Malam Guruntum has advised married women to avoid checking their husbands’ phones, arguing that constant attempts to monitor a spouse’s private conversations can create mistrust and lead to serious problems in marriage.
The Islamic scholar made the remark while speaking on marital relationships and the responsibilities of husbands and wives. He cautioned women against developing the habit of searching through their husbands’ mobile phones, describing it as a practice that could gradually undermine trust between couples.
According to him, the moment a wife begins to routinely check her husband’s phone, suspicion and mistrust may begin to take root in the relationship.
He argued that what may initially appear to be a simple attempt to satisfy curiosity or confirm a suspicion could eventually lead to arguments, accusations and a breakdown of communication between husband and wife.
Malam Guruntum stressed that marriage should be built on trust, mutual understanding, respect and clearly defined responsibilities.
Link: https://x.com/el_uthmaan/status/2089202143928455632?s=20
He further argued that a husband has a responsibility to provide good parenting and guidance within the family and suggested that, in his interpretation of marital responsibilities, a husband may have the authority to check his wife’s phone.
However, he maintained that the same right does not extend to the wife checking her husband’s phone, presenting the issue as part of the different responsibilities and authority he believes exist between spouses.
The cleric’s comments have drawn attention to the broader question of privacy, trust and accountability within marriage, particularly in an era when mobile phones contain private conversations, social media accounts, photographs, financial information and other personal details.
He urged couples to avoid actions that could unnecessarily create suspicion and conflict, stressing that problems in marriage can escalate when spouses begin to constantly monitor each other’s activities.
Malam Guruntum’s position also reflects a wider debate among religious scholars and relationship commentators about the balance between marital transparency and individual privacy.
While some believe spouses should have unrestricted access to each other’s devices as a demonstration of openness, others argue that marriage does not automatically eliminate personal privacy and that concerns about infidelity or secrecy should be addressed through communication rather than surveillance.
The issue is particularly sensitive because phone-checking can sometimes be driven by genuine concerns about infidelity, while in other cases it can become a cycle of suspicion in which one partner repeatedly searches for evidence of wrongdoing.
Malam Guruntum therefore urged couples to focus on building trust and maintaining healthy communication instead of allowing suspicion to dominate their relationships.
He warned that when distrust becomes a regular feature of a marriage, seemingly minor disagreements can develop into larger disputes and, in severe cases, contribute to separation.
His remarks have consequently reignited conversations about the rights and responsibilities of husbands and wives, the place of privacy in marriage, and how couples can resolve suspicions without allowing them to destroy their relationships.
The central message from the scholar was that couples should exercise restraint, communicate openly and avoid behaviours that could unnecessarily fuel suspicion and conflict in the home.
However, questions remain about whether expectations concerning access to a spouse’s phone should be understood as mutual, gender-specific or determined by the particular agreement and circumstances of each marriage.
For many relationship experts, sustainable marriages depend not only on defined responsibilities but also on mutual respect, trust, communication and consent between both partners.
