The views expressed do not reflect those of any POLICY WATCH SA clients
There’s far more the issuance of South Africa’s first Muslim marriage certificates than a recent Democratic Alliance (DA) post on X would have us believe. It reads: “Under the DA’s Dr. Leon Schreiber, the Dept. of Home Affairs has issued SA’s first official Muslim marriage certificates, giving rightful recognition to Muslim marriages. The DA in the GNU is committed to meaningful changes that uplift SA”. Elaborating on this, a media statement was also published on the party’s website to mark the achievement.
But why use it to score political points? Why not allow ordinary South Africans draw their own conclusions – especially those in the Muslim community? Surely it would have been more in the spirit of a ‘government of national unity’ (GNU) simply to circulate the Home Affairs Department’s press release, which refers to the milestone as “an expression of nation building, and a celebration of South Africa’s unity in diversity”? Importantly, the statement includes valuable information on “retroactively” recognising existing Muslim marriage certificates by rewording them appropriately before reprinting them.
Patriotic Alliance (PA) leader and Minister of Sport, Arts & Culture Gayton McKenzie’s X post the same day is spot on: “We in the GNU should guard against attributing our successes currently as political party victories at the expense of each other. I can’t claim victories as those of @OnsBaizaNie (PA), because we didn’t win by a majority. No one did. Let’s advance GNU. South Africa first”. And for the uninitiated, “Ons baiza nie” means “We don’t disappoint”. Which is a justifiable slogan given the PA’s meteoric rise as one of South Africa’s smaller political parties.
Granted, as GNU Home Affairs Minister the DA’s Leon Shreiber has moved mountains since assuming office. Especially in tackling the identity document application backlog, as an earlier media statement confirms. And not to forget the recent introduction of a points-based system for work visas, which is expected to go some way towards combating corruption (presumably among immigration officials) while also contributing to job creation – at least, according to a press release at the time. And all in the space of just a few months!
But when it comes to Muslim marriage certificates, credit does need to be given where it’s undoubtedly due. Because the process of recognising Muslim marriages in law has a long history.
In May 2015, Megan Harrington-Johnson wrote in De Rebus that the South African Law Reform Commission began its “investigation” into the “status” of South African Muslim marriages in 1990 – culminating 21 years later in the release of a draft Muslim Marriages Bill for public comment. Harrington-Johnson’s reference to the ensuing “intense debate” in Muslim community circles may explain why the proposed new piece of legislation was never tabled in Parliament and an 11-year hiatus followed.
Then, in June 2022, thanks to sterling efforts of the Women’s Legal Centre Trust, the Constitutional Court handed down a groundbreaking ruling on the failure of the 1961 Marriage Act and 1979 Divorce Act to recognise Muslim marriages. And Parliament was given two years to pass legislation addressing the problem.
Five months later, Al Jama-ah leader Ganief Hendricks introduced his private Registration of Muslim Marriages Bill in the National Assembly – although by then the Department of Home Affairs was in the final stages of developing a Marriage Bill encompassing all forms of marriage, including those solemnised under Sharia law. Released in draft form in June 2023 for public comment, the revised Bill was tabled in Parliament six months later and is now being considered by members of the National Assembly’s Home Affairs Committee.
Hendricks’ Bill has since been withdrawn, but a memorandum on its objects notes that “the non-recognition of Muslim marriages forced some Muslims to dilute their religious beliefs by electing to marry monogamously according to civil law in order for their marriages to be regarded as valid”. The memorandum also refers to “women in Muslim marriages” wanting their status recognised under South African law being required to register the marriages themselves. Perhaps this applied to women in polygamous marriages, although this isn’t clear. Nevertheless, the memorandum does tend to suggest that it was possible to register Muslim marriages from the time of the June 2022 Constitutional Court ruling.
The wording of an image attached to the DA’s X post points to problems with the marriage registration system, which has been fixed under Shreiber’s watch – hence the recent issuance of South Africa’s first Muslim marriage certificates. But how many X users look at the wording on a post’s image? Whatever the case, finally being able to register a Muslim marriage in South Africa can't be attributed solely to the speedy “overhauling” of a “system”. The enormous effort that went into the process of arriving at a Constitutional Court ruling on the matter merits acknowledgement.
Comments