The break-up of Pakistan bodes well for India

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

One more question - Afghanistan has, by many, many order of magnitudes higher, greater problems than Pakistan.

When was the last time analysis on the breakup of Afghanistan was carried out by US 'intellectuals'?

They seemed to be obsessed with 'dividing' a far more stable, developed, industrialized and progressive state.

 

[Flintlock]

^That's actually a good question, and the answer is that Pakistan has nuclear weapons, and the intellectuals carrying out that analysis are usually extreme-right wingers, who would obviously like to see the nukes taken away.

 

[rokhanyousafzai]

No, it's just that this "idiot" is describing some of the forces pulling Pakistan apart. Given the fact that Pakistan's leaders just accepted that Sharia law rather than State law will now be the rule in Swat, the "idiot" appears (in American eyes) to know what he's talking about.

this isn't Taliban style sharia this the the system which was in place in the 70's it is quick and speedy for the people and it's ridicoulous america critises it while Obama is calling for a diplomatic solution in Afghanistan

 

[Omar1984]

Saudi Arabia is doing just fine with Sharia Law. I think Pakistan will also be fine with Sharia Law.

 

[pama]

There is nothing wrong with Sharia law in Swat given that Federal Law is not over ruled over the Sharia law. It is believed that the people wanted this law. Such practices happen all over the world. It is not huge thing for us Pakistanis because we are custom to close practices of Sharia law. It may be threatening to the Americans or the Westerners.. but then they should mind their own business as its not their land to live in.

Personally, i dont like separate laws, not necessarily against the Sharia law, but separate laws. But if it works like it works in India.. where Hindus have their made up laws in some part of states, and it works.. so why not?

Sharia law also works in Saudi Arabia flawlessly.. while the country is happy.

there is not Hindu laws in India.

 

[Salahadin]

there is not Hindu laws in India.

Says who


INDIAN HINDU LAW :

Historically the term 'Hindu' is of foreign origin. It was used to designate people who were living east of the Hindi river, now known as the Indus. Etymologically, the term 'Hindu' was applicable to all the inhabitants of India irrespective of caste and creed. In course of time, the term Hindu has been associated with religion.

Thus logically, the term 'Hindu' is used to signify persons who are Hindus by birth and by faith and this is the basis for the applicability of Hindu Law

Hindu, Muslim and Christian Laws of marriage and divorce. The nature of the institution of marriage and its development the capacity and nuptial rights and the effect of void and voidable marriage under the aforesaid systems of law. Hindu law of marriage and divorce with reference to the changes brought about my modern legislation.

PERSONS GOVERNED BY HINDU LAW :

The following persons are governed by Hindu Law:

1. A HINDU BY BIRTH :

If the parents are both Hindus, their children whether legitimate or illegitimate become Hindus automatically.

2. A HINDU BY FAITH OR CONVERSION OF HINDUISM:

Previously, it was a contention that "a Hindu is horn and nor made". But now even a person converted to Hinduism is treated as a Hindu.

3. ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN :

Illegitimate children born to Hindu parents or both the parents.

4. ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN :

Illegitimate children born to Christian father and Hindu mother, and brought up as a Hindu.

5. JAIN SIKH, BUDHIST LINGAYAT, BRAHMOS, ARYA SAMAJ:

Jain sikh, budhist, Lingayat, Brahmos, Arya Samajist and Santhals of Chota Nagpuri, If not varied by custom.

6. A person who is Hindu by birth, and who has renounced Hinduism and reverted back to Hinduism either by religious rites or recognition from community.

7. The sons of Hindu dancing grils of the Naik caste who are converted to Mohammedanism, but whose sons are brought up by the Hindu grand parents as Hindus.

8. To Hindu who have made a declaration that they were not Hindus for the purpose of Special Marriage Act 1872



PERSONS NOT GOVERNED BY HINDU LAW :

1. Illegitimate children born to Hindu father and Christian mother and brought up as Christians.

2. Illegitimate children born to a Hindu father and a Muslim mother.

3. Hindu converted to islam religion

4. Hindu coverted to christianity.

5. A Hindu marrying under Special Marriage Act, for the purpose ofinheritance, governed by Indian Succession Act and not Hindu Succession Act.



EFFECT OF COVERSION AS PER INDIAN HINDU LAW :

APPLICABILITY OF HINDU LAW :

1. Chritianity :

Earlier to Indian Succession Act 1925, a Hindu covert to Christianity could opt for Hindu faith.

After passing the Indian Succession Act, the Hindu covert to Christianity is governed by the Indian Succession Act.

2.Mohammadanism :

A Hindu covert to Mohammedanism has no option to retain Hindu personal law and he is governed by Muslim personal law.

3. Hinduism :

Any covert to Hinduism from other religion does not have any caste, but if he professes hindu faith, it is sufficieant for the application of Hindu Law.

EFFECT OF CONVERSION ON INHERITANCE RIGHTS:

Previously a convert from one religion to another could not inherit the property of his original religion. But the Caste Disabilities Removal Act 1850 abolished the said forfeiture of rights to inheritance by a convert.

EFFECT OF CONVERSION ON MARITAL RIGHTS :

Under the Hindu Marriage Act 1956 if any of the spouse converts himself to another religion the other party is entitled for a divorce.

EFFECT OF CONVERSION ON RIGHT TO MAINTENANCE:

The spouse who gets converted from Hinduism to another religion cannote claim maintenance. However if a Hindu himself renounces Hinduism the Hindu wife can claim separate residential maintenance from him.

EFFECT OF CONVERSION ON RIGHT OF GUARDIANSHIP:

When a guardian changes his religion, he cannot act as a guardian for the minor.

http://indianhindulaw..com

 

[Salahadin]

there is not Hindu laws in India.

Here is more

Law in India
The legal practices and institutions of India

The general history of law in India is a well-documented case of reception as well as of grafting. Foreign laws have been “received” into the Indian subcontinent—for example, in the demand by the Hindus of Goa for Portuguese civil law; and the enactment by independent India of statutes such as the Estate Duty Act (1953), the Copyright Act (1957), and the Merchant Shipping Act (1958), which substantially reproduce English models. Foreign laws have also frequently been “grafted” upon indigenous laws, as is seen in both Anglo-Muslim and Hindu law. Legal institutions introduced by foreign governments were accepted readily by the Indians, either because they were compatible with existing trends or because they met new needs. Independence in 1947 brought an intensification of these processes.

Indian law thus draws on a number of sources. The Hindu law system began with the Vedas and contemporary non-Aryan customs 3,000 years ago. Slowly, it evolved through blending, comparison, and analysis. After the Arab invasions in the 8th century ad, Islāmic law was introduced in some areas, particularly in the north. The English common law is the residual law in the high courts of Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras; and, at times with the aid of relevant British statutes, it is the residual law also in all other jurisdictions representing the old East India Company’s courts, in which, since 1781, “justice, equity and good conscience” have supplied the rule of law when no Indian statute or rule of personal law (e.g., Hindu law) covered the point. The Portuguese and French used their own laws in their colonies. In British India some British statutes applied, and a few have remained in force. All powers adapted their laws to local conditions, and the famous Anglo-Indian codes, passed in India at intervals from 1860 to 1882, reflected the influence of French and American as well as English and Anglo-Indian models. During that period Roman, or civil, law and continental juridical theory were widely cited, particularly in the Madras high court, to give India the benefit of the best law available; but through codification and other influences this source was soon exhausted. Interpretation of the constitution has resulted in the introduction of some American principles, and welfare and industrial statutes are construed in the light of case law decided elsewhere in the Commonwealth. Western influence is also present in the treatment of personal law.

Generally speaking, Hindu law is the personal law applying to 85 percent of the population and constituting the main juridical product of Indian civilization. The word Hindu does not imply a strict religious orthodoxy and is more ethnic than creedal in its emphasis. Nevertheless, since independence India has aimed at abolishing the personal laws in favour of a civil code (constitution, article 44), which would unify, as far as practicable, the diverse Hindu schools and customs applicable to the various communities. Modern Hindu law is the creation of the Hindu Marriage Act (1955), and of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, Hindu Succession Act, and Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (all of 1956). Until 1955–56 Hindus were entitled to claim exemption from the personal law if a custom could be proved of sufficient certainty, continuity, and age and was not contrary to public policy. Very little scope is now allowed to custom. As an example of the changes, the Special Marriage Act (1954) provided that any couple might marry, irrespective of community, in a civil, Western-type manner, and their personal law of divorce and succession automatically would become inapplicable. In the new divorce law they have, in addition, a right of divorce by mutual consent after they have lived apart for a year and have waited an additional year.

Indian criminal law, on the other hand, has been very little changed since the Indian Penal Code was enacted in 1861. Thomas Babington Macaulay’s original draft of that code, which remains its nucleus, was not based on the contemporary English law alone, and many of the definitions and distinctions are unknown to English law, while later developments in English law are not represented. Yet Indian courts frequently consult English decisions in order to construe sections of the code. In spite of the fact that the wording of the code, when strictly construed, enables many wrongdoers to escape, India has modified it in only marginal respects. This is remarkable in view of the extreme rarity of the code’s coincidence with the criminal laws in force in India prior to 1861. The Criminal Procedure Code (1898), by contrast, is a true Anglo-Indian amalgam and has been amended further to suit peculiarly Indian conditions and the climate of opinion.
WORLD Law Direct -

 

[AmanPeace]

Salahadin

I am a passerby to this forum. I read the original article and then googled authors name for further info and landed here.

You too likely googled the words "hindu laws" came up with the response you posted and then probably patted yourself on the back. But, do you actually read what you post? I quote the following from the third para in that abstract:

"The word Hindu does not imply a strict religious orthodoxy and is more ethnic than creedal in its emphasis. Nevertheless, since independence India has aimed at abolishing the personal laws in favour of a civil code (constitution, article 44)..."

Also, the above lines actually demonstrate how India and Pakistan are moving in opposite direction as regards personal and criminal laws.

Thanks.

 

[foofighter]

Pakistan is already breaking up. Is it boding well for India?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistan is already breaking up. Is it boding well for India?

By what standard is Pakistan 'breaking up'?

The Baloch insurgency is minimal, the Taliban insurgency is an Islamist one, and Islamism tends to inherently be expansionist (i.e Khilafat and Shariah in all Muslim lands), so if it ever succeeds, you will see a 'larger' Pakistan, not a 'divided' one.

Ethnic tensions in Pakistan exists, but pretty much at the level they exist anywhere else. No larges scale ethnic riots or tensions that pose a serious threat to the stability of the state have occurred in the recent past.

In contrast India has had multiple communal riots and violence, Hindu, Muslim and Christian. So the authors analysis, if looked at in the light of empirical evidence and not a regurgitation of the 'stereotype' of Pakistan, and especially when analyzed relative to comparable tensions in India, is extremely flawed.

 

[Bull]

There is nothing wrong with Sharia law in Swat given that Federal Law is not over ruled over the Sharia law. It is believed that the people wanted this law. Such practices happen all over the world. It is not huge thing for us Pakistanis because we are custom to close practices of Sharia law. It may be threatening to the Americans or the Westerners.. but then they should mind their own business as its not their land to live in. .

That should the be the official line.

Personally, i dont like separate laws, not necessarily against the Sharia law, but separate laws. But if it works like it works in India.. where Hindus have their made up laws in some part of states, and it works.. so why not?.

Seperate law for matters related to relegion, individuals/families etc is very much ok. We have HUF/Christian and Muslim laws but most of them are related to property partition among familes, taxes and so on. Not for crimes like murder, theft and all.

Sharia law also works in Saudi Arabia flawlessly.. while the country is happy.

Saudi would be wrong to quote, how do you know if they are happy, Slightest signs of rebellion is dealth with a iron blow.

 

[Bull]

By what standard is Pakistan 'breaking up'?

The Baloch insurgency is minimal, the Taliban insurgency is an Islamist one, and Islamism tends to inherently be expansionist (i.e Khilafat and Shariah in all Muslim lands), so if it ever succeeds, you will see a 'larger' Pakistan, not a 'divided' one.

Ethnic tensions in Pakistan exists, but pretty much at the level they exist anywhere else. No larges scale ethnic riots or tensions that pose a serious threat to the stability of the state have occurred in the recent past.

In contrast India has had multiple communal riots and violence, Hindu, Muslim and Christian. So the authors analysis, if looked at in the light of empirical evidence and not a regurgitation of the 'stereotype' of Pakistan, and especially when analyzed relative to comparable tensions in India, is extremely flawed.

Baluchistan shouldnt have much significance in the 'divided Pakistan theory'. More apt would be the tribal areas. But in no way does a divided Pakistan bode well for us, smaller means unstable atleast in S asian context. It would be a massive headache.

The only prayer to Pakistanis is to hold two consecutive elections which are respected by both main political parties and you are through.

 

[SurvivoR]

The author is no better than idiot Bharat Verma. If you remember this idiot bharat wrote similar policy paper for implementation by India.

 

[PeacefulIndian]

Yesterday I saw Nawaz Sharif's interview on a tv channel. I don't have a link now, I am trting to find out. But this is what he had to say -

"Pakistan never cared for Baloch people, which is now paying back. We did not give them what they deserved. We did the same about East Pakistan, and Bangladesh got separated. We can not deny the same possibility about Balochistan."
And he also mentioned this peace deal with Taliban, and stated that this was not in favor of his country. And later he went on a rant about Parwez Musharraf, which I considered as Pakistan's internal politics.

So probably Pakistan's break up is an emminent possibility. It is good or bad for India, is another issue. But at least Nawaz Sharif saw very serious in the interview, which will make everyone think that Pakistan is on a brink of break up.

 

[koolio]

Yesterday I saw Nawaz Sharif's interview on a tv channel. I don't have a link now, I am trting to find out. But this is what he had to say -

"Pakistan never cared for Baloch people, which is now paying back. We did not give them what they deserved. We did the same about East Pakistan, and Bangladesh got separated. We can not deny the same possibility about Balochistan."
And he also mentioned this peace deal with Taliban, and stated that this was not in favor of his country. And later he went on a rant about Parwez Musharraf, which I considered as Pakistan's internal politics.

So probably Pakistan's break up is an emminent possibility. It is good or bad for India, is another issue. But at least Nawaz Sharif saw very serious in the interview, which will make everyone think that Pakistan is on a brink of break up.

I long suspected Indians here on this forum will think about the same about Pakistan breaking up, I was going though Pakistani youtube videoes and the comments by mostly indians were rubbing thier hands in glee thinking about the prospect of Pakistan breaking up into five states so does this mean with more than a dozen insurgencies going on in India, India will also break up?

Ever since Pakistans creation Indians were saying that Pakistan will not survive from day one but now more than 60 years has passed and Pakistan has gone from strength to strength. As for Nawaz sharif he was saying more about restoring judiciary.