| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Janko
Gambia
1267 Posts |
 Posted - 08 Jul 2008 : 07:13:37
|
Thanks, mansasulu
very interesting; the Goddard case underlines a legal problem with marriage between people from two different religions.
Thanks, Madiba,
I had no clue; things change
Are the marriage you know, bigamous, who is the Christian, the husband or the wife?
|
Clean your house before pointing a finger ... Never be moved by delirious Well-wishers in their ecstasy |
 |
|
|
MADIBA
United Kingdom
1275 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2008 : 10:11:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Janko
Thanks, mansasulu
very interesting; the Goddard case underlines a legal problem with marriage between people from two different religions.
Thanks, Madiba,
I had no clue; things change
Are the marriage you know, bigamous, who is the Christian, the husband or the wife?
Janko,
I know three very well. Two of these, the man is christian and the women muslim or from muslim homes. The third its the woman who is christian and the man muslim |
madiss |
|
|
|
njucks
Gambia
1131 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2008 : 11:09:47
|
Madiba, Nyari, Mansa
thanks for the historical examples. It seems this issue will be around for a long time in the future too. I personally know a muslim/christian couple and there are also touchy inheritance cases i have heard about.
In his book, ''In the Service of My beliefs'' the gambian Laywer. F.E M'bai has touched on this issue and other laws still in our books which will have to be revisited to deal deal with the modern society we live in.
by the way Turk, the word Kadi which is arabic for judge i think is where the word Alkali (head of a village) comes from as well.
|
|
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jul 2008 : 18:04:59
|
Turk
There is nothing in Islam called Mohameddan Marriage. However, i do know of Islamic Marriage. The two are totally and completely different. Its a matter of principle. Its that principle which is why Islam is not Mohameddan and Mohameddan is not Islam.
I think we are making a comparison that is not comparable. Even in the days of Jesus Christ, there was nothing called Christianity. The name Christianity came after Jesus died. Jesus never said he was a "Christian". Infact, to become a "Christian" then, one had to covert to Judaism first. More specifically, the Gentiles. Upheavals in the Church led to changes in that early doctrine. Protestants and Reformists made the religion accessible to every Tom, Dick and Harry who sought guidance.
Mohammed was a Prohet period. He was a servant of God but does not own the religion. He was a Messenger and as such the religion is not named after him. Thats why islam forbids worshiping even the Prophet but Him alone. (Surat Ikhlas). Mohammed is not a partner in Religion with God, but a Messenger and servant.
KHUL HUWA, ALLAHU AHAD
ALLAHU SAMAD
LAMYALID, WALM YU LAD
WA LAM YA KULA HO
KUFF ANN AHAD
Lets not make mistakes of the past.So the basic premise of the topic is wrong in the first place. Dont get me wrong, even our legal code in the Gambia used to called it Mohameddan. It was borrowed from colonial times and legislation.
But the imporatant thing is for us to learn from mistakes to prepare us for the future. May be the topic should be changed to reflect this. |
“When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always.” |
|
|
|
njucks
Gambia
1131 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jul 2008 : 18:45:38
|
 haha Kondorong welcome back, long time. hows Yorro Bawol
it a valid point and i'm sure if the law was written today it would reflect the correct language, and i'm sure the necessary ammendments have been made/can be man. but we must appreciate its historical nature.
Mohamedan,I think was used as a noun for muslims not islam. so muhamendan marriage means muslim marriage not islamic marriage. In this context it is understandable. After all there is still Mohamedan Primary School, one of the oldest schools in Banjul.
for the purpose of this discussion, a little research shows that there is equally a law called Civil Marriages, Christian Marriages and Foreign Marriages (Notice) etc.
Maybe some of the laywers here can touch briefly what all these laws are about. perhaps they |
|
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jul 2008 : 19:16:58
|
You are right. Mohameddan Primary School was built in the colonial times and the Conila Adminstrations rfereeded to it as Mohammedan Primary School.
But you see, you cannot call a Muslim Mohameddan. Its wrong. Muslims dont worship Mohammed. They believe in Islam. One who belives in Islam is a Muslim not a Mohameddan. Mohammedan was never used by the Prophet or any islamic authority through out the history of the religion nearly 1500 years now.
Civil Mrriages are those based on the western principles of marriage where religion does not carry enough weight to influence the marriage, Christiamn Marriage is self explanatory whilst Foreign Marriages Act, recognises customs and norms of non Gambians residing in the country.
If you contact the Registrar General'Office, they will throw more light on this. You are right lawyers should weigh in on this. I am just a novice here, and with Njuks in the house, i better watch out.
|
“When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always.” |
|
|
|
njucks
Gambia
1131 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jul 2008 : 21:19:28
|
| lol good to have you back. |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jul 2008 : 22:34:45
|
You are right about mohammeden vs. islam critics. But your clarification is something we all know.
However, it is not my fault that i am using this reference because it is your government and your people calling mohammeden marriage not me. Last time I check, it says mohammaden marriage ordiance or something like that on my marriage certificate which was done in the mosque by the imam and given my the government of gambia and base on islamic principles.
Instead of changing the topic, maybe gambia should change the name of the law :)
|
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
Edited by - turk on 09 Jul 2008 22:52:01 |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jul 2008 : 22:43:22
|
 |
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
|
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2008 : 00:03:06
|
Turk
You dont have to take the trouble of posting part of the Ordinance. I already concurred to its existence in the Gambia and confirmed its its origin as a colonial legacy. The Act was passed into law in 1941, 24 years before independence.
You see, changing the topic helps many understand the anomaly. Two wrongs dont make a right as my Teacher used to tell me.
Inorder to leave foot prints in the sands of time, do not walk the beaten path. Because out there its crowded
|
“When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always.” |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2008 : 21:50:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by mansasulu
This case made it all the way to the supreme court and even then and there the laws of Shariah were used to determine the outcome of the appeal. Even though we were not a republic by 1967, the prevailing legal system recognized the Cadi system.
Just this year, a briton was charged with Bigamy in Gambia so bigamy is apparently still "justiceable" in our courts under Section 154 of the Criminal Code.
The Brits was not charged for bigamy. He was sued [ a Civil proceeding that went no where] by his brits wife who apparently discovered that he was married to a Gambian woman. The word 'Charged' is only use in criminal matters. Bigamy is not a crime in the Gambia. Otherwise it would have being applicable to every citizen, in which case, no one would be allowed to marry two wives.
When I said Bigamy would be non-justiceable, it does mean no one can bring it before a judge or magistrate but only that it would not be entertained. So if you take a bigamy case before a Cadi court, they will just strike it out after mentioning as it is not an offence under the sharia. The same thing would happen if you take it to the High Court or Magistrate Court. They would allow the matter to be mentioned first and then strike it out. The plaintiff may even pick up a hefty cost for bringing before the court a frivolous and vexatious litigation. So, non-justiceable does not mean you can't take the matter to court but only that it won't stand to be entertained.
Thanks |
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 10 Jul 2008 22:26:54 |
|
|
|
toubab1020
12312 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2008 : 23:38:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by kondorong
Turk
You dont have to take the trouble of posting part of the Ordinance. I already concurred to its existence in the Gambia and confirmed its its origin as a colonial legacy. The Act was passed into law in 1941, 24 years before independence.
You see, changing the topic helps many understand the anomaly. Two wrongs dont make a right as my Teacher used to tell me.
Inorder to leave foot prints in the sands of time, do not walk the beaten path. Because out there its crowded
Ah... but did anyone get around to repealing it, or were all laws dumped and new ones made at independence ? Just a thought.
|
"Simple is good" & I strongly dislike politics. You cannot defend the indefensible.
|
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2008 : 10:27:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nyarikangbanna
The Brits was not charged for bigamy. He was sued [ a Civil proceeding that went no where] by his brits wife who apparently discovered that he was married to a Gambian woman. The word 'Charged' is only use in criminal matters. Bigamy is not a crime in the Gambia. Otherwise it would have being applicable to every citizen, in which case, no one would be allowed to marry two wives.
When I said Bigamy would be non-justiceable, it does mean no one can bring it before a judge or magistrate but only that it would not be entertained. So if you take a bigamy case before a Cadi court, they will just strike it out after mentioning as it is not an offence under the sharia. The same thing would happen if you take it to the High Court or Magistrate Court. They would allow the matter to be mentioned first and then strike it out. The plaintiff may even pick up a hefty cost for bringing before the court a frivolous and vexatious litigation. So, non-justiceable does not mean you can't take the matter to court but only that it won't stand to be entertained.
Thanks
Nyari, if I may ask, what was the Brit sued for? Bigamy? Is bygamy a civil offense then? Could he have been sued for fraud and misrepresentation instead? |
|
|
|
mansasulu
997 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2008 : 17:23:09
|
Nyari, contrary to what you are telling us, this case was indeed "entertained." If it was non-justiceable, it will have been thrown out rather than a trial date set as the link referring to the case below indicates.
The Brikama Majistrate court which has jurisdiction set a trial date. Bigamy may not be enforceable in Gambia, but it is a crime under our laws. How ironic... |
"...Verily, in the remembrance of Allâh do hearts find rest..." Sura Al-Rad (Chapter 13, Verse 28)
...Gambian by birth, Muslim by the grace of Allah... |
|
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2008 : 17:59:30
|
| If Bigamy is a crime in the Gambia, then tell me ".. who are the criminals.." (Peter Tosh). |
“When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always.” |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
