A man and his wife went to record a plot of land in their name in a government office. After several long waits and repeated appointments, the notary public asked the wife to sign without checking her identity.
In another case a woman who is a university teacher needed a maid to help her with housework so she hired a man to look after her request in the labor recruitment office. He came back to her, however, saying that she would have to go to the office in person. She went and it happened that there was an old woman in front of her in the queue. The office employee asked the old woman to put her fingerprint at the bottom of the application which she did.
The teacher naturally thought that the old woman was illiterate. When it was her turn, the employee also asked her to put her fingerprint on the document. She objected and said that she was a university teacher and thus perfectly capable of reading a document and signing her name.
The employee refused and said that all women must give their fingerprint on an application, regardless of whether they were literate or not. Though the teacher disagreed with the policy, she realized that if she wanted a maid as quickly as possible, the easy thing to do was to follow the employee’s instructions.
Another case involved a couple who bought a plot of land together and wanted to get a joint loan in order to build a house and protect their rights. At the loan office, they learned that the land must be registered in the husband’s name in order to get the loan. In other words, if the couple were to separate, the wife would have no way of asking for her share since she has no proof that she was involved in the purchase. These three examples reflect some problems in official procedures, especially in those pertaining to women. When is it more important to establish identity — when recruiting a servant or when buying or selling real estate? If fingerprinting is obligatory for women, why is it not also obligatory for men? Why are women in the labor recruitment office fingerprinted? What is the purpose of a civil ID card for women in these cases? Women were given IDs by the government because some men refuse to allow their wives and daughters an ID. Most of these men are concerned about finding a job for their wives and daughters and taking their salaries at the end of each month. Why does the real estate fund refuse to issue a loan in the name of both wife and husband? Is the system unable to devise a method of payment if there is a problem between the couple? These problems related to women are at the least annoying and open the door to many justified complaints. It would be simple to overcome and solve the problems.
First the public should be notified about changes in procedures before they occur. The public should also be told why the change is being made.
This means of course that all such changes should be carefully thought out and considered before being approved. Our trouble is that many people don’t want to change the way things are done, even if those things are obstructing progress and development. It is interesting to note that when many of these rules were made, they did not discriminate between men and women.
The first real estate fund in the 1970s, for example, did not discriminate. Now for some reason, we find that women are prevented from getting loans. And what about women who apply for a telephone? They are asked to bring a male relative with them!
- Arab News Local Press 16 September 2003
