By Sunday Citizen Reporter

Bride price payment has been practiced in most African societies. Men members of the family are often reluctant to release their daughters without getting dowry in the form of money or cattle, or even any expensive property.

This is because in the customary laws marriage is normally preceded, accompanied or followed by payment of bride price by the bridegroom to the bride's father or in Moslem communities to the married woman herself. 

However, although the legal position in Tanzania is that payment of bride price is not necessary for the validity of a marriage. It may sounds not normal in most Tanzanian traditions to hear that bride price has no room before the law to validate the marriage; but that is what the law provides.

The Law of Marriage Act clearly states under section 41, inter alia, that:
"A marriage which in all other respects complies with the express requirements of this Act shall be valid for all purpose, notwithstanding (a) any non-compliance with any custom relating to dowry or the giving or exchanging of gifts before or after marriage."

Thus bride price has no bearing in validating the marriage.  That means, so long as other legal requirements are fulfilled, the parties thereto are free to marry, payment or non-payment of dowry notwithstanding. 
That is why we say that payment of bride price, even if proved is not evidence of marriage; there must be evidence of a marriage ceremony.

As noted earlier, payment of dowry still goes on as a customary rite subject to the agreement of the parties involved thereto.  Thus in order for one to enforce payment of bridewealth, one has to make sure that a number of requirements have to be met before the ceremony takes place. 

There must be a marriage that is the subject matter of the bride price.  There must also be an agreement to the payment of bridewealth on the part of the bridegroom to his father in law.

Otherwise no enforcement shall be effected by the court. Thus, in case the court is invited to resolve the issue of dowry, particularly enforcing the payment thereof, it will first of all ascertain whether there was an agreement to pay the said amount of dowry. 
Therefore in the absence of an agreement to the payment thereof, the court will have no ground to rely on and pass a decree for enforcement of bride price. 

The case of Masera Mwita v. Matiko Muhabe (1968) HCD 490 elucidates.  In this case the respondent ran off with the appellant's daughter without paying the bridewealth. 

The appellant later seized seven head of cattle from the respondent. It was held that the father of a bride is not entitled to seize cattle when the bridewealth has not been paid if there has been no agreement as to the amount to be paid.

In case there is agreement as to the payment of bridewealth, the father in-law is required to avail himself of his civil remedies at law.  This applies even in cases where he claims the balance which is due to him. 

Let it be noted that doing otherwise which is not consonant with this standing of the law will be deemed to bring interruption or instability in the well established family.

However, despite the existing agreement to the payment of bridewealth, the same cannot be enforced after the breakdown of the marriage.  That is to say the payment ceases with the dissolution of the marriage. 

In principle, this position of the law was arrived at in the case of Raphael Dibogo v. Frablance Wambura (1975) LRT n.42. It was held in this case that there is no customary rule which requires the payment of bridewealth where the marriage has broken down. 

Bridewealth may only be recovered during the subsistence of the marriage and not later.

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites