…demystifying the act
Beverly Bizeki
Social media circles have been awash with discussions about the enactment of the new Marriages Act with most women saying they feel threatened by the introduction of civil universal partnerships majority which may mean them sharing properties acquired in the marriage with ‘small houses’ (mistresses).
Property ownership in marriages remains a bone of contention in the event of separation of partners, divorce or death of a spouse and has gotten tongues wagging as people try to interpret the new act which came into effect on September 16, 2022.
Unpacking the new Marriage Act Lin Manyika of Great Zimbabwe University Legal Clinic recently brought some light on the interpretation of the act at a fellowship meeting chaired by Zimbabwe Council of Churches Masvingo Women’s Fellowship.
The new Marriages Act according to Manyika follows the changes made in the constitution in 2013 with special reference to section 78 and 26 which include forbidding the marrying off of children below 18 years and the need for consent of both parties in marriage as well as equality of rights.
The Act also combines the two marriage acts in Zimbabwe 5.11 and 5.07 to make the new marriages act and has not rendered invalid these two marriage types whilst still considering adultery an offence in the presence of a civil marriage.
The most misinterpreted section of the act is the civil universal partnership which according to Manyika is not considered a type of marriage but is only considered during the sharing of properties in the event of separation or the death of a spouse which allows equal sharing of properties.
“The act was made to assist women especially those who face denial of spousal benefits from relatives in the event of death of a partner or denial of a partnership by the husband. There are some women who are staying together with their partners and have had no lobola paid or only tsvakirai kuno was paid who are considered to be not legally married they are considered to be in a universal partnership.
“The civil universal partnership is only considered in the event of death of a spouse or on divorce but is not considered a marriage,” explained Manyika.
Manyika further explained that properties belonging to the legal wife cannot be shared with the small house but the latter has power over properties bought by the two people in a partnership with children set to get a share of their father’s benefits like pension funds.
Women at the fellowship were urged to be actively involved in the purchasing of properties and keeping records for the purpose of proving their ownership of properties in marriage.
“When buying properties, be actively involved and have receipts or proof of payment in the process and have your names attached on these properties and not be labelled as next of kin to avoid conflict,” said Manyika.
She also mentioned that lobola is not a requirement for marriage at the courts hence parents should not refuse their kids to be legally married if they ask for it as they are now in a position to get married at the courts without lobola payment.
Issues of importance raised at the meeting also included the protection of women and properties from children who have a tendency to want to want to take over properties from their mothers in the event of death of the father figure.
“Men are better people as compared to our children who have become a threat to us as they want to take over properties from parents with some going to the extent of chasing away their mothers from the matrimonial homes,” explained one attendant.
