory against women in varied ways, we must aim to create new laws or amendexisting laws to ensure they are in consonance with the fundamental rights of equality and non-discrimination.In recognition of the fact that gender relations in society are unequal, these lawsmust provide special safeguards to secure the rights of women. Our demands: · Marriage among Muslims is a contract and hence cannot be dissolved in a unilateral manner. There can be no more injustice than to be constantly at the fear of being unilaterally divorced, with no judicial recourse available. We appeal that all the forms of unilateral talaq (including talaq-ahsan and talaq-hasan) should be invalidated as it vests power in the hands of the man, and reinforces unequal relations within the marriage. Accordingly, the matters related to talaqunder the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 should not be applicable. · Muslim women have the option to approach court for divorce under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939. This law should be available to men too. There should be legal provisions to deal with the matters of dower and maintenance of the wife, child custody, right to reside in matrimonial home, and other economic obligations. · The matrimonial home as the residence of a married woman has to be ensured in law, along with an equitable right of ownership and access to all property belonging to the partners at marriage. · In order to discourage the practiceof talaq-e-biddat, we suggest that when a complaint is received against any qazi, religious or social organisation for encouraging, abetting or administering instant triple talaq, their registration should be cancelled. · The practice of nikah-halalashould be made a punishable offence. This practice makes the woman vulnerable to all kinds of physical, sexual, emotional and economic abuse, thereby denying them their right to live with dignity and self-respect. Any person who solemnises or acts as a witness to a marriage knowing that it has been contracted as nikah-halala so as to facilitate remarriage with the previous husband should also be punished. · The Ministry of Minority Affairs should formulate a scheme to spread awareness about the Supreme Court’s judgment, take cognisance of complaints of its violation and the issues arising out of such matters with appropriate authorities, provide monetary relief and socio-legal aid to women who are affected by the violation of this judgment. Bebaak Collective is one of the interveners in the Supreme Court, who supported the petition of Ms. ShayaraBano challenging the constitutionality of triple talaq, nikah-halala and polygamy. We were represented by Senior Advocate Indira Jaising. (Ref.: < https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/greenyouth/Call$20from$20Bebaak$20Collective$2C$20an$20Intervenor$20in$20the$20SC$20Pleading$20for$20Abolition$20of$20(Instant)$20Triple$20Talaq$3A$20$27Stop$20Criminalising!$27$3A$20$27Have$20Wider$20Consultations!$27/greenyouth/PJZDkIzNaXw/HWrEe8B1CwAJ >.) D. (Press Statement by 'Indian Muslims for Secular Democracy': 'Don’t criminalise, make instant triple talaq an offence under Domestic Violence Act') http://imsd.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/171205-Press-release-on-triple-talaq-bill.pdf -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
