selves from the marital bond if it becomes neces-
sary, there is today a huge gap between divine
principles and reality. In most Muslim countries
female divorce is a controversial issue and women
are seldom allowed to exercise their right without
establishing strong evidence of mistreatment or
male sexual impotency. This is primarily because
the treatment of divorce, whether in the schools of
law or in various modern rules and regulations,
reflects patriarchal understanding of the Qur±àn
and the sunna. For example, in all schools of law
the right to end the marital tie rests exclusively in
the hands of the husband, who has the power to
repudiate his wife any time he wishes. In doing so,
he needs neither grounds nor the consent of his
wife. This kind of divorce is known as †alàqand it
is the unilateral prerogative of the husband – no
one else has the right to pronounce it. The ease with
which †alàqtakes place has led to abuse and mis-
use, and despite the fact that on many occasions
Mu™ammad condemned the arbitrary practice of
it, the jurists were and are still generally unwilling
to alter the status quo.
A woman can obtain a divorce only if her hus-
band agrees to it. In this context, she can secure her
release via a khul≠agreement in which she pays her
husband a sum of money (especially if she is the one
who initiates the process) in return for her freedom,
or through a so-called mutual agreement between
the two parties to dissolve the marital bond with no
payment on either side. The woman can also obtain
a divorce if she stipulates in her marriage contract
the right to do so. This form of divorce is known as
delegated divorce: the husband agrees to delegate
the right to divorce to his wife, or to someone else
who acts as an agent to release her on his behalf
(notice that the delegated divorce neither affects the
husband’s right to †alàqnor relieves the wife from
going to court to effect the divorce).
If the wife fails to secure her husband’s agree-
ment, her only recourse is to apply for court inter-
vention; this is called judicial divorce, in which the
judge (subject to approval) can either compel the
husband to pronounce †alàqor pronounces it on his
behalf. The grounds upon which a wife can demand
separation vary from one country to another
depending on the school of law to be followed. In
this context, the most restrictive is the £anafì
school, while the most liberal is the Màlikìschool.
Nevertheless, female divorce is limited even with
convincing evidence of mistreatment. The actual
legislation in most Muslim countries is rigid and
the cultural setting is patriarchal; these combine to
ensure that female divorce is a difficult and pro-
tracted process. If the woman does not have a very
western europe 109strong reason, she can easily be refused divorce and
sent back home to an unwanted husband. This is in
contrast to the Qur±ànic verse 2:29 and the ™adìth,
especially the ™adìthabout the wife of Thàbit b.
Qays, both of which offer clear and adequate legal
basis to allow women to obtain a divorce relatively
easily, even without powerful justification.
Divorce has been grossly abused. Indeed, in most
cases, it has been deliberately used to suppress, con-
trol, and humiliate women. The same attitude can
be found among Muslims living in Western Europe;
for example, in the United Kingdom, tensions can
easily arise in the area of divorce for Muslim
women. When marriages break down women are
often abandoned and find it difficult to get
divorced. This is primarily because of strong pres-
sure from the community to force women to stay
within the marital bond at all costs. Very often,
when a wife has problems with her husband, the
general attitude of the community is to blame her
and try and talk her into better behavior; if she asks
for divorce, the tendency is to persuade her to be
patient and considerate even in matters where the
husband is guilty of transgressing the terms of the
contract. If her husband (as happens in most cases)
refuses to cooperate, she is faced with the difficult
choice of having to seek judicial divorce. There are
at least two problems associated with this: first, as
Islamic law is not recognized in Europe, there is no
recognized body at the national level that could act
as a court or as a judge, leaving the wife at the
mercy of the individual representative. Here, the
Islamists disagree on who should assume the role of
a judge: some say an imam, shaykh, or learned per-
son could do the job, while others insist on an
Islamic-educated scholar. Second, the form of
Sharì≠a applied in Europe among Muslims with
regard to personal status law leaves little opportu-
nity for women to obtain a divorce.
Muslims in the United Kingdom are predomi-
nantly South East Asians who are mainly followers
of the £anafìschool of law, the most restrictive
school in terms of women’s issues in family law.
This means that Muslim women here face an uphill
struggle in their efforts to effect an “Islamic
divorce.” An Islamic Sharia Council was founded
in London in the 1980s to deal with family issues,
especially marital disputes, from the Islamic per-
spective. Its members, according to the council, are
drawn from all over the United Kingdom and rep-
resent the five different schools of law; its main
clients are women who are seeking divorce from
reluctant husbands. Although the council claims to
serve Muslims in the United Kingdom, with many
branches in cities such as Birmingham, Manchester,