'Men's rights organizations should be consulted by the Government'
by Rohit Karir 24 March, 2012
The
union cabinet, on March 23, gave clearance to some changes in the
Marriage Act via the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill 2010. While women's
rights organizations have largely supported the cleared amendments,
Virag R Dhulia, Head, Gender Studies, of Confidare India, a men's rights
community center, has voiced grave concern about men's rights not being
protected enough.
THE PROPOSED changes will, for the first time,
legally recognize the right of a wife to property acquired by her
spouse during their marriage. Equal rights to both adopted and
biological children will also be provided. The cabinet also gave its go
ahead to consider "irretrievable breakdown of marriage" as a new ground
for granting divorce as against expecting the couple to carry out
despite differences in what is named as a cooling off period. Though,
the cabinet has left it to the courts to decide its time period. But at
the same time, as per the amendments, while a wife can legally oppose
her husband's plea for a divorce under the new clause of "irretrievable
breakdown of marriage", a husband will not have similar rights.
The cabinet
amendments have already triggered reactions with Ranjana Kumari of
Centre for Social Research saying that majority of the women in the
country were illiterate and were in no position to know their rights.
The All
India
Democratic Women's Association has welcomed the amendments pertaining
to women's right to property in case of dissolution of marriage.In
an exclusive interview with merinews.com, Dhulia gives a 'gender'
perspective to marriage and gender laws. Confidare India, Dhulia says,
recognizes that men face domestic violence and false cases of harassment
related to dowry and domestic violence but often find it difficult to
prove their innocence and don’t get emotional support from society.
Dhulia, 31, also works as an IT professional in Bangalore, and in 2009,
was involved in a case of dowry in which he was jailed for two days and
later filed a counter-case of dowry against his wife.
Merinews:
You personally went through a disturbing experience with your wife
accusing you of taking dowry and spending two days in jail. But you
maintain that the allegation was false as you did not ‘ask’ for dowry –
it was given willingly. But then you also ‘accepted’ the dowry. You then
filed a counter dowry case against your wife. Where do things stand
today? Have you considered re-marrying?
Dhulia:
I have never said that I “accepted” dowry or that it was “given”. In
the case that I have filed against my wife and in-laws, it says,
“Because they have themselves made a claim of giving dowry to me, which
is an equal crime under the Dowry Prohibition Act, criminal proceedings
be initiated against them. It is only an unproved allegation against me
but they are admitting the crime, hence they should be punished before
me.” The judiciary was more than happy to stay the proceedings of the
case even before serving the notice to me and now the case is not coming
up for hearing at all. I have gone through a lot of harassment and
right now I have to focus on getting my innocence back. All other
options are secondary. The way society treats men in marriages, has left
deep psychological scars, which have to heal before I think of
re-marrying.Merinews: Why do you object to
the amendment that recognizes “Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage” as a
ground for divorce, in the proposed Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill,
2010?
Dhulia: We do not object to the ground of
“Irretrievable breakdown of marriage” per se. If a relationship does not
make a person happy, he/she should have every legal right to walk out
of the relationship gracefully. That being said, it does not mean, the
same step has to be achieved at the cost of the other person. Our
objections particularly target property division clauses. This is a
dangerous one. India is a complex society and definitely very different
from the western society. In India, we still have a good mix of nuclear
families, joint families, and the concept of Hindu Undivided Family
(HUF), etc. Still, there are large number of people who share common
ancestral property. There may arise a lot of complications with this law
coming in, which may even lead to more crime as people can go berserk
when it comes to property. This law has the potential to wreak social
havoc. Furthermore, the power of division of property wresting with the
judiciary is far more dangerous provision. Indian judiciary is
incompetent and people have lost faith on its integrity what with judges
being caught cheating in exams and found indulging in massive
corruption. This power will make a fish-market of the Indian criminal
justice system especially in the arena of matrimonial disputes.
Merinews: The
belief in the country persists that women, especial in rural and
semi-urban areas, are not empowered enough and need protection by law
when it comes to a husband not filing a counter divorce against his
wife. Do you think this protection is required or is it being more
misused than serving its purpose?
Dhulia: As the
question itself says, it’s a belief. Some people believe in God, some do
not. Can we have laws based on beliefs? There is a famous saying, “I
may not die for my beliefs for they may not be true”. Jokes apart, laws
must be based on actual ground research and data. The data is not
available. In a country where only 3% of the population pays income tax,
we can well imagine the condition of the Government when it comes to
knowledge about its citizens. However, if we look at the suicide
statistics, which include all areas – urban, rural, semi-urban, the
story is clear. It’s the men who are suffering and not the women as men
are committing suicides almost to the tune of 2 times compared to women,
year over year, especially married men. Why would a young married man,
full of life and aspirations, end his life? Something is definitely
wrong which is being ignored. As far as economic problems in rural and
semi-urban areas are concerned, it’s not a gender issue. It’s a social
issue in which men suffer more as they are forced to bear the primary
financial responsibility. Moreover, as of now, men’s rights
organizations are still largely prevalent on the internet. Men in these
areas do not have proper access to the Internet and thus they are not
even aware that there is some help available. Hence, they suffer in
silence and do not speak about their abuse fearing social ridicule.
Women’s organizations are found more frequenting Pizza huts.
Merinews: Do
you think the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2010 should contain more
conditional clauses when it comes to allocation of property after
dissolution of marriage?
Dhulia: This is a
complex situation. We need to consider many factors such as the tenure
of marriage, contribution of either partner towards the property, tenure
during which the savings were made to build the property because
property is never built overnight; it takes a lifetime’s savings to
build a property. It will be foolish to think that a man can lose his
property if his marriage breaks within months and he will lose his
lifetime fortune. Moreover, now women will marry keeping this thing in
mind and walk-out of marriages eyeing the man’s property. Men’s rights
organizations should be consulted by the Government before finalizing
the law and its clauses, else it might just end up annoying 50% of the
population in order to appease the other half.
Merinews:
Feminists suggest that marriage laws might appear to be loaded in
favour of women as this gender finds it much more difficult to re-marry
compared to men after a divorce. Do you think this compensates for
leaving dangerous loopholes that can be exploited?
Dhulia: Statements
of feminists need to be taken with a pinch of salt. For, from the way
they are operating, it seems they are more inclined on harassing men
than uplifting women. They leave genuine issues faced by women
unaddressed like plight of widows, domestic violence faced by daughters
in natal homes, and only focus on inventing ways to transfer tax-free
wealth from husband to wife. But this method only promulgates parasitism
in women and this law will become a legal channel for women to extort
men. Earlier, it was only by lodging a false criminal complaint (under
Section 498A) and getting few lakhs/millions from the man. Now, just
file for divorce and walk away with a plush apartment.
Merinews:
Some of the proposals in the proposed Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill,
2010 seem to suggest that women are less devious than men, and men are
out to harm the interests of women. Do you think this is case?
Dhulia:
These proposals are a direct result of social misandry (hatred of
males), which is an age-old social curse on men. Men face misandry day
in and day out. Whether it is while working late night shifts so that
women can go home early or taking more risks and endangering their lives
or living in a society that celebrates anti-male and gender-biased
laws. One more clause does not make much of a difference. It’s a
different question altogether that there is absolutely no basis or
data-backing for such claims. Such gender biases harm men beyond levels
imaginable.
Merinews: Should pre-nuptial
agreements be made mandatory for all couples in India? Will this address
some of the heartache post dissolution of marriage?
Dhulia:
Somehow Indians feels copying the West is a good idea. This may work as
far as movies are concerned, but laws should strictly be made on the
basis of our own societal constraints, structures and norms. Pre-nups
may sound lucrative but we must keep in mind that when it comes to
implementation, India has always underperformed. So, the best solution
to this is that property matters must be kept completely away from
marriage. Life will be much more peaceful then.
Read more at:
India :
Are you planning to marry Indian Girl? It is easy to get married (’Legal Trap’) in India if Boy is with handsome earning and have credible wealth.
“According to the Cabinet Note, while a wife can oppose a
husband’s plea for a divorce under the new “irretrievable
breakdown of marriage” clause, the husband will have no such
rights to oppose if the wife moves court on the same grounds.”
The word husband/wife must be replaced by the word Spouse, otherwise
it will lead a total Extrotion business of your hard earned
money/property and as the more awareness will come, maximum men will
stop saving and will spend their earling, result more and more
crime/fraud/stress in society and yes a huge father less child society on the way,
which today some male haters do not understand , but will value the
contrubution of husabnds family the day they will take oath to die as
debit man than credit man. We do not understand why so called educated
and libiral Women and LAW makers afrid to make law on the Principal with
the word “Spouse”, both get euall responsibility and Libility.
Introduction:
Confidare Research is the education and research wing of Confidare Consultancy that specializes in dealing with problems of men.
Confidare Research strongly condemn the upcoming “Marriage Laws
(Amendment) Bill” that was supposed to be tabled today before the
Cabinet.
This bill is a further evidence of the growing misandry (male
hatred) in the society and how the society treats men as disposable
entities. Even in this modern age when we talk of Gender Equality, the
stereotypical patriarchal notion that the financial responsibility of a
family should lay on a husband still prevails in the society, and this
pervert social mindset is the root cause of abuse of men, especially
husbands in a marriage.
In such a situation, where men are already burdened with so much of
load, another law which makes divorce extremely costly for them is
thoroughly unwelcome.
Highlights of the law:
This law recognizes “Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage” as a ground for divorce.
While the law empowers the wife to oppose the divorce at any point of
time if the husband has filed for divorce, it restrains the husband from
doing so when the wife has filed for the same.
This law also contains a clause by which courts will be empowered to
snatch away half the property of husband and give it away to wife.
This law only talks about women’s rights and has no considerations whatsoever for men.
Brief Background:
Due to demand from various quarters, this ground for divorce was
introduced by the Govt. of India by way of the Marriage Laws (Amendment)
Bill, 2010 which sought to amend the Hindu Marriage Act and the Special
Marriage Act. However, the bill contained clauses that facilitated
financial extortion of men.
The bill read that courts would have power not to grant the divorce
unless the wife was paid adequate amount of money under the cute name of
“Financial Security of Woman”.
And the bill also mentioned about special powers being given only to
wives to oppose the divorce if the wife was unhappy with the money she
received from the husband.
Such clauses being outright anti-male and gender-biased in nature
were vehemently opposed by various men’s rights activists and
organizations, who even deposed in front of the Standing Committee on
personnel, public grievances, law and justice. The panel, chaired by
Shri Santaram Naik, was presented with the objections raised by men’s
rights organizations who sought to make the bill gender-neutral and
ensure that no man faced any kind of financial hardship because of
gender-biased clauses in the bill.
Oppositions ignored:
However, the objections raised by men’s rights organizations have
been conveniently ignored by the standing committee panel, that has gone
ahead and recommended the very clauses to the Govt. of India for the
bill to be tabled, to which the men’s rights organizations has raised
objections against.
What will happen if?
Husband purchases a property just 6 months after marriage out of his
hard-earned savings earned before marriage and his marriage breaks and
he loses half of the property. In that case the husband will be doomed.
Men start fearing this law and stop buying real estate which adversely affects the economy of the country.
Husband has dependent parents and owns a single property and if 50% of
that goes to wife post-divorce, how will the husband take care of his
old parents? Is the concept of family restricted to only husband-wife in
the Indian context?
What, if the family is a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) owning a single
joint property? Will the wife get 50% of that? What about other
sibling’s share in it?
Confidare’s objections:
Marriages are tumultuous for men. This fact reflects in the suicide
statistics that are published year-over-year by the Union Ministry of
Home Affairs and it’s the married men who top the list of suicide.
Suicide rate of husbands’ increases 4 times the rate of wives’ and 6
times the rate they are born. Every 9 minutes a married man commits
suicide. This fact clearly proves how bad marriages turn out for men and
if divorces are also made costlier by way of such laws, this will lead
to further increase in suicides by men. Is the Government of India
trying to facilitate the suicides of men?
There is one more law in the pipeline – Matrimonial Property (Rights of
Women upon Marriage Act), 2012 – which talks about making wife the
co-owner of husband’s properties right at the time of marriage; then,
why this law? Why is the Government hell bent on making redundant
anti-male laws and convert marriage into an extortion industry thriving
on men?
In a democratic law making process, objections raised by a particular
group or individual cannot be ignored without any proper justification.
The panel has failed to give any just and proper reason as to why the
objections raised should not be considered.
As per Dowry Prohibition Act, any demand of cash/kind in relation to
marriage is “Dowry”. Is not this law legalizing dowry to be paid to wife
from husband under the cute name of “Financial Security of Wife”?
Right to Equality is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution
of India and cannot be disrespected under any circumstances. Current
bill thoroughly violates it, as far as men are concerned.
Feminists are claiming that nearly 80% of women do not have a place to
live post-divorce. This is completely false because no such study has
ever been conducted. India does not have any standard data collected as
to how many divorces are happening, of those how many own a house and
how many do not, how many are nuclear, joint and HUF families. Without
any such data in place, any claims made are just airy claims without any
data. Formulating a law on airy data is dangerous.
Confidare’s demands:
Marriages and Divorces should not be made a property-transfer-bureau.
If property division is to be done then wife’s share in her ancestral
property must also be considered and then division must be done.
Duration of marriage must be a crucial factor of consideration. The
difference between a 2 month marriage and a 20 year marriage must be
clearly understood.
Property division must take into account contributions made by both the
spouses and also the fact that the property was acquired from wealth
earned post marriage and not from previous savings.
Any and all outstanding financial liabilities on the property like loan
for property, loan against property, mortgage etc. must also be equally
divided and wife must be made to be equally paid for it. If she is not
working then she should get her share from her ancestral property.
Both the partners should have equal and unbridled right to oppose divorce and there should be no gender-bias in this.
There should not be any power wrested with the courts to decide upon
property transfer or stalling of proceedings as the Indian judiciary is
highly incompetent and has not shown positive trends favoring men when
it comes to disposing cases. The Indian judiciary is highly anti-male
and does not consider twice before ordering a man to either “sell his
kidney” or “beg, borrow or steal” just to pay maintenance to his
estranged wife. What is the guarantee that the same judiciary will make
judicious decisions when it comes to this law?
Institute a National Commission for Men, that can systematically collect
issues, concerns and problems of men, study them and recommend to the
Govt. about measures to be taken to address those problems.
If the Govt. of India does not take these considerations seriously then
we have only one message for the hardworking Indian men, who think
putting self before others, is a social norm –
Your hard earned property does not belong to you.
P.S. Long run effect as the more and more cases will come out :
“Also this bill will have a disastrous effect on the
marriageability of non-working or low income men/women - as all
women/men would like to marry high income men/women now. Will the govt.
take responsibility to get these low-income or no-income men/women
marrage? How is this bill useful when it helps high income men/women
while at the same time makes the low-income men/women un-marriageable?
This bill infact is contrary to women’s and men’s welfare”
So,what to do ?
1. This is nothing but legal terrorism and to stop that the First
think to make more and more awareness. So, highlight the danger to all
LAW makers MP, Society and Friends. Always demand as per constitution
every one is equal in front of law , so the word men/women must be
replaced by person and husband/wife must be replaced by spouse.
2. Those are in LAW filed must start collected the LAW of other country
of the world and be ready to fight in Supreme court. No country have
such biased law in place.
3. Before marriage must engage a Lawyers.
4. Book a low cost Home in some Village area , so that in old age you can have a place to live.
5. The moment you feel any smell of any problem without any second thought dispose-off all your movable or immovable assets .
6. Minimum Saving after marriage , enjoy the life instead of work like
donkey and one day die in Heart attack and left huge assets.
7.Come out from all the emotion , today marriage is no longer a
emotional bond, all this male haters LAW makers make the marriage a
emotionless simple Business deal and a easy money earning business for
wrong people.
Warning to all Male Haters :
To grab the Husbands money/property you have made several law start
from DP3, 498A, DV act, CRPC125, Section 24 and now this new HMA act,
with the Principal all wives born in Raja Harish Chandra Family , never
lie and all Husbands born in Criminal Family.
All the law the basic motive is how to grab the money and property
from Husbands family with the logic women had suffered so long, so now
it is turn to men to suffer.
But forget two wrong can’t make a right think. If women
is suffering that is not due to husbands family , it is due to the girls
at their own home had not given equal right and responsibility give to a
boy, instead of correcting the same started putting all burden/blame to
husbands family .
Do not forget more then 90% women who have a home in this country , they
got from their husbands family , not from their own family, correct
that first or the day the is not too far when we will be witness when a
man will die, the bank will come and take over all his assets , which we
witness in western country .
The day Indian Husbands will learn to live a life as Debit man than
credit man and stop making any saving in property or in other assets ,
then only you all will realize the real contribution of Indian husbands
for this society.
Do not take Indian husbands family
in ride and stop promotion of Legal Extortion of their hard earned
money/property, make the LAW gender neutral the word husband/wife must
be replaced by the word spouse and the share should be equal both
liability and claim in assets.
