The case in the New Jersey court seemingly tends to pit the religious beliefs of the defendant against the law of the state about the domestic violence. Nonetheless, the Appellate Division has been able to overcome such a position and countered the denial of the restraining order. On July 23, the three-judge panel in the case S.D. v. M.J.R, A-6107-08, concluded that non-consensual sexual intercourse by the defendant to his wife was evidently unquestionably knowing, irrespective of his perspective that religion allowed him to do what he did (caselaw.findlaw.com, 2018). Arguably, the verdict, in this case, was an excellent first step towards eliminating the wrong view that the Muslim culture accommodates violence acts against the Muslim women. Evidently, the ruling by the three judges is apparently in line with sharia law that is against spousal abuse such as the nonconsensual sexual relation.
For instance, several cases have been reported where the wives have been acquitted of killing their husbands based merely on the notion that they acted in the self-defense within abusive relationships. In this case, the wife opted to seek an ultimate restraining order against her husband, where she alleged that his nonconsensual actions amounted to physical abuses. caselaw.findlaw.com (2018) asserts that the wife went on to testify that her husband had told her in several instances that based on his religion she was obliged to submit to her husband’s sexual request entirely. The trial judges had refused to provide order and stated that her husband was evidently acting within the religious values that he was warranted to have marital relations with his wife any time he desired. Therefore, it was determined that the husband did not commit any criminal offense.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Muslims’ minority seem to mistakenly hold onto the belief that the husband has the right to punish wife using physical force with the aim of saving the marriage and at the same time avoid divorce. Studies have shown that it is a misplaced view founded on the cultural values related to the common-law of the "Rule of Thumb" principle which apparently allowed a devastated husband to chastise and punish the wife to obey. Evidently, such a case is not founded on the religious laws but runs against the core historical proof. Despite our perceptions of the gender equity, community’s properties and equal distribution of resources are a contemporary development. Historically and in the recent years, Muslim women have arguably fared much better compared to the European women in marriages and divorce, education and social impact and property ownership (caselaw.findlaw.com, 2018).
With the emergence of the Islam around the 17th century, Muslim women have had a legal responsibility to enter into contracts, they were able to inherit and bequeathed properties, and will could not disinherit them. The Muslim women owned, controlled and even managed properties (caselaw.findlaw.com, 2018). The women have continually been entitled to demand their marriage dissolutions when they experience physical abuse. In a situation where the court finds potential violence, it has an absolute power to dissolve any marriage and award these divorced wives the financial right such as damages for possible harm caused by the assaults.
From the case, it is apparent that majority Muslim women now understand their rights and often use them to access justice. Women can sue for civil damage, the remedy against potential defamation, physical assaults or even matrimonial claims. caselaw.findlaw.com (2018) argues that the Appellate Division legal analysis in the case of S.D. v. M.J.R was evidently appropriate and correct. It was determined that the defendant had violated the existing New Jersey law. Similar secular reasons under the New Jersey law within which such severe abuses were outlawed would evidently justify the entry of the final restraining order within sharia law. It is worth noting that it is not the Islamic religion that abused woman, but it is individual men who carry out such abuses.
References
caselaw.findlaw.com (2018). S.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. M.J.R., Defendant- Respondent. Retrieved from http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nj-superior-court- appellate-division/1532706.html
