Mizoram women’s group demands state repeal amended marriage law, calls it unsafe

Mizoram’s largest women’s organisation, the Mizo Hmeichhe Insuihkhawm Pawl (MHIP), on February 27 urged the state government to withdraw the recently passed amendment to the marriage and inheritance law, claiming that it is inadequate and potentially unsafe for women of the Mizo community.

The appeal comes days after the Mizoram Assembly passed the Mizo Marriage and Inheritance of Property (Amendment) Bill on February 24. The amendment has drawn sharp criticism from women’s groups, particularly over provisions related to inter-community marriage.

In a statement, the MHIP expressed concern that while the earlier law applied uniformly to all Mizo citizens, including those who married outside the community, the amended legislation excludes Mizo women who marry non-tribal men. The organisation said this clause could have serious social and legal consequences for women and their children.

The MHIP also claimed that despite being represented on the Mizo Customary Law Committee, it was neither consulted nor informed during the drafting of the Bill’s specific provisions. The organisation said it has rejected the current version of the legislation and is now exploring alternative legal frameworks to better protect women’s rights and ensure gender justice.

The Bill was introduced by Chief Minister Lalduhoma in his capacity as Law Minister, with the stated objective of further codifying Mizo customary laws. It seeks to bring changes to traditional practices concerning polygamy, inter-community marriage and inheritance rights.

Under the amendment, polygamy and bigamy have been formally banned. The law also strengthens women’s property rights by allowing them to claim up to 50 per cent of matrimonial property and jointly acquired assets in the event of divorce. It further mandates that divorcees must produce a valid divorce certificate before remarrying, ensuring that previous marriages are legally dissolved.

However, a major point of contention is a clause stating that if a Mizo woman marries a non-Mizo, she will cease to retain her Mizo identity, and her children will not be eligible to claim Scheduled Tribe status. Critics argue that this provision institutionalises gender discrimination and undermines constitutional protections.

Since its passage, the amendment has triggered a polarised debate across social media and public forums. While some have defended the law as a measure to regulate inter-tribal marriages and preserve customary practices, opponents contend that a woman’s ethnic identity is determined by birth and cannot be revoked through statutory codification.

Legal experts and critics have also cited Supreme Court rulings which hold that a woman’s caste or tribal status is determined by birth and does not change upon marriage, and that her children remain eligible for SC or ST status based on lineage.

The MHIP has called on the state government to review and repeal the amendment, warning that failure to do so could weaken legal safeguards for Mizo women and deepen gender inequality within customary law frameworks.