Disappointed interim govt has not supported women’s commission: Shireen Huq

Shireen Huq, the head of the Women’s Affairs Reform Commission, says she is disappointed that the interim government has not spoken up or made public its support of the panel amid heated criticism of its report.

Asked whether she agreed with Prof Giti Ara Nasreen’s recent comments on her disappointment with the government’s response, she told bdnews24.com’s Inside Out: “I am disappointed as well.”

Huq, an activist for women’s rights and public health, is the founder of Naripokkho and was selected to chair the commission the interim government formed to recommend state reforms regarding women’s affairs.

She spoke with Inside Out on the proposals put forward in the commission’s report and the intense debate it has sparked.

Regarding the backlash to the proposals put forward by the commission on matters of property laws, inheritance, and the recognition of sex workers, she said: “What was expected is the Hifazat-e (Islam) criticism. That was not unexpected, that was not unanticipated, but we welcomed it anyway. Let there be debate. Let these issues be discussed in the public domain because many of these issues have never been discussed in the public domain. So we welcome that.”

“What we did not welcome was the abusive language used, where they've even called me a whore, a bitch, and various other things. But what has disappointed us is that very few male members from any of the other commissions have spoken up. In fact, except for labour, very few of the other commissions have spoken up to support us.”

‘IF WE CANNOT TALK ABOUT EQUALITY NOW, WHEN CAN WE?’

Huq said that the changes the commission proposed to laws on property, inheritance, and other topics do not affect the religious-based personal laws that currently exist.

“What we have actually proposed is not a change in the religious law. It should remain the way it is. There are many people who abide by it. There are many people who would like to live under those provisions, but we are asking for an option to be created for those people who do not want to live or abide by the religion-based personal law to create a civil option based on equality of men and women,” she said.

She acknowledges the controversy that may arise from addressing laws that intersect with religious beliefs, but insists it is a necessary step.

“This is 2025. If we can't talk about equality even now, when are we ever going to be able to talk about equality? In 1961, a major change was brought about in the personal family laws, specifically Islamic family laws, Muslim family laws, ordinance. How many years ago was that? 39 plus 25 – 64.”

“Nobody wants to touch this. Everybody is afraid of touching or even speaking about reforms, because it touches on religion, because our personal laws are religion-based.”

However, the change would address something Huq believes leads to fundamental inequality between men and women in terms of property rights.

“How many assets do women own? Even if the religious law was enforced and women were given half the share of their brothers, even then the percentage of assets and wealth in the hands of women would be far higher. I'm told it's now about 4 percent so even the religious law is not enforced,” she said.

The head of the Women’s Affairs Reform Commission believes this disparity is due to the social pressures and power dynamics of the situation.

“When it comes to giving up property to sisters, brothers become very hesitant, reluctant. And I think that sisters are afraid that if they insist on their rightful share - I'm not even talking about equal share, on their rightful share as it is laid out in law - they are afraid they will lose the relationship with the brother.”

“And once the parents are gone, it is the brother who is the only refuge should something go wrong in the marriage. So that's why women also don't pursue the claim. Women are afraid to pursue the claim.”

‘WOMEN IN SEX WORK DESERVE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS’

Another controversial recommendation put forward by the Women’s Affairs Reform Commission has been the official recognition of sex workers as workers and the recognition of their labour rights.

In addition to religious and moral objections to the proposal, some have also argued that the proposal goes against the Constitution, which says the state should adopt measures to prevent prostitution and gambling.

Defending the recommendation, Huq says: “We are not talking about the profession, but we are talking about the women who work in that profession. Those women are citizens of this country, and they have every right to every single right that I have. So, they have a right to fundamental rights, and that is why it's important to speak about the rights of sex workers. Nothing is said about the profession. We are not encouraging that profession to thrive, but who keeps the profession going? Men.”

She says that sex workers have provided their input on the situation, arguing that the recognition of their profession would protect them from an adversarial relationship with the law.

“One of the main things they have complained about is police harassment... police harassment is one of the major difficulties they experience. You know, police may often will take away all their earnings,” she said.

“So, police protection, police violation of their rights, is one of the main issues. They think that if they are recognised, then there will be some protection. That they can actually make a complaint, a formal complaint or a judicial complaint, and so this is one of the main reasons why they want recognition.”

These sex workers also want recognition so that they can send their children to school and they don’t have to end up in the same profession, she said.

RESPONDING TO CRITICISM

Regarding the criticism from Hifazat on the Women’s Affairs Reform Commission and the group’s call for the panel to be scrapped, Huq said that they have the right to disagree.

“At least now we all have freedom of speech, freedom of expression, so they have the right to disagree,” she said. “What they do not have the right to is use verbal abuse and but they have the right to disagree. Anybody has the right to disagree.”

She also responded to the National Citizen Party (NCP) criticism that the commission was not representative or inclusive of women from all sections of society, stating: “To make a commission broadly representative of the population would require at least a 150-member commission because then you would want religious representation. You would want different ethnic groups represented, you would want different classes represented, you would want different professions represented. It is not practical. It is easy to say that.”

Asked whether additional scrutiny from a larger sample of women would improve the report, Huq said: “Our report is now in the public domain. Everybody and anybody can discuss it. They can organise their own discussions with their own stakeholders.”