Times of Malta reported that the United Nations’ Committee for the Rights of the Child recommended that Malta’s marriage law should be amended to forbid people under 18 from getting married. Understandably this recommendation caused some animated discussion.
As Maltese law stands, while normally one has to be 18 years of age in order to get married, minors who have attained 16 years of age may contract marriage if the parents consent, or if authorised to do so by the courts.
It is precisely these exceptions to the law which the United Nations Committee for the Rights of the Child is targeting with its recommendation.
Official statistics appear to show that the phenomenon of married minors in Malta is by no means worryingly high: over a 10-year period ending in 2017, 21 marriages involving minors – including brides as young as 16 – were registered in Malta.
However, when one considers that fewer young couples are willing to enter into marriage and prefer to cohabit, the proportion of marriages involving minors is somewhat bigger than would appear to be at first glance.
Why should the government bother to consider curtailing the right to marry when the institution is clearly falling out of favour as a life choice for so many people?
The answer lies in the inherent importance to society of a State-recognised social union whose most essential function is the socialisation of children.
Marriage is the official recognition that the status of a given couple has changed and that their role of prospective or actual parents is being accorded its due importance.
The law should ensure that, as far as possible, only those mature enough to understand and withstand the difficulties which will inevitably crop up should be allowed to enter into them.
In a knee-jerk fashion, objections to the UN recommendation materialise thick and fast. Young people are allowed, and actually encouraged, to vote at 16 years of age. They may drink alcohol at 17. Therefore it doesn’t make sense for the State to deny them the right to officialise their romantic unions – or so the argument goes.
The question is: does the drive to recognise the rights of young people and to show society’s faith in their judgement thrust too much responsibility on the shoulders of those who are not yet mature enough to carry it?
So rather than refraining from considering the restriction of marriage on the basis of age, we should perhaps be reviewing critically the decisions taken in recent years to extend rights and freedoms to minors, because those rights and freedoms may be asking too much of them.
The Commissioner for Children has wisely pointed out that the age of marriage should be raised to 18 because at 16 young people may not be mature enough to take the right decisions in such a crucial area of their lives.
A spokesperson for the Ministry for the Family was more non-committal, but did not rule out changing the law in order to restrict marriage in all circumstances to people who have attained the age of majority.
Although there will certainly be attempts to retain the status quo, it does appear that there is a possibility that the relevant changes to the marriage law may yet be effected.
This would be the right decision.