On 21st January, Iraq's parliament made headlines by passing three controversial laws, including amendments to the nation’s personal status law. These changes have sparked a wave of criticism, with activists claiming that they effectively legalize child marriage and undermine women’s rights. The amendments grant Islamic courts expanded authority over family matters such as marriage, divorce, and inheritance, a move critics argue reverses decades of progress established under Iraq’s 1959 Personal Status Law. This law had once been considered a landmark achievement in protecting women’s rights and unifying family law across the country.

The driving force behind the amendments came from conservative Shiite lawmakers who positioned the changes as an attempt to curb Western cultural influence and align Iraq’s legal system with Islamic values. However, these so-called "values" have raised alarm internationally. Under existing Iraqi law, the legal age for marriage is 18. Yet, many Shia clerics, following the Jaafari school of Islamic jurisprudence, allow marriages for girls as young as nine. The amendments would now empower clerics to officiate marriages based on their interpretation of Islamic law, which could institutionalize child marriages under the guise of religious practices.

Adding fuel to the fire, Iraq’s parliament also passed a general amnesty bill, which has been criticized for disproportionately favoring Sunni detainees. Critics argue that it opens the door for individuals involved in embezzlement and corruption to evade punishment. Another bill addressing Kurdish land claims was also approved, further intensifying Iraq’s already fraught political landscape.

The backlash from women’s rights groups and activists has been fierce. “The amendments to the civil status law will leave disastrous effects on the rights of women and girls, through the marriage of girls at an early age, which violates their right to life as children, and will disrupt the protection mechanisms for divorce, custody, and inheritance for women,” warned Intisar al-Mayali, a human rights activist and member of the Iraqi Women’s League. These words capture the gravity of the situation as these laws prioritize religious interpretations over fundamental human rights and legal protections.

The Iraqi parliament’s session on 21st January concluded in chaos and controversy, with allegations of procedural irregularities overshadowing the adoption of three contentious laws. A parliamentary official, speaking anonymously, revealed that “the legal quorum was broken because half of the lawmakers present in the session did not vote.” This breakdown of parliamentary protocol added fuel to the already heated debates. He further disclosed that some members climbed onto the podium in protest, while others vehemently opposed the proceedings. The session witnessed an unprecedented uproar as lawmakers criticized the simultaneous voting on all three laws, each supported by different political blocs.

Despite the disorder, Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, the speaker of the parliament, defended the session’s outcomes, calling the adoption of the laws “an important step in the process of enhancing justice and organizing the daily lives of citizens.” However, this perspective was not shared by all. Independent MP Raed al-Maliki expressed a nuanced stance, stating, “Regarding the civil status law, we are strongly supporting it and there were no issues with that. But it was combined with other laws to be voted on together and this might lead to a legal appeal at the federal court.” His comments highlighted concerns over the legality of grouping the laws for a single vote, which many believe undermines parliamentary procedures.

The criticism did not end there. Noor Nafea Ali, another independent lawmaker, openly condemned the session, labeling it a “farce” and asserting that the bills were passed without securing the required number of votes. This accusation has raised questions about the legitimacy of the laws and whether they will withstand scrutiny if challenged in the federal court.

Meanwhile, Iraq faced another tragic event on the same day. An explosion at an ammunition stockpile in the al-Tarmiyah district, north of Baghdad, claimed the lives of at least three policemen, including the national security chief of the district, and left four others injured. According to a security official, the incident occurred during an operation conducted by a joint force of the Iraqi army and the national security service. The mission was launched following intelligence reports of Islamic State (IS) activity and the presence of an ammunition cache in the area. The official, speaking anonymously due to restrictions on briefing the media, provided details of the operation and its deadly outcome.

The Islamist Attempts to Impose Sharia Law in India

The push to impose Sharia law in India has been a recurring concern, with numerous individuals and groups from a specific community openly or covertly advocating for its enforcement. These appeals have not been limited to fringe elements but have frequently included groups like the outlawed Popular Front of India (PFI), the Students’ Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), and even prominent Islamic leaders, parties, and politicians. Additionally, terrorist organizations from neighboring countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan have long aimed to subjugate India and its Hindu population, seeking to either eliminate them or reduce them to a status of subhuman treatment under the guise of Sharia law.

The grim realities of Sharia law are well-documented in regions governed by it. Afghanistan under the Taliban’s rule and territories under the control of the Islamic State (IS or ISIS) stand as stark examples of the suffering inflicted upon women and non-Muslims in such regimes. Despite their claims of moderation, the Taliban’s oppressive restrictions on women’s basic rights, including education, paint a dark picture of life under this archaic legal system. Similarly, ISIS’s atrocities against non-Muslim women, especially Christian and Yazidi females, demonstrate the dehumanization perpetuated by Sharia law. These women were often subjected to abuse, traded as commodities, and raped by their captors.

The plight of minorities, especially Hindus, in countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh, where Sharia law is practiced in both letter and spirit, serves as another horrifying testament. The miserable conditions of these communities were a significant factor in the establishment of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in 2019, which aimed to provide refuge to persecuted minorities. Despite these clear examples of exploitation and dehumanization, there remains a vocal section in India that advocates for the implementation of Sharia law, arguing that it aligns with their religious ideology and beliefs.

The chilling slogan, “gustakh e rasool ki ek hi saza, sar tan se juda” (behead those who insult Prophet Muhammad and Islam), often heard during incidents of alleged blasphemy, exemplifies the influence of Sharia principles. This phrase, originating from Pakistan’s Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP), a political outfit with extremist roots, reflects the prioritization of religious fervor over logic, rationality, and even the sanctity of human life.

India has witnessed the tragic consequences of such ideologies. The brutal killings of innocent Hindus following the circulation of an edited video by Mohammed Zubair of Alt News, featuring comments by former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma, underline the dangers of mob justice inspired by Sharia law. These incidents mirror the fate of alleged blasphemers in Islamic countries, where mob violence is rampant, and those who escape immediate harm often face equally severe punishments under Sharia-based legal systems.

AIMPLB, Sharia Law, and Opposition to the UCC

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has consistently focused on protecting Sharia law, actively opposing any legislation it believes undermines its principles. Its spokesperson, Qasim Rasool Ilyas, disclosed, “We have more than 100 Sharia courts in India under AIMPLB, and there are several others running under Imarat-e-Sharia across states including Bihar, Orissa, Jharkhand, under Imarat-e-Sharia Assam and Karnataka. Jamiat Ulema is also running Sharia courts.” He further revealed the board’s plans to expand these courts, stating, “We are planning to establish Sharia courts wherever there is a Muslim population.”

Interestingly, the AIMPLB claims that these Sharia courts aim to reduce the burden on India’s constitutional judicial system. However, the organization has long resisted any interference in its jurisdiction, opposing laws such as the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act of 2019 and other reforms aimed at protecting the rights of Muslim women. In 2018, it announced its intention to establish Darul-Qaza, or Sharia courts, across the country to strengthen its hold on personal laws. The board even published a book titled “Nikah-O-Talaq (Marriage and Divorce)” to defend Sharia practices.

One of the board’s staunchest positions has been against the Uniform Civil Code (UCC). It argues that implementing the UCC would be “against the spirit of the Constitution” and deprive citizens of the privileges provided under personal laws, which are guided by Sharia. The AIMPLB has gone as far as to claim that the UCC would disrupt peace and harmony in the country. The board’s opposition extends to challenging Supreme Court rulings, such as those allowing divorced women to seek maintenance after the iddat period, and contesting Uttarakhand’s UCC law.

Many Muslim leaders have echoed these sentiments, rejecting the UCC outright. The president of Hyderabad-based Tahreek Muslim Shabban, Maulana Mushtaq Malik, issued a warning last year, saying, “We are against the UCC, and if it is forced upon us, the reaction will be the same as it was for the CAA and NRC (National Register of Citizens). The Muslims of the country will never tolerate it at all.”

Samajwadi Party leader Abu Asim Azmi expressed similar views, emphasizing adherence to Islamic teachings over constitutional laws. He stated, “1400 years ago a constitution of Islam was formulated, but the government wants to make amendments even in that. They want you to marry according to their laws and divide your properties as per them. What shall we do? Should we follow the government’s Uniform Civil Code or the teachings of the Holy Quran and Allah? The situation is deteriorating in the country, and Muslims are worried.”

The AIMPLB and its supporters remain steadfast in their opposition to the UCC, despite its constitutional backing. Their fight to preserve Sharia law, however, highlights a significant inconsistency. While demanding the implementation of Sharia law in personal matters, they do not advocate for its application to criminal law, revealing a selective and arguably hypocritical approach. By resisting the UCC, these groups aim to safeguard their religious laws, even at the expense of constitutional principles and national unity.

Presence of Sharia Law in Marriages and Other Walks of Life

Sharia law continues to influence various aspects of life in India, from marriage to everyday practices, often creating conflicts with constitutional laws and societal norms. A striking example was last year’s judgment by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which ruled that a marriage between a Muslim boy and a Hindu girl is not lawful under Mohammedan law. The court explained that even if the marriage were registered under the Special Marriage Act, it would still be considered an “irregular (or fasid) marriage under Muslim personal law.” The couple’s plea for police protection was denied, with the court emphasizing that the Hindu girl was unwilling to convert to Islam and that the couple did not wish to live together without formalizing the marriage. The court further hinted that for such a union to be valid under Sharia law, the Hindu girl would need to convert to Islam, despite the Special Marriage Act permitting interfaith marriages.

Another major development occurred in August last year when the Himanta Biswa Sarma-led government repealed the 1935 Assam Muslim Marriages and Divorce Registration Act and Rules, a colonial-era legislation. The repeal brought significant reforms to Muslim marriages, including the elimination of Qazis (who acted as marriage and divorce registrars), the prohibition of child marriages, and the compulsory registration of weddings. The Act’s Section 8 had previously legitimized child marriages by mandating that guardians apply for marriage registration even if one or both parties were minors. The repeal was seen as a critical step toward protecting the rights of minors and women.

Beyond marriage, Sharia law enforces strict limitations on daily life, particularly for women. For instance, Kanthapuram A P Aboobacker Musliyar, the general secretary of All India Sunni Jamiyyathul Ulama, recently criticized a popular physical fitness program called Multi-Exercise Combination (MEC-7) in Kerala. He stated, “When we enquire about what we see, it is that there is an intermingling of men and women. Not just that, women are exposing their bodies and doing this exercise. The programme has even abolished the thought that men and women seeing one another is haram (forbidden).” According to him, such activities violated Islamic norms and were unacceptable under Sharia law.

The influence of Sharia law extends to historical and religious disputes as well. One prominent example is the opposition to the reclamation of Hindu temples, such as the Ram Mandir, which were destroyed during Islamic rule. Organizations like the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and political entities like the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) have been vocal against these reclamation efforts. Their leaders, often known for incendiary remarks, have opposed moves to restore Hindu temples, both in courts and through street protests. A violent incident during the survey of Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal stands as a testament to the resistance from Muslim groups.

Adding to the controversy, the Waqf Board, an institution rooted in Sharia law, has frequently been accused of fraudulent claims over public and private properties, including temples. The agitation against the Waqf Amendment Bill by Muslim groups and leaders reflects the resistance to curbing these powers. The Waqf Board’s role and the strong opposition to reforms aimed at regulating it underscore how Sharia law continues to shape disputes over land, property, and religious sites.

Sharia Law: A Tool of Oppression and Persecution

The implementation of Sharia law in its entirety has consistently proven to be a mechanism of oppression, particularly targeting non-Muslims and women. Its imposition often leads to severe human rights violations, including child marriages, public flogging of women under baseless accusations, and systematic discrimination. The oppressive nature of Sharia law is starkly visible in countries like Afghanistan and Iran, where women have faced brutal consequences, even being murdered, for minor infractions such as not adhering to prescribed dress codes like wearing a headscarf. These incidents highlight the grim reality of life under such a legal framework, where basic freedoms are stripped away, and existence becomes burdensome, especially for women.

In nations like Bangladesh and Pakistan, Sharia law serves as a tool to persecute non-Muslims, often on fabricated charges. These laws are wielded as weapons to single out minorities, depriving them of their rights and dignity. The consequences for non-Muslims under Sharia law are uniformly dire, with individuals subjected to harassment, violence, and systemic marginalization.

The situation in India is no different, where radical elements are pushing for the application of Sharia law with the intent of replicating the methods of historical Islamic invaders. Their goal, as documented in the vision document of the Popular Front of India (PFI), is to transform India into an Islamic nation by targeting Hindus and erasing their cultural and religious identity. This effort seeks to use Sharia law as a means to impose religious dominance, undermine democratic principles, and perpetuate a cycle of oppression and injustice.

The call for Sharia law in India, especially by extremist groups, raises serious concerns about the potential erosion of human rights, equality, and the secular fabric of the nation. Its history of being used as a tool of oppression and persecution serves as a stark reminder of the dangers such a legal system poses to a diverse and democratic society.