In a deeply controversial move, Iraq’s parliament is considering an amendment that would lower the age of consent for marriage to nine, a change that has sparked widespread outrage among human rights activists and citizens alike. The new legislation, spearheaded by ultra-conservative Shia Muslim parties, aims to drastically alter the country’s progressive personal status law, stripping women and girls of their most fundamental rights.
The proposed amendment would allow men to marry children as young as nine, significantly reducing the current legal age of consent from 18. It also seeks to eliminate women’s rights to divorce, child custody, and inheritance. The draft law represents a significant rollback of the country’s relatively progressive personal status legislation, known as Law 188, which was initially introduced in 1959. This law has, for decades, provided a unified legal framework to protect Iraqi families, regardless of religious affiliation, making it one of the most forward-thinking pieces of legislation in the Middle East at the time of its introduction.
For many, the amendment is a stark signal of the growing influence of religious conservatism in Iraq. Proponents of the new law argue that it aligns with a strict interpretation of Islamic law and claim that it will protect young girls from what they deem as “immoral relationships.” However, critics see this move as nothing short of an assault on women’s rights and an attempt to codify gender inequality within Iraq’s legal system.
Reviving an Old Battle with New Power
This is not the first time Shia parties in Iraq have attempted to amend the personal status law. Similar efforts in 2014 and 2017 were met with fierce resistance from women’s rights groups and broader Iraqi society, ultimately failing due to the backlash. However, this time the political landscape is different. The coalition of Shia Muslim parties now holds a substantial majority in parliament, providing the momentum needed to push the amendment closer to reality.
“It’s the closest it’s ever been,” said Dr. Renad Mansour, a senior research fellow at Chatham House. He emphasized that the current political dynamics make this attempt far more threatening than previous efforts. “It has more momentum than it’s ever had, primarily because of the Shia parties that are empowered and are really pushing it.”
Dr Mansour added that this push is part of a broader political strategy by Shia Islamist groups to consolidate power and regain legitimacy. In recent years, these groups have faced declining support, and appealing to religious conservatism is a way to reaffirm their ideological credentials among their base. The timing of the parliamentary vote remains unclear, but experts suggest it could occur at any moment, catching opponents off guard.
Eroding Women’s Rights
The proposed amendment, if passed, would dismantle many of the protections that Law 188 provides to Iraqi women. Sarah Sanbar, a researcher at Human Rights Watch, expressed her concerns, stating that the amendment would not only undermine but effectively erase women’s rights in Iraq. “The amendment would erase these rights entirely,” she said.
Under the current law, Iraqi women are guaranteed rights regarding divorce, custody of children, and inheritance, regardless of their religious affiliation. The amendment, however, would remove these provisions and impose a version of the law that heavily favors men, particularly those from conservative sects.
Fear of Religious Rule
The amendment has raised fears among activists like Athraa Al-Hassan, international human rights legal adviser and director of Model Iraqi Woman. She worries that Iraq’s system of governance could be replaced with the Guardianship of the Jurist—a model of governance where religious rule supersedes state authority. This system, which underpins the regimes in Afghanistan and Iran, places a Guardian Jurist as the supreme leader, giving them ultimate authority over state matters, including personal lives.
“I am afraid we are headed in the direction of Afghanistan and Iran, where the religious establishment dictates every aspect of our lives,” Al-Hassan told The Telegraph.
Child Marriage and the Impact on Young Girls
Child marriage is already a pervasive issue in Iraq. According to the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), about 28 percent of women in Iraq are married before they turn 18. A loophole in the existing personal status law allows religious leaders to officiate marriages, including those involving girls as young as 15, with parental consent. These marriages, often prevalent in economically deprived and ultra-conservative communities, are not formally recognized by law, leaving the women and their children without legal protections.
Hospitals can refuse to admit women for childbirth if they lack a marriage certificate, which is often the case for those married informally through religious ceremonies. By legitimizing these marriages, the amendment would expose more young girls to sexual and physical abuse, deny them access to education, and strip them of future economic opportunities.
“This amendment will put thousands of young girls at risk,” Sanbar warned. “They will be forced into marriages that limit their access to basic rights, including education and healthcare.”
Escalating Restrictions on Women
The proposed amendment is just the latest in a series of actions taken by Iraq’s governing coalition to limit personal freedoms. Earlier this year, the parliament criminalized same-sex relationships, making them punishable by up to 15 years in prison, and mandated the use of the term “sexual deviance” instead of “homosexuality” across all media outlets. These actions are part of a broader campaign to impose conservative social norms on Iraqi society, often at the expense of marginalized communities.
Women’s rights activists have voiced their outrage, with some accusing the government of attempting to legalize child exploitation and “child rape.” In August, protests erupted across Baghdad and other cities, organized by Coalition 188—a group of Iraqi female activists vehemently opposed to amending the personal status law.
Athraa Al-Hassan, a prominent voice in Iraq’s feminist movement, emphasized that these amendments are not being proposed in the interest of society. “What they aspire to in parliament is not in the interest of society, but rather in their own personal interests,” she said. Al-Hassan fears that the amendments will deepen Iraq’s sectarian divides and further entrench conservative, patriarchal power structures.
A Return to Sectarian Rule
Sectarianism has long been a source of tension in Iraq, particularly following the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003, which led to increased Iranian Shia influence in the country. Experts like Dr. Mansour believe that amending Law 188 will only exacerbate these divisions, bringing Iraq back to a time when personal status was dictated solely by sectarian affiliation.
“It would bring everything back to the sect,” Mansour said. “But many Iraqis don’t want to be defined politically by their sect. They want to be defined by their government and their state.”
The proposed amendment offers Muslim citizens the choice between the existing, largely secular personal status law and religious law, depending on their sect. However, this choice is limited, as it ultimately falls to the husband in the event of a dispute. “It’s explicitly written in the draft that when there’s a disagreement, the sect of the husband takes precedence,” said Sanbar. “This undermines the principle of equality before the law and strips women of protections.”
Unequal Impact on Women
The amendment could also create disparities among Iraqi women, depending on their religious sect. Some women might retain certain privileges and the ability to seek divorce or child custody, while others may find themselves trapped in abusive marriages with no legal recourse.
“Women in some sects may still have the ability to leave harmful relationships, but for others, the amendment means they must stay in abusive marriages to avoid losing their children,” Sanbar explained. This, she added, would create a society where women’s rights and privileges are determined not by the law, but by their sect and the whims of their husbands.
Athraa Al-Hassan condemned the amendment as “very dangerous” and a clear interference with the judiciary’s independence. She argued that such amendments violate the Iraqi constitution and erode the country’s civil state. “Iraq is a civilised state that cannot be otherwise,” she said. “The first female minister in the Arab world was Iraqi, and the first female judge was Iraqi. We aspire to progress, not regress.”
A Crossroads for Iraq
As Iraq’s parliament prepares for the formal debate and vote on the amendment, the country stands at a critical juncture. The proposed law not only affects the lives of millions of women and girls but also raises fundamental questions about Iraq’s future—whether it will continue on the path of modernization and equal rights or regress into sectarianism and gender inequality.
The outcry from human rights organizations, activists, and ordinary citizens underscores the stakes involved. For many, this is not just a legal battle but a struggle for the soul of Iraq’s social fabric. Whether the amendment passes or is struck down will have far-reaching implications for Iraq’s identity as a nation and the rights of its people.
“We are defending the rights of women and girls,” Al-Hassan said, “and protecting Iraqi society from disintegration and the imposition of sectarianism within the social fabric.” Her words resonate with many who fear that Iraq, once a beacon of progress in the Arab world, could be pulled back into an era of regressive policies that jeopardize its future.