The celebrity wedding that many hoped might bring India and Pakistan closer together has been thrown into doubt by accusations of bigamy, a bizarre case of mistaken identity and now a fatwa issued by a noted cleric.
Indian tennis star Sania Mirza, 23, and Pakistani cricketer Shoaib Malik, 28, met for the first time in February. Their surprise cross-border engagement – announced soon thereafter on Twitter – was greeted with delight in both countries. The Times of India published a gushing editorial on the marriage’s ability “to ease tensions between the two neighbours.”
However, within hours of the announcement, another Indian woman, Ayesha Siddiqui, 29, came forward to claim that she was already married to Malik. According to her family, the couple was wedded in 2002 - over the telephone - in a ceremony called a nikah.
Malik says he was duped into marrying Siddiqui, who sent him photos of a younger, prettier woman, then masqueraded as that imaginary woman’s sister.
The subsequent media frenzy has drawn in politicians, sports stars and religious scholars. News reports claim that no fewer than five dedicated police investigative teams are probing the allegations against Malik of cheating and harassment. He has been questioned by Indian police, who have also confiscated his passport.
Ominously, the Pakistani foreign ministry has pledged its support for their sports idol, and demanded details of the Indian investigation.
Day after day, the obstacles to the fairy tale wedding pile up. On Tuesday, a Muslim cleric issued a fatwa against Malik.
“If Shoaib accepts the nikah, no problem,” the Shahi Imam of Tipu Sultan’s Mosque told the Hindustan Times. “But if he denies, he will be out of the Muslim society.”
Initially, Malik denied ever having married. But when Siddiqui’s family provided a marriage certificate, including what they say is Malik’s signature, he changed his story. Malik now admits that a phone marriage took place, but claims it wasn’t valid.
The strange story of Malik’s first marriage began in 2001, when he says he was contacted by a female cricket fan from India. The pair exchanged emails, phone calls and, eventually, photographs. However, visa problems prevented them from meeting in person.
When Malik managed to travel to India to see the woman – Ayesha Siddiqui – he says he was told she had left suddenly to return to her job in the Middle East. However, Siddiqui’s family, including her Maha apa (older sister), offered to show him around.
Malik now says the Maha apa was, in fact, Siddiqui herself. Later, Malik says, Siddiqui pressured him into a marriage – intended to end local gossip – that took place over the phone, with an imam present.
Malik says he only discovered the true identity of his wife three years after he married her.
“We accidentally ran into the truth about who Ayesha was. It was the worst moment of my life. No one enjoys being made a fool of, and that was exactly how I was made to look,” Malik told reporters in Hyderabad on Sunday.
“It happened in August 2005. My brother-in-law got a photograph of a teacher in Saudi Arabia who was telling people around her that she was married to me. His nephews were studying in that school,” he said.
“I was aghast when he showed me the photograph of the teacher. The woman in it was the person I called Maha apa. I immediately confronted Maha apa. It was she who had been making a fool of me all these years, pretending to be the person whose pictures she had been sending me. I told her I didn’t even want to speak to her again. At that point, I wondered if I could ever trust anyone again.”
Malik says that because the marriage was based on a lie, it isn’t valid under Islamic law.
He also claims the nikah was dissolved in 2008 because the families could not agree on the terms of the marriage.
It’s not clear how much time the husband and wife spent together between 2002 and 2008. Malik has suggested almost none, and most of it under false pretenses. Even the Siddiquis aren’t suggesting the marriage was close.
“We have proof that Shoaib and Ayesha met 14 times,” Dr. Shams Babar, a Siddiqui family friend told reporters Monday, in an attempt to bolster the family’s case. “They even lived together for a few days in Dubai.”
The family claims that Siddiqui became pregnant during the marriage, but miscarried. Malik claims there was no intimate contact between them.
Newspapers have been poring over photographs of the pair, though no one can be positive of what Siddiqui looks like because she remains hidden. Like her marriage, her contact with the media comes over the phone or through relatives.
Her family blames the marriage’s failure on Malik’s superficiality. Siddiqui’s father told reporters that Malik dumped his daughter because “she has become fat.”
The Siddiqui family has said they have no objection to Malik’s marriage to Mirza, as long as he first apologizes to and then divorces their daughter. Malik continues to maintain that no divorce is necessary, as the marriage is invalid.
A dizzying variety of lawsuits have been threatened, with lawyers in Pakistan and India retained by both sides.
On Monday, Mirza, the 90th ranked tennis player in the world, said she is still determined that she will wed Malik on April 15.
By Tuesday, Mirza family insiders were floating the possibility of a postponement.
For now, the floor belongs to a variety of astrologers, bookmakers and mystics, all of whom are wagering on when, how and if India’s most anticipated marriage comes off.
Both Mirza and Malik regularly court controversy. She has come under pressure to dress more demurely. He is serving a suspension from the Pakistani national cricket team after creating “disharmony” in the dressing room and faking an injury.
Malik became a political lightning rod in 2007 when he thanked “Muslims all over the world” for supporting Pakistan against India. In one blow, he managed to irritate Indian Muslims, non-Muslim Pakistanis, and Muslim cricket fans from a dozen other nations.
His celebrity status managed to survive that blow. It’s debatable whether it can emerge from this current whirlwind relatively intact.
No comments:
Post a Comment