Maldives High Court Validates Marriage Conducted in Sri Lanka Under Judge’s Guardianship
The High Court has issued a landmark ruling on a family law case involving a marriage conducted abroad, declaring it valid and ordering its registration in the Maldives. The decision addresses a long-running dispute over guardian consent and highlights how Islamic Sharia is applied when a legal guardian refuses to act without proper justification.
Background of the Case
The case began when a Maldivian woman married in Sri Lanka without her father’s consent. Under Islamic law, the father is recognized as her legal guardian, or Wali. However, the father refused to act as her guardian, claiming without evidence that she was not his daughter.
Her first marriage was later taken to the Family Court in the Maldives for registration. The court reviewed whether the father’s consent had been obtained but dismissed the request after the woman stated she no longer wished to proceed. The validity of the marriage itself remained unresolved.
The woman later entered into a second marriage in Sri Lanka, again without her father’s approval. In this instance, the judge (Hakim) acted as her guardian, formally solemnizing the union after notifying the Maldives Embassy and completing the required documentation.
When she sought to register this second marriage in the Maldives, the Family Court ruled it invalid due to the lack of guardian consent. By then, the couple had a child, and questions of legal parentage remained unsettled.
Father’s Refusal and Appeal to High Court
The father continued to deny his guardianship role, insisting the woman was not his child, despite a court ruling that legally recognized their relationship. His stance caused emotional distress to both the woman and her mother, leaving the family in prolonged turmoil.
The husband challenged the Family Court’s decision at the High Court, arguing that the judge’s role as guardian in solemnizing the marriage abroad was legitimate. He maintained that the father’s refusal was not based on valid grounds, but rather on his continued denial of paternity.
High Court’s Ruling
In a majority decision, the High Court found no legal basis to nullify the marriage. The judges ruled that when a legitimate guardian refuses consent without valid reason, Islamic Sharia permits a judge to act as Wali.
Presiding Judge Dheebanaz stressed that the law allows a judge to step in when a guardian’s refusal is unjustified, especially to prevent a woman from being indefinitely blocked from marriage. He confirmed that the consent given by the judge in Sri Lanka was valid and ordered the Family Court to register the marriage.
Judge Dheebanaz also condemned the father’s repeated denial of paternity, describing it as slander against the mother under Islamic jurisprudence. He noted that such claims cause deep social harm in close-knit communities, where misinformation spreads quickly.
Opinions of Other Judges
Judge Hussain Mazeed supported the ruling, emphasizing that neither the Family Act nor its regulations provide procedures for appointing a guardian in marriages performed abroad. He concluded that marriages conducted by judges or officials under Islamic law in other countries should be recognized as valid in the Maldives.
Judge Fatimath Farheeza agreed that the absence of guardian consent alone is not enough to nullify a marriage. However, she noted that efforts to obtain the guardian’s consent should always be considered during registration to ensure proper oversight.
The High Court’s ruling provides clarity in a sensitive area of family law. It reinforces the principle that a guardian cannot deny consent without valid reason, and in such cases, the judiciary has the authority to act as guardian.
For families facing similar disputes, the judgment also underscores the importance of protecting women from being unfairly prevented from marriage. The court’s order to register the marriage may also help resolve the child’s legal status, which had remained uncertain while the case was under review.