Justice minister Yvonne Dausab says the definition of “spouse” in the Marriage Act is still applicable, and was never meant to be included in the just-tabled Divorce Bill.
“The definition of spouse and what marriage is have always been part of the marriage legislation. We currently have a Marriage Act of 1961, which is still applicable. The definition that is provided for in that particular Act has not changed. The common law definition of ‘spouse’ and how we understand it has not changed in terms of that piece of legislation,” said the minister.
Dausab was responding to Swapo backbencher Tjekero Tweya, who on Tuesday requested that the Divorce Bill be put on hold until the definition of “spouses” is clarified.
Dausab on Tuesday tabled the Divorce Bill in the National Assembly, which aims to consolidate and reform the outdated law concerning divorces related to civil marriages in the country.
In terms of the civil registration and identification bill, “spouse” refers to “a person being one half of a union between a genetically-born man and a genetically-born woman of the opposite sex of that person”.
“I am aware that the minister responsible for Home Affairs, Immigration, Safety and Security, Albert Kawana intends to table a Marriage Bill, which will comprehensively address the definitional aspects of marriage and spouse,” said Dausab last Thursday during a Cabinet committee briefing while sharing accomplishments of the ministry of justice in the first half of 2024.
The minister said tabling the Divorce Bill was a step in the right direction after more than 20 years of wide consultations.
“The issue of dissolution of marriages has been a difficult conversation, at least from our perspective as a ministry of justice, for over 20 years. A lot of conversation has gone into it, and a lot of consultation has gone into it. We have made every effort to cover every concern that has been raised during the consultation process of the Bill,” she said.
According to the minister, the aim of tabling the Bill in Parliament is to have the lawmakers satisfy themselves with the content of the Bill and for them to own it.
-mamakali@nepc.com.na