A Ugandan marriage ceremony known as ‘kuhingira’ at which the groom pays a ‘bride price’. The country’s Supreme Court has now ruled that refunding them if the marriage breaks up is unconstitutional. Credit: Wambi Michael/IPS

By Wambi Michael
KAMPALA, Aug 7 2015 (IPS)

After years of a protracted battle against Uganda’s “bride price” practice, the country’s Supreme Court this week ruled that husbands can no longer demand that it be returned in the event of dissolution of a customary marriage but has stopped short of declaring the practice itself unconstitutional.

In a country in which most marriages are customary, women’s rights activists have hailed the decision as a step in the right direction for greater equality in the marriage relationship but had hoped that the court would rule the bride price – or dowry – itself unconstitutional.

In Uganda, the bride price is the gift that is given as a token of appreciation by grooms to the families of their brides. Traditionally, it takes the forms of cows or goats, besides money, and some tribes have recently been demanding articles such as sofas and refrigerators among others.

The legal battle over “bride prices” started back in 2007 when MIFUMI, a non-governmental women’s rights organisation based in Kampala, filed a petition to Uganda’s Constitutional Court, seeking to have them declared unconstitutional.“Refund of the bride price connotes that a woman is on loan and can be returned and money recovered. This compromises the dignity of a woman" – Uganda’s Chief Justice Bert Katureebe

MIFUMI, whose work revolves around the protection of women and children experiencing violence and other forms of abuse, argues that if women are empowered they can rise above many of the cultural traditions, such as bride price, that hold them back, blocking their potential contribution to development.

The MIFUMI petition argued that the demand for and payment of bride price by the groom to the parents of the bride, as practised by many communities in Uganda, gives rise to conditions of inequality during marriage contrary to the country’s constitutional provisions which guarantee that men and women be accorded equal rights in marriage and its dissolution.

In 2010, however, the Constitutional Court ruled that the bride price was constitutional, with just one judge, Amos Twinomujuni (who has since died) dissenting, arguing that the main issue at stake was women’s equality and that the bride price was a source of domestic violence.

Undeterred, MIFUMI decided to appeal to the country’s Supreme Court and finally, in a 6-1 decision, the judges have ruled that the act of refunding the bride price is contrary to the country’s constitution regarding equality in contracting marriage, during marriage and in its dissolution.

Lead Justice Jotham Tumwesigye observed that it was unfair for the parents of the woman to be asked to refund the bride price after years of marriage and that it in any case it was unlikely that the parents of the bride would have kept anything involved in the bride price on hand for refunding.

Justice Tumwesigye further argued that one effect of the bride’s parents no longer having bride price goods or cash to refund could force a married woman into a situation of marital abuse for fear that her parents would be in trouble owing to their inability to refund the bride price.

Uganda’s Chief Justice Bert Katureebe, one of the six judges, ruled that “refund of the bride price connotes that a woman is on loan and can be returned and money recovered. This compromises the dignity of a woman.”

The judges of the Supreme Court unanimously agreed that referring to bridal gifts as bride price reduces its significance to a mere market value.

Solomy Awiidi, a legal officer with MIFUMI told IPS after the judgment that she was happy that ruling had partly struck off some of the cultural practice that has held women hostage in abusive marriages.

She said much as MIFUMI had wanted the whole issue of bride price totally abolished, the fact that court had ruled against refund was something to celebrate after 15 years of struggle against the practice.

“There are fathers and brothers of brides facing civil suit because they failed to return the bride price, while thousand if not millions of women across the country who have been abused because of failure to refund the bride price. This ruling will liberate many of them,” said Awiidi.

Kampala-based human rights lawyer Ladislaus Rwakafuzi, who has been the principal lawyer for the MIFUMI petition, told IPS: “We have not got everything we wanted but at least we know that people will start being cautious paying too much when they know there is going to be no refund when there is failure of the marriage.”

Rita Achiro, Executive Director of the Uganda Women’s Network (UWONET), told IPS that the ruling has shown that women of Uganda can use courts of law to fight against laws that oppress them.

Achiro also challenged the Ugandan government and Parliament to come up with a law to enforce the court decision, saying that demand for refund of the bride price will continue if government and Parliament do not enact a law criminalising bride price refunds.

She said there were precedents in which Ugandan courts had nullified laws discriminating against women but Parliament and government had failed to enact the laws needed enforce the judgments.

Achiro cited the March 2004 Constitutional Court ruling that struck down ten sections of the Divorce Law on the grounds that they contravened a clause in the constitution that guaranteed women and men equal rights.

Uganda’s Divorce Law had previously allowed men to leave their wives in cases of adultery, while women were not granted the same right because they had to prove their husbands guilty not only of adultery but also of a range of crimes including bigamy, sodomy, rape and desertion.

A panel of five constitutional judges unanimously upheld the view that grounds for divorce must apply equally to all parties in a marriage.  Women activists had hailed the judgment as a landmark ruling that would bring equality of the sexes but, eleven year later, no law has yet been enacted to enforce the ruling.

Edited by Phil Harris    

Women in the Solomon Islands suffer one of the highest rates of domestic violence in the world. Credit: Catherine Wilson/IPS

By Catherine Wilson
AUKI, Solomon Islands, May 30 2013 (IPS)

Selina, a resident of a small community in Malaita, the most populous province in the Solomon Islands, watched in horror as a man standing on the road in front of her house tore the clothing off his wife, then beat her and inflicted wounds with a knife.

“The man kept telling his wife to get up and follow him along the road and every time she fell, he kicked her,” Selina (not her real name) told IPS, recounting the incident that happened earlier this month. “The husband then swore that, according to ‘kastom’ (the traditional value system in the Solomon Islands), no one was allowed to touch this woman or defend her.”

Although the crowd that had gathered at the scene was unwilling to intervene, Selina was not intimidated.

“I have been a victim of domestic violence too, so I felt her pain,” she continued. “I had a feeling that I had to follow this woman; that I could save her.”

Selina pursued the couple alone along the road and took her chance to rescue the woman when the husband walked away for a cigarette. Fleeing through the darkness with the perpetrator in blind pursuit, Selina finally managed to hide the victim in a nearby house before alerting police and medical services.

The husband was arrested and remains in police custody.

In this Western Pacific country comprising over 900 islands, located northeast of Australia and east of Papua New Guinea, there are tales every day of violence and abuse against women.

Entrenched gender inequality has resulted in one of the world’s highest rates of domestic violence, with an estimated 64 percent of women aged 15 to 49 years experiencing violence at the hands of a partner.

But in Malaita Province, 100 kilometres east of the capital, Honiara, women are taking action and saving lives.

In 2011 the Malaita Council of Women urged the ministry of national unity, peace and reconciliation to offer a domestic violence education programme for local women in this province of approximately 140,000 people.

A spokesperson for the Council told IPS that, with 80 percent of the population residing in rural areas with inadequate infrastructure and services, it is vital that women at the grassroots level receive the support and training they need to defend themselves, especially since the only women’s refuge in the country, the Christian Care Centre, is located miles away, in Honiara.

The education programme has generated strategies that include intervening when witnessing family violence, promptly alerting police, assisting the victim to safety and working in partnership with law enforcement officers to visit affected communities and engage people in dialogue about domestic violence as a crime.

Although less than half of the Council’s 500 individual and 30 group members have completed the awareness programme so far, women like Selina have already demonstrated its benefits.

“This workshop changed my life,” she declared. “My views about domestic violence changed and I knew, for the first time in my life, that I could do something about it.”

Stigmas surrounding victims of gender violence, coupled with fear of punishment by male relatives and “retribution”, have forced female survivors into silence.

But Selina’s act of courage earned her much applause and pushed women in the community to call for greater media coverage of such incidents.

Entrenched inequality

Advocates say it will take a long time to change the behaviours and attitudes that have allowed this climate of abuse to prevail.

In a 2008 family health and safety study, many men referred to gender inequality as a “norm”, while 73 percent of both men and women indicated that violence was acceptable if women failed to live up to “traditional roles” of domestic labour and service within the family.

Despite the presence of women in education and formal employment, views that their rightful place is within the domestic sphere remain strong.

Women carry the burden of labour intensive work, such as collecting firewood, water and working in food gardens, and remain underrepresented in public decision-making roles, with currently only one female parliamentarian in the country.

The most recent independent education survey conducted in 2007 by the Asian South Pacific Bureau of Adult Education revealed massive gender gaps in education: 53.8 percent of female respondents aged 15 to 19 years were not enrolled in school, compared to 37.6 percent of males; female literacy stands at 14 percent, in contrast to 21 percent for males.

Domestic violence is now endemic in the country, with the Family Support Centre in Honiara recording up to six cases per day.

“Zero tolerance” for violence

The government recently introduced national polices on eliminating violence against women and on gender equality and women’s development, both of which promote women’s political, social and economic advancement.

The launch of a “zero tolerance” policy on family violence by the police force seven years ago has also supported women’s efforts to see justice.

“When someone reports a domestic violence case, we conduct an investigation and the perpetrator is immediately remanded in custody,” a police spokesperson in the main provincial town of Auki told IPS.

“Even if the victim subsequently asks for the case to be withdrawn, it must still go to court and the magistrate will decide the verdict and sentence.”

The policy has fostered a higher degree of trust for the police force, and resulted in many police officers charged with domestic violence losing their jobs.

Prior to implementation of the policy, only one domestic violence case was reported in Malaita in 2005, but this rose to 18 cases in 2010 and 12 last year, with the majority involving grievous bodily harm and unlawful wounding.

Experts estimate scores of cases go unreported, with victims facing enormous pressure from extended family members, especially in-laws, to remain silent.

“We can no longer stand by and say that domestic violence is not our business. We must take action and intervene to stop it happening,” Selina emphasised.