T

he Constitutional Court (MK) has rejected the judicial review of Article 7 paragraph (1) of the Marriage Law regarding the marriageable age for females. Thus, the court upholds 16 years as the marriageable age for women, among other reasons on the grounds that there is no guarantee that if the age requirement was increased to 18, it would reduce divorce rates and solve health and social problems.

The decision certainly has sparked discontent as it is not deemed a progressive ruling. The court'€™s decision is final and binding; however, as the court said, there is still a way to revise the provision, namely through the government and the House of Representatives.

The Marriage Law was passed in 1974 with no amendments since then. Perhaps at that time girls who married at 16 were common as education for women was considered not too important.

Women were also limited to domestic affairs '€” '€œsumur, dapur, kasur'€ (well, kitchen, bed) '€” a saying that was apparently deeply rooted among lawmakers.

However, life evolves every second. A change in social and cultural values is inevitable. Now, women'€™s position is equal to men. As such, the law should be progressive in handling facts and developments, as well as demands within society. If not, the law will always lag behind and become obsolete.
________________________

Young wives are often powerless, with even more limited autonomy and freedom.

The Marriage Law needs to be revised, especially regarding the marriageable age for females, to fulfill the demands of society and, most importantly, to protect children'€™s rights by delaying their entry into marriage and motherhood.

In the Child Protection Law, a child is defined as a person under 18 and includes the unborn, therefore 16 years as the marriageable age for females definitely contravenes the aim to protect children'€™s rights.

This law guarantees fulfillment of children'€™s right to life, growth, development, to participate fully in society and to receive protection from violence and discrimination. A woman married at 16 and having children would face barriers against continuing her education given the extra psychological burden '€” including that of seeing her peers still freely playing and going to school.

The Constitutional Court judges seemed to see the problem only in terms of physical readiness for reproduction. Indeed, perhaps 16 years is old enough for a woman to have children.

However, several expert witnesses presented by the petitioners had showed how early marriage has caused a high risk for diseases and for maternal and infant mortality.

Marriage at 16 also leaves girls very vulnerable to violence and divorce, given that psychologically, the teenager has not fully understood her rights and obligations in marriage. Often the husband, with the support of his family, perceives that the errors committed by his young wife need to be punished, either verbally or physically.

The National Commission for Violence against Women recorded in 2013 that most victims of violence were female victims of domestic abuse, namely 64 percent of the total of 279,760 recorded cases.

Young wives are often powerless, with even more limited autonomy and freedom compared to older women, and are unable to negotiate sexual relations, contraceptive use, childbearing and other aspects of domestic life.

Furthermore, early marriage results in a loss of childhood. Women are inhibited from realizing their dreams and aspirations.

Their rights are violated and they lose the ability to choose how their life is fulfilled.

Thus, it is our duty to push the government and the legislative body to amend the Marriage Law for our children'€™s future. Children have a strategic role and unique position in determining our future.

Don'€™t let them fall before they grow.
___________________________

The writer is a lawyer at Lubis Ganie Surowidjojo law firm. The views expressed are his own.