through its distinction between mahr, maintenance,
and fair provision supported that (Pearl and
W. Menski 1998, 222).pakistan
Pakistan enacted the Muslim Family Law Ordi-
nance (MFLO) in 1961, which established codes
for marriage, divorce, and inheritance. Arbitration
councils and nikà™registrars would regulate uni-
lateral divorce and polygamy by enforcing the
waiting and arbitration period and the terms of the
marriage contract. The Pakistan Women Lawyers
Association has tried to compensate for the poverty
and illiteracy of women by working to represent
women and to advocate simplification of judicial
procedures. Some changes are apparent. In 1952
the Supreme Court ruled in Syeeda Khanum v.
Muhammad Sami that “if the wives were allowed
to dissolve their marriage without consent of their
husbands by merely giving up their dowers, paid or
promised to be paid, the institution of marriage
would be meaningless as there would be no stabil-
ity attached to it.” In 1959 the Lahore High Court
ruled in Balquis Fatima v. Najm-ul-Ikram Qureshi
that the court could grant the wife a divorce if the
couple were incompatible, departing from accepted
£anafìlaw by quoting a Qur±ànic verse: “Unless
they both fear they cannot comply with God’s
bounds... Then it is no offence if the woman ran-
soms herself” (2:28). This in effect utilized Màlikì
law, which recognized marital discord as grounds
for divorce. In rendering judgment the court
referred directly to the Qur±àn’s support of women
(Esposito and DeLong 2001, 79–80). Pakistani
women’s groups have been extremely critical of the
Hudood Ordinances passed in 1988, and of the
Enforcement of Shariah Ordinance (which declared
the Sharì≠a as the main source of law in Pakistan) as
it failed to distinguish between rape and adultery
and endorsed the unequal weight of testimony
under the law of evidence, which favored men.bangladesh
In Bangladesh the Shariat Act, the DMMA, and
the MFLO laws were included in the legal system.
In addition to the arbitration council, rural courts
called salishwere sought to be regulated by the
Village Courts Ordinance 1976 and the Council of
Dispute (Municipal Areas) 1979 (Hashmi 2000,
103–4). Village courts rulings, a mixture of rural
tradition and conservatism, work against women.
Non-governmental organizations that work on
women’s issues have been subjected to fatwas that
denounce their activities (Hashmi 2000, 103–13).
Federal courts have referred directly to the Qur±àn378 law: access to the legal system
to support women’s right to maintenance as in the
case of Md. Hefzur Rahman v. Shamsun Nahar
Begum in 1995 (Pearl and Menski 1998, 205) and
that of Jesmin Sultana v. Mohammad Elias in 1977,
upholding the right to mahr and maintenance
unless the wife remits the mahramount voluntarily
(Pearl and Menski 1998, 374).sri lanka
In Sri Lanka Shàfi≠ìlaw is followed in the Sharì≠a
courts, and under pressure from conservatives,
women judges cannot be appointed despite the fact
that in secular courts Muslim women were both
lawyers and judges.Bibliography
J. L. Esposito and N. J. DeLong, Women in Muslim fam-
ily law, New York 2001.
T. I. Hashmi, Women and Islam in Bangladesh, London
2000.
M. A. Nuhuman, Religious identity, religious fundamen-
talism and Muslim women in Sri Lanka, in Women
Living under Muslim Laws, Dossier 21 (September
1998), 89–111.
D. Pearl and W. Menski, Muslim family law, London 1998.Shahida LateefSoutheast AsiaThis entry describes and evaluates issues within
the legal systems of the Southeast Asian nations
(mainly Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Brunei,
the Philippines, and Thailand) and how they affect
Muslim women’s access to justice.Overview of the legal systems
in Southeast Asia
The legal systems of the Southeast Asian nations
are typically characterized by pluralism. In a par-
ticular country there will be a generally applicable
system of law enforced for matters common to the
general population. This generally applicable law
regulates the lives of citizens with regard to crime,
commerce, and a broad spectrum of civil matters
covering tort, contract, trust, and modern business
and social transactions. In many of the countries,
the commonly prescribed system of law is based on
the legal system of a country’s pre-independent
colonial power. The prevailing legal systems of
Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei, for example, are
broadly based on the common law originating in
England. The Philippine system of law reflects
Spanish and American influences. Colonial Dutch
law, on the other hand, heavily influences Indone-
sia’s legal system.