National women development policy Jawad Hossain Nirjhor

It all started in 1997, when the National Women's Development Policy (NWDP) was first passed but was left at that. As the years went by, its existence was revived once more in 2004 and was briefly glimpsed at in the subsequent years until 2008, when, in honors of International Women's Day, the policy was brought back once more into the limelight. This time, a few amendments were suggested for it to more clearly define women's rights and highlight their importance in our culture and society today. What followed afterwards was an astonishing multitude of events. As a result, even seven years after its initial revival, the NWDP still remains a matter of debate. The policy was first introduced in January 1997 by the Department of Women's Affairsand Jatiya Mohila Sangstha with the aim of stopping repression and discrimination of women and to ensure gender equality politically, socially and economically. Whilst scrapped by the subsequent government, itsreintroduction in 2008 with the amendments sparked controversy in quite a few sectors; in particular it was met with strong opposition from religious leaders and Islamic scholars who feel that the provisions of the policy clash strongly with Islamic views, and women's rightsactivists who feel that any amendments to the policy will repress the basic inherent rights ofwomen. As reported on 3 June 2006 by Bdnews24.com, the reintroduction of the policy began with the roundtable meeting organised by the Bangladesh Mohila Parishad at CIRDAP auditorium in June 2006. Rekha Chowdhury, the then central secretary of Movement Sub-committee of the Parishad, presented thewritten statement, while Aysha Khanam, the then general secretary of the Mohila Parishad central committee, delivered the address of welcome. In her written statement, Rekha Chowdhury stated that the changes made to the policy in May 2004 actually became apparent when the nomination procedure regarding the issue of reserving seats for women in Parliament arose. She pointed out that such fundamental changes clashed with the concept of a democratic political system. She further added that variations "in terms of political and economic empowerment of women opened the floodgate of interference of the reactionary evil forces that would confine the women to their houses rather than their empowerment". It seems like she was right. As reported on 14 March 2008 by EBangladesh, when the Chief Adviser of Caretaker Government Dr Fakhruddin Ahmed unveiled the women's developmental policy on International Women's Day on 8 March 2008, several thousand activists of different Islamist organisations staged

demonstrations in front of the Baitul Mukarram National Mosque, protesting against the proposed NWDP and demanding its immediate withdrawal. The organizations which prearranged the protest included Islami Shashantantra Andolan, Hizbut Tahrir Bangladesh, Islami Chhatra Majlish and Islami Ain Bastobayon Committee. In between the noisy rallying and protests, the Islamic speakers branded adviser Rasheda K Chowdhury an 'anti-Islamic element' and demanded her 'expulsion' from the cabinet. Further accusations stated that the government was simply using the name "Women's Development Policy" as a pseudonym for introducing and implementing anti-Shariah policy. The main focus of theIslamic speakers' anger seemed to be concentrated on the fact that, as the rally speakers themselves said, the Quran clearly defines issues in relation to inheritance and how property should be divided amongst male and female heirs. The funny thing, however, is the fact that "inheritance" is not even mentioned once within the whole policy. No such law has been passed about inheritance and the policy contained no such clause that concerned or focused on inheritance. In fact, the policy solely concentrates on the protection of women from different forms of harassment and deprivation. However, the rallies and protests of the many Islamic groups seemed to have a profound effect on the government. After their violent protests, they were allowed by the government to form a committee to study the policy for clauses that might go against Islamic values. As reported by a leading newspaper on 18 April 2008, the ulema committee (committee of Islamic scholars), came up with 21 sections of the policy they deemed to be against Muslim religious sentiments and laws - six of which they recommended should be deleted and 15 others amended. Mufti Mohammad Nuruddin, acting khatib of Baitul Mukarram National Mosque who headed the review committee, commented on the policy being 'very objectionable'. "A woman cannot enjoy rights equal to a man's because a woman is not equal to a man by birth. Can there be two prime ministers - one male and one female -in a country at the same time?" Nuruddin further stated.What's interesting about this point is that it is virtually impossible for two prime ministers to exist in a country at the same time, and the situation will remain unchanged no matter which of the following scenarios apply - if both the prime ministers are male, if both the prime ministers are female, or, as Nuruddin so delicately phrases it, if both prime ministers are "one male and one female". It seems that emphasis was given here to the wrong question. The question is not whether one country can have two prime ministers or not, the question should have been whether both a male candidate and a female candidate are given the equal opportunity to enable them to be elected as prime minister. Ambiguous questions aside, what exact changes have been recommended for the Women's Development Policy? The ulema committee suggested the elimination of six sections and revision of 15 sections of the policy. The Islamic scholars stated that giving women equality would deprive them of their rights in many sectors. Amongst many, their recommendations included replacing the phrase "equality, equal rights and affirmative action" with "just rights", the phrase "existing disparities between women and men" is unclear and should be replaced by the phrase "existing disparities between women and men in light of the Quran and the Sunnah", and the phrase "child marriage" of the section concerned with "discourage underage marriage". The ulema also proposed cancelling the provision which included women in peacekeeping missions, saying it would make

women insecure and it could tarnish Bangladesh's image. They also observed that the policy's proposed penalty for child marriages is not in line with Islamic policy as the legal marriage age of 18 should not apply here because Islam states that a girl can be married as soon as she has "come of age". They opposed the provision that women "must be given equal opportunities and participation in wealth, employment, market and business", saying it clashes with the Quran's teachings and suggested giving women equal opportunities and participation in these sectors in light of religious dictums. Other suggestions included the abolition of the initiative to reserve one third of the parliamentary seats for women and specifically stated that one's inheritance rights should be determined by one's own religion. So, after all these amendments and "suggestions", what exactly is left of the policy? Exactly nothing - it is the equivalent of taking one step forward, and two steps back. As mentioned previously, inheritance law is not even mentioned once in the policy. Therefore, no law regarding inheritance was passed in any form which contradicted the Quran and Sunnah. The obvious question which now arises is this - all this opposition against the National Women's Development Policy, does this really have any firm basis, or is it merely the opinion of some extremist minority groups who fear that the passing of the policy will actually break into the inherently-held beliefs that women are inferior? Are these extremist groups really concerned about the "so-called" clashes between the policy and Shariah law or, in reality, do they fear that once women have been granted established equal rights, they will not be able to dominate the female gender and treat them as if they are weak and mediocre? It is a tricky situation, and one which needs to be resolved very soon. What is disappointing in this whole situation is the fact that the government has seemingly maintained its silence in regards to the issue at hand, whilst bowing down to allow the formation of the ulema committee after the violent demonstration and rallies held by the Islamic organizations. Does this governmental action condone that ultimately violence is the answer to everything? Regardless of all these issues, the fact remains: the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. And, in this instance; the first step would be the implementation of the original National Development Policy, minus its amendments and deletions. However, apart from rumors of implementation of the policy in last March, nothing concrete has yet materialized, and we are left wondering whether it ever will.