This could very well fit in the Shor Sharaba section, since its about a tv show, but the cultural aspect of it was what compelled me to write about it. Well, for those of u living in the US, if anyone got a chance to see the hit show ‘The Practice’, probably got a chance to see something that I personally am having a hard time deciphering. Well, ‘the practice’ is a series about a law firm, that seemingly employs logic, morality and good faith in the way they handle their cases. Todays episode carried a case about a Pakistani guy, who had gotten married to an American white woman. After finding out that she had cheated on him, he planned a trip to Pakistan for him and his wife, and then sent his wife on the trip alone. His wife is subsequently burnt to death in Pakistan by the mans brother. The brother is charged with death in Pakistan, and the womans husband, under Islamic law, grants his brother a pardon. The American courts charge the husband as an accessory to murder and get him convicted since they cant charge the brother.
There was a lot of stereotypical portrayal displayed by the prosecution in the case, where they put the husband on the stand, and basically ridiculed everything from Islam to Pakistan and Pakistani tribes and men, and their laws. The prosecutor made it out to be a common occurence in Pakistan, under tribal laws, and charged that the husband had intentionally done it this way, so as to get a clean bill for both himself and his brother. However, the defence team, which is always depicted as the moral side in this series, was shown as equally active in defending the mans role, making a stiff point of how this was an isolated incident, and not something thats practiced in Islam, or in Pakistan on a regular basis. As a matter of fact, the last scene revolved around the defence lawyer lambasting the judge for allowing the prosecutor to deliver such a biased and prejudiced closing, and for allowing the verdict to stand, which held the husband as the guilty party.
They did try to ‘preserve’ the sanctity of religion by not talking about Islam that openly, which I believe was done in order to avoid backlash from the Muslim population in the US, and they also tried to portray this as an ancient outdated custom which was not condoned by Islamic or Pakistani laws. But a point was made to highlight the fact that tribal or family laws, at times overtake the validity of national laws in Pakistan. However, the ending also clearly showed a clearly biased judge who made it a point to mention that a person who allowed his wife to be burnt alive, ‘could not be a good man’. It was a topsy turvy show, in which, i think the writers were trying their level best to portray Pakistan and Islam negatively, while at the same time doing damage control by having the defence lawyers shoot a few harsh rebuttals at the prosecution and the judge.
I did watch the show tonight. I never miss it, it's the only show on TV that I watch on regular basis.
I understand where you are coming from and on couple of points, I felt the same way. But the reasons I felt about were different than yours. I do not agree with your statement
[quote]
i think the writers were trying their level best to portray Pakistan and Islam negatively, while at the same time doing damage control by having the defence lawyers shoot a few harsh rebuttals at the prosecution and the judge
[/quote]
, although I think it may have negative effect on average American viewer.
In my opinion, it's easier to negatively stereotype a culture if you watch a TV portrayl because it's shocking to know about such a 'practice', than to take into any account of what the defense attorney rightfully described. The shocking factor overshadows the rationality and hence overall it leaves bad connotations. And that's why I particularly didn't like that part of the show today.
As far as the clearly biased judge is concerned, that's exactly how it is: It shows the judge is biased, hence wrongful. I'm saying this because I don't remember her using the words 'allowed'. I think the words were more towards the circumstantial nature of the case rather than her declaring the Pakistani guy as part of a conspiracy.
I'm not much familiar with Pakistani law, so the 'kasas' thing they mentioned, I didn't know if it is actually part of Pakistani law. (i.e. for example, if somebody kills somebody's wife and if the husband 'pardons' muderer's life then muderer is not executed and released), so can't say anything about that. But if it is so, then it is in fact a debatable issue.
As far as honor killings are concerned, they do happen in Pakistan, there is no denying it. It's all over the world press for quite some time now. And if they used it as the basis to produce a show, I don't see anything wrong with that. I do think the case is not over yet and next week they are going to appeal against the jury decision. If they don't then it will definitely make the show less credible and reputable in my opinion.
The worst incident of Honor killing that I've come across is of two brothers aged 5 and 11, killing their sisters of ages 16 and 18 in some village of Punjab. The reason? Well, the "Chaudhrys" of the village were constantly harrasing the girls and since the police was of no help, the young brothers simply killed their sisters upon the insistance of their father.
Imagine! A 5 year old killing his own sister in the name of honor.
Who's responsible here?
Who says nothing is impossible? I've been doing nothing all my life!
I usually don’t watch the Practice (past my “TV Time”, but not past my reading time), but this one I watched, as I read about it and I was curious to see it.
Akif and Rom both make valid points. I was a little disturbed by the stereotypical portrayal of a culture (it could easily have been Jordan or Egypt), and it was a little upsetting to see how the prosecution went a little too overboard in implicating a man purely based on his affiliation with his culture. At times, I felt as thought the entire culture was on trial. Even if the man was guilty of “planing” and being “accomplice” in this horrific killing, under the American Law, the evidence against the accused was far beyond the ‘reasonable” doubt. I was glad to see that the Judge was portrayed in the end as biased and a closet racist.
Rom, the system of Kasas is very much alive in parts of Pakistan. In the rural areas, people don’t bother to take their disputes (killings, etc.) to the justice system and often cases are settled by time honored methods, kasas being one of them. In my village, e.g., there are generations' old disputes that get settled by killings. As far as I know, the opposing Clan has a few up on ours, and it is a matter of time when they smell the Barood. Over 50 killings in about 20 years in a small village of about 2000 people, and not a single case is brought to the courts.
Honory Killing, it is good or bad? I know it is bad in most cases but sometime specially in our society it's the only way to get result. Like I remember, When I was little and living in Azizabad Karachi, we had one of those small Kucha Hotel owned by a Balooch or one of those mix races of either Balooch and Sindhi or Pathans and Balooch. The guys had a Son and had another son born, either somebody told him or he had his own doubts that the baby is not his. One day he went home and Killed the baby.... (U Don't wanna know how). He constantly use to abuse his other Son too. Well, one day his older son thought that enough is enough, so he woke up one night and killed him by cutting his throat.That was the only way for him to either get rid of him and get the justice, Yeah it was a murder but may be the only way for him to protect himself from his own father.
Ahamadi yara, do you know if kasas is allowed according to Pakistani law/constitution? There is a lot of stuff that is practiced that may not be permitted according to the govering law. But the show specifically mentioned/associated kasas with Pakistani law.
Rom.. Pakistani Law is copied after the English common Law. There is this basic provision that in matter of civil disputes or killings, if the victim party does not bring forth the case against the accused in the court, the Legal System can not prosecute the culprits. It is true that the Tribal Codes are not “legally” accepted in the Pakistani Justice System, but Pakistan has turned a blind eye (for various reasons) towards such practices as Kasas. The law of Kasas and Diyat (re: physical injury, manslaughter and murder) allows the victim's family to decide whether they report it or prosecute the offender (again, as I mentioned earlier, a practice copied from the British Common Law). In effect it condones the family forgiving the honor killer and signals that men murdering their wives will not be punished in the same manner as in the murder of other people.
Although, when you ask “does Pakistani Law allow such a thing to happen?” The answer is “We don’t know”. Police have upheld this custom both by apprehending condemned women instead of protecting them, and by accepting bribes either to turn them over to their families or the tribe, or not to register complaints against perpetrators. There were 595 killings in Punjab in 1999, that were carried out by relatives and 286 were reportedly for reasons of honor. An overwhelming majority of the culprits roam free. So, I don’t know if we should pint fingers to the Pakistani Legal System, or towards Our Culture. Obviously, one or the other is the Culprit.
Roman...actually the referral in the show was made to tribal laws, not Pakistani law. And the defendant made it a point to mention it was well. And even though the prosecutor was washing it all under the carpet by 'suggesting' in not so many words that this was something that was 'authorized' by Pakistani law, she too mentioned it in her closing by referring to it as ancient tribal laws. I dont think the law of Qisas is active under the Pakistani Penal system. And i really dont think it is practiced in the tribal areas under a 'qisas' header. As you know tribes in Pakistan usually make their own laws, and these laws are always meant to tip the balance in favor of men. This case, on the face of it, didnt make much sense to me, because i dont know if this was a practical scenario that they presented. If this were to be taken as a following of the Islamic rule of Qisas, then first of all, they would need 2 witnesses who would testify that the woman did indeed commit adultery. And there was no witness in Pakistan to speak of. The husband was in the US, so the brother of the man basically committed a cold blooded murder with no proof of the womans infidelity other than his brothers word, which should have been produced in a court or a jirga. None of that happened. And furthermore, if someone can correct me if I am wrong, a husband perhaps does not have the authority, or at least the sole authority, to forgive the blood of his wife in exchange for money. The parents of the girl, I believe, supercede a husband in such a case. Only blood relatives can forgive. So it wasnt a portrayal of Islamic law by any means either.
Basically Im trying to get to the point that this mode of vigilante justice is practiced in Pakistani villages, but Id think twice before calling it Qisas. Qisas includes a long list of guidelines and requirements. Its not as simple as a brother sitting in the USA saying, "mein ney maaf kiya".