Constitutional Validity of the Muslim Women’s Act The path breaking Supreme Court decision Daniel Latifi v Union of India (2001 (7) SCC 740), which upheld the Constitutional validity of the controversial Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (Muslim Women’s Act or MWA for short) is an important milestone in the realm of minority identity and gender concerns. Even prior to the pronouncement of this ruling, Majlis has been advocating for the Constitutional validity of the controversial Act. Following the controversial judgement in the Shah Bano case, (Mohd. Ahmad Khan v Shahbano Begum AIR 1985 SC 945) a new statute was enacted in 1986, which prescribed certain new remedies to divorced Muslim woman. But since this statute was enacted amidst protests from women’s rights groups and progressive social organisations, it was viewed with suspicion and foreboding by these sections. Hence the first response of the protesting groups was to challenge its Constitutionality, rather than examine its viability. But while these petitions were pending, several High Courts were validating the act and interpreting it in a manner which was strengthening the rights of Muslim women. Many Muslim husbands who were aggrieved by these judgements had filed appeals in the Supreme Court. Finally in 2000 the Supreme Court clubbed all the appeals and the writ petitions and heard the issue. At this point, our concern at Majlis was that if the new Act is struck off as unconstitutional, it would erase the gains of all these years, where divorced Muslim woman was granted lump sum maintenance. If the position of the Muslim Personal Law Board is upheld, then the Act would be held constitutional but the right of maintenance would be confined to three months. In 2001, we brought out a booklet, titled Judgement Call, which analysed the judgements of various High Courts and explored the myth that the Act was anti-women. The landmark ruling of the Supreme Court in Daniel Lalifi v Union of India (cited above) validated our stand by upholding the Act and declaring that divorced Muslim woman is entitled to a fair and reasonable settlement for life.   Though it was a positive ruling protecting the rights of Muslim women it did not receive media publicity since the issue was not sensational in the prevailing anti-Muslim climate. So we launched a sustained campaign to popularize this judgement through orientation programmes for activists and lawyers and providing material for training of judges to the National Judicial Academy.