A Rapist-Friendly System

#25 by Urstruly on March 11, 2005 7:05am PT

`` I think you are too angry for some reason to communicate in a coherent and intelligent manner. Please compose yourself. Yelling does not gurantee that you will be heard as well. ``

I was never angry. I raised simple points on three issues

1. What I regard as Arab centric view on who the people of the book are

2. Widespread historical abuse of pagan and animist peoples by followers of Judeo-Christian religions

3. Can you have a equitable justice system when you classify people based on their religion

hamidm

Now that we have gotten past the exchange of niceties and clear on our respective intentions, let me answer babbu`s question. He asked ``Any legal system that classifies people into Muslim or non-Muslim (or for that matter in any arbitrary manner) will never serve justice in a equitable manner ``.

Answer:

That is true. there cannot be two opinions about that. But the actual answer to your question lies in your honest answer to this question:``would you, as a hindu ( I presume) would like to be governed by Islamic Law?``. If the answer to this question is an honest ``NO`` then why should Muslims let themselves be governed by someone else`s law. The secularism and secualr law is just that. It is the law of atheists, agnostics, Kafirs, and rejectors. It is the law of those who reject God in their social lives. It is the law of those who think and promote that God is so incompetent that he has totally failed to provide answers to our social problems. Would secularism allow us the Muslims an autonomy to govern ourselves according to the rule of God? Yes it is possible. Indian constitution gives this autonomy to Indian Muslims in the shape of Muslim Family Law. The constitutions of various European countries and Canada are giving Muslims a limited autonomy to do just that by allowing them to establish Shria courts. So why in the world, in a country where Muslims are 97% of the population, they shouldn`t be allowed to have a law that is comensurate with their system of values? Islamic law does not apply to non-Muslims, period. Islamic law provides autonomy to non-Muslims to run their affairs according to the system of values of their own, just like secularism in aforementioned countries allows autonomy to Muslims. Why is this concept of autonomy so allien to you when you see it with your own eyes.

urstruly,

``I have a feeling that you don`t ASK questions for the reason of asking question``....... of course ...... i have probably been a muslim longer than you, so it is not surprising that i already know all the traditional, if lame, answers ! ............ the question is to find out if there are people out there who still believe in those answers - unfortunately there seem to be quite a few ........... that`s why the world is not safe

hamidm

I think you too are too angry for some reason to communicate in a coherent and intelligent manner. Please explain to me why I have a feeling that you don`t ASK questions for the reason of asking question; you ask questions so that you can get an opportunity to TELL. Therefore, please spare me of your lectures as in #26. Please compose yourself. Yelling does not gurantee that you will be heard as well.

urstruly,

...... you accuse babu of yelling .... now, which part of this statement didn`t you understand ?

``Any legal system that classifies people into Muslim or non-Muslim (or for that matter in any arbitrary manner) will never serve justice in a equitable manner.``

............ seems quite simple to me ......

.......... and, by the way, your rejoinder to jay was kind of silly because, regarless of the the sohni sanwali mehbooba ditty and the habashi bilal, pakis are just as obsessed with a fair complexion .......... and to be fair about it, it might have some to do with innate aesthetic values ...........

Re: # 23 Einstein


``True but in law being right beyond reasonable doubt is insisted upon when proving guilt not the other way. A western jurist will thwart any presumption of guilt during trial process.

Don`t you think that in case of a rape victim when she is not able to prove rape the Islamic law system is presuming her guilt? Should not law start with a clean slate in prosecuting her? ``

Yes. That was the argument in my several posts below. Let me state this point blank one more time: Under Islamic law (not Pakistani Law) a woman cannot be prosecuted if she fails to prove her case of rape. Period. Pakistani law has loopholes in it which permits women to be prosecuted in this case. We want to end this injustice thru a legislative process.

``Also you are referring to field of law. Which field of law? Islamic or non-Islamic? Problem with Islam is this bastardized approach. Either you adopt western law standards or you don`t.``

Exactly. That is exactly what we the terrorists, I mean Islamists, err I mean Muslims want to do - just end the dichotomy in the existing system of justice. Get rid of English Common Law and establish Islmiv law in its entirety. No ifs, ands, or buts. This is our goal and whenever people of Pakistan will attain their freedom and soveriegnity they will establish the law that is comensurate with their system of values- the law that codifies their values.

Babu

I think you are too angry for some reason to communicate in a coherent and intelligent manner. Please compose yourself. Yelling does not gurantee that you will be heard as well.

Re: # 21 Jay

The people who start worshiping toilets have no right to criticize others. Enjoy:


http://www.naseeb.com/naseebvibes/prose-detail.php?aid=3608&pg=1&PHPSESSID=3c158bd794bf6ae4e7c482fce07e433d

[But let me explain a bit more. It is the very nature of the subject and fieled of law and jurisprudence that the notions of ``being right`` and ``being wrong`` are immaterial. ]

True but in law being right beyond reasonable doubt is insisted upon when proving guilt not the other way. A western jurist will thwart any presumption of guilt during trial process.

Don`t you think that in case of a rape victim when she is not able to prove rape the Islamic law system is presuming her guilt? Should not law start with a clean slate in prosecuting her?

Also you are referring to field of law. Which field of law? Islamic or non-Islamic? Problem with Islam is this bastardized approach. Either you adopt western law standards or you don`t. But what Islamists do is take from west what they like. And then they join it with what they like in Islamic law system. And often they take worst things from both sources.

Urstruly #5

`` 1. People of the book and that includes Jews, Christians, Zorthostorians, and Hindus (the matter with Hindus is too controversial though). In this case these people are given autonomy to formulate their own laws based on their own values as they come from their books. ``

Most Arabs do not consider anyone other than Jews or Chrisitians to be people of the book.
If you treat Hindus as people of the book why not Buddhists, Shintoists and Confucianists.
Is it another of these silly Arab centric concepts ?

`` 2. Non-Muslims, who are not of category#1, such as pagans, animists etc.. They are governed by the law that the Islamic government deems fit for them and it must be commensurate with the societal norms of the Muslim society. ``

It looks like the only way Pagans or Animists can retain their culture is to wipe out Judeo-Christian religions from this planet.

`` Whether belonging to Category # 1 or #2 these people are exempt from any Islamic law such as law of Hudood or Islamic law of inheritence or non-interest based business etc. However, this exemption ends when they are dealing with a Muslim counterpart. In that case, the Islamic law supercedes any other. That is the reason when a non-Muslim man rapes a Muslim woman, the minimum punishment meted out to the rapist is the capital punishment. ``

Any legal system that classifies people into Muslim or non-Muslim (or for that matter in any arbitrary manner) will never serve justice in a equitable manner.

I enjoyed all this koranic jimnastics. It would have been simpler if urstruly were to say that in islamic society woman is an asset that the winner takes, not different from the gold of somanath temples. Well let us ask gaznavi about it. In fact the poligamy and honour killings stem from this notion.

hamidm

oh how you got me; i am devistated

urstruly,

......... thanks for your explanation, however i have a little difficulty in swallowing that married female prisoners would divorce their husbands to marry their tormentors willingly ........ you are making excuses for the inexcusable when you say : `` since consent is an integral part of any Nikah contract I assume that it had to be consentual``............ it is hard to believe that a POW woman`s (or man`s) consent means much .............. after all, nobody believes that the prisoners at abu gharaib gave their consent to pose in the nude !!!

.......... in any case, let`s not air all this dirty laundry in public - it is tough enough being a muslim as it is ............

hamidm

Under Islamic law, the only permissible avenue to have sex with another gender is after Nikah regardless of whether one party is a POW, or a slave or free. Those among women who are captured in war as POW or are enslaved(if you will) and are single can become wives of their captors after Nikah is performed in an open ceremony. There is difference of opinion about those women who are married while they are captured. According to Maliki school of thought, as they are captured their former marriage becomes annuled automatically if their captor wants to bring her in his Nikah, whereas Hanfi school argues that married women cannot be brought under Nikah. I plead ignorance in either case whether the consent of woman is sought or not. But since consent is an integral part of any Nikah contract I assume that it had to be consentual. These laws were in effect in midieval times and rendered ineffective/impractical since then. Becuase they served the pupose of those times and the societal norms of those times. With the onset of Ottoman Caliphate in post midieval times these practices were rendered ineffective and POWs were treated more on the basis of laws of reciprocity with contending nations. Even in Hindustan, where Muslim rule almost started at the same time as that of Ottomans, there is no evidence of such practice - though some caliphs had harems of hundereds of women at a time. Some Mughal kings and sultans married local Hindu women as their queens but not concubines. But not of course every ruler was a by the book islamist - we are only talking about law here.

Einstein

And let me add more insult to the injury.

More than half of the women that are rotting in Pakistani jails under hadud laws are those who has been accused by their husbands of adultery. The current loophole in the CrPC and lack of legislation allows police to interfere in such cases and arrest women unless they are willing to pay thru one way or the other.

Zia enacted the so called ``Islamic Laws`` for absolute reasons of expedience only. And that is because his foreign masters told him to do so. As everyone knows it should be viewed in the perspective of ``Afghan Jihad`` that good General was fighting for his masters. To his peoplehe had to prove that he was man of faith, and leader of Muslims, so that he could get more recruits for his masters. He took half-assed, half-hearted measures to Islamize the country based on the recommendations of his illiterate, badmash, and corrupt military legal advisors as they saw fit. None of these a/holes ever saw the face of a madrassa and none was educated in Islamic jurisprudence.

The actual Islamic Law, as it has been in practice for centuries, however, stipulates that when a spouse accuses other of adultery, the case is non-cognizable, which means that police cannot interfere in the matter. The matter directly goes to the civil court. The judge in the civil court first tries to reconcile the estranged couple by appointing arbiters from each family but when the matter cannot be resolved then he initiates the process of Lia`an. In Lia`an, the judge first asks accuser to decalre under oath that he is telling the truth about his or her spouse`s infidelity and if he is telling a lie then may Allah`s curse be upon him/her. The accuser has to take this oath verbally three times on Qura`n. Then judge repeats the same procedure with accused where he or she declares under oath that his accuser is telling a lie and if not then may Allah`s curse be upon him/her. After this oath, the judge declares the marriage annuled.

It is just as simple as that but innocent human beings are suffering because our rulers have disenfranchised us. The main blame goes to the so-called religious parties who remain silent at these attrocities because it is politically more pragmatic. It is these fat bellied a/holes, and impotence of these satans in beards who have caused so much pain to us. It is their complacency, and hunger for power that should be blamed.

urstruly,

serious question: it is my understanding that under islamic law non-muslim women taken prisoner in a war can be taken as concubines ............ now what if the woman resists - is this considered rape ?.............. or, if the sex is consensual then is it not adultery (zina) ?

Einstien

``In other words if rape victim fails to prove because of ``benefit of doubt`` it is not assumed that although she may be right but not able to prove. There are two aspects: (1) being right and (2) being able to prove it. Why assume that not being able to prove necessarily means being not right. ``

Yes, unfortunately that case is true in existing Pakistani legal system. And that is the core of the problems that people are having with Hadud laws.

But let me explain a bit more. It is the very nature of the subject and fieled of law and jurisprudence that the notions of ``being right`` and ``being wrong`` are immaterial. What really counts in law is ``proven right`` or proven wrong`` according to the standards set up thru the jurisprudence. Hence, no matter how victimized one would be he has to ``prove`` his or her case.

The loophole that exists in the Pakistani law is exploited fully by police, political entities, and courts. There are thousands of women who filed a complaint for a rape and they are in jail because they failed to prove their case. This loophole is sometimes used to extort money, sexual favors, and revenge. And in every one of such cases that gets media attention judges reject the police case because precedent has been set by higher courts but since CrPC still allows that loophole the police and lower courts still persecute women and they are incarcerated until the appeal process takes them to higher courts where there is more visibility.

This injustice can be removed in just one session of the legislature but our rulers are scared of their foreign masters and their own weaknesses but they do not fear God. No one wants to risk being seen ``reforming`` Hadud laws, because in the eyes of their foreign masters and patrons they will be immediately labelled as ``fundamentalists`` and ``Islamists`` and hence ``terrorists``. They would rather let ordinary citizens of Pakistan suffer and rot. Neither these so called political leadreship have power to dare repeal Hadud laws because people of Pakistan will drown them in Arabian Sea. People do not want to stand up for sometheing that they do not have faith in. There is not a single state institution left in Paksitan that commands the respect and faith of people. We are an absolutely disenfranchized and dispossessed people from whom their whole country has been stolen.