Marriage Bill: The hard questions

Picture this, you are about to say your marriage vows to the man of your dreams in a civil ceremony officiated by a registrar of marriages.

You have dreamt of this moment when he will finally be yours legally for a long time – but before the two of you say the binding words, he drops the bombshell.

He reveals that in a few years to come, he may want to marry another wife, and therefore wants you to promise him that should the need arise, you will not object to him bringing home another woman.

How would you react if faced with such a predicament? Saying ‘No’ would mean that there would be no marriage ceremony, while saying ‘yes’ would be like giving your husband-to-be the leeway to marry all the women he wishes to in future.

Does such a scenario sound like the stuff movies are made of? Granted, it may not play out exactly in this way, but should the Marriage Bill 2007, which is due for debate in parliament during this term, pass into law, couples will be given the power to choose the kind of marriage they want right from the beginning – whether monogamous of polygamous. And herein lies the controversy.

The Bill states that when you apply to the Registrar of Marriages to marry you, one of the things a couple will have to indicate in writing at that time whether the marriage is intended to be polygamous or monogamous.

Most of the people that Saturday interviewed felt that this was an unrealistic expectation since few people, at the time of getting married, have the intention of marrying another person.

“Most people get married because they are in love, and at that moment, they don’t foresee themselves falling out of love or bringing a third party into their lives,” newly married 30-year-old Salome Mueni said.

The issue of how many women would actually give their husband the green light to marry another woman in future also arises. Most women today are educated and aware of their rights and know that too many cooks spoil the broth.

“I would never allow my husband to marry another woman so that she can enjoy what we have both slaved for,” says Janet Kinyua, a 28-year-old accountant.

As for Pascal Mwalimu, a 45-year-old married woman, it all boiled down to human nature.

“We human beings are jealous by nature, and it would be difficult for us to pretend that we can willingly share our husbands or wives with others,” she said.

And then comes the million-dollar question, isn’t this outright infringement on the rights and position of the first wife?

As it is, stories of women, all claiming to be the legally married, battling with the legal wife over property left behind once a man dies are a common feature in our society. We read about it in the papers, watch the drama unfold on television or hear about it through the grapevine.

One case that stands out is the public battle for the property left behind by former Embakasi MP, Mugabe Were. After his death, three women, all claiming to be his widows, went to court to lay claim to his property.