Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
Rape case doesn’t require four witness as a matter of fact most Ulemas agree on this Rape case is checked through other circumstances DNA can be used or if it is caught on camera it is the way used in Saudi Arabia
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
Hey Im only responding to posts as they come. Please read through my reply to see whether this is a general thread on the feasibility of shariah laws, or whether this is a thread raising questions on the leadings Islamist party's interpretation of the hudood laws (He explicitly rejects options other than 4 witnesses) and opposing amendments to the bill on that basis.
All shardmanny's post does, with relevance to this particular thread, is offer an Islamic jurist's reasons for why the Molvi's understanding of the rape laws were off the mark. Great! Frequently the point of amendments to laws is to clarify doubt. Its reasonable to think that if the head of the biggest Islamist party is so off-base about what a raped woman's options are, and has been part of the leadership that agitated strongly against amendments to laws concerning it, then explicit clarifications to the law reinforcing the fact that raped women have more options than 4 witnesses should be welcomed by one and all.
With regard to the two cases, yes they were released on appeal, but the fact that lower courts convicted them and both cases became international controversies and their subsequent appeals had the whiff of caving to public pressure suggests that a) lower courts had an insufficient understanding of the law which should make explicit amendments welcome and b) shariat laws are hard for not just leaders of Islamist parties to understand, but jurists too.
Finally your point about Islamist being like the N word is hilarious. Islamist is a political designation, not a racial epithet. Otherwise you could apply your logic to pretty much any word. I can call myself Muslim but dont call me Muslim! I can call myself Pakistani but dont call me Pakistani!
ravage sahab!
Did yo even read the full answer posted above by shardmanny?
Just checking. :)
Bhai mere, there is no substantial reason to bash at least the part where zina is considered a crime by islam (as some people do) and that is also a part of other religions. (Punishment and process may vary in different religions).
Secondly, you have put all the weight on these two cases...but have failed to read that in both cases by the apeal of Federal Shariat court the punishment were not given. Missed those parts? ;)
Third, Justice sahab is still more credible after reading that Federal shariat court actually helped these women.
Fourth, you have not said anything on the part where Justice sahab did say the injustice might have occurred but that is because of lack underdtanding the law and lack of correct implementations, not becasue there is somethng wrog with the law itself.
Fifth, you missed Charles kennedy admittance of no big problem quoted by the Justice sahab.
Sixth, you have not commented on the drama queen who interviwed Munawwar Hussain... It is hilarious to see him saying and defendiing he is a good muslim for no reason. He was NOT accused of being Kafir and no fatwa was sanctioned, he himself interpreted that by cutting Munawwar Hussain off. (These interviewers ARE trained to cut off others, if you observe them closely)
7th, I agree that women should be able to speak out without fear if rape is committed aganst them and beyond four witnesses **other means **have to be used, same thing Justice sahab mentioned and stated that it is provided to those who cannot bring four witnesses and yes majority will not be able to.
8th, Even in those societies where freedom is available to speak out, a lot of cases may not be reported because of the nature of the accusation and shame attached to it ...as well as the justice system is complex everywhere...no matter how simple that can be made. Wrong accusations are made and true crimes go unnoticed.
Nine, **Why not ALSO talk about the accountability for those women who wrongly accuse men for any secondary gain? What is/should be the process for that?
Another question I posed above was what if there is NO EVIDENCE at all, not even scientific? ** 10- There is no reason to make Rai Ka Pahaar (Making a big deal out of nothing).
It is the implementation of law that has to be addressed, not changing the law altogether.
(Read that long post again by Shardmanny. :))
Addendum: There are blacks who use N word themselves, does not change the fact that this word is and can be used as a hateful word. It also depends on who says in what context and same word can be taken as a hateful word. So one needs to be a bit careful.
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
Peace ravage
Please read the post that shardmanny has posted with careful regard ... Chief Justice Mufti Taqi Usmani denied the issue of rape victims being sentenced not out of denial of the phenomenon that merely it is not likely to happen ... but it was backed up with him mentioning other judges names, and the American who came to observe and he said it to defend the original hudood ordinance that if followed correctly it would disallow such cases to be entertained let alone go all the way to sentencing ... Rather he also clarified one avenue in which some cases can lead to women who (claim to be rape victims) are later through the procedings found themselves to have comitted zina (to a level without doubt) willingly were sentenced with the hudd punishment. He also blames the media for representing such cases as "rape-victim gets punished for being unable to provide 4 witnesses". According to the laws rape victims are not arrested - however the police who are "thick" in general arrest rape victims as well. The new bill has disallowed FIRs to be raised in an attempt to prevent rape victims being arrested, but it has instead created complexity to file a rape case. Mufti Taqi Usmani said that all they needed to do was create another law that prohibits police from arresting people who are accusing of rape and that rape cases can only be dealt with by police of a high rank.
I think the response is reasonable and to be honest I was amongst the first people to point the finger at the hudood ordinance because of that issue, but it seems I was wrong about it and so are the media at large and you have to admit it and humble yourself about this issue as well ... If you are making a political point so be it ... but at least accept clarification when it comes your way.
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
Hey Psyah,
I clearly do not know about the issue as much as Mufti sahab, nor do I know about the issue as much as the National Commision Of Status Of Women, both of whom are saying opposite things. Mufti sahab says he has never come across any woman who was awarded punishment for rape. That at best indicates that his experience is limited, at worst suggests he is lying, given the two well known examples of women who were awarded punishment, imprisoned, then subsequently released on appeal by higher courts. The issue is certainly not just one of policing. The sentences on these women were passed by courts lets bear in mind, so the rank of the police is irrelevant.
Reasonable people can disagree on what aspects of the law need be changed. However I have no basis to assume that the government would lie about its own prisons. The media canard is irrelevant, the statistics come from the government. This lumping together of everything that runs counter to our opinions as 'media' and 'propaganda' strikes me as an easy out.
Lets be clear, Im not arguing against what was posted, except for specific points that came up ('i've never seen a raped woman get awarded punishment'). The only takeaway for me from that post, as far as the law goes is, that according to Mufti sahab forensic evidence can be used without even needing a single witness. If you look at the video quoted, that was what the question put to Munawar Hussain, and that was what Ameer sahab explicitly rejected. Given that both lower courts and the country's largest Islamist parties appear confused on this point, its clear that an explicit amendment addressing this point was not redundant. With regards to other aspects of the law that can backfire, I wholly agree, any law that makes it difficult to report rape should be amended. That is the advantage of laws when voted democratically.. they are amendable without controversy, and without people claiming, as Ameer sahab did in that clip, that to criticize the law is tantamount to heresy.
We can all agree that
a) No raped woman should ever be punished.
b) A raped woman who was raped alone, as most rapes occur, should have avenues for seeking justice instead of keeping her crime to herself.
c) If there are any impediments to reporting rape, they can always be addressed and removed.
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
Peace ravage
It's all good what you say ... I'm not arguing ... All I'm saying is that the law was always adequate - if there was anything amiss it was down to the wrong call of certain individuals in those situations now that may mean the judge, the ability of the barristers, the technicalities in the court (the people need better training) ... the point being we should not change a law that does not need changing - rather we should create other laws to fill the gaps that experience has shown us to be exploited by people in actual case history. In the article Mufti Saahib has also admitted one weakness that the original huddood ordinance had and said the new bill rectifies that aspect but on the whole the new bill creates more potential problems.
Now what was said first or after and whether the people are telling the truth or not or merely reiterating a version of what they think to be true ... perhaps we need to run a court case to decide which is the case? Is it to create understanding "yes" is it to bash existing religious clergy "no" - we need to approach the subject without bias and without political slant to do it justice.
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
At best all you’re saying is that changes to the law were unnecessary. On balance, a reinforcing of principles and rules atleast some of which Usmani sahab agrees with isnt bad at all, particularly wrt evidential standards for rape. After all parliament passes resolutions on kashmir etc every day. Claims of complications have a similar answer to what you’re saying.. advocate that we fix em, no argument.
With regards to whether the law was bad in the first place, Im in no position to state whether Usmani sahab is correct when he says that raped women were never punished or whether the 18 member panel of justices and social policy figures is correct when they say that there is a serious problem of raped women suffering at the hands of authorities. This report is much more exhaustive and wideranging than the article Shardmanny posted, and I have no expertise of proving either right or wrong:
http://www.ncsw.gov.pk/apanel/upload_file/part-1.pdf
http://www.ncsw.gov.pk/apanel/upload_file/part-2.pdf
http://www.ncsw.gov.pk/apanel/upload_file/part-3.pdf
http://www.ncsw.gov.pk/apanel/upload_file/part-4.pdf
http://www.ncsw.gov.pk/apanel/upload_file/part-5.pdf
http://www.ncsw.gov.pk/apanel/upload_file/part-6.pdf
Quoting a section:
According to these 18 experts [not media propaganda], there was enough lacking in the law itself, and not just the enforcement mechanisms [which really are part of the law..], to justify amendments to it. So from this perspective, amendments to the law itself were justified. Wrt evidential standards for rape, one side says justified, other side says wasted paper at worst. Returning to the topic at hand, both sides, Usmani sahab and this government committee would agree that the Islamist’s interpretation of the law is completely incorrect, and therefore their opposition to the amendments was predicated on a complete misunderstanding of the issues, of the law itself.
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
Peace ravage
I think there are two issues here as you have mentioned ... And to be clearer about those issues is vital ...
1) Interpretation of Law
2) The importance of doing something to rectify any injustices that are prevalent
It must be noted that from the Islamic angle literal changes need to be avoided as much as possible, but methods to reinforce the correct Islamic interpretations need to be in place.
The injustice of rape victim treatment and the injustice of poor conclusions of trials is more of a society issue than a law based one. On the other hand to reduce the threat of Islamic justice by altering penalties will increase the problem itself ... the law primarily needs to behave as a deterent to the crime in the first instance and then dish out the penalties for justice in the second should that be necessary ...
So when myopically the changes were proposed that FIRs could not be raised for rape cases in order to deal with the fact that rape victims found themselves in custody they ended up creating a premise for the raped person to suffer the complexity of reporting the crime.
Everyone has motive and often the groups that are set out to achieve a favourable end for their own perspective do not think about the balance and possible injustices their ends may have on the other side. Dealing with this issue from an Islamic basis is the correct basis because it looks at every issue without bias ...
There is a woman infamous with the police in the village from where my wife has relatives ... every other week she is at the police with a claim of rape against her from different men ... and at first they treated her seriously and after a while they just ignore her ... they take a few statements and that is it. They don't arrest her but on the flip side they don't take her seriously either ... now this is just one story ... people will look at this scenario with two minds - oh all those different men - she must be a slut, or oh those men must be in league together to take advantage of the poor woman and the police are complicit ...
Who is correct?
We can't say unless there is a trial and that trial will determine who is telling the truth, who is the liar, who is the real victim and who is the criminal (i.e. rapist or false accuser) ...
The point being we can't take the position "A rape-victim ...." etc ... because that statement presupposes that the person IS a rape victim ... Can we really say that in our newspaper aticles before a court has shown that to be true? In the west we tend to give the accuser the benefit of the doubt - because physical harm is seen as more severe than harm to reputation, (however you will find the reverse is probably more damaging) ... the issue of wrongly defaming people is considered with more severity in the East than in the West and likewise is considered with due regard in Islam as well ... the case of blaming the media is just this - journalism techniques are not out to find the truth, but they take a side and they spin it in that perspective ...
Are rapes happening? Yes ... is it because the law protects the rapist? I don't think so ... Is it because society is poisoned - that is the more appropriate question ... let's deal with the issue and prevent these rapes rather than focussing on how to deal with symptoms. The law being a deterent will only work if the system that upholds the law is out to get justice and desires it ...
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
You're broadening the discussion to aspects of the law I have little knowledge about i.e. Usmani sahab's concerns with respect to FIRs etc. With that disclaimer, and with the reminder that issues where raped women are having difficulties (though I dont quite understand why) can always be addressed, I'll take a crack at it.
[quote]
The injustice of rape victim treatment and the injustice of poor conclusions of trials is more of a society issue than a law based one. On the other hand to reduce the threat of Islamic justice by altering penalties will increase the problem itself ... the law primarily needs to behave as a deterent to the crime in the first instance and then dish out the penalties for justice in the second should that be necessary ...
[/quote]
You're begging the question here by saying off the bat the the injustice is a society issue than a law based one. That is far from clear to me, given this report saying that these laws were hastily put together under a dictator wishing to appear Islamic, and have resulted in hundreds of women who suffered rape receiving further prison time. While its true that exploitation of lacunae of law is done by dastardly people, and to that extent it is a social problem, even well crafted laws are constantly being updated to minimize abuse.
[quote]
So when myopically the changes were proposed that FIRs could not be raised for rape cases in order to deal with the fact that rape victims found themselves in custody they ended up creating a premise for the raped person to suffer the complexity of reporting the crime.
[/quote]
Your phrasing here is a bit confusing What do you mean that FIRs could not be raised for 'rape' cases. Its obvious thats how it should be, rape victims or people acting on their behalf, with their consent, should be the ones to raise rape cases assuming its not happening at the time. Who is this third party you speak of raising the issue.
If its a case of someone is hostage to her situation and is unable to freely report a crime occurring against her, a simple strategy is for police and other social institutions to get involved, to the extent of freeing her from constraints that prevent her from reporting the rape.
[quote]
We can't say unless there is a trial and that trial will determine who is telling the truth, who is the liar, who is the real victim and who is the criminal (i.e. rapist or false accuser) ...
[/quote]
We dont need to know anything if it doesnt involve us. Do we need to know who was robbed and who wasnt? If it doesnt involve you what is this meddling where everyone needs to know whether a woman was actually raped? This isnt a fact finding mission, the purpose ought to be to capture and punish the rapist. If a woman is making frivolous cases and those charges are not taken seriously after a while, I dont see a harm great enough for us to build laws around that. What I do see troubling is that you use this as an example for rape cases that get reported. It appears that the victim ought to be a suspect in the eyes of the law in your perspective, because you happen to know a promiscuous woman that means every raped woman should be in the same boat from the eyes of the law?
[quote]
The point being we can't take the position "A rape-victim ...." etc ... because that statement presupposes that the person IS a rape victim ... Can we really say that in our newspaper aticles before a court has shown that to be true?
[/quote]
Im not sure how newspaper articles come into it. When we say rape victims, what we mean is that the law ought to be designed to provide justice to women who have been raped. Just as robbery related crimes are designed with a view towards providing justice to those robbed, not with a view towards determining property ownership. Whether or not the claim is real is for further proceedings to decide. This does not mean we are granting that everyone who avails of that service has been raped.
[quote]
In the west we tend to give the accuser the benefit of the doubt - because physical harm is seen as more severe than harm to reputation, (however you will find the reverse is probably more damaging) ... the issue of wrongly defaming people is considered with more severity in the East than in the West and likewise is considered with due regard in Islam as well ... the case of blaming the media is just this - journalism techniques are not out to find the truth, but they take a side and they spin it in that perspective ...
[/quote]
The media is a red herring here. I never cited media sources for anything. The particular report, cited in the first post, is not a journalistic endeavour, nor is it even an NGO endeavour. It is a government body, comprised of several justices amongst other people, who have deliberated the law at length.
[quote]
Are rapes happening? Yes ... is it because the law protects the rapist?
[/quote]
That was never the claim. The original issue was whether in the absence of 4 witnesses the rape victim has any recourse. The amendment explicitly made that true. JI leader says that should not have happened, and in the absence of 4 witnesses the rape victim should stay quiet. Under that reading of the law, the law IS protecting the rapist, in denying the raped woman forensic and medical resources to prove her case and imposing unrealistic conditions to prove her rape. Mufti sahab that is not the case, great, I believe he believes that. I dont know which side is true; whether the law used to be as JI/NCSW see it or as Mufti sahab sees it, Im glad that particular point is now clarified via amendment and uncontroversial.
[quote]
I don't think so ... Is it because society is poisoned - that is the more appropriate question ... let's deal with the issue and prevent these rapes rather than focussing on how to deal with symptoms. The law being a deterent will only work if the system that upholds the law is out to get justice and desires it ..
[/quote]
I agree, theres a lot in our society that needs to change to prevent rapes from happening.
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
Are you a Muslim? I don't know so that's why I'm asking
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
ji
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
really 
do you have proof
did you have your circumcison?
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
Are you a Muslim? I don't know so that's why I'm asking
What made you ask this? Is it because he questioned a law which encourages rape in the name of religion?
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
JI chief is such an idiot. The anchor person is not questioning Quran, he is questioning the interpretation of Quran by JI chief. This is what I hate about our so called scholars. They present their self created tafseer of Quran as Quran itself.
Moron.
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
Hey Im only responding to posts as they come. Please read through my reply to see whether this is a general thread on the feasibility of shariah laws, or whether this is a thread raising questions on the leadings Islamist party's interpretation of the hudood laws (He explicitly rejects options other than 4 witnesses) and opposing amendments to the bill on that basis.
All shardmanny's post does, with relevance to this particular thread, is offer an Islamic jurist's reasons for why the Molvi's understanding of the rape laws were off the mark. Great! Frequently the point of amendments to laws is to clarify doubt. Its reasonable to think that if the head of the biggest Islamist party is so off-base about what a raped woman's options are, and has been part of the leadership that agitated strongly against amendments to laws concerning it, then explicit clarifications to the law reinforcing the fact that raped women have more options than 4 witnesses should be welcomed by one and all.
With regard to the two cases, yes they were released on appeal, but the fact that lower courts convicted them and both cases became international controversies and their subsequent appeals had the whiff of caving to public pressure suggests that a) lower courts had an insufficient understanding of the law which should make explicit amendments welcome and b) shariat laws are hard for not just leaders of Islamist parties to understand, but jurists too.
Finally your point about Islamist being like the N word is hilarious. Islamist is a political designation, not a racial epithet. Otherwise you could apply your logic to pretty much any word. I can call myself Muslim but dont call me Muslim! I can call myself Pakistani but dont call me Pakistani!
ravage:
Your problem is that you do not read posts and keep saying what you like.
There was no reason to contnue the arguments after Justice sahab was quoted.
As for Munawwar Hussain politically incorrect statement, you perhaps can realze that in practical world women would choose to stay quiet unfortunately even when they had full liberties to bring charges but no real evidence can be provided. There was no need for him to say that. I asked questions along the same way...and perhaps you deliberatly chose not to answer. :)
Lets face it, you seem to have very little basis to start a thread and have been avoiding the real discussion on the issue of the law and its implimention which could have been more fruitful discussion.
P.S. I have a feeling you just want to drag the thread. So last post by me. G'bye.
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
ji
k, allhamdulillah, jazak Allah khayran :) Just to confirm, what are you inquiring about: 1) rape law in Pakistan or 2) understanding of rape law by leader of jamati Islami or 3) rape law in the Shari'ah?
What made you ask this?
because I wanted to respond to him accordingly. And what's wrong asking a man whether he's Muslim or not when you don't know? You should also learn to give other people benefit of doubt before jumping to baseless conclusions.
Is it because he questioned a law which encourages rape in the name of religion?
how anyone can reach that conclusion from my question is beyond me!!
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
k, allhamdulillah, jazak Allah khayran :) Just to confirm, what are you inquiring about: 1) rape law in Pakistan or 2) understanding of rape law by leader of jamati Islami or 3) rape law in the Shari'ah?
because I wanted to respond to him accordingly. And what's wrong asking a man whether he's Muslim or not when you don't know? You should also learn to give other people benefit of doubt before jumping to baseless conclusions.
how anyone can reach that conclusion from my question is beyond me!!
Islam does not ask for four witness in case of Rape In the time of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW a rape took place and HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW never asked the women for the four witness as a matter of fact she told about the man on the orders of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW he was what we will call arrested and shabas gave him a little bit of beating and he accepted it and than he was killed Publicly
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
k, allhamdulillah, jazak Allah khayran :) Just to confirm, what are you inquiring about: 1) rape law in Pakistan or 2) understanding of rape law by leader of jamati Islami or 3) rape law in the Shari'ah?
The purpose of this thread seems to have evolved since it began. It initially was a question on 1,2, and 3, since I assumed JI leader's understanding of the law was correct, and his insistence that this understanding is what is mandated by the Quran meant I asked for comment on that. Since then its been pointed out that the JI leader was wrong about what the law actually requires to prove rape (4 witnesses not necessary) by Mufti sahab, although that is not a view taken by governmental body appointed to study the law. This makes Ameer sahab's opposition to the amendment farcical, along with his insistence that any view other than 4 witnesses to prove rape is tantamount to heresy (since that makes Mufti Usmani a heretic). While the controversial point of Ameer sahab saying what women should do if they are raped without witnesses under Islamic law is believed to be incorrect by all posters, this is now a discussion on different aspects of the original law and the amendment to it.
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
This is an astonishingly outrageous mental lapse by the JI chief. He has confused zina with zina-bil-jabar.
Not only has he shown a lack of understanding of Islam, he does not even properly understand the Hudood ordinance that he is supposedly defending.
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
This is my understanding of the issues surrounding the Hudood ordinance. (Most of the issues are now moot because of Women's Protection Bill)
There are 2 charges commonly levelled against the Hudood ordinance.
This is false. 4 witnesses are required only for Hadd punishment. Conviction can still take place by normal evidence. In this case Taazir punishment is applied which could be as much as 25yrs or death in case of gang rape.
This is also not true. Confusion arose because in one or two cases the **lower courts **had convicted women by considering their unsuccessful rape allegation or illegitimate pregnancy as evidence of unlawful sex. The Federal Shariat Court threw out all such convictions and **clearly established the precedent **that the woman does not have the burden of proving herself innocent[Safia Bibi vs. State, Zafran Bibi vs State].
The real impact of the Hudood ordinance was in the fact that it criminalized consensual sex, which was never a crime under before under the laws inherited from British times. As a result, anyone could go and lodge an FIR against someone alleging consensual sex. Women, being the more vulnerable section of the society, became victims of this in disproprtionally large numbers. Corruption at lower levels of police made the situation worse. Many women were simply locked up on fabricated charges and were too poor to make bail.
It was this situation that was rectified by the Women's Protection Bill. Consensual Sex is still techincally a crime. But, it has been made very difficult to make an accusation. The burden on the accuser is very high.
In my opinion, this is actually in tune with Islamic law where the 4 witness rule was created to prevent frivoluos accusations of consensual sex (as in the case of Hazrat Aisha when this verse was revealed).
Re: A raped woman who cannot produced four witnesses should keep quiet about it
good, balanced post krash :k:. presumably wrt point 2, since lower courts kept convicting raped women (Safia and Zafran are merely two well-known cases, 20 odd years apart, suggesting that precedence wasnt having enough of a clarifying effect.. ncsw says hundreds of women have exactly this problem) presumably there was room enough in the legalese for lower courts to pass convictions.