Citizenship in India not gender-neutral, Arizona State U professor asserts

Interesting article on the long-standing impact of “personal law” and group religious rights in India:

One aspect of Indian democracy that is unfamiliar to most Americans is the concept of personal law, a legacy of British colonial administration. Four religious communities – majority Hindu and minority Muslim, Christian and Parsi – have their own personal laws. Other religious groups, Sikh, Buddhist and Jain, are subsumed under Hindu personal law. No one may opt out of a religious identity, and therefore no one is exempt from personal law. Proponents of personal law claim that it secures religious difference, Behl said.

“Personal law associated with India’s religious communities shapes every aspect of a woman’s life – her status at birth; her capacity to own, inherit and manage property; her freedom to work, marry, divorce and remarry; and her relationship with her children,” she [Natasha Behl] said.

“Personal law effectively suspends Indian women’s most basic rights on behalf of group rights. The issue of personal law divides women on multiple fronts – between their respective religious communities, between civil rights and minority rights, and between gender equality and minority claims for recognition.”

The interviews Behl conducted for the “Situated citizenship” article document situations including a disconnect between property and inheritance rights for women, which in theory are legally protected, and the reality in the community. “Practically speaking, girls don’t receive any land from their parents, and they don’t receive any land from their in-laws,” one interviewee told her.

Deep multiculturalism focus on group rights rather than ‘shallow’ multiculturalism focussing on individual rights as in Canada, Australia etc.

Citizenship in India not gender-neutral, ASU professor asserts | ASU News.