A/55/280/Add.2 were regarded as often discriminatory with regard to Muslim women and women of other faiths. 79. With regard to Muslim women, it was noted that the 1961 Muslim Family Ordinance was favourable to women, especially in the areas of marriage and inheritance. With respect to divorce, it was explained that reform had made it possible, through the Muslim Marriages and Divorces (Registration) Act of 1974, to guarantee certain rights to Muslim women (3-months’ advance notice and the right to appeal to the courts; mandatory registration of divorce; pension; etc.). However, it was stressed that these advances were being undermined, notably by the practice of repudiation, and especially in rural areas, because many marriages were not registered. 80. The status of women seems to be especially problematical with regard to the Hindu minority. Mention was made of religious personal laws governing the Hindu community, sources of discrimination in the area of inheritance, divorce, and childcare. According to non-governmental representatives, these laws do not recognize any right of inheritance for women with respect to parental property. This discrimination does in fact encourage the practice of the dowry, and hence the related violations mentioned above. Furthermore, according to non-governmental experts, these religious personal laws make no provision for the registration of Hindu marriages and deny women any right to divorce. According to these same interviewees, since 1956 — despite protests from women’s organizations —, governments have refused to amend religious personal laws in favour of the rights of Hindu women, despite the fact that the same reform has been introduced for Muslims. Unfortunately, the Special Rapporteur was not able to gather information about the status of women from other minorities, within the framework of their religious personal laws. 81. The experts also described acts of discrimination against women in the area of religious practice. It was noted that whereas most mosques in urban areas were forbidden to women (there were a few rare places of worship where special facilities had been provided, allowing women access to mosques), in rural areas, virtually all Muslim places of worship were reserved exclusively for men. Reference should also be made to the statements made by Muslim religious officials in Dhaka and Rangamati (see sect. IV.A). 20 82. These acts of discrimination against women in Bangladesh, whatever their religious affiliation, were attributed by the various non-governmental sources to traditions (especially religious traditions or those ascribed to religion) as well as to the preservation of a patriarchal system. In this respect, the fact that some women held key positions in Bangladesh was not considered to reflect the overall situation in the country. According to non-governmental sources, women’s access to these “positions of power” was in fact limited, and dependent upon membership of powerful families. 83. In addition to this symbolic violence of discrimination, experts described physical violence against women, noting that the two forms of violence were often linked. They denounced not only violence associated with the practice of the dowry, but also violence related to fatwas. These fatwas, declared in the name of the Muslim religion, are especially common in rural areas. They are declared against women who are accused — almost always wrongly — of having sexual relations outside marriage, and other behaviour subject to social and religious prohibition. In fact, however, these fatwas are declared by people who are not qualified to do so — namely, by Shalish Councils, members of the local clergy having a superficial or flawed religious education, local officials, extremists, or individuals enjoying the tacit support of extremist parties. Experts said that the fatwas declared by these officials were in fact designed to stifle any efforts to emancipate women. For example, women’s access to work was thought to undermine roles regarded as the exclusive preserve of women and restricted to the private sphere of the family, enabling women to participate actively in public life. Such developments were regarded — especially in rural areas — as a threat to the patriarchal structure of society, and therefore to men’s monopolization of power. This was the reason why the fatwas were accompanied by attacks carried out by extremists against certain Bangladeshi nongovernmental organizations, which were very active in promoting women’s rights. According to information provided by non-governmental sources, 43 fatwas were declared against women in 1993, and 26 in 1999. The most famous case was, of course, that of Taslima Nasreen, who was forced to flee Bangladesh after receiving death threats from extremists. However, one might also mention the case of 17-year-old Noorjahan, who on 10 January 1993, at Moulvibazar, was a victim