A lot of problems in marriage in our society arise from traditions and customs, which more often in our time is no longer compatible. The problem of divorce is very urgent. Today the divorce rate is only growing. We are trying to find solutions at the state level. Adopts legislative acts, we prohibit the courts from immediately divorcing. But in reality, divorce rates are on the rise. Globalization, is it all to blame or young people have become better aware of their rights and not allow one gender to be dominant over them.

These are wonderful insights, Prof. Ismailova. One agrees in toto with the view expressed. At some point, I made some observations with suggestions towards addressing the issue of femicide and gender-based violence. To avoid rehashing the whole article, I attach a copy to this response. The way most customary marriages are configured in various communities where these still exist tends to take humanity back to the times when might be right – which is just plain hogwash.

Newer generations have not only increasingly become aware of their rights, but the socio-economic environment has also made it conducive for such rights to be asserted and jealously guarded. Residual nostalgia of the old days when one gender had arrogated to itself the right to be mighty, persists. It, in part, translates into these various degrees of recalcitrance that spike the graphs of divorce rates. It also spikes the regression line of the incidents of femicide and gender-based violence. The role of culture as loosely defined still ted s to be dominant when all it means, most of the time, is just sticking to old habits whether they are useful or not. It is the inertia of the habitual mind refusing to adapt and grow with transformation times and then environment.

Nevertheless, one still seeks clarity and views regarding the above questions on the anatomy of the marriage and the anatomy of its dissolution. What would be ten views of ten Prof. in this regard?

Apologies. I omitted to attach the promised Femicide paper. Here it is.

These interesting questions may be answered with some cultural contexts. For instance, in a Muslim society or even in a more traditional society the decision of marriage is taken by family members not by individuals and it happens at the time of Nikah (نِكاح). Nikah in the Islamic legal system implies a marriage contract or official wedding ceremony, when solemnized, meaning that the marriage contract has been done, but Rukhsati (رُخصتی‎ ‎) is the departure (farewell) ceremony of the marriage, in which the groom’s family will leave together with the couples to their own home. Actually, from Nikah to Rukhsati, it often takes several days. A premarital sexual relationship, religiously or legally is not generally accepted in these societies and is considered as a taboo in many societies.

Thank you, Prof. That is quite enlightening. It appears that any issuing of a certificate in this example, by the state authorities, would only be capturing a record of an event that has already concluded. This means that even if the couple or family may not register that marriage immediately after its conclusion along the lines adequately captured, the marriage will still have occurred, perhaps at the conclusion of Nikah, as Rukhsati could be a direct consequence of Nikah and not a stand-alone event or stage in the process of the union. One can also postulate that perhaps, legally speaking, nit-picking lawyers would have to argue that the late registration of the marriage even years after Nikah, would still have to record the date of the marriage as that of the date of Nikah.

This proposition assumes that the registration of a marriage, in this culture, could be delayed even by years without losing its validity. The registration by state officials does not make the marriage. Witnesses or the couple can themselves through affidavits confirm that the marriage did take place at the time it occurred. Then officials should be able to register it on paper, without validating it as it validates itself when Nikah is deemed in place (as from a specific date and place).

This is really thinking to solve practical problems that parties may encounter in courts when debating the issues of whether the marriage occurred and its validity. Some people look to the piece of paper, while the marriage is not a piece of paper. The piece of paper only presents soe form of universally accepted evidence that the state has recognised its existence and recorded it at some point.

But in this discourse, we are still missing the issue of divorce say in the same culture. Can we share any views as to at what point does divorce occur, if it is allowed at all? Can it also occur in practical terms before being recognised by the law? Even in western civil marriages, the marriage officer, first pronounces the couple husband and wife before issuing the marriage certificate. The issuing of that certificate may occur a few days or even weeks after the event. The date of issue is not necessarily the same a s the date of marriage. But before we drift to far away from the facts into speculation, how is divorce processed and at which point in the chain of events does not become concluded? What evidence must be presented in court for the judge or magistrate to recognise it and bless it on behalf of the state?

These questions are key in elevating the cultural marriages to the same level of comprehensibility that is enjoyed by civil marriages which are regarded as colonial and artificial by indigenous people. Intermarriages between cultures also require that we harmonise the practices and recognisability of marriages across the cultures and even religions. Otherwise, unfairness and injustice could remain marginalising to those culturally joined in conjugal relationships.

The conferment of a university degree for instance, may be said to only take root when declared by the Chancellor in absentia or when tapping happens during the capping if at a ceremony (witnessed by congregants). The requirements are met by the time such a conferment takes place. Completing ten curriculum and meeting then requirements alone does not confer the degree. This is just to present a sharp contrast with some of our human ritualistic practices which are still pretty much leftovers from our embedded religious backgrounds.

أتفق معك يجب مناقشة الظاهرة من جميع الجوانب الدينية والاجتماعية والاقتصادية والقانونية