Editing Polygamy (section)

== Legal status ==
{{See also|Legal status of polygamy}}
[[File:Legality of polygamy.svg|thumb|300px
 | <div style="margin:0 0.5em;">
{{legend|#009e73|Polygamy is legal only for Muslims}}
{{legend|#56b4e9|Polygamy is legal}}
{{legend|#0072b2|Polygamy is legal in some regions (Indonesia)}}
{{legend|#d55e00|Polygamy is illegal, but not criminalised in practice}}
{{legend|#000000|Polygamy is illegal and criminalised in practice}}
{{legend|#e0e0e0|Legal status unknown}} </div> 
{{Bulleted list |style=margin:0.5em 0.5em 0.25em;border-top:1px solid#aaa;font-size:94%; |item_style=line-height:1.3em;
| In India, Malaysia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Singapore, polygamy is only legal for [[Muslim]]s.
| In Nigeria and South Africa, polygamous marriages under customary law and for Muslims are legally recognized.
}} ]]

===International law===
In 2000, the [[United Nations Human Rights Committee]] reported that polygamy violates the [[ICCPR|International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights]] (ICCPR), citing concerns that the lack of "equality of treatment with regard to the right to marry" meant that polygamy, restricted to polygyny in practice, violates the dignity of women and should be outlawed.<ref>{{cite web |title=Equality of Rights Between Men and Women |url=http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/gencomm/hrcom28.htm |publisher=University of Minnesota Human Rights Library |access-date=22 May 2013 |archive-date=2 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220402212302/http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/gencomm/hrcom28.htm |url-status=live }}</ref> Specifically, reports to UN Committees have noted violations of ICCPR due to these inequalities,<ref>{{cite web |title=OHCHR report |url=http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/docs/ngos/IHRLS_Chad_95.pdf |publisher=Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights |access-date=22 May 2013 |archive-date=7 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220307093134/https://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/docs/ngos/IHRLS_Chad_95.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> and reports to the UN General Assembly have recommended it be outlawed.<ref>{{cite web |title=Report of the Human Rights Committee |url=http://www.ccprcentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A_63_40_Vol.I_E.pdf |publisher=United Nations General Assembly |access-date=22 May 2013 |archive-date=2 November 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211102072335/https://www.ccprcentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A_63_40_Vol.I_E.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=GENERAL COMMENTS ADOPTED BY THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE UNDER ARTICLE 40, PARAGRAPH 4, OF THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS |url=http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/0/13b02776122d4838802568b900360e80 |publisher=United Nations Human Rights Website |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130630225551/http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/0/13b02776122d4838802568b900360e80 |archive-date=30 June 2013 }}</ref>

ICCPR does not apply to countries that have not signed it, which includes many Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Malaysia, Brunei, Oman, and South Sudan.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=IV-4&chapter=4&lang=en|title=United Nations Treaty Collection|access-date=15 February 2016|archive-date=8 April 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170408174039/https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=IV-4&chapter=4&lang=en|url-status=dead}}</ref>

===Canada===
Canada has taken a strong stand against polygamy, and the [[Department of Justice (Canada)|Canadian Department of Justice]] has argued that polygyny is a violation of International Human Rights Law, as a form of gender discrimination.<ref>{{cite web |title=POLYGYNY AS A VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW |url=http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/other-autre/poly/chap3.html |publisher=Department of Justice, Government of Canada |date=2006-07-11 |access-date=22 May 2013 |archive-date=13 May 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130513231102/http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/other-autre/poly/chap3.html |url-status=live }}</ref> In Canada, the federal [[Criminal Code (Canada)|Criminal Code]] applies throughout the country. It extends the definition of polygamy to having any kind of conjugal union with more than one person at the same time. Also anyone who assists, celebrates, or is a part to a rite, ceremony, or contract that sanctions a polygamist relationship is guilty of polygamy. Polygamy is an offence punishable by up to five years in prison.

In 2017, two Canadian religious leaders were found guilty of practicing polygamy by the [[Supreme Court of British Columbia]].<ref name="bbc.com">{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40709250|title=Canadian polygamists found guilty|date=25 July 2017|publisher=BBC News|access-date=20 July 2018|archive-date=9 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201109041237/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40709250|url-status=live}}</ref> Both of them are former bishops of the Mormon denomination of the [[Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints]] (FLDS).<ref name="bbc.com"/>

===Russia===
{{Excerpt|Polygamy in Russia}}

===United Kingdom===
Bigamy is illegal in the United Kingdom.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/336403/Polygamous-marriage-not-legal-in-UK|title=Polygamous marriage not legal in UK|first=Daily Express|last=reporter|date=31 July 2012|access-date=15 February 2016|archive-date=24 February 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160224000251/http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/336403/Polygamous-marriage-not-legal-in-UK|url-status=live}}</ref> ''De facto'' polygamy (having multiple partners at the same time) is not a criminal offence, provided the person does not register more than one marriage at the same time. In the UK, adultery is not a criminal offence (it is only a [[ground for divorce]]<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.uk/divorce/overview|title=Get a divorce – GOV.UK|website=gov.uk|access-date=4 September 2017|archive-date=5 September 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170905010115/https://www.gov.uk/divorce/overview|url-status=live}}</ref>). In a written answer to the House of Commons, "In Great Britain, polygamy is only recognized as valid in law in circumstances where the marriage ceremony has been performed in a country whose laws permit polygamy and the parties to the marriage were domiciled there at the time. In addition, immigration rules have generally prevented the formation of polygamous households in this country since 1988."<ref>{{cite hansard |jurisdiction=United Kingdom |house=House of Commons |date=20 February 2008 |column=755W |speaker=James Plaskitt}}</ref>

The 2010 UK government decided that Universal Credit (UC), which replaces means-tested benefits and tax credits for working-age people and will not be completely introduced until 2021, will not recognize polygamous marriages. A House of Commons briefing paper states "Treating second and subsequent partners in polygamous relationships as separate claimants could in some situations mean that polygamous households receive more under Universal Credit than they do under the current rules for means-tested benefits and tax credits. This is because, as explained above, the amounts which may be paid in respect of additional spouses are lower than those which generally apply to single claimants." There is currently no official statistics data on cohabiting polygamous couples who have arranged marriage in religious ceremonies.<ref name=UKPOLY>{{cite web |url=http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn05051.pdf |archive-url=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20181113063153/http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn05051.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=13 November 2018 |title=House of Commons Library Briefing Paper Number 05051: Polygamy |publisher=[[House of Commons Library]] |date=6 January 2016 }}</ref>

===United States===

[[File:Utah in United States.svg|thumb|Polygamy in [[Utah]] remains a controversial issue that has been subject to legislative battles throughout the years; it is currently an [[infraction]]; and recognition of polygamy is illegal under the [[Constitution of Utah]].]]

{{Further|Legality of polygamy in the United States}}
{{see also|Mormonism and polygamy|Mormon fundamentalism|Current state of polygamy in the Latter Day Saint movement}}

Polygamy is illegal in all 50 states in the U.S.; in [[Utah]] it currently remains a controversial issue that has been subject to legislative battles throughout the years. As of 2020 Utah is the only state where the practice is designated as an [[infraction]] rather than the more serious designation as a crime. However, recognizing polygamous unions is still illegal under the [[Constitution of Utah]].<ref>{{Cite web|url = https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-news/polygamy-is-essentially-decriminalized-in-utah-under-a-bill-signed-into-law|title = Polygamy is essentially decriminalized in Utah under a bill signed into law|date = 29 March 2020|access-date = 27 January 2022|archive-date = 27 January 2022|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20220127165713/https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-news/polygamy-is-essentially-decriminalized-in-utah-under-a-bill-signed-into-law|url-status = live}}</ref> Federal legislation to outlaw the practice was endorsed as constitutional in 1878 by the Supreme Court in ''[[Reynolds v. United States]],'' despite the religious objections of [[Mormonism]]'s largest denomination the [[Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]] (LDS Church). The LDS Church subsequently ended the practice of polygamy around the turn of the twentieth century;<ref>{{cite web|title=Official Declaration 1|url=https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/od/1?lang=eng|access-date=2021-08-27|website=churchofjesuschrist.org|archive-date=15 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201115012641/https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/od/1?lang=eng|url-status=live}}</ref> however, several smaller [[Mormon fundamentalism|fundamentalist Mormon]] groups across the state (not associated with the mainstream Church) continue the practice.

On 13 December 2013, a [[United States district court|federal judge]], spurred by the [[American Civil Liberties Union]] and other groups,<ref>[https://www.aclu.org/religion/frb/16163prs19990716.html ACLU of Utah to Join Polygamists in Bigamy Fight] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091018195924/http://www.aclu.org/religion/frb/16163prs19990716.html |date=18 October 2009 }}, 16 July 1999 press release.</ref> struck down the parts of Utah's bigamy law that criminalized cohabitation, while also acknowledging that the state may still enforce bans on having multiple marriage licenses.<ref name=utahban>{{cite web |url=http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56894145-78/utah-waddoups-brown-family.html.csp |title=Federal judge declared Utah polygamy law unconstitutional |work=[[The Salt Lake Tribune]] |issn=0746-3502 |date=13 December 2013 |access-date=14 December 2013 |archive-date=4 March 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170304200624/http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56894145-78/utah-waddoups-brown-family.html.csp |url-status=live }}</ref> This decision was overturned by the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit]], thus effectively recriminalizing polygamy as a felony.<ref>{{Cite news|url = https://www.reuters.com/article/us-utah-polygamy-sisterwives-idUSKCN0X82AJ|title = Appeals court restores Utah's polygamy law in 'Sister Wives' case|work = Reuters|date = 11 April 2016|access-date = 27 January 2022|archive-date = 27 January 2022|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20220127181657/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-utah-polygamy-sisterwives-idUSKCN0X82AJ|url-status = live}}</ref> In 2020, Utah voted to downgrade polygamy from a felony to an infraction, but it remains a felony if force, threats or other abuses are involved.<ref>{{cite news  |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/us/utah-bigamy-law.html  |title=Utah Lowers Penalty for Polygamy, No Longer a Felony  |date=2020-05-13  |newspaper=[[The New York Times]]  |access-date=2022-02-14  |archive-date=21 January 2022  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220121191930/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/us/utah-bigamy-law.html  |url-status=live  }}</ref>

Prosecutors in Utah have long had a policy of not pursuing polygamy in the absence of other associated crimes (e.g. fraud, abuse, marriage of underage persons, etc.).<ref>{{cite web|title=Brown v. Buhman, No. 14-4117 (10th Cir. 2016)|url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/14-4117/14-4117-2016-04-11.html|access-date=2021-08-27|website=Justia Law|language=en|archive-date=27 August 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210827051927/https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/14-4117/14-4117-2016-04-11.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.deseret.com/2011/7/12/20203261/sister-wives-family-to-challenge-utah-bigamy-law |title='Sister Wives' family to challenge Utah bigamy law |newspaper=[[Deseret News]] |date=2011-07-12 |access-date=2022-02-14 |archive-date=27 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220127165712/https://www.deseret.com/2011/7/12/20203261/sister-wives-family-to-challenge-utah-bigamy-law |url-status=live }}</ref> There are about 30,000 people living in polygamous communities in Utah.<ref>{{Cite web|url = https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/polygamists-face-jail-time-utah-bill-68893806|title = Polygamists may not face jail time under new Utah bill|website = [[ABC News (United States)|ABC News]]|access-date = 27 January 2022|archive-date = 27 January 2022|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20220127170132/https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/polygamists-face-jail-time-utah-bill-68893806|url-status = live}}</ref>

[[Individualist feminism]] and advocates such as [[Wendy McElroy]] and journalist Jillian Keenan support the freedom for adults to voluntarily enter polygamous marriages.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Bruce |last=Korol |year=2009 |title=Polygamy is a (al)right |journal=Arts & Opinion |volume=8 |issue=3}} [http://www.wendymcelroy.com/print.php?news.2384 Reprinted] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200806052152/http://www.wendymcelroy.com/print.php?news.2384 |date=6 August 2020 }} by Wendy McElroy at wendymcelroy.com</ref><ref>{{cite journal |first=Jillian |last=Keenan |url=http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/04/legalize_polygamy_marriage_equality_for_all.html |title=Legalize Polygamy! No. I am not kidding |journal=[[Slate (magazine)|Slate]] |date=15 April 2013 |access-date=15 November 2014 |archive-date=10 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190510163110/http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/04/legalize_polygamy_marriage_equality_for_all.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

Authors such as Alyssa Rower and Samantha Slark argue that there is a case for legalizing polygamy on the basis of regulation and monitoring of the practice, legally protecting the polygamous partners and allowing them to join mainstream society instead of forcing them to hide from it when any public situation arises.<ref>{{cite journal|jstor=25740483|title=The Legality of Polygamy: Using the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment|first=ALYSSA|last=ROWER|date=29 December 2017|journal=Family Law Quarterly|volume=38|issue=3|pages=711–731}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Slark |first1=Samantha |title=Are Anti-Polgygamy Laws an Unconstitutional Infringement on the Liberty Interests of Consenting Adults? |journal=Journal of Law and Family Studies |date=2004 |volume=6 |pages=451–460 |url=https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/jlfst6&div=36&id=&page= |access-date=5 January 2021 |archive-date=11 May 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210511125157/https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/jlfst6&div=36&id=&page= |url-status=live }}</ref>

In an October 2004 op-ed for ''[[USA Today]]'', [[George Washington University]] law professor [[Jonathan Turley]] argued that, as a simple matter of equal treatment under the law, polygamy ought to be legal. Acknowledging that underage girls are sometimes coerced into polygamous marriages, Turley replied that "banning polygamy is no more a solution to child abuse than banning marriage would be a solution to spousal abuse".<ref>[http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/2004-10-03-turley_x.htm "Polygamy laws expose our own hypocrisy"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210623223258/http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/2004-10-03-turley_x.htm |date=23 June 2021 }}. Jonathan Turley, ''USA Today'' (3 March 2004)</ref>

[[Stanley Kurtz]], a [[Conservatism in the United States|conservative]] fellow at the [[Hudson Institute]], rejects the decriminalization and legalization of polygamy. He stated:

{{Blockquote|Marriage, as its ultramodern critics would like to say, is indeed about choosing one's partner, and about freedom in a society that values freedom. But that's not the only thing it is about. As the Supreme Court justices who unanimously decided Reynolds in 1878 understood, marriage is also about sustaining the conditions in which freedom can thrive. Polygamy in all its forms is a recipe for social structures that inhibit and ultimately undermine social freedom and democracy. A hard-won lesson of Western history is that genuine democratic self-rule begins at the hearth of the monogamous family.<ref name="Polygamy vs. Democracy">[http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/266jhfgd.asp?nopager=1 "Polygamy vs. Democracy"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150917015638/http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/266jhfgd.asp?nopager=1 |date=17 September 2015 }}. ''The Weekly Standard''. Published: 5 June 2006.</ref>}}

In January 2015, Pastor Neil Patrick Carrick of Detroit, Michigan, brought a case (''[[Carrick v. Snyder]]'') against the State of Michigan that the state's ban of polygamy violates the [[Free Exercise Clause|Free Exercise]] and [[Equal Protection Clause]] of the U.S. Constitution.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://dockets.justia.com/docket/michigan/miedce/5:2015cv10108/297820 |title=Carrick v. Snyder et al |work=Justia Dockets & Filings |access-date=17 February 2015 |archive-date=10 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190510192718/https://dockets.justia.com/docket/michigan/miedce/5:2015cv10108/297820 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/wayne-county/2015/01/13/minister-sues-mich-right-marry-sex-couples/21718645/ |title=Minister sues Mich. for right to marry same-sex couples |author=Oralandar Brand-Williams, The Detroit News |date=13 January 2015 |work=The Detroit News |access-date=17 February 2015 |archive-date=10 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190510194220/https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/wayne-county/2015/01/13/minister-sues-mich-right-marry-sex-couples/21718645/ |url-status=live }}</ref> The case was dismissed with prejudice on 10 February 2016, for lack of standing.<ref>{{cite web|last=Judge|first=JUDITH E. LEVY, District|title=CARRICK v. SNYDER {{!}} Case No. 15-cv-10108. {{!}} By... {{!}} 20160211c62{{!}} Leagle.com|url=https://www.leagle.com/decision/infdco20160211c62|access-date=2021-09-08|website=Leagle|language=en|archive-date=16 September 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180916093234/https://www.leagle.com/decision/infdco20160211c62|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Indonesia ===
Indonesia is the most populous Muslim country. Most polygamous families in the country are of Muslim background; they may also be aristocrats, registered civil servants, Islamic students (santri), and wholesalers.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://historia.id/kultur/articles/angka-poligami-dari-masa-ke-masa-vgXwV | title=Angka Poligami dari Masa ke Masa | date=25 June 2019 | access-date=24 November 2022 | archive-date=24 November 2022 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221124075645/https://historia.id/kultur/articles/angka-poligami-dari-masa-ke-masa-vgXwV | url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.kemenpppa.go.id/index.php/page/read/29/3140/poligami-tak-sesuai-syariat-berpotensi-rugikan-perempuan | title=Kementerian Pemberdayaan Perempuan Dan Perlindungan Anak | access-date=24 November 2022 | archive-date=24 November 2022 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221124075646/https://www.kemenpppa.go.id/index.php/page/read/29/3140/poligami-tak-sesuai-syariat-berpotensi-rugikan-perempuan | url-status=dead }}</ref>

Constitutionally, Indonesia (basically) only recognizes monogamy. But, government allows polygamy in some conditions:
* The wife cannot carry out her obligations as a wife.
* The wife has a physical disability or an incurable disease.
* The wife cannot bear children.

There are other requirements for registered civil servants.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://msscounsel.com/2021/11/15/poligami-dalam-sistem-hukum-republik-indonesia/ | title=Poligami Dalam Sistem Hukum Republik Indonesia | date=15 November 2021 | access-date=24 November 2022 | archive-date=24 November 2022 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221124075645/http://msscounsel.com/2021/11/15/poligami-dalam-sistem-hukum-republik-indonesia/ | url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/hukum-poligami-dan-prosedurnya-yang-sah-di-indonesia-lt5136cbfaaeef9 | title=Hukum Poligami dan Prosedurnya yang Sah di Indonesia - Klinik Hukumonline | date=7 July 2018 | access-date=24 November 2022 | archive-date=24 November 2022 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221124075654/https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/hukum-poligami-dan-prosedurnya-yang-sah-di-indonesia-lt5136cbfaaeef9 | url-status=live }}</ref>