Notices issued on plea against Christians Divorce Act

LAHORE :The Lahore High Court on Monday issued notices to federal and provincial governments on an appeal challenging order of a single bench wherein Section 7 of the Christian Divorce Act, 1869 was restored, allowing Christian couples to seek divorce without levelling accusations of adultery.

A division bench headed by Justice Ayesha A Malik heard the appeal moved by Emmanuel Francis, a Christian from Faisalabad.  The appellant through his counsel Advocate Saiful Malook challenged the decision of the single bench comprising Chief Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.

The appellant counsel said that Section 7 was even the part of the law passed and approved by the assembly and then president Ziaul Haq. He questioned that how the section was restored when it was not part of the relevant law of Christian Divorce Act, 1869. Even otherwise, Section 10 was there in the Act which provided Christian couples the way how they could part ways, the counsel argued.

He said an 11-member bench of the SC had also declared the law as intra vires to the Constitution. He challenged that how a single bench then could allow a petition against such historic law approved by both assembly and the country’s top court. After hearing initial arguments, the bench issued notices to the parties for arguments.

On June 20, Chief Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah allowed a petition moved by Amin Masih against a provision of the Christian Divorce Act 1869, which requires a Christian couple to use allegation of adultery for dissolution of marriage.

The CJ had observed that the Christians would be able to depart in a dignified way without accusing each other of adultery. The judge also restored section 7 of the Christian Divorce Act 1869 enabling the couples to approach a court of law for dissolution of marriage on ordinary grounds.

The section 7 of the Act was suspended by then military ruler Ziaul Haq through an ordinance in 1981 leaving no ground for Christian men for divorcing their wives except on adultery charges.

Amin Masih through his counsel Advocate Sheraz Zaka for the restoration of the section 7 saying he wanted to divorce his wife but without accusing her of adultery. The counsel argued that the suspended section should be restored according to which the principles of court’s of England would apply so far as family/divorce issues of Christians were concerned.

He said by the restoration of section 7 there will be other just and reasonable grounds available in order to seek a divorce by a Christian man. At present, he said, there was only one ground available under section 10 of the Act and it was adultery, which was in conflict with the dignity of a woman.

The lawyer said in the UK the Matrimonial Causes Act was now interpreted in a liberal manner providing a cushion to both Christian men and women to part their ways if marriage was an irretrievably broken down or with mutual consent, but this ground was not available for Christians living in Pakistan.

Advocate Zaka contended that since protection of minorities was one of the norm/salient features of Constitution of Pakistan; therefore the omission of section 7 of the Divorce Act 1869 through the ordinance should be declared unconstitutional as well as null and void. In this case, the chief justice had also sought opinion from the Christian religious leaders and scholars.

SC moved: A Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) lawyer has approached the Supreme Court for disqualification of all those parliamentarians who voted in favour of “The Election Act 2017,” an amended piece of legislation that allowed ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif to become the PML-N president despite his disqualification in Panama Papers case.

Advocate Gohar Nawaz Sindhu of PTI lawyers wing filed a petition at Lahore registry of the apex court pleading that the parliamentarians violated the provisions of Article 62 of the Constitution by voting for the new election reforms law.

He submitted that the whole legislation is supposed to protect an individual who has been disqualified by the Supreme Court. He argued that the law has been made to enable a disqualified man to head a political party, which he believed, against the spirit of the Constitution and Islamic injunctions.

The petitioner-lawyer asked the court to order National Assembly Speaker and Senate chairman to disqualify all the parliamentarians who exercised their vote in favour of the Election Act 2017.