purpose, who shall confirm in writing that the consent of each party appears to him to be truly voluntary;" is a wholly inadequate one. The Sub-Committee thinks that such a procedure would impose on these officials a duty of inquiry for which they are not particularly well-fitted, and which they are unlikely to be able to discharge effectively. What is clearly required is an inquiry by a judge used to the assessment of evidence in court, in which the parties should be subject to cross-examination by counsel. The Sub-Committee believes that only in this way would the procedure amount to a real safeguard for the weaker party, normally the woman. The Sub-Committee does not only have in mind the question of establishing the genuine character of the consent of the parties. Such matters as the custody of and access to the children, together with a settlement and/or maintenance for the wife (the extent of which must be based on the vital question of the husband's means, all too easily concealed from an official unfamiliar with the niceties of property dispositions) are quite clearly matters which can only be brought into the open properly by cross-examination, and they are all matters which are very much within the professional ex- perience of a judge. The majority of the members of the Sub- Committee feel that the questions of consent, financial means, maintenance, and the custody of children are all matters within the domain of the public interest when a divorce is being given legal saction, and they firmly believe that they should be the subject of effective safeguards if divorce by consent is to be given a legislative basis. They are fortified in this belief by the consideration that the introduction of safeguards on the dissolution of marriage has been consistently advocated by the international bodies (including those operating under United Nations auspices, as mentioned in the Report) which have been concerned with the status of women.
73. The Sub-Committee has given thought to the proper procedure to be applied to the examination of consensual divorces. In the first place, it would seem clear that such cases can best be dealt with by a Supreme Court judge with experience of matrimonial matters, or by a Divorce Commissioner in the event that one should be appointed. In view of the fact that proceedings will clearly not be contentious, it would appear that the investigation, at least of
44
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.