Public declaration of matrimonial regimes chosen by prospective spouses, during civil weddings, could no longer be done if a proposal in a draft law governing persons and family is adopted by parliament. In line with the justification of the proposal, an explanatory note of the bill indicates that it has been observed that when a civil registrar pronounces in public the matrimonial regime chosen by the spouses, the public present at the ceremony shouts when the regime is other than the community of property. This provokes stigma to some spouses, it pointed out. ALSO READ: Family bill: Govt proposes new matrimonial regime The draft law provides that the prospective spouses shall register their matrimonial regimes seven days before the celebration, and prohibits a civil registrar [overseeing the civil wedding] from announcing publicly the chosen matrimonial regimes. “On the day of marriage, the type of matrimonial regime chosen by the spouses is recorded in the registry of marriage and on the marriage record. However, the type of matrimonial regime chosen by spouses is not publicly declared,’ reads article 206 (proposed) of the bill. During a session in which the Lower House’s Committee on Political Affairs and Gender was scrutinising the bill, on April 4, MP Marie Therese Nirere wanted to know the negative effects that the public declaration of a matrimonial regime chosen by intending spouses had, which might lead to the prohibition of such a practice. She wondered why parents or people who support individuals who are about to get married should not know a matrimonial regime they have chosen. Sometimes, Nirere said, families shouted helpfully, in case of the adoption of a given matrimonial regime [that parents or people who support the individuals getting married, do not approve of], and sometimes that could halt a marriage, which implies that there would be valid reasons for such a decision. In response, the Minister of Gender and Family Promotion, Valentine Uwamariya, said that public pronouncement of matrimonial regimes was not provided for by legislation. The reason that was the case, she said, is the cultural consideration that the assets of couples are pooled under the community of property, and shouts erupted when other regimes were adopted. In the current legislation, there are three matrimonial regimes in Rwanda. They are; the community of property, which is a contract by which the spouses opt for joint ownership of all their property; limited community of property whereby partners share everything they build up from their wedding day; and separation of property which means complete separation of spouses’ respective assets, without any equalisation of accrued gains in case of divorce. Though other regimes are provided for by laws, Uwamariya said, the Rwandan society never welcomed them as useful in the interests of a family. When the public including families of the future-to-be spouses hear that they are getting married under a regime apart from the community of property, misunderstanding between families ensues, she pointed out. “That was intended to remove the interferences of families to order partners how they must manage their assets, yet they have agreed on it [a given matrimonial regime], because a marriage contract is between two people, not among families,” she said. Marie Louise Mukashema, a lawyer at Legal Aid Forum, told The New Times that two people who are getting married discuss different things, including ways to manage their property. She indicated that a matrimonial regime is a contract between prospective couples, and there was no need to disclose it to people who attend a wedding party. “We think that is the privacy of two people who are about to get married, and that they do not need to stand before a crowd of people, including those who are not concerned, and tell them the way they chose to manage their property,” she said. “There are some who were frustrated by that, there are cases where a family would say that it disagrees with the marriage if you choose that matrimonial regime,” she observed. ALSO READ: Matrimonial law will end GBV–Gender body Explanations on types of matrimonial regimes to intending spouses Article 203 (proposed) of the bill provides that a civil registrar prepares and provides the intending spouses with detailed instructions and explains to them the nature of each type of matrimonial regime for them to choose the appropriate regime. This, it indicated, must be done at least seven days before the ceremony of marriage. If one or both intending spouses have hearing impairment, speech impediment, vision impairment, or multiple disabilities, the civil registrar requests the institution in charge of persons with disabilities to appoint a person with the required skills to help the person with disability, the article proposes.
