The Society for the Protection of our Constitution is taking on several Muslim organisations in court over the much-debated Muslim Marriages Bill.

The Society for the Protection of our Constitution is taking on several Muslim organisations in court over the much-debated Muslim Marriages Bill.

It says that the Bill is anti-Islamic and wants the court to order that the organisations should properly consult with the Muslim community and provide comments to the Minister of Justice.

The application, lodged in the South Gauteng High Court is expected to be heard on March 8.

It has been lodged against Scholars of the Truth, the MJC, Jamiatul Ulama Transvaal, the United Ulama Council of SA, the Al Jama-ah political party, the Muslim Lawyers Association, the Council of Righteous Female Islamic Theologians, Jamiatul Ulama of KwaZulu-Natal, Jamiatul Ulama Gauteng and the Majlis.

In an affidavit filed at the High Court, society secretary Muahmmed Hussein Vawda said that, until now, Muslims had kept their affairs away from the secular arms of government and the legislature, and abided by shariah law.

He said that shariah, which was consistent with the Quran, was not compatible with South African law, particularly the Constitution.

“The freedoms and rights afforded in the Constitution are not all afforded in Islamic/shariah law,” he said.


Vawda said in the affidavit that the Bill raised various contentious issues and that, if enacted, it would be subject to attack to bring it in line with the Constitution.

He raised concerns that, since shariah did not afford the same polygamy rights to women as it did to men, the legislation could later be amended to allow women to have more than one partner.

In addition, it was liable to be amended to allow same sex marriages in line with the South African Constitution, he said. “Homosexuality is forbidden in Islam.”

Vawda added that the Bill encouraged illicit affairs and adultery in situations in which men were declined permission to engage in a polygamous marriage.

Another concern was that Muslim affairs would be adjudicated by secular courts and that these courts did not respect the Muslim lifestyle.


He asked the court to order that the Minister of Justice extend the period for comment to November 15.

The respondents have not yet filed any opposing papers