Hadiya case exposes our deep-rooted misogyny

Law and morality must remain separate and distinct. Whenever any political narrative gains too much credence, the lines are blurred and the law seems to tilt in favour of the dominant narrative. But forces of democracy, the push and pull force reinstatement of liberal democratic principles - democracy functions relying on this utopia.

The conversion and marriage of 24-year-old Hadiya to Islam in Kerala sparked off a new debate. The entire episode was termed as "love jihad" where Hindu girls are "brainwashed and radicalised" into Islam. What's interesting is that this case isn't even a classic example of the so-called "love jihad". The woman converted much earlier and got married years later. 

The Kerala High Court annulled her marriage exercising the "loco parentis" jurisdiction where the court acts like a guardian. The court came to the conclusion that the woman is not fit to make a decision for herself and has been brainwashed. 

When the matter reached the Supreme Court, an NIA investigation was ordered. A report was submitted before the top court that various organisations are recruiting and radicalising for the ISIS. After many hearings and adjournments, the chief justice of India, Dipak Misra, spelled it out yesterday (October 30) that "there is no law that stops a woman from marrying even a criminal", and ordered her to be produced before the Supreme Court.

The most problematic aspect of this case has been that the woman who is legally an adult was sent to the "custody of her parents". The NIA conceded in the Supreme Court yesterday, that "custody" for a major girl is a problematic word in law. She is been guarded by policemen, her movements are restricted and is not allowed to meet other people.

Even if all the allegations of the NIA are to be believed and taken at face value that the girl was in fact radicalised and there is a concerted effort and a "well-oiled machinery that targets women", is locking up Hadiya the solution of it?

If she made a bad choice of a life partner, will you annul the marriage and lock her up inside her house? Or the law must book such organisations, cut their funding and charge such  institutions for sedition which radicalise and recruit for terror activities?

No one would ever argue that anti-national and terrorist activities should be allowed to flourish under the garb of freedom of religion or any idea of liberalism, there is no reluctance to deny the problem, but the objection is to the proposed solution. If the woman has been "psycologically kidnapped", as the NIA claims, then shouldn't she and others like her be sent for a correction programme, counselling or treatment? Under what law do you lock up an adult woman and dictate choices for her?

At some point in history, even in law, women were considered chattels and property. Their bodies and sexuality were conquered and protected to establish kingdoms and states. In the 21st century, though women are given full and equal rights, their bodies and sexuality remain the battleground for a political and cultural war. 

The case of Hadiya is a classic 21st century example when the law gives in to a political narrative, sidelines individual rights and women take the status of chattels and property. It is only the democratic utopia that perhaps keeps the faith in modern democracy alive.

Also read: How right to privacy fails Hadiya, put under house arrest by her father