Judge for Matters of Special Urgency overrules the government’s case against civil marriage

Following the lawsuit filed by Dalal Moawwad and Ibrahim Maaluf before the Judge for Matters of Special Urgency in Beirut, Judge Jad Maaluf issued on February 21, an unprecedented ruling, regarding the registration of a civil marriage. The Judge included in his verdict a jurisprudence or independent opinion substantiating and supporting a civil contract while repealing all the excuses drawn by the state to this effect. By doing this, the judge authenticated the right to hold civil marriages in Lebanon based on the following three fundamentals: the first, it is forbidden to manipulate or infringe on the right of marriage, for it is a basic human right, as stipulated by the Constitution and international conventions, that “the freedom of belief out of which originates the freedom to believe or not to believe in a specific religion or faith, as well as the right to marry, are all considered fundamental human rights, and therefore, require protection to this effect. Secondly, Judge Maaluf settled for the first time in the history of court rulings a controversial issue between the state and activists in determining the efficacy of canceling religion from the birth registry of persons. Maaluf said this is not indicative of a temporary suppression of the sect, rather it signifies a complete withdrawal from the sect towards the community at large, without association with another sect. This said, any person who does not mention his religious preference on his birth certificate, cannot but be considered a person who does not belong to any sect or religion. Maaluf explained that this category of persons “enjoy the various rights other people with religious affiliations also enjoy.”  The judge’s line of attack believes in the essential right of those persons to marry in accordance with the civil law. Third, Maaluf went beyond the ruling in question, to address the legislative vacuum resulting from the absence of civil law, and to recommend the sound judgment of the couple in choosing a foreign law in this respect, which, he maintained, does not infringe on the public order in matters of personal status. Finally, Maaluf considered that "acknowledging the validity of civil marriages held abroad, demonstrates, unintentionally though, discrimination between citizens. He argued that the civil marriage option becomes feasible and practicable only for well-off couples or who can afford the expenses of travel. (Al Akhbar, March 29, 2016) (For full text of the judgment ruling please check:  http://www.legal-agenda.com/article.php?id=1463&folder=articles&lang=ar)