Hyderabad, Sep 27 (IANS) The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), the apex body of Indian Muslims, on Thursday termed as ‘murder of democracy’ and an ‘insult to Parliament’ the ordinance brought by the Centre last week making triple talaq a criminal offence.
AIMPLB Secretary Moulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani told reporters here that the government brought the ordinance through backdoor on an issue which was not very important and where there was room for making legislation democratically and through public opinion.
Rahmani, who is also the spokesperson of the board, said the legislation was unacceptable for Muslims. He pointed out that Muslim women have already rejected it.
On whether the board will challenge the ordinance in the Supreme Court, he said the board’s legal committee will look into it as the ordinance will anyway lapse in six months.
AIMPLB member and Hyderabad MP Asaduddin Owaisi, who also addressed the news conference, said the ordinance would lapse the moment Parliament meets for the next session.
Rahmani said the government tried to bring a bill in Parliament, which was an interference in Shariat and was against the rights of women.
He said it was ironic that the government drafted the bill without consulting the community for which the legislation was being made.
The government also turned down the demand of the opposition in the Rajya Sabha to refer the bill to Select Committee which would have given an opportunity to the community or its representative organisations like AIMPLB to put forth their view.
He claimed that the ordinance was bereft of any logic as it seeks to punish a man for a crime which he has not committed.
“The Supreme Court has set aside triple talaq. When you are saying that when a man gives triple talaq, it will not come into effect, then what for you are sending him to jail for three years?” he asked.
Rahmani said criminalization of triple talaq would increase the number of women deserted by their husbands.
Owaisi said that marriage in Islam was a social contract and to apply penal provisions was unconstitutional.