A recent observation by the High Court has reopened an old and sensitive debate in Bangladesh. According to the court, under Muslim family law, a man does not require the consent of his first wife to contract a second marriage. Approval from the local Arbitration Council is deemed sufficient. While the ruling is framed as a legal clarification, its wider social and political implications cannot be ignored.
For decades, it was widely understood that contracting a second marriage without the consent of the first wife could lead to criminal liability. Section 494 of the Penal Code provides for imprisonment of up to seven years for bigamy. This strict provision was later moderated with the enactment of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance in 1961, which introduced a regulatory framework for second marriages among Muslims. Under the Ordinance, a husband may contract a second marriage only with the prior permission of the Arbitration Council, and failure to obtain such permission attracts a comparatively lighter penalty of up to one year’s imprisonment and a fine of up to ten thousand taka. In practice, the requirement of the first wife’s consent act as a safeguard for women’s rights and dignity within marriage. The recent interpretation weakens that safeguard and raises serious concerns about the future of gender justice in the country.
This legal shift has not occurred in isolation. Since August 5, 2024, the influence of Islamist forces within state power and public life has become increasingly visible. Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, though not formally in office, is widely perceived to be exercising influence through the interim government. Policies and reform agendas emerging during this period reflect ideological priorities that align closely with conservative religious politics rather than constitutional equality.
One of the most affected areas has been reform initiatives, including quota restructuring. These changes have disproportionately impacted women and indigenous communities, groups that have historically relied on protective quotas to access education and employment. For Islamist fundamentalist politics, these communities are often viewed as obstacles to a rigid social order. The rollback or dilution of such protections signals a deeper intent that goes beyond administrative reform.
There are also reports that the interim government is considering including provisions to list multiple wives’ names on the National Identity Card. If implemented, this would not merely recognize polygamy but actively normalize and promote it through state documentation. Such a move would mark a significant departure from the constitutional promise of equality and could institutionalize discrimination against women under the guise of administrative convenience.
Supporters of these changes argue that reforms should continue and that the current Jamaat backed Yunus led interim arrangement deserves more time. They claim that these policies address grievances faced by men and reduce what they describe as “male oppression.” However, framing gender justice as a zero-sum conflict between men and women is both misleading and dangerous. Expanding rights for one group by shrinking protections for another undermines the very idea of justice.
In Bangladesh, there is a long standing practice of multiple marriages by men across society, from rural to urban areas and from poor to wealthy households. Although often justified as tradition or religion, this practice has deep social consequences. Legal provisions that allow multiple marriages tend to normalize and encourage the behavior, rather than regulate it. In reality, multiple marriages frequently result in emotional neglect, economic insecurity, and physical and psychological violence against women. The power imbalance created by this system leaves many women with little choice but to accept injustice, fearing social stigma, abandonment, or poverty. Instead of protecting families, the continuation of multiple marriage provisions reinforces patriarchal control and increases vulnerability and violence against women.
Globally, multiple marriage, or polygamy, is legally recognized in around fifty countries, mostly across parts of Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia. In most cases, it is permitted under Islamic law or customary legal systems and usually allows a man to marry more than one wife, often up to four, subject to certain conditions. However, even among these countries, the practice is frequently regulated through court approval, consent requirements, or economic capacity tests. By contrast, the vast majority of countries in Europe, the Americas, and East Asia strictly prohibit polygamy under criminal law, viewing it as incompatible with gender equality and modern civil rights frameworks. This global contrast highlights how laws on marriage often reflect deeper ideological, religious, and constitutional choices made by states.
Bangladesh was founded on secular, democratic, and egalitarian principles. Legal reforms, especially in personal law, must be guided by constitutional values, not ideological pressure. The growing influence of Islamist politics in lawmaking and governance risks pushing the country away from those foundational commitments.
The question is no longer only about polygamy or family law. It is about the direction in which the state is moving, who benefits from these reforms, and who is being left more vulnerable than before. A democratic society must debate these issues openly, critically, and without fear. Silence now may shape a future that is difficult to reverse.
Writer: Parvez Hashem, Lawyer and Human Rights Defender.
