MARYLAND Rejects Islamic DIVORCE "Law" !
jisso
the United States, a Maryland appeals court has ruled a husband cannot
divorce his wife simply by saying three "I divorce thees," and walking
away with all their acquired wealth and property.
The precedent-setting decision is a welcome change to the way wives
can be treated when a marriage is ending and the wife faces a very
short end of the stick.
Perhaps in several decades the ruling might make its way into the
divorce "customs" of Muslim communities in other nations. But given
centuries-old Muslim pro-male practices that accord virtually NO legal
rights to women, maybe that's expecting too much.
But for starters, if "men" in countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq,
and Pakistan would stop stoning, burning, and beheading women in
"HONOR KILLINGS," some humanity, charity, kindness and enlightenment
might start to be squeezed into the behavior of Muslims everywhere.
-----------------------------------
"Islamic Divorce Ruled Not Valid in Maryland"
"Custom Allowing Men to End Marriage With Oral Declaration Lacks 'Due
Process'"
By Ruben Castaneda
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 8, 2008; B02
After his wife of more than two decades filed for divorce in
Montgomery County Circuit Court, Irfan Aleem responded in writing in
2003, and not just in court.
Aleem went to the Pakistani Embassy in the District, where he executed
a written document that asserted he was divorcing Farah Aleem. He
performed "talaq," exercising a provision of Islamic religious and
Pakistani secular law that allows husbands to divorce their wives by
declaring "I divorce thee" three times. In Muslim countries, men have
used talaq to leave their wives for centuries.
But they can't use it in Maryland, the state's highest court decided
this week.
The state Court of Appeals issued a unanimous 21-page opinion Tuesday
declaring that talaq is contrary to Maryland's constitutional
provisions providing equal rights to men and women.
"Talaq lacks any significant 'due process' for the wife, its use,
moreover, directly deprives the wife of the 'due process' she is
entitled to when she initiates divorce litigation in this state. The
lack and deprivation of due process is itself contrary to this state's
public policy," the court wrote.
The decision affirms a 2007 ruling by the Court of Special Appeals,
the state's intermediate appellate court, which also said that talaq
does not apply in the Free State.
Under Islamic traditions, talaq can be invoked only by a husband,
unless he grants his wife the same right.
According to the Court of Appeals' opinion, Irfan Aleem, who worked
for years as an economist with the World Bank, is worth about $2
million, half of which Farah Aleem is entitled to under Maryland law.
When Irfan Aleem tried to divorce his wife under the concept of talaq,
a sum of $2,500 was mentioned as a "full and final" settlement,
according to the appellate decision.
That amount was written into the marriage contract Farah Aleem signed
the day she married him in their native Pakistan in 1980, according to
the appellate decision. The contract was in accordance with Pakistani
custom. At the time, he was 29 and she was 18. The couple moved to the
Washington area in 1985.
"I don't even know how to express how happy I am. I am ecstatic,
relieved," Farah Aleem, 46, said yesterday.
Over the years, a lack of financial support from her ex-husband caused
hardship for her and her son and daughter, who are in college, she
said. "All I ever wanted was my fair share, not a penny more," said
Aleem, who lives in the Washington area, works full time for an
accounting firm and is pursuing an accounting degree at night.
At the direction of the judge who presided over the Aleems' divorce
proceedings, the couple's Potomac home was sold, and half the proceeds
-- about $200,000 -- went to Farah Aleem, said Susan Friedman, her
attorney.
Friedman said she thinks that Irfan Aleem, who retired in recent
years, invoked talaq to avoid paying Farah half of his World Bank
pension, which provides him with $90,000 annually, the attorney said.
"It will be very pleasant when [Farah] gets her share of that,"
Friedman said. "She's delighted about that."
Friedman said she will serve papers on the World Bank showing that the
original order from the Circuit Court -- that Farah Aleem is entitled
to half her ex-husband's pension -- is now final and that the bank has
to give her half.
Irfan Aleem, who is in his late 50s, lives in Pakistan, Friedman said.
His attorney, Priya R. Aryar, said, "We're very disappointed with the
decision. We think this could have adverse ramifications for a whole
bunch of people who reside in the D.C. area under diplomatic visas and
assume that their family law rights and obligations are governed by
the laws of their country of citizenship."
A legal scholar and an Islamic leader said the appellate court's
decision was not surprising.
"For the most part, Muslims expected this kind of ruling," said Muneer
Fareed, secretary general of the Islamic Society of North America in
Plainfield, Ind. "The contrary would be a surprise to them. They do
not expect the U.S. legal system to give full recognition of talaq."
Julie Macfarlane, a legal scholar who is researching a book about
Islamic divorces in North America, said the decision was not
surprising. "There's no legal enforceability [for talaq] in U.S.
courts," said Macfarlane, a professor at the University of Windsor in
Canada.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/07/AR2008050703592.html
Middle Class Warrior
Is anybody surpirsed that "at will" marriages aren't legal in the US!
uUGLY2
Misconceptions About a Pakistani Divorce
Letter to the Editor
Friday, May 16, 2008; A18
The May 8 Metro article "Islamic Divorce Ruled Not Valid in Maryland"
contained several misconceptions that I feel compelled to correct, not
only because of my own case but, more important, because they cast
aspersions on Islamic marriages and Pakistani law.
First, the Pakistani marriage contract under which my wife and I were
married explicitly set forth the division of property in the event of
divorce, much as a prenuptial agreement does in the United States.
Under that agreement, each party was entitled to retain property in
his or her own name as well as half of any property held jointly. My
property rights and my wife's property rights were the same in that
respect.
Second, the divorce proceeding that the talaq procedure initiated was
not unilateral. There is an administrative and court process in
Pakistan, in which my wife chose not to participate, that would have
safeguarded any rights she wished to assert. The Maryland courts,
however, refused to hear any evidence about Pakistani law and
procedure on these or any other points -- a fundamental violation of
due process rights.
Third, I never took the position that she was entitled to only $2,500
while I would retain $2 million. As a result of the Pakistani order of
divorce, my ex-wife received property with a total value of
approximately $500,000.
Fourth, the only issue in the Maryland proceeding was the division of
my pension. Although the Maryland court found it contrary to public
policy not to give half that pension to my ex-wife, I would note that
the laws of a number of states also provide that retirement benefits
are not shared property in a divorce settlement.
Thus, bizarrely, Maryland has refused to apply a foreign law that is
consistent with the laws of its sister states and the federal
government, which Maryland courts do recognize and apply. I would also
note that Maryland law would enforce a U.S. prenuptial agreement to
the same effect.
Only foreign Muslims, it appears, do not get the benefit of such
comity.
IRFAN ALEEM
Karachi, Pakistan
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/15/AR2008051503729.html
abelincoln
pakistan....
and feel free to take as many neocon assfuckers with you as you like...
you might start with awol bush and the halliburton whore, dick head
cheney....
don't fucking bother to say good-bye, just fucking leave....