Should Hudood Ordinance be eradicated, changed or unchanged?
Give your opinion.
Re: Huddod Ordinance
It should be kept in place, but changed to be less vulnerable to abuse, particularly when dealing with women who were raped without witnesses being around, or who were raped but had witnesses refuse to testify.
The Hudood Ordnance has a number of success stories, such as the recent execution of 4 rapists who raped a Christian girl.
Re: Huddod Ordinance
should be changed exactly what Maddy said.
[added] but what about filing the false FIR?
Re: Huddod Ordinance
This ordinance is only good for societies living in a world of 600 years ago.
This ordinance is only good for uncouth tribals as they only understand the language of jootas (shoes).
This ordinance is only good for the corrupt among Arabs.
For everyone else including Pakistanis there is a "master card"
(based society where we don't need draconian laws.)
p.s. A shiny golden example of uncouth tribal society is ???? (hint hint!).
Re: Huddod Ordinance
This is the great accomplishment of our great enlightened and moderate dictator?
After 6+ years of speeches and propaganda, he can only grant possible bail to these poor people. Where will they get money for the bail? Completely useless in practice, though perhaps more surprising is the fact that bail was not allowed for these women before. What is the use of ruling by force when you can’t even change the unjust laws?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060707/ap_on_re_as/pakistan_women_prisoners_1
Pakistan allows bail for female adulterers 1 hour, 50 minutes ago
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - Pakistan’s president amended a controversial Islamic law Friday so that women facing charges for adultery and other minor crimes can be released on bail. The much-awaited amendment by President Gen. Pervez Musharraf to the Hadood Ordinance will initially affect 1,300 female prisoners, Pakistan’s minister for women’s affairs, Sumaira Malik, told journalists.
ADVERTISEMENT
“President Musharraf has taken a bold decision to protect the rights of women and save them from the misuse of Islamic laws,” she said.
Under the Hadood Ordinance — passed under the military dictatorship of late Gen. Mohammed Zia-ul-Haq in 1979 — women can be sentenced to death if found guilty of having sex outside of marriage. The ordinance did not allow for women to be released on bail.
Currently more than 6,000 women are in jails awaiting trial.
Re: Huddod Ordinance
I agree with antiobl...this law is such a shame for Pakistan. Treating women this way and not being able to apply for bail. wah bheei.
Re: Huddod Ordinance
We need to add DNA testing somewhere in hudood ordinance.
Re: Huddod Ordinance
Hadd punishment from the Hudood Ordinance is only given when witnesses are around. Tazir punishment in the Hudood Ordinance can be given with DNA evidence or victim testimony alone.
Re: Huddod Ordinance
There are existing laws permitting the use of DNA etc. Why to load 1000 years old approach with such modern concepts. Let us leave the hud alone. If Arabs want to use it, well let them. They deserve all that.
Re: Huddod Ordinance
Bail is a good step forward.
Re: Huddod Ordinance
^ Hud ordinance was not developed by King Fahd or Ibn Wahab or King Faisal, or shah of Jordan/Syria etc.
Re: Huddod Ordinance
Bail is a step forward yes, but a very tiny step.
Persecution of people in the name of Islam must stop (period).
Re: Huddod Ordinance
mAd_ScIeNtIsT:
[quote]
It should be kept in place, but changed to be less vulnerable to abuse, particularly when dealing with women who were raped without witnesses being around, or who were raped but had witnesses refuse to testify.
The Hudood Ordnance has a number of success stories, such as the recent execution of 4 rapists who raped a Christian girl.
[/quote]
Brother: Rapist found punishment because their case went to terrorist court, not Shariet court (probably because it was group rape, not ordinary rape and group rape now comes in terrorism, not rape). If their cases had gone to Shariaet court (as rape cases ends up there), they would have got trialed using ‘Hudud Ordinance’ and thus probably have been free looking for another victim (Shikar).
Here is what little I know and understand about Pakistan justice system. We have three different justice systems and different courts deal with them.
The first court is traditional (civil and criminal) court that Pakistan inherited and has them since British rule. Most of Pakistan cases go here though some goes to terrorist courts and Shariet courts, depending on the nature of the crime. Traditional courts and Pakistani laws need lot of revamping as they are not perfect, but there is hope and we should pray that something good get done there.
Since this case (four rapist that got executed) was not dealt there, I do not know what would have been the outcome but most likely if cases of these four rapists had gone to civil/criminal court, these four would have stayed free on bail most of the time while case would kept running until victim party gives it up. Then case would have ended without much punishment (I think that we need to modify laws in civil courts to make such crime punished. We also need to make court judgment time get much shorter). On occasions if court would have convicted these rapists, they would have got jail sentence for a period (could be few years).
Second court is Shariet court (that got started and working since ZIa-ul-Haq) and its purpose was to make mulla/maulvies happy (at the cost of poor and weak, especially women). Shariet court can punish using ‘Hudud ordinance’ taking two routes. Haad [needs four eyewitnesses or self-confession of culprit to impose Hadd. Nothing else is allowed, not even forensic evidence, circumstantial evidence of medical evidence] or Tazeer (where punishment is in the hand of the shariet court judge taking into account evidences).
If case of these four rapists had gone to Shariat court, most likely they would have been free and would have been looking for their next shikaar (victim). [Note: Witness has to be practicing male Muslim with good known reputation. Non-Muslims, non-practicing Muslims, Muslims with bad reputations and women do not count. Since Tazir judgment does not have to follow any rules, corruption and influences is ripe].
The worse thing about hudud ordinance is cases regarding ‘Zina-bil-jabar’ and ‘FIR of Zina’. ‘FIR of Zina under Hudud ordinance’ is accusation that Pakistanis use to intimidate, victimize, cower and humiliate women, be they wife, sister, daughter, mother, nieces or even those women that resist their violation by some male relatives or vedera. Most ‘Shariat court cases using hudud ordinance’ relates to these two things, ‘Zina-bil-jabar’ and ‘FIR of Zina’, anyhow. Next is probably ‘khula’ where again women are victimized and their rights curtailed by making khula difficult for them. There is little if any other uses are there for Hudud ordinance. It is to give freedom to rape or victimize women (using ‘FIR of Zina’ against them).
Because of Hudud ordinance thousands of innocent women victimized in Pakistan by corrupts registering ‘FIR of Zina’ against them and thus getting them sent to prison (because no proof is required to register FIR). Once FIR is registered, corrupt police arrest the woman and put her in prison until that woman is proven innocent in court (that could take literally many years, over 5 or even 10 years is not uncommon, depending if women have money to fight the case). Regardless, nothing happens to people that registered ‘FIR accusation of Zina’ unless the women after getting cleared decides to sue them (something never happens as after getting victimized in such way, most women are completely mentally broken or have no money anyhow to pursue cases against culprits (most culprits are their known relatives or influential people anyhow).
[What Quean says? All instance in Quran of requiring witnesses in case of accusation:
Surah An-nisa: Ayah 15
YUSUFALI: If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, Take the evidence of four (Reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way.
(This ayah is regarding guilty (not accused) with four witnesses available to testify that. Confine them only if witnesses testify (not before). Ayah does not say that if a person registers an ‘FIR of zina’ or accuse a woman, that woman should be imprisoned where she stays waiting for verification by four witnesses. I do not know where these retarded munafiqs got the law that is clearly against Quran (Quran cannot mention anything unjust anyhow as such law to confine someone only on basis of accusation is not justice).
Surah Noor: Ayah 4 *
**YUSUFALI:* And those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses (to support their allegations),- flog them with eighty stripes; and reject their evidence ever after: for such men are wicked transgressors;-
(Here it is clear that those who charge (register FIR against a women) should produce four witnesses and if they do not (or cannot), than give them plenty of beating (regardless there accusation is true or not, if one cannot bring four witnesses, one should not accuse). Again, this ayah does not say that if FIR is registered (or she is charged) than put her into prison and start punishing the woman. Where these crooks in the name of Islam brought such Shaitanic law?)
Surah Noor: Ayah 11-13
YUSUFALI: … Those who brought forward the lie are a body among yourselves: think it not to be an evil to you; On the contrary it is good for you: to every man among them (will come the punishment) of the sin that he earned, and to him who took on himself the lead among them, will be a penalty grievous. ………Why did not the believers - men and women - when ye heard of the affair,- put the best construction on it in their own minds and say, "This (charge) is an obvious lie"? ………. Why did they not bring four witnesses to prove it? When they have not brought the witnesses, such men, in the sight of Allah, (stand forth) themselves as liars!
The above Quranic ayah came when some people accused Aisha (RA). There is no evidence that Prophet (SAW) put Aisha (RA) into prison on accusation charges, so why Pakistani women are suffering in prison on accusation charges, just because of these retarded mullah/maulvies?]
As for rape, even a retarded should know that it is not same as ‘sex with consent’ but these shaitanic munafaqeeen made it same in ‘hudud ordinance’ and protest when government want to separate Zina (sex with consent) with Zina-bil-jabar (rape).
Under Hudud ordinance, ‘rape’ and ‘sex with consent’ is same and comes under having involved in ‘illegal sex’ by both party involved. Thus, no girl can dare to start a rape case because if she starts, due to her confession of sex (even though that is actually rape) she goes to prison. Now to come out of prison, she has to prove by bringing as witness four adult male practicing respectable Muslims that saw the rape with their own eyes (that mean, they saw literal rape, where entering was visual). Non-Muslims, Muslim of perceived bad character and women (whatever their number) does not count. Now, is that possible? Does rape has to happen in Mosque in front of four Salah Namazi else rape is not a rape but Zina? Does rape happens in open Bazar in front of plenty of witnesses? I leave it to rationality of anyone but then, those that brought Hudud ordinance are not sensible intelligent people but seem mentally retarded or lunatic.
Thus, this ordinance encourages rape in Pakistan and thousands of innocent girls must have got raped unreported because, under this ordinance rapist stay free and raped girl goes to prison and should get executed, though taking help of Tazeer, most judge just let them stay in jail without ordering their execution. Note, even if a raped girl does not register the case, she can still get imprisoned (or executed) because of having illegal sex if she gets pregnant as pregnancy would be taken as proof of having illegal sex.
**Third court is terrorist court (that got started by Nawaz Shareef during his last period) and the purpose was to bring quick justice (or punishment) to at least those that were involved in terrorism or violence crimes. **Court can award death punishment for certain crimes. These four rapist went under the guillotine (and rightly too) courtesy to terrorist court
[Regardless, corruption is ripe amongst Pakistan police and courts and most that have influence or money to hire good lawyers or pay up (rushwat) go free but poor, weak (like women) and un-influential stay imprisoned for years. That need changes and InshAllah I hope that with time it would. Unfortunately, in such corruption-infected country, such victimizing laws like ‘hudud ordinance’ increases misery of poor, weak and un-influential].
*I think that we should think of such laws, putting ourselves in the shoe of those innocents that this law victimizes. *
I think that Pakistan should have one type of court (that is traditional court) but laws should get modified, corruption should get curtailed (with heavy punishment to those who get involved) and judgment should come quick with maximum time period no more then a year for most complicated cases.
Re: Huddod Ordinance
Persecution of people in the name of Islam must stop (period).
It is true, I'd like to see it removed. But this isnt possible. But if bail can be granted, what now is the problem. There's no punishment as such is there unless someone is found guilty of adultery?
Re: Huddod Ordinance
^^
Allowing bail is not answer by itself but it would help. No one should be imprisoned on accused charges or registering of FIR. Law should treat a person innocent until proven guilty (though law could ask any question or investigates on accusation or FIR). Onus of proof should be on those who accused and not on those that are accused. All forensic evidence, DNA testing, lie detectors, medical evidence, circumstantial evidence even hypnotism should be used to get to the truth (but not any physical torture).
Re: Huddod Ordinance
Allowing bail is not answer by itself but it would help. No one should be imprisoned on accused charges or registering of FIR. Law should treat a person innocent until proven guilty (though law could ask any question or investigates on accusation or FIR). Onus of proof should be on those who accused and not on those that are accused. All forensic evidence, DNA testing, lie detectors, medical evidence, circumstantial evidence even hypnotism should be used to get to the truth (but not any physical torture).
True, but by confessing to rape, the woman admits to sexual intercourse. If rape cannot be proved, the adultery case has to be investigated. The accused of a rape or adultery trial has to be held in case they run away. Now that bail is allowed, they wont be held. So there's no punishing of the victim as such (except perhaps some bail money, which if innocent should be paid back).
Re: Huddod Ordinance
^^
Well that is the problem what you wrote:
[quote]
If rape cannot be proved, the adultery case has to be investigated. The accused of a rape or adultery trial has to be held in case they run away.
[/quote]
If rape is not proved, then why investigation has to start for adultery case? When a girl declares rape or declares that the result of any pregnancy was rape, then why adultery case has to start?
If a woman accuses anyone of rape then obviously what investigation can prove that it was not rape? Does she need to provide witnesses? Do you think that a rapist would rape in front of four adults male witnesses? Obviously not and it is unfair to ask girl that has gone through rape to produce witnesses of her accusation as condition of giving her justice. The only thing court can do is investigation (medical tests and other forensic evidence should be collected and should be used to prove the rape). Even here, it is not necessary that medical or other forensic evidence would necessary confirm rapist or even that rape happened. If rape evidences cannot be found then court cannot do anything, still it would be unfair to punish the girl for initiating the case.
It is true that some unethical females may exploit the situation by accusing someone of rape and this type of loopholes would be there in all system of justice (Though I doubt if this would be a norm rather it would be rare exception). Still, that exploitation is not as problematic or abusive as putting a girl into prison in rape case or discourages rape reporting, making rape un-punishable crime (as it is present with Hudud ordinance).
A girl plea (or words) in rape case should be acceptable similar to a married women (wife) words regarding father of children. How many men start suspecting their wife when a child is born, considering the child to be not theirs? All fathers take the word of a woman (his wife) in case of fatherhood of child, respecting the word of the women. I think that women words should be similarly respected in rape cases as law and society respect her claim regarding father of the child. Though accused rapists should get punishment only when medical, forensic and other evidences confirm rape and pinpoints rapist.
Re: Huddod Ordinance
It needs to be eradicated completely. New laws need to be created that are in accordance with the Quran and Sunnah.
Re: Huddod Ordinance
If rape is not proved, then why investigation has to start for adultery case? When a girl declares rape or declares that the result of any pregnancy was rape, then why adultery case has to start?
When the rape case comes to court, the woman has to admit she had sexual intercourse with the man, in order for him to have raped her..Agreed? So if she had intercourse, she must have been either raped, or she must have committed adultery..Agreed? Both rape and adultery are illegal in Pakistan. So the woman has a right to prosecute the man, but the man or even the woman's husband does also have the right to prosecute the woman if she cannot prove she was raped. That is because adultery is a criminal offence in Pakistan (and many other countries).
[QUOTE]
If a woman accuses anyone of rape then obviously what investigation can prove that it was not rape? Does she need to provide witnesses? Do you think that a rapist would rape in front of four adults male witnesses? Obviously not and it is unfair to ask girl that has gone through rape to produce witnesses of her accusation as condition of giving her justice.
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, but you're incorrect on this Sa1eem. A woman does not need to bring 4 witnesses to prove she was raped in Pakistan. The judicial system in Pakistan works something like this for rape cases. A rape case in Pakistan can be tried using the Hadd court or a Tazir court.
- If the rape is committed in public, this is considered very bad for the society and the punishment is higher. In this case a Hadd punishment or death might be given. One example was the Mai case. To get a Hadd rape case prosecuted the woman needs to bring 4 witnesses. It is difficult but then the punishment is severe.
- If the rape is committed in private, this is considered to be bad, but not as bad as doing it in front of society. In this case, the standard of evidence is less. 4 witnesses are not required, and the woman's testimony is admissible, as is DNA evidence etc (like in the West basically). This is the Tazir court system, and most rape cases are tried using this method, because most rapes do not occur in public. The sentence is a long jail term for those found guilty. So you see you are only talking about Hadd rape cases and this does not apply to most rape cases that are not done in public.
[QUOTE]
The only thing court can do is investigation (medical tests and other forensic evidence should be collected and should be used to prove the rape). Even here, it is not necessary that medical or other forensic evidence would necessary confirm rapist or even that rape happened. If rape evidences cannot be found then court cannot do anything, still it would be unfair to punish the girl for initiating the case.
[/QUOTE]
As above, DNA evidence is permissible in rape cases in Pakistan.
[QUOTE]
It is true that some unethical females may exploit the situation by accusing someone of rape and this type of loopholes would be there in all system of justice (Though I doubt if this would be a norm rather it would be rare exception). Still, that exploitation is not as problematic or abusive as putting a girl into prison in rape case or discourages rape reporting, making rape un-punishable crime (as it is present with Hudud ordinance).
[/QUOTE]
As above again. Rape is not an unpunishable crime in Pakistan. I agree with you that before the jail term was punishing a victim, but now that bail can be granted, this is not the case. All that is needed is that the bail money be repaid if the woman is not guilty of adultery (which most arent).
[QUOTE]
A girl plea (or words) in rape case should be acceptable similar to a married women (wife) words regarding father of children. How many men start suspecting their wife when a child is born, considering the child to be not theirs? All fathers take the word of a woman (his wife) in case of fatherhood of child, respecting the word of the women. I think that women words should be similarly respected in rape cases as law and society respect her claim regarding father of the child. Though accused rapists should get punishment only when medical, forensic and other evidences confirm rape and pinpoints rapist.
[/quote]
This is just a complete contradiction to what you wrote earlier. Earlier you appeared to be suggesting innocent until proven guilty. Now you are saying take the word of the woman that if she says she was raped, she was raped. I disagree, and I do believe some women would be unethical enough to lie about it. There is an adultery law in Pakistan. This means that adultery is an offence. Do you want this adultery law or not?