View Article |
Women’s right to divorce: a comparative study of al-Khula` on Libyan and Malaysian women
Madi, Sabah Faraj1, Ruzman Md Noor2, Saged, Ali Ali3.
The major problem with al-khula` is that it becomes a
worldwide phenomenon especially throughout the
Muslim world. Besides that, it leads to a general
misunderstanding among Muslim women. Al-khula` is
often resorted to a quick fix solution to marital
problems and a mean of divorce. The prevalence of alkhula`
practiced in this manner generally has become
an obstacle to the development of the society,
especially since women are now playing an effective
role in the growth and development of society. The
proliferation of al-khula` has become a major obstacle
in the advancement of women as a worker as well as
the foundation of the family institution and
community. Libyan researchers have identified the
practices of al-khula’ in the Arab laws whereas there
are any research on the practices of al-khula` in the
Malaysian context that will lead to detrimental in the
understanding of al-khula’ among Malaysian society.
Therefore, this study aims to compare between alkhula`
practices in Libyan and Malaysian laws and alkhula`
in Islamic law. The potential causes such as
changing economic, social, and political conditions,
speeding up the practices of al-khula` compared to
talaq (divorce) that may extend for many years due to
the intransigence of some judges without reaching a
quick solution, as well as the improvement of social
status of women. However, certain conventional laws
unduly impose some restrictions on women’s rights to
request to al-khula` such as when they are still
breastfeeding their child, while others fail to impose conditions to determine the legitimacy of the request for al-khula`.
Affiliation:
- University of Malaya, Malaysia
- University of Malaya, Malaysia
- University of Malaya, Malaysia
Toggle translation
Download this article (This article has been downloaded 387 time(s))
|
|
Indexation |
Indexed by |
MyJurnal (2020) |
H-Index
|
2 |
Immediacy Index
|
0.000 |
Rank |
0 |
Indexed by |
Scopus 2020 |
Impact Factor
|
CiteScore (0.1) |
Rank |
Q3 (Religious Studies) Q3 (Philosophy) |
Additional Information |
SJR (0.154) |
|
|
|