Hmong ‘Marriage by Capture’ in the United States of America and Ukuthwala in South Africa: Unfolding Discussions

IF 0.1 Q4 LAW
L. Mwambene
{"title":"Hmong ‘Marriage by Capture’ in the United States of America and Ukuthwala in South Africa: Unfolding Discussions","authors":"L. Mwambene","doi":"10.25159/2522-3062/5981","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"‘Marriage by capture’ among the Hmong people in the United States of America and ukuthwala in South Africa both take the form of the mock abduction of a young woman for the purpose of a customary marriage. The noteworthy point about these two customary marriage practices is that, although Hmong marriage by capture takes place in the context of a minority community in a liberal state, and ukuthwala occurs in a postcolonial state, courts in these jurisdictions convert these marriage practices to the common law offences of rape, assault, and abduction. This article reflects on the accused-centred approach in the case of People v Moua, in which the court invoked the cultural defence, and the victim-centred approach in Jezile v S, which severed cultural values from the rights of the woman. It questions whether the two communities in question, in their respective liberal and postcolonial settings, influence the attitudes of the courts in cases involving rape, assault, and abduction charges. The main argument proffered is that both approaches may encourage communities to continue marriage abduction practices without bringing them to the attention of investigative organs, with adverse human rights implications for the women and girls affected. The ultimate purpose of this conversation, therefore, is to show how the approaches of the courts to the recognition or non-recognition of these customary practices affect the rights of girls and women who encounter institutions of law that alienate people belonging to minority cultural groups, and often perpetuate injustice.","PeriodicalId":29899,"journal":{"name":"Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa-CILSA","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa-CILSA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25159/2522-3062/5981","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

‘Marriage by capture’ among the Hmong people in the United States of America and ukuthwala in South Africa both take the form of the mock abduction of a young woman for the purpose of a customary marriage. The noteworthy point about these two customary marriage practices is that, although Hmong marriage by capture takes place in the context of a minority community in a liberal state, and ukuthwala occurs in a postcolonial state, courts in these jurisdictions convert these marriage practices to the common law offences of rape, assault, and abduction. This article reflects on the accused-centred approach in the case of People v Moua, in which the court invoked the cultural defence, and the victim-centred approach in Jezile v S, which severed cultural values from the rights of the woman. It questions whether the two communities in question, in their respective liberal and postcolonial settings, influence the attitudes of the courts in cases involving rape, assault, and abduction charges. The main argument proffered is that both approaches may encourage communities to continue marriage abduction practices without bringing them to the attention of investigative organs, with adverse human rights implications for the women and girls affected. The ultimate purpose of this conversation, therefore, is to show how the approaches of the courts to the recognition or non-recognition of these customary practices affect the rights of girls and women who encounter institutions of law that alienate people belonging to minority cultural groups, and often perpetuate injustice.
美利坚合众国的苗族“捕获婚姻”和南非的乌库特瓦拉:展开讨论
美利坚合众国的苗族人和南非的乌库特瓦拉人之间的“捕获婚姻”都是以模拟绑架一名年轻女子的形式进行习俗婚姻。关于这两种习惯婚姻做法,值得注意的一点是,尽管苗族的捕获婚姻发生在自由国家的少数民族社区,而乌库特瓦拉发生在后殖民国家,但这些司法管辖区的法院将这些婚姻做法转化为强奸、袭击和绑架的普通法罪行。本文回顾了人民诉Moua案中以被告为中心的做法,法院在该案中援引了文化辩护,以及Jezile诉S案中以受害者为中心的方法,该方法将文化价值观与妇女权利割裂开来。它质疑这两个社区在各自的自由主义和后殖民主义环境中是否会影响法院在涉及强奸、袭击和绑架指控的案件中的态度。所提出的主要论点是,这两种方法都可能鼓励社区在不引起调查机关注意的情况下继续采取绑架婚姻的做法,对受影响的妇女和女孩的人权产生不利影响。因此,这次对话的最终目的是表明,法院承认或不承认这些习惯做法的方式如何影响女孩和妇女的权利,她们遇到的法律制度疏远了属于少数文化群体的人,并往往使不公正现象长期存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信