8 Year Old Denied Divorce - Saudi Arabia

[Didacus]

Un juge refuse le divorce à une fillette de 8 ans en Arabie Saoudite
PsychoMédia - Publié le 27 décembre 2008



Un tribunal saoudien a refusé le divorce à une filette de huit ans mariée par son père à un homme de 58 ans. La demande de divorce a été déposée par la mère de la fillette après que l'acte de mariage eut été signé par le père. Les parents sont eux-mêmes divorcés.

Le juge, du tribunal de Unayzah (nord de Ryad), a considéré que l'enfant devait d'abord atteindre la puberté pour faire elle-même la demande de divorce.

Link:
[url="http://www.psychomedia.qc.ca/pn/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=6515"]Un juge refuse le divorce à une fillette de 8 ans en Arabie Saoudite[/url]

Quick Translation:

[quote]A judge refused a divorce for an 8-year-old little girl in Saudi Arabia


A Saudi court refused divorce a girl of eight years married by her father to a 58-year-old man. The petition for divorce was submitted by the mother of the little girl after the wedding act had been signed by the father. The parents are divorced themselves.

The judge, of the court of Unayzah (north of Ryad), considered that the child first had to attain the puberty in order to request the divorce herself.[/quote]



I would have expected a reasonable judge to grant the divorce, and once the little girl has the age of puberty would then decide for herself who to mary, but then again, that's just my opinion.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Didacus' post='1737569' date='Dec 29 2008, 09:07 AM']Un juge refuse le divorce à une fillette de 8 ans en Arabie Saoudite
PsychoMédia - Publié le 27 décembre 2008



Un tribunal saoudien a refusé le divorce à une filette de huit ans mariée par son père à un homme de 58 ans. La demande de divorce a été déposée par la mère de la fillette après que l'acte de mariage eut été signé par le père. Les parents sont eux-mêmes divorcés.

Le juge, du tribunal de Unayzah (nord de Ryad), a considéré que l'enfant devait d'abord atteindre la puberté pour faire elle-même la demande de divorce.

Link:
[url="http://www.psychomedia.qc.ca/pn/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=6515"]Un juge refuse le divorce à une fillette de 8 ans en Arabie Saoudite[/url]

Quick Translation:





I would have expected a reasonable judge to grant the divorce, and once the little girl has the age of puberty would then decide for herself who to mary, but then again, that's just my opinion.[/quote]

I suspect that he is now seen as her guardian and consiquently she could not enat the divorce untill she is seen as a legally autonomous individual which comes with the advent of puberty. But I know little about salafi rendering of Sharia or fiqh

[icelandic_iceskater]

that poor girl

[Didacus]

[quote name='icelandic_iceskater' post='1737607' date='Dec 29 2008, 10:48 AM']that poor girl [/quote]

Yes.

Strange that she's old enough to get married, but not old enough to decide for herself to get a divorce.

(not that I am endorcing divorce here, but you know what I mean - right? )




Another way of putting it is that the woman's (in this case girl's) consent is not required for a marriage, but her consent is required for a divorce. Can this make any sense whatsoever?

Edited December 29, 2008 by Didacus

[homeschoolmom]

[CatherineM]

By the time she hits puberty, she might be a widow instead.

[tinytherese]

Eh, that age gap between her and her husband is disturbing.

[MichaelF]

Not surprising. Salafi "jurisprudence" was responsible* for recently "reopening" the slavery debate in islamic society (hint: the Saudi Salafis came down on the side of slavery), after it had been condemned as unislamic, at the end of the XIXth Century.
Slavery, despite being formally outlawed (in the ancient days of 1963), is still extant in Saudi Arabia.

Note: for all intents and purposes, Salafi = Wahhabi (Salafis disagree on this, as they don't think Ibn Abdul Wahhab actually established a seperate school worth distinction from the Salafi stream).


*--In 2003 a high-level Saudi jurist, Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan, issued a fatwa claiming “Slavery is a part of Islam. Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam.” He attacked Muslim scholars who said otherwise maintaining, “They are ignorant, not scholars ... They are merely writers. Whoever says such things is an infidel.” At the time of the fatwa, al-Fawzaan was a member of the Senior Council of Clerics, Saudi Arabia’s highest religious body, a member of the Council of Religious Edicts and Research, the Imam of Prince Mitaeb Mosque in Riyadh, and a professor at Imam Mohamed Bin Saud Islamic University, the main Wahhabi center of learning in the country.

Edited December 29, 2008 by MichaelF

[Seven77]

sick

[Didacus]

Michael, you seem to know quite a bit on Islam. What is your source? Wht are you reading?

[Hassan]

[quote name='MichaelF' post='1737852' date='Dec 29 2008, 04:48 PM']Not surprising. Salafi "jurisprudence" was responsible* for recently "reopening" the slavery debate in islamic society (hint: the Saudi Salafis came down on the side of slavery), after it had been condemned as unislamic, at the end of the XIXth Century.
Slavery, despite being formally outlawed (in the ancient days of 1963), is still extant in Saudi Arabia.

Note: for all intents and purposes, Salafi = Wahhabi (Salafis disagree on this, as they don't think Ibn Abdul Wahhab actually established a seperate school worth distinction from the Salafi stream).


*--In 2003 a high-level Saudi jurist, Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan, issued a fatwa claiming “Slavery is a part of Islam. Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam.” He attacked Muslim scholars who said otherwise maintaining, “They are ignorant, not scholars ... They are merely writers. Whoever says such things is an infidel.” At the time of the fatwa, al-Fawzaan was a member of the Senior Council of Clerics, Saudi Arabia’s highest religious body, a member of the Council of Religious Edicts and Research, the Imam of Prince Mitaeb Mosque in Riyadh, and a professor at Imam Mohamed Bin Saud Islamic University, the main Wahhabi center of learning in the country.[/quote]

The Salafi movement [i]is[/i] distinct from Wahhab's movement. There are similarities but also distinct differences, such as their views on apostasy and innovations

[Tinkerlina]

That's awful. It's sad that there is no objective government body to step in.... Katie

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Didacus' post='1737569' date='Dec 29 2008, 09:07 AM']I would have expected a reasonable judge to grant the divorce, and once the little girl has the age of puberty would then decide for herself who to mary, but then again, that's just my opinion.[/quote]

It's not strange. It's Saudi Islam. Same ol', same ol'. The news is full of stories like this. Of the rape of little girls, the forced marriages and the refusal to hear the pleas of little Muslims girls to divorce their "husbands". We only get a handful of stories, but for thousands and thousands of children this is the story of their lives.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1737694' date='Dec 29 2008, 02:15 PM']By the time she hits puberty, she might be a widow instead.[/quote]

By the time she hits puberty, she might be stoned to death.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1738436' date='Dec 29 2008, 09:17 PM']By the time she hits puberty, she might be stoned to death.[/quote]

I thought honor killings were acid or setting them on fire. I heard they are trying to pass a law in England about forced marriages. Someone noticed that girls were disappearing from classes there. It's not just Muslim though, it is also Hindu and something else that I forget. They said they thought just as many are disappearing from schools here in Canada, but no one is tracking it.

[MichaelF]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1738070' date='Dec 29 2008, 07:12 PM']The Salafi movement [i]is[/i] distinct from Wahhab's movement.[/quote]

Most Salafi scholars disagree. The argument is that the distinctions are not great enough to rationalise a "splitting" of the school into subsets. Whether that is a reasoned argument, or simply Salafi indignation....

Edited December 30, 2008 by MichaelF

[MichaelF]

[quote name='Didacus' post='1738048' date='Dec 29 2008, 06:53 PM']Michael, you seem to know quite a bit on Islam. What is your source? Wht are you reading?[/quote]


The Army sent us (Company Grade Officers) to "muslim and arab school", prior to our second OIF deployment (the first being the Invasion, which was a bit "come as you are").

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='MichaelF' post='1738561' date='Dec 30 2008, 01:24 AM']The Army sent us (Company Grade Officers) to "muslim and arab school", prior to our second OIF deployment (the first being the Invasion, which was a bit "come as you are").[/quote]

My daughter is heading to "arab and muslim" school in 5 days.

[Christie_M]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1738563' date='Dec 29 2008, 10:27 PM']My daughter is heading to "arab and muslim" school in 5 days.[/quote]
I know I'm pretty ignorant, but may I ask what that is?

[Hassan]

[quote name='MichaelF' post='1738559' date='Dec 30 2008, 01:21 AM']Most Salafi scholars disagree. The argument is that the distinctions are not great enough to rationalise a "splitting" of the school into subsets. Whether that is a reasoned argument, or simply Salafi indignation....[/quote]

Sure, they can argue that and I wouldn’t claim to know enough to contradict them. I would just object to the notion of the two being identical.