Swiss seek to modernise their marriage law

Press, 20 September 1985, Page 16

Swiss seek to modernise their marriage law

By

HANNS NEUERBOURG,

of Associated Press, in Berne

The Swiss are about to decide if they want to raze the last bastion of male supremacy. Fourteen' years after giving women the vote and four years after approving an equal rights amendment, they vote in a referendum on September 22 on a sweeping revision of the marriage law. The law now in effect gives husbands sweeping legal power over their wives and has been declared out of place in a modern society by the Federal executive and by Parliament. The referendum is the second chance for the change. Parliament passed a new law in 1984 — the vote was 160-3 in the Lower House and 33-5 in the Upper House — but popular opposition was sufficient to necessitate a referendum before the law could take effect. Under the Swiss system of direct democracy, if 50,000 signatures are collected against any legislative measure, a referendum must be held. Opponents gathered 86,000 signatures in six months. Although the preferences of the almost 3 million voters have not been polled on this issue, many Swiss believe the vote will be close. “Nothing is more difficult than to abandon privileges,” commented Josi Meier, a lawyer and one of the three women deputies in the 46-member Council of States, or Senate. “There are people to whom a partnership with equal rights is just inconceivable, who believe that there must be a boss.” Legal experts agree that most married couples have long anticipated the reform, but in theory at least, Swiss husbands are the boss. The old law gives them considerable power: • The husband is legally the “head of the family,” and upon marriage the wife automatically loses her surname. • He can choose the family’s place of residence. • He can prevent his wife from working. • n addition to his own property, he has the right to manage the savings his wife had before marriage and whatever she inherits. He also can dispose freely of the returns. His wife has control only over her earned income. • The husband is not obliged to tell his wife about his financial situation. She cannot open a bank account without his consent. Eugen Huber, chief author of the 78-year-old law now in effect, once

said the law reflects a belief in the “husband’s personal authority over the wife, as based on nature and tradition.” A Government report describes the old law as “incompatible with female dignity,” and to replace it, voted in a package of measures, stressing “partnership in marriage.” The Justice Minister, Elisabeth Kopp, the first woman to get a Cabinet post, says the law produces a “family portrait that was at best valid for our grandmothers.” The new draft pledges spouses to “harmonious co-operation” and deletes all references to the head of the family and to the male partner as the decision-maker and financial manager. Husband and wife are to agree between themselves on their responsibilities. The draft would also oblige each spouse to give the other information on income, property, and debts. The family name of the children will be that of the father but the wife may put her maiden name before her husband’s name. Debate over the changes has been heated, with the opposition justifying its case on the basis of the Bible, Swiss tradition, and the need to defend the family. Heading the campaign against the new law is Christoph Blocher, a leading member of the conservative Swiss People’s Party. He says the new law is “anti-family and anti-marriage”. Suzette Sandoz, a jurist and member of the women’s committee which opposes the law, says it transforms “partners in marriage to business partners.” A Berne pastor, the Rev. Herbert Knast, argued that the man’s leading role was laid down in the new testament. “The Gospel does not stipulate a division of labour,” the Government responded in a leaflet sent to all Swiss households. “St Paul’s call on the women to subordinate themselves to the men is as nonbinding for the modern legislator as his order to the slaves to obey their masters.” Critics also say the 120 articles of the new law are too complicated and will increase marital disputes. The Government responded in its leaflet, saying: “No law can guarantee marital bliss, but in case of conflict, it must provide for solutions which correspond to modern conditions and views.”