"Why Are You Letting This Happen?" Sonia Gandhi To Rajiv In Shah Bano Case

New Delhi: Sonia Gandhi says she was "agitated" by what she read in newspapers and magazine articles on the Shah Bano case, a legal case concerning the rights of a Muslim divorcee, and she "argued" with and "questioned" her husband on it.Rajiv Gandhi's defence, she says, was that he was trying to deal with a complicated situation fairly and asked wouldn't he defend women's rights. The conversation is part of Sonia Gandhi's memoir, "Belonging: A Journey Of Love", which hit the stands on Tuesday.The newspapers accused Rajiv Gandhi of "sacrificing" Muslim women's interests.Shah Bano, a poor Muslim woman, had gone to court seeking maintenance for herself and her children from the husband who had remarried and thrown her out of their home. The court ruled in her favour and ordered a small maintenance to be paid. The husband contested the judgment on grounds of Muslim Personal Law. In April 1985, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the High Court that ordered the payment of maintenance to Shah Bano.The then Rajiv Gandhi government passed the Muslim Women (Protection on Divorce) Act, 1986, essentially overturning the Supreme Court verdict."The argument for making laws applicable to all citizens, without distinction of religious affiliation, came into head-on collision with the fundamental right to freedom of religion, which included the legal guarantees given in the early years of Independence to the country's minorities that their personal laws would be protected," writes Sonia Gandhi, noting that it was the first occasion on her husband's watch that inflamed "Hindu-Muslim animosities"."I was agitated by the issue - by what I read about it in newspaper and magazine articles. Many well-known women activists, including Muslim women, had spoken out in favour of Shah Bano's right to maintenance."I argued with him (Rajiv Gandhi) and questioned him: 'The papers are accusing you of sacrificing Muslim women's interests. What's going on? Why are you letting this happen?'" she writes.The compromise Rajiv Gandhi accepted did, in fact, strike a balance between religious beliefs and gender justice, and it also gave Muslim women a fairer and more reasonable portion than the pitiful monthly amount of Rs 179.2 awarded by the court to Shah Bano, Sonia Gandhi argues."He replied that he was trying to deal fairly with a complicated situation. 'Wouldn't I defend women's rights - don't you know me?' he said in a slightly irritated tone. He explained that he was seeking a way to address the problem of Shah Bano and other women like her without putting in jeopardy the entire edifice of Muslim Personal Law," Sonia Gandhi recounts.But the legal amendment that overturned the court's decision was a political step that was widely criticised, she says.The BJP predictably accused the government of indulging in "vote-bank politics", while progressive liberal opinion viewed the decision as a capitulation to the conservative elements of Muslim society, she says.In 2001, after seven changes of government, the Supreme Court upheld Rajiv's stand in the 1986 "Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce)" Act, she points out.