|
Abstract:
|
The articles seeks to understand the politics of transnational Islamic family law in Canada, the United
States, France and Germany, through the migration of one particular legal institution: Mahr, “the gift
which the bridegroom has to give to the bride when the contract of marriage is made and which
becomes the property of the wife.” The issue of Mahr typically presents itself in a crisis-like fashion:
married Muslim women, engaged in religiously structured marriages, and living in Western liberal
states, reach out to the secular court upon the dissolution of their marriage to claim the enforcement of
Mahr, presumably because their husbands have previously refused to give them the amount of
deferred Mahr. Through an analysis of the case law, I will explore the ways in which legal pluralism,
formal equality and substantive equality are being used by courts to accept or root out Islamic law
from the family of institutions that are deemed appropriate in Western countries. How do the diverse
and contradictory conceptual themes around Islamic law and Islamic theory get received or brought to
Western liberal courts? What are the modes of influence in the selection and imposition processes of
Mahr as a legal transplant? Does the reification of religion by courts simultaneously fragment it as
rules move across borders? Does the way Mahr travels affect subjectivity, in both productive and
reactive terms? |