The Daily Fix

The Daily Fix: Regressive customs like triple talaq should not be protected just because they’re old

Everything you need to know for the day (and a little more).

The Big Story: Constitution vs customs

A Constitution bench of the Supreme Court last week began hearing challenges against triple talaq, a form of divorce in Islam that is extremely unfair to women. The practice considers a marriage to have been dissolved if the man utters the word “talaq” three times. As many Muslim women have pointed out, this leaves wives completely vulnerable to the whims of their husbands

But instead of testing the practice of triple talaq on grounds of gender equality, the primary question the Supreme Court will seek to answer through the case is whether this method of divorce is a fundamental aspect of Islam. The court has made it clear that if triple talaq was indeed an integral part of religion, little could be done about it.

This has opened the doors for faith to take precedence over rights. This is exactly what happened on Tuesday, when the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, an non-governmental organisation, told the court that triple talaq was a 1,400 years-old custom with which the government had no right to interfere. Senior lawyer and Congress leader Kapil Sibal, who argued on behalf of AIMPLB, made a stunning comparison between triple talaq and the Ram temple movement. In the late 1980s, the Bharatiya Janata Party launched a violent campaign to have the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya demolished, claiming it had been built on the exactly spot where the god Ram had been born. On December 6, 1992, the party’s supporters tore down the ancient mosque. In court on Tuesday, Sibal claimed that while the belief that Ram was born in Ayodhya is never questioned, triple talaq alone was being disputed despite being a similar article of faith.

On the very face of it, the argument is deeply flawed. Whether Ram was born in Ayodhya has little to do with the everyday lives of Hindus. This belief does not manifest itself in the form of a discriminatory process that hurts one half of the population at a very personal level. Instantaneous triple talaq, on the other hand, robs the woman of the ability to safeguard her own interests in a marriage and renders her dignity irrelevant by privileging a man’s claims.

Secondly, there is no reason for a custom to be considered infallible merely because it is thought to be ancient. By claiming that the practice of triple talaq should be preserved simply because it is 1,400 years old negates the very idea of constitutional reforms. If the argument of antiquity is accepted, there is a very good case to be made for untouchability in Hinduism, a caste-based discriminatory process that was encoded in its scriptures.

Allowing religious customs and laws to be deemed immune to constitutional morality undermines the very idea of a modern republic.

The Big Scroll

  • Here are six articles that will help you understand the controversy surrounding triple talaq. 

Punditry

  1. In The Hindu, A Faizur Rahman says triple talaq is not fundamental to Islam and that the government should go ahead and ban the practice. 
  2. Ejaz Ghani in the Mint argues that the Indian economy is heavily biased against women. 
  3. In the Indian Express, Ram Madhav says not being part of China’s “One Road One Belt” project will not affect bilateral relations. 

Giggles

Don’t miss

Anita Katyal reports on what the meeting between Congress president Sonia Gandhi and West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Tuesday means.

“The Congress and the communists are no longer the dreaded political enemies of the Trinamool chief – the two parties have been virtually decimated in West Bengal. Instead, Banerjee has to contend with the rise and rise of the BJP, which appeared an impossibility in West Bengal till recently.

Though the Trinamool chief was a member of the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance when Atal Bihari Vajpayee was prime minister, Banerjee is now locked in direct confrontation with the saffron party, which has made deep inroads in West Bengal and has emerged as the chief challenger for the Trinamool Congress.”

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Do you really need to use that plastic straw?

The hazards of single-use plastic items, and what to use instead.

In June 2018, a distressed whale in Thailand made headlines around the world. After an autopsy it’s cause of death was determined to be more than 80 plastic bags it had ingested. The pictures caused great concern and brought into focus the urgency of the fight against single-use plastic. This term refers to use-and-throw plastic products that are designed for one-time use, such as takeaway spoons and forks, polythene bags styrofoam cups etc. In its report on single-use plastics, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has described how single-use plastics have a far-reaching impact in the environment.

Dense quantity of plastic litter means sights such as the distressed whale in Thailand aren’t uncommon. Plastic products have been found in the airways and stomachs of hundreds of marine and land species. Plastic bags, especially, confuse turtles who mistake them for jellyfish - their food. They can even exacerbate health crises, such as a malarial outbreak, by clogging sewers and creating ideal conditions for vector-borne diseases to thrive. In 1988, poor drainage made worse by plastic clogging contributed to the devastating Bangladesh floods in which two-thirds of the country was submerged.

Plastic litter can, moreover, cause physiological harm. Burning plastic waste for cooking fuel and in open air pits releases harmful gases in the air, contributing to poor air quality especially in poorer countries where these practices are common. But plastic needn’t even be burned to cause physiological harm. The toxic chemical additives in the manufacturing process of plastics remain in animal tissue, which is then consumed by humans. These highly toxic and carcinogenic substances (benzene, styrene etc.) can cause damage to nervous systems, lungs and reproductive organs.

The European Commission recently released a list of top 10 single-use plastic items that it plans to ban in the near future. These items are ubiquitous as trash across the world’s beaches, even the pristine, seemingly untouched ones. Some of them, such as styrofoam cups, take up to a 1,000 years to photodegrade (the breakdown of substances by exposure to UV and infrared rays from sunlight), disintegrating into microplastics, another health hazard.

More than 60 countries have introduced levies and bans to discourage the use of single-use plastics. Morocco and Rwanda have emerged as inspiring success stories of such policies. Rwanda, in fact, is now among the cleanest countries on Earth. In India, Maharashtra became the 18th state to effect a ban on disposable plastic items in March 2018. Now India plans to replicate the decision on a national level, aiming to eliminate single-use plastics entirely by 2022. While government efforts are important to encourage industries to redesign their production methods, individuals too can take steps to minimise their consumption, and littering, of single-use plastics. Most of these actions are low on effort, but can cause a significant reduction in plastic waste in the environment, if the return of Olive Ridley turtles to a Mumbai beach are anything to go by.

To know more about the single-use plastics problem, visit Planet or Plastic portal, National Geographic’s multi-year effort to raise awareness about the global plastic trash crisis. From microplastics in cosmetics to haunting art on plastic pollution, Planet or Plastic is a comprehensive resource on the problem. You can take the pledge to reduce your use of single-use plastics, here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of National Geographic, and not by the Scroll editorial team.