The Taliban government in Afghanistan has again placed themselves at the center of controversy after introducing a new Family Law Decree which govern marriage, divorce, guardianship, and child marriage under its interpretation of Islamic law. The 31-article regulation, titled “Principles of Separation Between Spouses,” was approved by Taliban supreme leader Hibatullah Akhundzada and recently published in Afghanistan’s official gazette.
This Family law decree is another step toward institutionalizing gender inequality and restricting women’s autonomy. The law has triggered widespread debate not only because of its contents, but also because it sharply contrasts with reforms adopted by several Muslim-majority countries and modern legal standards followed in democracies such as India.
At the heart of the criticism lies one deeply troubling clause: “the recognition of a virgin girl’s silence as consent to marriage”.
The debate surrounding this decree of law is therefore larger than Afghanistan itself. It is about how states interpret religion, how power shapes personal freedoms, and whether women’s rights can survive under systems where obedience is prioritized over choice or we can say Right to choice even doesn’t exist in their Dictionary.
WHEN A GIRL’S SILENCE BECOMES A WEDDING VOW
For decades, World Cinema romanticized the idea that a woman’s silence meant Approval. Dialogues like “ladki ki na mein haan hoti hai” were casually celebrated on screen, turning hesitation into consent and silence into acceptance. What once appeared as problematic cinematic drama has now resurfaced in a far more disturbing reality.
Under the Taliban’s new family law in Afghanistan, a girl’s silence can legally be interpreted as consent to marriage, transforming an outdated patriarchal mindset into official state policy.
One of the most controversial aspects of the Taliban decree is the provision stating that the silence of a virgin girl may be interpreted as consent to marriage. The same rule, however, does not apply to boys or previously married women.
Silence, especially in deeply conservative societies where girls often face family pressure and limited freedom cannot reasonably be treated as genuine approval. This law effectively weakens a woman’s agency by assuming compliance unless she openly resists. In societies where opposing family authority can result in social exclusion, intimidation, or violence, silence may represent fear rather than consent.
THE TALIBAN’S NEW FAMILY LAWS ARE ABOUT POWER, NOT PROTECTION
The Taliban has defended the decree as a measure designed to preserve morality and strengthen family structures. Yet many analysts argue that the law is less about protection and more about control.
Since regaining power in 2021, the Taliban has imposed severe restrictions on Afghan women’s participation in public life. Girls have been barred from secondary and higher education, women have faced employment limitations, and strict dress and mobility rules have been enforced.
The new family law appears to fit within this broader political ideology, one in which women’s independence is systematically reduced while male guardianship is strengthened.
By granting fathers and grandfathers authority over marriage decisions, the decree reinforces patriarchal structures in which women remain legally and socially dependent on men. Critics argue that such laws transform family institutions into tools of obedience rather than mutual partnership.
The issue is not simply religious but it is deeply a political stunt. Laws governing marriage, consent, and guardianship often determine how power operates inside society itself.
HOW OTHER MUSLIM-MAJORITY COUNTRIES DIFFER
The Taliban frequently presents its laws as authentic Islamic governance. However, the Muslim world is far from legally uniform, and several Muslim- majority nations have adopted reforms aimed at protecting women’s rights and limiting child marriage.
In Saudi Arabia, despite its conservative reputation, authorities introduced regulations in recent years restricting marriages involving minors and requiring court approval for marriages under the age of 18. Similarly, the United Arab Emirates has implemented legal reforms strengthening women’s rights in marriage and divorce proceedings.
INDIA’S LEGAL FRAMEWORK: A SHARP CONTRAST
India, despite its own social challenges involving child marriage and gender inequality, follows a significantly different constitutional and legal approach.
Under Indian law, marriage requires the free consent of both parties. The legal age of marriage is 18 for women and 21 for men under the Prohibition of Child
Marriage Act. Forced marriage is considered illegal, and courts increasingly emphasize individual autonomy in marital decisions.
India’s legal system also allows women to challenge abusive marriages, seek divorce, and claim legal protections under domestic violence laws. While implementation remains inconsistent in some rural regions, the constitutional framework strongly supports equality and individual rights.
Importantly, Indian courts have repeatedly affirmed that silence cannot be interpreted as consent in legal matters involving personal liberty. This principle sharply contrasts with the Taliban decree.
The comparison highlights a broader distinction between democratic constitutional systems and authoritarian religious governance. In democracies, laws are generally debated through institutions, challenged in courts, and subject to public criticism. Under Taliban rule, dissent itself carries significant risks.
A FUTURE DEFINED BY CONTROL OR CHOICE?
Marriage laws reveal the moral priorities of society. They determine who possesses authority, whose voice matters, and how freedom is understood within families and institutions.
The Taliban’s new family decree is not merely about domestic disputes or legal technicalities. It reflects a larger struggle between control and autonomy, between patriarchal authority and individual rights.
By allowing silence to stand in for consent and by legitimizing the authority of guardians over minors, the Taliban has reignited global concerns about women’s rights under its rule. At the same time, comparisons with other Muslim-majority
countries demonstrate that religion itself is not the central issue; rather, it is the interpretation and political use of religion that shapes such policies.
As Afghanistan becomes increasingly isolated from the international community, the lives most affected by these policies remain those of Afghan women and girls many of whom continue to resist quietly despite enormous risks.
The global debate surrounding these laws ultimately asks a universal question: should marriage be built on free choice and dignity, or on silence and submission?
A FUTURE DEFINED BY CONTROL OR CHOICE?
Marriage laws reveal the moral priorities of society. They determine who possesses authority, whose voice matters, and how freedom is understood within families and institutions.
The Taliban’s new family decree is not merely about domestic disputes or legal technicalities. It reflects a larger struggle between control and autonomy, between patriarchal authority and individual rights.
By allowing silence to stand in for consent and by legitimizing the authority of guardians over minors, the Taliban has reignited global concerns about women’s rights under its rule. At the same time, comparisons with other Muslim-majority
countries demonstrate that religion itself is not the central issue; rather, it is the interpretation and political use of religion that shapes such policies.
As Afghanistan becomes increasingly isolated from the international community, the lives most affected by these policies remain those of Afghan women and girls many of whom continue to resist quietly despite enormous risks.
The global debate surrounding these laws ultimately asks a universal question: should marriage be built on free choice and dignity, or on silence and submission?
For millions watching Afghanistan today, the answer will define far more than family law. It will define the future of human rights itself.
For many observers, this clause reflects a larger ideological pattern under Taliban rule; one where women are expected to comply quietly rather than participate equally.
ANURAG GUPTA
ADVOCATE
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
About The Author
