Pakistan’s Hudood Laws: Extremely Misused
Beena Sarwar March 9, 2004
#34 Posted by Knowledge123 on April 14, 2004 8:49:09 pm
Salaam Alaikum!
To me (in my very own conceited world), culture has uprooted Islam fourfold in Pakistan. I have referenced many anthropologists in the past about this issue, but lapdog liberals insist on their cultural relativism two-step rhetoric. It`s about time a true Muslim intellectual stood up and took action against this zenith of perpetual barbarity!
Hakim
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#33 Posted by echoboom on March 13, 2004 10:50:46 am
An eye-opener for the colonised minds. The secularists( read: KUFFAAR) in Pakistan are desperately convincing themselves and others that they are maaadren and progressive. Far from it, they are hankering hoarse for the days of Firaun, shaddad, and Nimrod..to moenjo-Dero & Harrapa days. This they will never ever be granted by muslims.
It is unfortunate that these ignoramuses never had the benefit of a madressa education.
The Toronto Star:
Mar. 13, 2004. 01:00 AM
Having faith in the law
A new Islamic judicial panel in Ontario sparks concerns about how Shari`a law will be applied But faith-based tribunals have long..
``God commands you to hand back your trusts to their rightful owners, and when you pass judgment among men, to judge with fairness.``
The Qur`an, 4:58
``If cases come before your courts that are too difficult for you to judge, whether bloodshed, lawsuits or assaults, take them to the place the Lord your God will choose.``
Deuteronomy, 17:8
You`d have thought the Taliban decamped to Ontario by some of the reactions to the announcement late last year that a group of Canadian Muslims has set up a judicial tribunal that will implement Shari`a, or Islamic law, in this province to resolve civil and marital disputes.
Right-wing bloggers in the United States went ballistic. ``Apparently, it doesn`t bother the Canadian government that an ancient and barbaric system of laws could take precedence over [its] own,`` fumed ChronWatch, adding that the development proves ``once again why our neighbour to the north is often more of a liability in the battle against Islamic extremism than an ally.``
The like-minded Web site Americandaily.com opined, ``It seems that some in the Muslim community there have every intention of instituting insane Shari`a style laws to govern its own community within Canada itself.``
Even a local columnist went off the deep end. ``Have we lost our minds in Canada?`` wondered the normally level-headed Marianne Meed-Ward in the Toronto Sun. ``We are poised to become like the repressive Middle Eastern countries we occasionally bomb, and start enforcing Islamic Shari`a law.``
Lost in all the hysteria were several banal truths: the newly formed Islamic Institute of Civil Justice will merely formalize an ad hoc system that has been quietly settling mundane marital and business disputes in Ontario using Islamic law for several years.
And judges of Ontario`s courts will be free to strike down any decision that is contrary to public policy, encroaches on existing statutes or violates any aspect of Canada`s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The Islamic panel, intended chiefly to bring a spiritual dimension to conflict resolution, is already up and running. Retired lawyer Sayed Mumtaz Ali, who is spearheading the initiative, says one or two cases were scheduled to be heard last month .
Meantime, Canada`s 70,000 Ismaili Muslims, who belong to a branch of Shia Islam, continue to use their own highly organized system of community-based dispute resolution that dates back 14 centuries.
Jews and Christians across Canada also avail themselves of religious-based dispute resolution in their faith communities, combining healthy doses of biblical justice with modern pragmatism.
In fact, faced with the daunting prospects of clogged secular courts and their intimidating formality, pricey lawyers and a system rooted in go-for-the-jugular adversary that produces clear winners and losers, more Canadians are choosing to submit to legal services provided by their religious communities.
A University of Alberta study has noted how well these ancient bodies fit into today`s trend toward mediation. Courts certainly welcome approved alternative dispute resolution, or ADR, whether religious in character or not, because it eases their dockets and cases are dispatched nearly always with the same fairness, but minus any cultural differences.
Faith communities agree that solving disputes from within is cheaper, faster and far less combative than secular courts. Disputants are more likely to feel comfortable with a system they know. And the results are private.
Still, some Muslims worry the new Islamic judicial initiative will discriminate against women, especially in matters of family law, inheritance and divorce, which tend to favour men. For example, Islamic family law dictates that male heirs receive a greater share of inheritance than females (in order to look after women); that only husbands may initiate divorce; and that in divorce cases, fathers are usually awarded custody of daughters.
The development has caught the attention of the International Campaign for the Defence of Women`s Rights in Iran, which has mounted an online campaign against the Islamic tribunals here. ``We strongly believe that this move is anti-women...and will push back women in society in general,`` says the group, which calls the Ontario Shari`a courts ``anti-freedom, anti-women, misogynist, anti-modernist and strongly racist.``
As recently as last weekend, the group hosted a conference in Toronto denouncing the Islamic courts. Panellist Farzana Hassan Shahid of the Mississauga-based group Muslims Against Terrorism said that while she`s not opposed to the dispensation of Shari`a in Canada, ``as I am a proud Muslim who subscribes to the belief and value system of Islam,`` she finds herself in a quandary ``due to the painful realization that the Shari`a models in various Islamic countries have failed miserably to deliver justice to the most vulnerable members of our society, namely women and children.
``The Qur`an is equitable and revolutionary, whereas Shari`a is draconian, regressive and discriminatory,`` Shahid said.
Others have expressed concern about which interpretation of Shari`a will be employed in Canada, as Islamic law is vast and complex, varying widely from country to country.
Ali dismisses the concerns of the Canadian Council of Muslim Women, which has said it is ``gravely concerned`` that the panel won`t protect the rights of women.
``Muslim women`s imaginary and hypothetical concerns that they may not receive fair treatment before these panels are just baseless,`` he says. ``Muslim women have the option to go to these panels or go to secular Canadian courts.``
Also, all those who come before a tribunal may choose to have Muslim law or Canadian law applied to their case, Ali notes.
The panels, he explains, will be presided over by two ``experienced`` female mediators under his direction as president, and another member who serves as secretary. Ali says he and the secretary are qualified arbitrators.
Ontario courts are required to enforce agreements negotiated voluntarily through an arbitrator as long as they are not unreasonable or contrary to such statutes as the Divorce Act, the Criminal Code and the Charter.
Besides, says Ali, ``Muslim law dictates that in case of conflict on any legal point between Muslim law and Canadian law, the local Canadian law shall prevail. Period.``
The institute will limit itself to disputes involving marriage, commerce and civil contracts — no criminal or child custody cases — much the same way as Jewish courts of law have done for thousands of years.
Mandated by the Torah, these courts, known as a Beit Din (house of law), hear cases about every other week in the Greater Toronto Area, says Rabbi Reuven Tradburks, who coordinates intake for the Toronto Beit Din.
Hearings take place before three dayanim (judges who are rabbis). The complainant and defendant choose one each, and the two judges pick the third.
Two centuries ago in Europe, a quarrel or the besmirching of a good name would be fodder for a Beit Din, but no longer. Today, Tradburks says, it functions as a binding arbitration panel that resolves contractual disputes, monetary damages, restitution of property and fallout from failed marriages, all through the prism of Halachah, or Jewish law.
A Beit Din may issue summonses and call witnesses. Lawyers are permitted, but only as advisers. Proceedings move briskly, with little adversity, and with a success rate that approaches 100 per cent. The complainant pays a $125 administrative fee and the actual session costs $150 per side.
In a celebrated case in 1999, an Ontario judge turned over a lawsuit among three Toronto rabbis and a Montreal kosher meat distributor to a Beit Din.
Under the guidance of their spiritual leader, the Aga Khan, Ismaili Muslims have run ADRs across Canada going back to 1987 to resolve matrimonial and civil disputes in which at least one party is an Ismaili.
Known as Conciliation and Arbitration Boards (CABs), they are part of a worldwide Ismaili network of panels that offer both mediation and arbitration in matrimonial and commercial disputes.
These panels do not apply Shari`a strictly speaking, but rather Qur`anic principles of ``respect, harmony, unity, fairness and justice, all of which are consistent with Canadian values,`` says Nurjehan Mawani, a former chair of the national CAB in Canada.
About 70 per cent of all cases are resolved, she says.
The Catholic and Anglican churches in Canada both operate ecclesiastical courts across the country, but they are convened mainly for internal spiritual wrangles or to discipline priests. Since 1946, marriage tribunals in the Roman Catholic church in Canada have ruled on whether a union may be annulled should either party wish to remarry in the Church.
Conflict is not inherently bad, says the United Church of Canada`s 26-page Dispute Resolution Policy Handbook, replete with rules, forms and theological affirmations. The church`s ADR service provides about 90 mediators across the country who deal mainly with internal disputes.
As the church sees it, conflict can be an agent of constructive change. Trouble is, a secular courtroom reflects an un-Christian ethic of domination and control.
Ultimately, says the church, Jesus` teachings are less concerned with such temporal concepts as damages and guilt, than with the restoration of right relationships between people, and between people and God.
Ron Csillag is a Toronto-based freelance writer specializing in religion. He can be reached at csillag@rogers.com.
It is unfortunate that these ignoramuses never had the benefit of a madressa education.
The Toronto Star:
Mar. 13, 2004. 01:00 AM
Having faith in the law
A new Islamic judicial panel in Ontario sparks concerns about how Shari`a law will be applied But faith-based tribunals have long..
``God commands you to hand back your trusts to their rightful owners, and when you pass judgment among men, to judge with fairness.``
The Qur`an, 4:58
``If cases come before your courts that are too difficult for you to judge, whether bloodshed, lawsuits or assaults, take them to the place the Lord your God will choose.``
Deuteronomy, 17:8
You`d have thought the Taliban decamped to Ontario by some of the reactions to the announcement late last year that a group of Canadian Muslims has set up a judicial tribunal that will implement Shari`a, or Islamic law, in this province to resolve civil and marital disputes.
Right-wing bloggers in the United States went ballistic. ``Apparently, it doesn`t bother the Canadian government that an ancient and barbaric system of laws could take precedence over [its] own,`` fumed ChronWatch, adding that the development proves ``once again why our neighbour to the north is often more of a liability in the battle against Islamic extremism than an ally.``
The like-minded Web site Americandaily.com opined, ``It seems that some in the Muslim community there have every intention of instituting insane Shari`a style laws to govern its own community within Canada itself.``
Even a local columnist went off the deep end. ``Have we lost our minds in Canada?`` wondered the normally level-headed Marianne Meed-Ward in the Toronto Sun. ``We are poised to become like the repressive Middle Eastern countries we occasionally bomb, and start enforcing Islamic Shari`a law.``
Lost in all the hysteria were several banal truths: the newly formed Islamic Institute of Civil Justice will merely formalize an ad hoc system that has been quietly settling mundane marital and business disputes in Ontario using Islamic law for several years.
And judges of Ontario`s courts will be free to strike down any decision that is contrary to public policy, encroaches on existing statutes or violates any aspect of Canada`s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The Islamic panel, intended chiefly to bring a spiritual dimension to conflict resolution, is already up and running. Retired lawyer Sayed Mumtaz Ali, who is spearheading the initiative, says one or two cases were scheduled to be heard last month .
Meantime, Canada`s 70,000 Ismaili Muslims, who belong to a branch of Shia Islam, continue to use their own highly organized system of community-based dispute resolution that dates back 14 centuries.
Jews and Christians across Canada also avail themselves of religious-based dispute resolution in their faith communities, combining healthy doses of biblical justice with modern pragmatism.
In fact, faced with the daunting prospects of clogged secular courts and their intimidating formality, pricey lawyers and a system rooted in go-for-the-jugular adversary that produces clear winners and losers, more Canadians are choosing to submit to legal services provided by their religious communities.
A University of Alberta study has noted how well these ancient bodies fit into today`s trend toward mediation. Courts certainly welcome approved alternative dispute resolution, or ADR, whether religious in character or not, because it eases their dockets and cases are dispatched nearly always with the same fairness, but minus any cultural differences.
Faith communities agree that solving disputes from within is cheaper, faster and far less combative than secular courts. Disputants are more likely to feel comfortable with a system they know. And the results are private.
Still, some Muslims worry the new Islamic judicial initiative will discriminate against women, especially in matters of family law, inheritance and divorce, which tend to favour men. For example, Islamic family law dictates that male heirs receive a greater share of inheritance than females (in order to look after women); that only husbands may initiate divorce; and that in divorce cases, fathers are usually awarded custody of daughters.
The development has caught the attention of the International Campaign for the Defence of Women`s Rights in Iran, which has mounted an online campaign against the Islamic tribunals here. ``We strongly believe that this move is anti-women...and will push back women in society in general,`` says the group, which calls the Ontario Shari`a courts ``anti-freedom, anti-women, misogynist, anti-modernist and strongly racist.``
As recently as last weekend, the group hosted a conference in Toronto denouncing the Islamic courts. Panellist Farzana Hassan Shahid of the Mississauga-based group Muslims Against Terrorism said that while she`s not opposed to the dispensation of Shari`a in Canada, ``as I am a proud Muslim who subscribes to the belief and value system of Islam,`` she finds herself in a quandary ``due to the painful realization that the Shari`a models in various Islamic countries have failed miserably to deliver justice to the most vulnerable members of our society, namely women and children.
``The Qur`an is equitable and revolutionary, whereas Shari`a is draconian, regressive and discriminatory,`` Shahid said.
Others have expressed concern about which interpretation of Shari`a will be employed in Canada, as Islamic law is vast and complex, varying widely from country to country.
Ali dismisses the concerns of the Canadian Council of Muslim Women, which has said it is ``gravely concerned`` that the panel won`t protect the rights of women.
``Muslim women`s imaginary and hypothetical concerns that they may not receive fair treatment before these panels are just baseless,`` he says. ``Muslim women have the option to go to these panels or go to secular Canadian courts.``
Also, all those who come before a tribunal may choose to have Muslim law or Canadian law applied to their case, Ali notes.
The panels, he explains, will be presided over by two ``experienced`` female mediators under his direction as president, and another member who serves as secretary. Ali says he and the secretary are qualified arbitrators.
Ontario courts are required to enforce agreements negotiated voluntarily through an arbitrator as long as they are not unreasonable or contrary to such statutes as the Divorce Act, the Criminal Code and the Charter.
Besides, says Ali, ``Muslim law dictates that in case of conflict on any legal point between Muslim law and Canadian law, the local Canadian law shall prevail. Period.``
The institute will limit itself to disputes involving marriage, commerce and civil contracts — no criminal or child custody cases — much the same way as Jewish courts of law have done for thousands of years.
Mandated by the Torah, these courts, known as a Beit Din (house of law), hear cases about every other week in the Greater Toronto Area, says Rabbi Reuven Tradburks, who coordinates intake for the Toronto Beit Din.
Hearings take place before three dayanim (judges who are rabbis). The complainant and defendant choose one each, and the two judges pick the third.
Two centuries ago in Europe, a quarrel or the besmirching of a good name would be fodder for a Beit Din, but no longer. Today, Tradburks says, it functions as a binding arbitration panel that resolves contractual disputes, monetary damages, restitution of property and fallout from failed marriages, all through the prism of Halachah, or Jewish law.
A Beit Din may issue summonses and call witnesses. Lawyers are permitted, but only as advisers. Proceedings move briskly, with little adversity, and with a success rate that approaches 100 per cent. The complainant pays a $125 administrative fee and the actual session costs $150 per side.
In a celebrated case in 1999, an Ontario judge turned over a lawsuit among three Toronto rabbis and a Montreal kosher meat distributor to a Beit Din.
Under the guidance of their spiritual leader, the Aga Khan, Ismaili Muslims have run ADRs across Canada going back to 1987 to resolve matrimonial and civil disputes in which at least one party is an Ismaili.
Known as Conciliation and Arbitration Boards (CABs), they are part of a worldwide Ismaili network of panels that offer both mediation and arbitration in matrimonial and commercial disputes.
These panels do not apply Shari`a strictly speaking, but rather Qur`anic principles of ``respect, harmony, unity, fairness and justice, all of which are consistent with Canadian values,`` says Nurjehan Mawani, a former chair of the national CAB in Canada.
About 70 per cent of all cases are resolved, she says.
The Catholic and Anglican churches in Canada both operate ecclesiastical courts across the country, but they are convened mainly for internal spiritual wrangles or to discipline priests. Since 1946, marriage tribunals in the Roman Catholic church in Canada have ruled on whether a union may be annulled should either party wish to remarry in the Church.
Conflict is not inherently bad, says the United Church of Canada`s 26-page Dispute Resolution Policy Handbook, replete with rules, forms and theological affirmations. The church`s ADR service provides about 90 mediators across the country who deal mainly with internal disputes.
As the church sees it, conflict can be an agent of constructive change. Trouble is, a secular courtroom reflects an un-Christian ethic of domination and control.
Ultimately, says the church, Jesus` teachings are less concerned with such temporal concepts as damages and guilt, than with the restoration of right relationships between people, and between people and God.
Ron Csillag is a Toronto-based freelance writer specializing in religion. He can be reached at csillag@rogers.com.
#32 Posted by jay on March 13, 2004 5:17:44 am
Honour killing and isalm,
All pakistanis are eager to say that honour killing is unislamic. Take the case of pakistan. Kiloling of others is as ols as human beings. But it is only after zia and after the hoodood ordinances were issues that such killings have become no crime in pakistan. The fact is that the islamic laws make honour killings a no crime. Then again pakistanis say that hodood is unislamic. Then what is the sheria court of pakistan doing. Sheria court of pakistan is manned by the people who have dedicated their lives to islamic studies and they have approved of the hoodood. If they were not to agree, they would have challenged it as they did with interest rates. Interest rates in pakistan is as old as the mountains, still the sheria court asked the govt to review it. If hoodood were unislamic they would have challenged it.
It is pathetic to see the pakistanis on chowk, like the beens and urstrulies maiking pious judgements on islamic interpretations while the sheria court has accepted the hoododod and hounour killings as legal.
This thread is about to vanish and it is remarkable that no tahmed on romair on this thread. If they were to be here , it will be an acceptance that honour killing is legal in pakistan they have read this article.
All pakistanis are eager to say that honour killing is unislamic. Take the case of pakistan. Kiloling of others is as ols as human beings. But it is only after zia and after the hoodood ordinances were issues that such killings have become no crime in pakistan. The fact is that the islamic laws make honour killings a no crime. Then again pakistanis say that hodood is unislamic. Then what is the sheria court of pakistan doing. Sheria court of pakistan is manned by the people who have dedicated their lives to islamic studies and they have approved of the hoodood. If they were not to agree, they would have challenged it as they did with interest rates. Interest rates in pakistan is as old as the mountains, still the sheria court asked the govt to review it. If hoodood were unislamic they would have challenged it.
It is pathetic to see the pakistanis on chowk, like the beens and urstrulies maiking pious judgements on islamic interpretations while the sheria court has accepted the hoododod and hounour killings as legal.
This thread is about to vanish and it is remarkable that no tahmed on romair on this thread. If they were to be here , it will be an acceptance that honour killing is legal in pakistan they have read this article.
#31 Posted by Ralph on March 11, 2004 3:28:47 pm
Pakistan should implement as many Islamic laws as Pakistanis can find. The more the merrier. Good luck.
#30 Posted by echoboom on March 11, 2004 1:01:09 pm
FerozeK:
your recent i-L is a relief.
Happy discovering.
Thanks for yahoo.
Let`s hope.
your recent i-L is a relief.
Happy discovering.
Thanks for yahoo.
Let`s hope.
#29 Posted by Urstruly on March 11, 2004 12:32:48 pm
RAPE
Under Islamic law (the real one and not that which is practiced in Islamic Republic) rape does not fall under the category of hadud crime. But in Pakistan the practice is exactly the opposite.
Under Islamic law – through ahadith - the state/prosecution must spare no effort to avoid imposing Hadd punishment on an accused while in Pakistan state/police/prosecution try their best to charge people with Hadud. Even those who go through a civil marriage in court are charged with committing a Hadd crime of fornication/zina.
Under Islamic law pregnancy can neither be used as a proof of rape nor that of a consensual sex. So a Hudd of fornication cannot be imposed but in Pakistan women are regularly charged with Hudd if found pregnant with rape or incest. This is barbaric and cruel.
There are only three possibilities when Hadd can be imposed in the cases of rape.
1. If the rapist voluntarily confesses that he had committed rape and he is fully aware of the consequences of his confession.
2. If the rape victim voluntarily confesses that she actually had a consensual sex and that the allegation of rape was false. In that case Hadd of fornication is imposed on both man and woman.
3. If there are four adult male witnesses who testify that they had seen act of penetration during rape with their own eyes then the rapist is charged with Hadd of zina.
Pakistani society is basically an oppressed society, ruled by the law of the jungle where every big fish swallows the smaller one. In this culture, the survival of the fittest depends on the elimination or subjugation of the week and voiceless. In such societies the weakest on the lowest rung of the food chain suffer the most – the women and the children. How do you expect a man to be compassionate and loving towards his wife and his children when he had just lost his days earnings to the thulla police wala at the check post and got kicked in the posterior as well. This culture of badmashi and ghundagardi goes to the very top – to the military dictators who gang rape constitution whenever they feel like it and keep the nation corrupt and in malaise so that no one raises a voice against their own lawlessness. Pakistani nation must make up their mind and think, how those who themselves have broken every law of the state and raped constitution can deliver a law abiding society. They are the first who must be brought to the guillotine – them and that class which supports them.
PS. A brief intro of Hadud Laws is available at the article ``Justice for Half a Man``
http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00002336&channel=university%20ave&start=0&end=9&chapter=1&page=1
#28 Posted by vertex on March 11, 2004 10:27:31 am
Urstruly,
Yours is probably the majority opinion, despite liberals using lack of support for MMA-types as proof-positive of Pakistan`s ``liberal`` mindset.
These liberals have no credeblility, and so have nothing to offer politically. It`s up to Pakistanis, and Paki-expats, like you to get these laws fixed! Inshaallah...
#27 Posted by XeroxKhan on March 11, 2004 10:08:24 am
Dear Ras,
This is never going to happen in PUKESTAN.
It is backward country to begin with, ruled by people who have benifited from it`s backwardness. Under the pretext of ``do not mess with`` Quran, and accepting the idiocies preached by the Beards (of different shades and lengths) , the rulers (Khakis and Muftis) have allowed the merciless rape and torture of the Women in Pukestan. Goats enjoy a better status than women. When did a goat die unlike the little sisters who died under the ``intense loving Care`` of Karachi Police? Pukestan is a land of cowards.
This is never going to happen in PUKESTAN.
It is backward country to begin with, ruled by people who have benifited from it`s backwardness. Under the pretext of ``do not mess with`` Quran, and accepting the idiocies preached by the Beards (of different shades and lengths) , the rulers (Khakis and Muftis) have allowed the merciless rape and torture of the Women in Pukestan. Goats enjoy a better status than women. When did a goat die unlike the little sisters who died under the ``intense loving Care`` of Karachi Police? Pukestan is a land of cowards.
#26 Posted by Urstruly on March 11, 2004 9:36:33 am
I fully support the Hadud Laws in Pakistan, however, the way they have been implemented currently is not only inhuman but also un-islamic. The current laws must be repealed.
#25 Posted by solitude on March 11, 2004 8:24:01 am
#21 by rafay_alam on March 11, 2004 4:17am PT
Dear Rafay, where are you nowadays ? Anywhere near the east coast ? NY ?
I don`t remember the SPECIFICS of your worldview but I think we need more liberal Pakistanis to spearhead an intellectual awakening within Pakistanis and you fit the bill (of a liberal Pakistani). I have some other plans for which I am accumulating capital. Get in touch with me arthurshiraz@yahoo.com and we will catch up?
Actually I was urging against calling these laws un islamic. I was arguing against trying to convince Mullahs that the laws are un islamic. I recommend saying ``Fine! this is very Islamic and it may be OK for Islamists but it is NOT ok for Pakistan``. It sounds like a difficult position to take but it is the best way things will work in the long term.
The feminists don`t need to engage the Mullahs the Mullahs love to engage the feminists. Have you ever seen them hurl abuse, acid, stones and gunfire at the brave feminists marching for women`s rights (http://www.RAWA.org anyone?)
If anything the gentlemen of Pakistan need to teach our feminists how to carry and fire weapons and then stand by your sister, mother, daughter, wife and girlfriend you cowards!
Dear Rafay, where are you nowadays ? Anywhere near the east coast ? NY ?
I don`t remember the SPECIFICS of your worldview but I think we need more liberal Pakistanis to spearhead an intellectual awakening within Pakistanis and you fit the bill (of a liberal Pakistani). I have some other plans for which I am accumulating capital. Get in touch with me arthurshiraz@yahoo.com and we will catch up?
Actually I was urging against calling these laws un islamic. I was arguing against trying to convince Mullahs that the laws are un islamic. I recommend saying ``Fine! this is very Islamic and it may be OK for Islamists but it is NOT ok for Pakistan``. It sounds like a difficult position to take but it is the best way things will work in the long term.
The feminists don`t need to engage the Mullahs the Mullahs love to engage the feminists. Have you ever seen them hurl abuse, acid, stones and gunfire at the brave feminists marching for women`s rights (http://www.RAWA.org anyone?)
If anything the gentlemen of Pakistan need to teach our feminists how to carry and fire weapons and then stand by your sister, mother, daughter, wife and girlfriend you cowards!
#24 Posted by arjun_m on March 11, 2004 8:24:01 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#23 Posted by Ras on March 11, 2004 8:24:01 am
These laws are inhuman.
It is never too late to throw them in the dustbin.
Ras
#22 Posted by ferozk on March 11, 2004 7:32:13 am
re: echoboom # 20
I thank you for your concern, though I never realized my ilogs would cause that much disquiet. If you wish to talk to me, please contact me ferozrafik@yahoo.com and I look forward to hearing from you.
re: hari # 19
Hari, you have made a good point.
Rapes in Pakistani villages have been seen by the entire village and yet, the person raped could not produce four male witness to the act. Even if she does manage to get four witness to the crime, the police will refuse to lodge a FIR (First Information Report). They will intimidate the woman to withdraw the charge or if they are reasonable, they will tell her to sort out the matter with the other party. In most cases, the police might register a case of zina - sexual intercourse - against the woman and charge her instead.
The failure resides over the whole spectrum of law enforcement. Even the provincial government is not interested in pursuing the case and neither are the members of provincial or national legislatures. In essence, the reality is that hudood ordinances provide a legal cover for rape and lack of a governmental response, provides the legitimacy of condoning murder. In Pakistan, hudood ordinances have the same significance as prime notte, or the ``first night`` did in medieval Europe. These ordinances, the manner in which they are implemented and the manner in which they provide a legalizied sanctury against prosecution, encourage sexual aggression by the rich and powerful men over poor and less privileged and economically disadvantaged women.
There is no justice in these laws; intentionally or how they are implemented. The best situation would be if they are cancelled, but there is no political will to lock horns with the regressive clergy of Pakistan and hence, they will continue to exist.
re: rafay_alam # 21
I agree with you!
The clergy in Pakistan has to be taken to the task and humanized. There is no other alternative, if Pakistan is to progress. It seems that reality suggests that religion and its narrow myopic interpretation is the real cause of malise in Pakistan`s body politic. Pakistani political leadership is genuinely afraid of the power of the mullah and the clergy in Pakistani politics. You have a valid point, when you say that the clergy gained power more as a result of the liberals in Pakistan not wishing to challenge it and in the process abdicating the field, which the clergy filled with relative ease.
However, there is a silver lining. In the recent MMA protests and proclaimations, there was a very limited support for its calls for anti-government marches. This means that people of Pakistan are not entirely willing to support the MMA platform, but will not oppose it because they have no faith in the ability of the government to captialize on a popular reaction against the clergy. Pakistani governments lack political legitimacy and they compenstate by appealing to religion and making deals with the religious parties. In all of this, the people of Pakistan end up being politically disenfranchised and now, they have lost their faith in the sovereign contract, which they once thought they had signed.
Ciao
I thank you for your concern, though I never realized my ilogs would cause that much disquiet. If you wish to talk to me, please contact me ferozrafik@yahoo.com and I look forward to hearing from you.
re: hari # 19
Hari, you have made a good point.
Rapes in Pakistani villages have been seen by the entire village and yet, the person raped could not produce four male witness to the act. Even if she does manage to get four witness to the crime, the police will refuse to lodge a FIR (First Information Report). They will intimidate the woman to withdraw the charge or if they are reasonable, they will tell her to sort out the matter with the other party. In most cases, the police might register a case of zina - sexual intercourse - against the woman and charge her instead.
The failure resides over the whole spectrum of law enforcement. Even the provincial government is not interested in pursuing the case and neither are the members of provincial or national legislatures. In essence, the reality is that hudood ordinances provide a legal cover for rape and lack of a governmental response, provides the legitimacy of condoning murder. In Pakistan, hudood ordinances have the same significance as prime notte, or the ``first night`` did in medieval Europe. These ordinances, the manner in which they are implemented and the manner in which they provide a legalizied sanctury against prosecution, encourage sexual aggression by the rich and powerful men over poor and less privileged and economically disadvantaged women.
There is no justice in these laws; intentionally or how they are implemented. The best situation would be if they are cancelled, but there is no political will to lock horns with the regressive clergy of Pakistan and hence, they will continue to exist.
re: rafay_alam # 21
I agree with you!
The clergy in Pakistan has to be taken to the task and humanized. There is no other alternative, if Pakistan is to progress. It seems that reality suggests that religion and its narrow myopic interpretation is the real cause of malise in Pakistan`s body politic. Pakistani political leadership is genuinely afraid of the power of the mullah and the clergy in Pakistani politics. You have a valid point, when you say that the clergy gained power more as a result of the liberals in Pakistan not wishing to challenge it and in the process abdicating the field, which the clergy filled with relative ease.
However, there is a silver lining. In the recent MMA protests and proclaimations, there was a very limited support for its calls for anti-government marches. This means that people of Pakistan are not entirely willing to support the MMA platform, but will not oppose it because they have no faith in the ability of the government to captialize on a popular reaction against the clergy. Pakistani governments lack political legitimacy and they compenstate by appealing to religion and making deals with the religious parties. In all of this, the people of Pakistan end up being politically disenfranchised and now, they have lost their faith in the sovereign contract, which they once thought they had signed.
Ciao
#21 Posted by echoboom on March 11, 2004 4:17:22 am
FerozeK:
A request.
This is regarding a couple of your i-Ls musings.
I`m concerned. I care.
Just wanted to convey this to you.
Would talking/writing (privately) be good?
A request.
This is regarding a couple of your i-Ls musings.
I`m concerned. I care.
Just wanted to convey this to you.
Would talking/writing (privately) be good?
#20 Posted by rafay_alam on March 11, 2004 4:17:22 am
Just a thought prompted by Solitude`s remarks (post # 8):
Sabiha Sumar, a Pakistani film maker wrote an article criticizing the Pakistani women`s movement (I forget the name of the article, but it was published by OUP as part of Pakistani`s 50 years of independence - I`ll try and get the reference). She ruffled some feathers with her comments.
One of the things she wrote - by way of observation - was that the women`s movement had, from a very early stage, decided not to engage the clergy. In other words, the movement was secular. Activists argued that the Hudood laws and the Qanoon-e-Shahadat were illegal; they did not argue that they were un-Islamic. There were reasons for this decision: engaging the clergy would give them a platform (show you just how politically strong the right-wing clergy was at the time). The decision, it seems to me, has backfired: The right-wing clergy got its platform anyway (via the Afghan War, General Zia and loads of money from the House of Sa`ud).
It`s interesting to note the effect of that decision. The rhetoric of women`s right`s activists seems to slant towards emphasizing the illogical nature of these laws. Almost pointing a finger at Dogma and saying ``Look, how funny the native Moosalmans are!`` By not engaging the Clergy, the movement has deprived itself of the opportunity of arguing that the laws are NOT ISLAMIC!! - which is a no-brainer if you read the 1997 and recent Women`s Commission Reports.
Another effect: Since the women`s rights movement was also more or less the beginning of the Human Rights movement in Pakistan, the rhetoric of Human Right`s activists and Civil Society in general has aped that of the women`s movement. For those who can`t see the connection: Both Hina Jilani and Asma Jehangir - both pioneers in the women`s rights movement - have been executive officers of the HRCP since it`s inception in the early 80s.
I wonder if it would be possible for the women`s movement to change it`s strategy; for it to engage the right-wing clergy on religion; argue that the Hudood laws and other regressive so-called ``Islamic`` laws are in reality not Islamic.
Rafay Alam
Sabiha Sumar, a Pakistani film maker wrote an article criticizing the Pakistani women`s movement (I forget the name of the article, but it was published by OUP as part of Pakistani`s 50 years of independence - I`ll try and get the reference). She ruffled some feathers with her comments.
One of the things she wrote - by way of observation - was that the women`s movement had, from a very early stage, decided not to engage the clergy. In other words, the movement was secular. Activists argued that the Hudood laws and the Qanoon-e-Shahadat were illegal; they did not argue that they were un-Islamic. There were reasons for this decision: engaging the clergy would give them a platform (show you just how politically strong the right-wing clergy was at the time). The decision, it seems to me, has backfired: The right-wing clergy got its platform anyway (via the Afghan War, General Zia and loads of money from the House of Sa`ud).
It`s interesting to note the effect of that decision. The rhetoric of women`s right`s activists seems to slant towards emphasizing the illogical nature of these laws. Almost pointing a finger at Dogma and saying ``Look, how funny the native Moosalmans are!`` By not engaging the Clergy, the movement has deprived itself of the opportunity of arguing that the laws are NOT ISLAMIC!! - which is a no-brainer if you read the 1997 and recent Women`s Commission Reports.
Another effect: Since the women`s rights movement was also more or less the beginning of the Human Rights movement in Pakistan, the rhetoric of Human Right`s activists and Civil Society in general has aped that of the women`s movement. For those who can`t see the connection: Both Hina Jilani and Asma Jehangir - both pioneers in the women`s rights movement - have been executive officers of the HRCP since it`s inception in the early 80s.
I wonder if it would be possible for the women`s movement to change it`s strategy; for it to engage the right-wing clergy on religion; argue that the Hudood laws and other regressive so-called ``Islamic`` laws are in reality not Islamic.
Rafay Alam
#19 Posted by hari on March 10, 2004 8:45:52 pm
Jay and rest:
one of the stupid things I see about this ``zina`` crap, is that the woman has to produce 4 males of virtue...etc.
why in the hell would ``4 ````good````men watch a rape`` and bear witness. By doing that act, aren`t they participating in the crime for not doing anything about it?
one of the stupid things I see about this ``zina`` crap, is that the woman has to produce 4 males of virtue...etc.
why in the hell would ``4 ````good````men watch a rape`` and bear witness. By doing that act, aren`t they participating in the crime for not doing anything about it?
#18 Posted by nasah on March 10, 2004 6:58:28 pm
My dear Bina Sarwar --
two suggestions - Firstly -- at the very beginning of the article you should explain to the Sharia illiterate Chowk audience -- what is this murdood Hudood `Law` --
Secondly your title -- ``Pakistan’s Hudood Laws: Extremely Misused` -- gives the impression that this murdood law is -- `useful` -- in certain areas of Pakistani Jurisimprudence -- ONLY that it`s being ``extremely misused``.......
is that what you`re trying to convey....?
two suggestions - Firstly -- at the very beginning of the article you should explain to the Sharia illiterate Chowk audience -- what is this murdood Hudood `Law` --
Secondly your title -- ``Pakistan’s Hudood Laws: Extremely Misused` -- gives the impression that this murdood law is -- `useful` -- in certain areas of Pakistani Jurisimprudence -- ONLY that it`s being ``extremely misused``.......
is that what you`re trying to convey....?
#17 Posted by Pakfin on March 10, 2004 2:02:50 pm
It is rather ironic that it is the lower middle class who actually supports the right wing fundamentalist groups. Even though the impact of repressive laws such as these is the highest on the poor, there is also some effect on the lives of the lower middle classes. The upper middle class and the wealthy generally are more progressive and support left wing parties.
Unfortunately the armed forces have always been hand in glove with the right wingers to maintain the status quo.
Unfortunately the armed forces have always been hand in glove with the right wingers to maintain the status quo.
#16 Posted by hossp on March 10, 2004 1:29:32 pm
What this article misses are stats about the social classes of the society that are impacted by the Hudood Ordinance. By the description of the use of the ordinance it is clear that lowest of the low classes or the poorest sections of the society are impacted mostly. That is one reason that this law would notbe changed/revoked or repealed unless there is a democratic govt. in place in Pakistan. Even then it would depend on the make up of the political outfit that comes to the stage.
If the middleclass or the upperclass were going to be impacted by these laws it would have been repealed a long time ago. At this time this law does not even find consistent and vocal opposition to it. Simply because the people impacted are not a factor in the social layers of Pakistani society.
This may appear to be a sort of left wing rhetoric but is there a better explanation of this law than saying that this law is as Islamic as the ban against the multiple marriages (Aaily Qanoon) is un-islamic? The law against multiple marriages would stay as it has strong support from the vocal middleclass and the upper middleclass. MMA or the religious parties have been making a huge noise about the repeal of that law for a long time or from the time it is in effect but nobody pays attention to it.
The Hudood or Zina ordinances are not likely to affect the middle class or the upper middle class and these laws will stay on the books and would be used or misused by the interested parties.
We must not also discount the police factor or the police station itself. Once this law is applied by the munshi(clerk) of the police station the burden of the proof is on the aggrieved party and in most likelihood that party, a poor girl has no means to beat this law. The Thanedar(police officer) likes the law as it saves him/her from making the effort to stick the crime to the alleged. These law are easy to stick and hard to defend.
How big is the impact of this law? The figures presented show that this law has been applied to women more often but it does not show whether the number of women accused of different crime has changed by that numbers. If the number of the accused women has not increased in proportion than it is safe to assume that this law is being used by the police itself for the simple reason that it saves them from additional work.
{{{In 1979, there were only 70 women in prisons all over Pakistan. By 1988, this figure was an astounding 6,000 (six thousand).
In three years (1994-96), the Women Police Station Karachi South, registered 113 cases against women, 94 out of which ((80 %), were registered under the Zina Ordinance. In 1988, 47 per cent of the women in Punjab prisons had been charged with zina.}}}
These are isolated numbers and there is no way to compare these numbers. The author has not provided complete stats. 6000 cases in 1988 all over the country do not look to be huge numbers. Neither are 94 cases from one police station in two years (1994-96) period.
The number of women in Jail in Pakistan at comparable time period and or accused of other crime has to be higher in a population of almost 150 million. If the base numbers are low then the percentages are going to look higher and that is not an accurate way of measuring the impact of a law over a period.
If these are the numbers, than it is a low impact law and likelihood of any govt. repealing it for political purpose diminish drastically.
#15 Posted by Pardaisi on March 10, 2004 11:19:19 am
#13 by XeroxKhan
Nice (sarcastically speaking) you prove the quality of your upbringing and education with your post, congrats!
That`s what I think.....
Nice (sarcastically speaking) you prove the quality of your upbringing and education with your post, congrats!
That`s what I think.....
#14 Posted by XeroxKhan on March 10, 2004 8:53:00 am
Looking superficially, the Pakistani women do not fare better than the ``Baqra``. Bought, consumed, and soon replaced. No wonder Muslim Men had to raid other civilizations to replenish the supply of ``Baqras``. Off late they have not been successful in their pursuit of fresh Baqras.
Often raped (incest could play a major role), she has nowhere to turn to. Her life is worthless. As soon as the girl attains maturity to bear children, she is married off to cousins (sometimes forst cousins). Such a segregation of genepool should result in a massive outbreak of genetic disorders. Surprisingly it is not so, The Pakistani population is hale and hearty! This could only mean one of the two things.
1) Laws of genetics do not apply to Pakistanis (Allah Be Parised), or
2) Pakistani women have found a way to avenge their honour by producing BA$TARDS.
I would recommend a DNA analysis of a sample population to acertain the true paternity.
what do you all think?
Often raped (incest could play a major role), she has nowhere to turn to. Her life is worthless. As soon as the girl attains maturity to bear children, she is married off to cousins (sometimes forst cousins). Such a segregation of genepool should result in a massive outbreak of genetic disorders. Surprisingly it is not so, The Pakistani population is hale and hearty! This could only mean one of the two things.
1) Laws of genetics do not apply to Pakistanis (Allah Be Parised), or
2) Pakistani women have found a way to avenge their honour by producing BA$TARDS.
I would recommend a DNA analysis of a sample population to acertain the true paternity.
what do you all think?
#13 Posted by MantoLives on March 10, 2004 8:53:00 am
The recommendations of the National commission of the status of women should be taken up immediately... Hudood ordinance should be repealed, and legislation against honor killing should be brought out immediately.
Murder under sudden provocation is considered less liable because of the absence of Mens rea... as if the person wouldn`t do it if in a different state of mind... this position might be correct, but I think the principle of Equity which as much part of our British legal tradition as the rest of jurisprudence requires a different approach to the issue of Honor killing...
#12 Posted by ferozk on March 10, 2004 8:15:25 am
re: Beena Sarwar
What is the point of this article?
If it is a paean to some misguided form of liberal conscience in Pakistan, it is misplaced. You and I can disagree with the nature of Hudood Ordinances all we wish and we will still be ignored and our pleas will fall on deaf ears.
The reality is that there is no tangible political will to repeal these ordinances and the Musharraf government needs the political support of MMA and it will not irk MMA. Musharraf government is presently seeking MMAs concurance on the issue of the national security council, as an act of parliament. In return, it will offer to maintain the Hudood Ordinances as a sop for MMA for sweetening its political resistence towards the national security council.
I personally disagree with the intent and the selective interpretation of the hudood laws, but I also understand that these laws will exist, because the political costs of repealing them outweigh the social cost of voiding them. The laws are a reflection of a patriarchal society, which is regressive and dehumanizing not only towards women, but also towards less previleged. There is no honor in these honor killings and the state of Pakistan is complict in the legality of murder, which these laws ordain. Women in Pakistan are not considered as citizens, worthy of the law`s protection, but as minorities with their own separate electorates and reserved constituencies and political representation. When a nation demonizes women legally and ignores their concerns about their own fate, it blurs the distinction between gender genocide and hate crimes.
The hudood ordinances are not a crime against women of Pakistan but they are, in reality, a crime against humanity and if Pakistani state will not stop them, there will come a time, when people, with a conscience from outside will end this inhuman and barbaric practice. The sands of time are already running out and either Pakistan abolishes these laws itself, or Pakistan will once more captiulate to international norms of behavior.
I agree with your anger and I second your concerns, but till these laws are ended, both you and I will have the consolation of being part of a murder and we will stand guilty by our inactions and silence, while the crime was being committed. The fact that our voices have no meaning in Pakistan and will be ignored, will not lessen the burden on our conscience and one day, not to a Pakistani court and not to an international court, but we will beanswerable to the Court of Allah for our deeds and misdeeds as our religion tell us. You and I and all Pakistanis are already accused and it is only a matter of time, before we serve our punishment.
Ciao
What is the point of this article?
If it is a paean to some misguided form of liberal conscience in Pakistan, it is misplaced. You and I can disagree with the nature of Hudood Ordinances all we wish and we will still be ignored and our pleas will fall on deaf ears.
The reality is that there is no tangible political will to repeal these ordinances and the Musharraf government needs the political support of MMA and it will not irk MMA. Musharraf government is presently seeking MMAs concurance on the issue of the national security council, as an act of parliament. In return, it will offer to maintain the Hudood Ordinances as a sop for MMA for sweetening its political resistence towards the national security council.
I personally disagree with the intent and the selective interpretation of the hudood laws, but I also understand that these laws will exist, because the political costs of repealing them outweigh the social cost of voiding them. The laws are a reflection of a patriarchal society, which is regressive and dehumanizing not only towards women, but also towards less previleged. There is no honor in these honor killings and the state of Pakistan is complict in the legality of murder, which these laws ordain. Women in Pakistan are not considered as citizens, worthy of the law`s protection, but as minorities with their own separate electorates and reserved constituencies and political representation. When a nation demonizes women legally and ignores their concerns about their own fate, it blurs the distinction between gender genocide and hate crimes.
The hudood ordinances are not a crime against women of Pakistan but they are, in reality, a crime against humanity and if Pakistani state will not stop them, there will come a time, when people, with a conscience from outside will end this inhuman and barbaric practice. The sands of time are already running out and either Pakistan abolishes these laws itself, or Pakistan will once more captiulate to international norms of behavior.
I agree with your anger and I second your concerns, but till these laws are ended, both you and I will have the consolation of being part of a murder and we will stand guilty by our inactions and silence, while the crime was being committed. The fact that our voices have no meaning in Pakistan and will be ignored, will not lessen the burden on our conscience and one day, not to a Pakistani court and not to an international court, but we will beanswerable to the Court of Allah for our deeds and misdeeds as our religion tell us. You and I and all Pakistanis are already accused and it is only a matter of time, before we serve our punishment.
Ciao
#11 Posted by Saminasha on March 10, 2004 7:09:41 am
Who are the members of the MMA? Are they publically visible? (i.e. having spokespeople, etc)
#10 Posted by jay on March 10, 2004 6:22:21 am
96 by Romair on March 2, 2004 7:21am PT
stuka #91: ``Honor Killings are not deemed illegal.``
I hope you are not serious. Do you really think that honor killings are not illegal in Pakistan? If you do, could I ask you for your source of this information?
Killings of all kinds, in Pakistan, just like in other socieities are illegal. Why wouldn`t they be?
An analogy would be to say that killing Muslims is legal in India, just because Muslims were killed in Gujrat, and their killers were not prosecuted.
The above is a post by romair, in a long line of posts supported by tahmed, ylh and other pakistanis on chowk. This represent the tragedy of pakistan, the educated not accepting the reality of pakistan and believing that it is all a question of propaganda.
The real tragedy is that even after this article, the pakistanis will continue to insist that honour killing is not legal in pakistan. May be it is time that at least some pakistanis to accept the contribution of one indian in brigning this shameful pak fact open on chowk.
stuka #91: ``Honor Killings are not deemed illegal.``
I hope you are not serious. Do you really think that honor killings are not illegal in Pakistan? If you do, could I ask you for your source of this information?
Killings of all kinds, in Pakistan, just like in other socieities are illegal. Why wouldn`t they be?
An analogy would be to say that killing Muslims is legal in India, just because Muslims were killed in Gujrat, and their killers were not prosecuted.
The above is a post by romair, in a long line of posts supported by tahmed, ylh and other pakistanis on chowk. This represent the tragedy of pakistan, the educated not accepting the reality of pakistan and believing that it is all a question of propaganda.
The real tragedy is that even after this article, the pakistanis will continue to insist that honour killing is not legal in pakistan. May be it is time that at least some pakistanis to accept the contribution of one indian in brigning this shameful pak fact open on chowk.
#9 Posted by jay on March 10, 2004 6:22:20 am
At last it heartening to see an article to tell the truth that honour killing is legal in pakistan and once and for to shut up the romairs, tahmeds and ylhs of chowk. The tragedy of education in pakistan is exemplified by the tahmeds ahere the education has only given them a vocabulary to hide the truth.
Tahmed is a classic example, a crude jihadist trying to be a moderate by attacking every criticism of pakistan as hate mongoring. By this relentless attack on me tahmed believes that he is a moderate. The fact is that with such a conviction in hois beliefs on what is right and wrong, tahmed is no different from a jihadist crossing the loc to kill the kafirs who are in the wrong.
Tahmed is a classic example, a crude jihadist trying to be a moderate by attacking every criticism of pakistan as hate mongoring. By this relentless attack on me tahmed believes that he is a moderate. The fact is that with such a conviction in hois beliefs on what is right and wrong, tahmed is no different from a jihadist crossing the loc to kill the kafirs who are in the wrong.
#8 Posted by solitude on March 10, 2004 6:22:19 am
Ms. Sarwar,
You are doing a disservice to your gender and to humankind by calling these laws un-Islamic. How are you doing this? you are making Islam look like what it is not. Islam is sexist and misogynist scripturally and historically.
Let me try to understand why you are doing this because we both have the same goals : to emancipate women and to end the Hudood Ordinance. Right?
We just have different methods of approaching this same goal. Right?
One method (1): To criticize Islam and the Shariah directly for being responsible for crimes against women.
Another method (your approach) (2): To absolve Islam of any culpability and hope that by saying ``Islam does not REALLY say testimony of women is half that of men`` you re-invent and re-interpret Islam.
Perhaps you dislike approach (1) because its aggressive, perhaps you think that it will only turn people off, perhaps you have revised your religion enough to truly BELIEVE that Islam is perfect and the one TRUE religion, perhaps you are surrounded by people who support Islam and constantly remind you of your heritage and beginnings and your race, perhaps you really love some patriarch in your life (perhaps a father figure).
Here is the thing though, static societies and cultures (progress resistant cultures and cultures that are filled with hatred) often take the approach you have taken which is : to re interpret old truths. To take something from the 6th century and say ``this really is not the right way of interpreting Islam, the prophet was really just to women he gave all of his 13 wives + the concubines one night each... ``. The trait of writing interpretations and commentaries and super commentaries is really the way of primitive societies.
Modern societies invent new truths. Truths that are relevant to their time. They don`t say ``Islam REALLY meant this ...``, they say ``The ways of the past were so and so dictated by such a religion but for today we will come together believing in a new value``.
You are young and not hardened in your ways. Please take the courage to cut the chord and break free and create a new foundation.
You are doing a disservice to your gender and to humankind by calling these laws un-Islamic. How are you doing this? you are making Islam look like what it is not. Islam is sexist and misogynist scripturally and historically.
Let me try to understand why you are doing this because we both have the same goals : to emancipate women and to end the Hudood Ordinance. Right?
We just have different methods of approaching this same goal. Right?
One method (1): To criticize Islam and the Shariah directly for being responsible for crimes against women.
Another method (your approach) (2): To absolve Islam of any culpability and hope that by saying ``Islam does not REALLY say testimony of women is half that of men`` you re-invent and re-interpret Islam.
Perhaps you dislike approach (1) because its aggressive, perhaps you think that it will only turn people off, perhaps you have revised your religion enough to truly BELIEVE that Islam is perfect and the one TRUE religion, perhaps you are surrounded by people who support Islam and constantly remind you of your heritage and beginnings and your race, perhaps you really love some patriarch in your life (perhaps a father figure).
Here is the thing though, static societies and cultures (progress resistant cultures and cultures that are filled with hatred) often take the approach you have taken which is : to re interpret old truths. To take something from the 6th century and say ``this really is not the right way of interpreting Islam, the prophet was really just to women he gave all of his 13 wives + the concubines one night each... ``. The trait of writing interpretations and commentaries and super commentaries is really the way of primitive societies.
Modern societies invent new truths. Truths that are relevant to their time. They don`t say ``Islam REALLY meant this ...``, they say ``The ways of the past were so and so dictated by such a religion but for today we will come together believing in a new value``.
You are young and not hardened in your ways. Please take the courage to cut the chord and break free and create a new foundation.
#7 Posted by soundmeister on March 9, 2004 10:44:05 pm
What to say? Just when you think there`s some hope for Pakistan, someone writes an article like this and we`re back where we started.
I can`t believe there is actually a debate on whether these fukkin laws are Islamic or un-Islamic, used or misused, can`t you morons see they`re just plain fukkin wrong?
``Some such high profile cases of the 1980s include 13-year old Jehan Mina, raped and made pregnant by an uncle and his son, and sentenced to a hundred lashes, reduced to 15 in view of her tender age. The blind maid servant Safia Bibi was sentenced to a similar punishment. In both cases, the fact that the raped girls had become pregnant was used against them, as proof of the sex act having been committed. The men were acquitted on benefit of doubt in both cases. ``
May God forgive you all.... cuz you have no fukkin cloo what you do...
I can`t believe there is actually a debate on whether these fukkin laws are Islamic or un-Islamic, used or misused, can`t you morons see they`re just plain fukkin wrong?
``Some such high profile cases of the 1980s include 13-year old Jehan Mina, raped and made pregnant by an uncle and his son, and sentenced to a hundred lashes, reduced to 15 in view of her tender age. The blind maid servant Safia Bibi was sentenced to a similar punishment. In both cases, the fact that the raped girls had become pregnant was used against them, as proof of the sex act having been committed. The men were acquitted on benefit of doubt in both cases. ``
May God forgive you all.... cuz you have no fukkin cloo what you do...
#6 Posted by satyamvada on March 9, 2004 10:44:05 pm
Arjun said:
If the military government can`t change this law in ~5 years, what good is it for?
Come on Arjun, dont tell me you are going all mushy ?
The laws have not been repealed because it was the Army`s idea in the
first place. Who do you think put the laws into force in the first place ?
What did you expect from the Pak Army ? Turkey style secularism ?
These laws are directly from ``the book``. Nobody in Pak dares to
question them. Notice how the author states that the laws are being misused ,
as if it is some well intentioned modern law being badly applied.
The so called ``laws`` are clearly 7th century arab-desert code and is encouraging violent
behavior and revenge.
You are right on one thing though, we will now have the apologists blame the
feudals, poverty etc etc...
If the military government can`t change this law in ~5 years, what good is it for?
Come on Arjun, dont tell me you are going all mushy ?
The laws have not been repealed because it was the Army`s idea in the
first place. Who do you think put the laws into force in the first place ?
What did you expect from the Pak Army ? Turkey style secularism ?
These laws are directly from ``the book``. Nobody in Pak dares to
question them. Notice how the author states that the laws are being misused ,
as if it is some well intentioned modern law being badly applied.
The so called ``laws`` are clearly 7th century arab-desert code and is encouraging violent
behavior and revenge.
You are right on one thing though, we will now have the apologists blame the
feudals, poverty etc etc...
#5 Posted by inquilaabi on March 9, 2004 4:53:17 pm
(If the military government can`t change this law in ~5 years, what good is it for? )
Absolutely nothing.
Absolutely nothing.
#4 Posted by M.B.Z.Isphahani on March 9, 2004 4:24:58 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#3 Posted by arjun_m on March 9, 2004 12:02:49 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#2 Posted by tainted on March 9, 2004 10:58:16 am
I hope we live to see a day when the Ordinance is no longer part of our Constitution.
#1 Posted by Pardaisi on March 9, 2004 10:58:16 am
Jay,
have a shot at this, a dream come true topic for you..ins`nt it
have a shot at this, a dream come true topic for you..ins`nt it
Interact Index
Also by Beena Sarwar
Similar Articles
- Rape Survivor Families Struggle Against Odds Beena Sarwar
- Alcohol and Teenagers: A Lethal Mixture Feroz Qutabshahi
- Pakistan and the Death Penalty: Time to Call it Quits Beena Sarwar
- Aitzaz’s Monumental Blunder saeed qureshi
- Please De-stabilize the System Ahmer Muzammil
US Elections 2008 Primaries
Get Chowk RSS FeedLatest Interacts
- altar: I am going to... The Heart of Starkness:
- KaalChakra: "Now or Never" is... Muhammad Aslam Khan Khattak:
- muqaddam: If one did a... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- muqaddam: Omar Abdulla is just... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- banneditem: Oye Ehtisham, meet us... Losing the Battle, Losing
- pinku: Indian society never persecuted... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- masadi: banneditem writes "Ras, In my... Three Cups of Tea
- masadi: He says a few... Three Cups of Tea
