menu_open Columnists
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close

Eighteen Is Not Western—It Is Constitutional, Islamic, and Just

49 0
05.07.2025

The critics’ lament—“But that’s westernization!”—rings hollow.

When Islamabad passed the Child Marriage Restraint Bill in May 2025, it did not just legislate; it made a statement. A statement that childhood is not a loophole, girlhood is not a waiting room for marriage, and consent without maturity is not consent at all.

The law sets 18 as the minimum legal age for marriage across the capital and introduces clear penalties for guardians, officiants, and adults who enter into or enable underage unions. In doing so, it aligns the federal capital with Sindh, the only province to have taken this step back in 2013. The reaction was predictable. The Council of Islamic Ideology called it “un-Islamic.” Religious leaders argued, again, that puberty is the only valid threshold. And the rest of Pakistan—Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan—must now decide whether to follow the lead of the capital and Sindh or remain stuck in a contradiction that costs girls their education, health, autonomy, and sometimes, their lives.

Opponents claim the law is un-Islamic, insisting puberty alone suffices for marriage. But that captures half the story. The Qur’an never names an age. It speaks of maturity (rushd) and consent. Take Surah An-Nisa (4:6), which entrusts orphans’ property only when they show “marriageable age and sound judgment.” Islamic scholars, from Imam Malik to the Hanafi school, understood this to mean that mental maturity—not bodily changes—enables legal contracts, including marriage. And consent? The Prophet ﷺ said, “A woman shall not be married until her permission is sought.” Put bluntly: consent without comprehension is a mirage. Laws that still allow marriage at 16 or under often violate this principle. Islamic law has always prioritized consent, not arbitrarily defined entitlement.

This cultural habit, fossilized over time, has become so politically sacrosanct that to challenge it is to be accused of betraying tradition. But traditions must justify their continued existence. When they cause harm—physical,........

© Courting The Law