Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

Re: Hadood ordinance Amended!!

In addition to my previous mail, without naming: I would like to ask question to those that were satisfied with hudud ordinance of Zia is that: Can they give answer putting themselves in victim shoe?

Let say someone influential and rich rape their mother, wife, sister or daughter and they went to police that wants to register their case under hudud ordinance of Zia (for whatever reason, maybe due to influence of rapists or their money).

Would they like that? Since no rapist rapes in front of 4 witnesses, obviously their mother, wife, sister or daughter would not be able to bring witnesses, so would they think it to be all right for their mother, wife, sister or daughter to be imprisoned on charges of adultery on basis of their rape confession (and stay in prison for years)?

If they would not like to see this fate when it comes to their mother, wife, sister or daughter, how can they support such ordinance (of Zia)?

If they think that the Zia ordinance was unjust, because many innocents were imprisoned and suffered because of that ordinance, and still think that it was Islamic, can they answer that what they think of Allah, just or unjust?

Re: Hadood ordinance Amended!!

…and who reads this law? hmmm Pakistani authorities? Why is there to begin with is my question? Does it make any sense?

Repealing this law is the only way to fix the problem.

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006\11\17\story_17-11-2006_pg3_1

Well done President Musharraf :k:

After a long dilly-dallying and dithering, the PMLQ government was able to table the Women’s Protection Bill (WPB) at the National Assembly with predictable success. The PPPP from the opposition acted wisely by standing by its principled position and voting for the bill; the government ally MQM returned from its offended retreat and added its votes to the bill. But the MMA walked out predictably and the PMLN abstained, once again proving that the sprit of Abbaji still presides over the bifurcated party. The day the WPB was passed in the National Assembly was also the day when someone went to the Supreme Court against the much-amended Hasba Bill of the NWFP, saying the law violated the Constitution by bestowing on the Peshawar executive functions belonging strictly with the judiciary. The MMA in its wisdom had taken the stance that if the women’s bill was ever passed the alliance would resign. The crunch time came on Wednesday but the MMA did not resign en masse. The Jama’at firebrand chief, Qazi Hussain Ahmad, has always been more ready to get out of parliament and face the rulers in the streets, but not so the more pragmatic and better established in the present power structure, Maulana Fazlur Rehman of the JUI.

Maulana Rehman has walked away from parliament, grumbling that the MMA will soon decide what to do after it has made the determination whether the bill passed was earlier okayed by the select committee or whether by another committee of the ulema recommended by him. Although he is a qualified cleric, he wants to refer the matter to the ulema and wait for their final verdict. Needless to say, he leads the most powerful party of the ulema and they will deliver the verdict he favours. If he thinks as he has done in the past, he will not agree with Qazi Hussain Ahmad and refuse to resign, which will mean that the MMA will suffer yet another crack down the middle.

President Musharraf has understandably taken credit for pushing his party to get serious and stop its usual politicking over the bill. He took some flak over failing to achieve what most people thought was the easiest ‘moderately-enlightened’ thing to do in Pakistan. But after many false starts and hiccups on this front, he can finally show something good that his government has done. He says more pro-women laws opposing such ugly customs as vani, swara and marriage to the Quran will be passed soon. The prime minister has echoed him and more dramatically, the party chief, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, has offered his ‘conditional’ resignation to the Speaker ‘if the law is found to violate the Quran’. The ‘other’ good laws promised to the women of Pakistan have to deal with customs rather than anything to do with religion. These customs are already against Islam and offend against the shariat as guarded by our Federal Shariat Court. These customs simply signal the low status of women in society. If the mullahs have not attacked them in the past it is because they don’t not want to lose support in the segment of Pakistani society where they are practised. Vani comes from Punjab, ‘Quran marriage’ is in vogue among Sindhi feudals, and swara is practised in the NWFP where the MMA vote-bank is located. It must be firmly kept in mind that the abolition of hudood — if they had been abolished — would have prevented the state from being cruel to women. (The latest amendment will also take care of that to a great extent.) The anti-women customs have nothing to do with the state and therefore will linger like all other anti-women customs unless there is a change in the way we conduct our lives.

The new WPB has consigned rape back in the ambit of the Penal Code and, as a sop to the pious, has made consensual sex punishable under the Penal Code. Both were originally outside the PPC. The liberals wanted the former (rape) to be in the PPC and the latter (adultery) to remain in the Hudood, making it easier to prove the former and impossible to prove the latter. Now a compromise has been stuck — rape will be easier to prove and adultery will not be impossible to prove — with which a conservative society can live. Had it not been for a timely intervention by the PPPP, however, the term ‘lewdness’ would have described what in fact would be fornication. Thus a misplaced finicky decency would have made the law a big stick with which to beat the gentle citizens of Pakistan. The world has laughed at us a long time over what we thought was the Islamic law against rape: a woman had to prove with four pious Muslim witnesses that someone had raped her. It will no longer laugh and may even be grateful that Pakistan has gone and scrapped the evil corruption of Divine Intent while the other Muslim states boasting Shariah will carry on as usual. The PMLQ should be congratulated, although the party hardly realises what it has done; it has overturned a misogynist law that had endured for more than a thousand years. But the truth is that the ruling party was not scared of tinkering with ‘Islam’ as it was scared of getting on the wrong side of the clergy even though the citizens in general were completely in favour of an amendment after a very effective public debate. The PPPP is equally to be congratulated because it refrained from politicising the issue and voted for the bill even after many text-tweakings and delays. The decision to vote was an act of wisdom which the PMLN has not been able to grasp and is fingering the Charter of Democracy menacingly and sending out dire warnings about the possible rupture the vote will produce within the ARD.

**Finally, we must pat President Pervez Musharraf on the back. He stuck to his guns. If it hadn’t been for his determination and belief, this bill would never have been dragged again and again to the National Assembly and eventually passed. We shouldn’t quibble about why the Hudood Ordinance wasn’t altogether repealed or why a small compromise was made in the end. This was the best that could have been done in the difficult circumstances facing President Musharraf. **

Re: Hadood ordinance Amended!!

Chanda, do I look like the molvi party's spokeperson to you? I am just replying to Haris's question, as this is what an MMA spokesperson replied with when asked about DNA tests... Understood?

Re: Hadood ordinance Amended!!

post type kartay huay aap kay left hand mein barfi thi shayad…

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

And there is hope ... maybe very little hope but there is HOPE!

Re: Hadood ordinance Amended!!


You quoted my post and said
[quote]
come up with some intelligent answers
[/quote]
so I 'd assume you were replying to me (the first part of your post).

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

^^ Why is adultery a crime?

If two adults want to have sex and a good time, why is the government getting involved in their personal affairs?

This entire Hudhood laws are totally idiotic and need to be removed....

I wonder if we implement hudhood laws to all pakistanis and not just poor innocent village girls, I think more than half of pakistan will be guilty

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

Sa1eem, the Hudood Ordinance was not perfect and had to be changed..but the 4 witness ruling was not the problem with it, despite what foreign media and women's rights groups have to say. The problem with the Hudood was that adultery and rape were punished in the same way, and the automatic charge of adultery if a rape wasnt proven, based on the admission of sex by the woman.

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

adultery is defined that a married man or woman has an affair with another man or woman. If you ask most married Pakistanis in Pakistan, most would say they would want their partner punished if they cheated on them. What you;re thinking about is fornication. Now I'm all for government not getting involved in personal matters, but most Western countries do have adultery laws also, a lot of the time, they're not implemented like in Pakistan. I would say a referendum on whether Pakistanis want an adultery law would be best..Quite a few of them would I suspect.

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

Merc, are you really a muslim?

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

Roadrunner: Actually, there is no law against adultery in western country. Regardless, there is difference between laws against adultery and hudud ordinance. Actually, hudud ordinance in Pakistan is only making law of Allah a joke, nothing else, and what is in Pakistan is against ‘law of Allah’ anyhow.

Just imagine, Adultery done in front of four adult, pious and reliable Muslim men who witnessed penetration with their own eyes, and become witness to that too.

If I was judge and such witnesses presented, before giving any verdict, I would throw these witnesses into jail of being deceptive witnesses (and thus slandering a woman) and would consider there witness as unreliable.

Reason being that, if they were pious Muslim and eligible to become witness, how can they (not just one, four of them together) be watching adultery so closely (in intimate positions) that they saw penetration, and thus become witness? If they were not that close (and in certain positions) to watch penetration, how can they be sure that penetration happened, and thus it was adultery?

Hence, under hudud ordinance where four pious Muslim witnesses required to give evidence of adultery, all verdicts are either farce or victimization. Thus, it means that hudud ordinance is a farce ordinance for such cases.

What Quran says regarding adultery (very simple and very logical).

According to Islam, if one or more persons (other then husband) accuse a woman of adultery, they have to bring four adult pious reliable witnesses, and if they could not, they should get severe punishment. According to Islam, onus of proving the accusation lies with accusers and not for woman to defend the accusation.

Now it is obvious that if anyone come as witness and claims to be pious, first question would arise on the claim of that person, being pious. It is impossible that adultery happens in front of four pious person and they see literal penetration to become witness (for that they not only need to be close but in certain positions, watching intentionally and intimately). If they did not see literal penetration, how can they become witness of adultery, on their perception alone?

Further, question arises that, being pious, why they were watching so closely to see penetration literally, while adultery happened. Why they did not stopped adultery from happening? Regardless, why they kept watching, and so closely that they saw the penetration (not one, but four of them, together).

Another question arises is that, if such situation occurs, were those doing adultery were sane? Because, no sane person would do adultery in front of four especially pious persons, and show the penetration to them. Gosh, it is so ridiculous that even Iblis would not think of that, how these Shaitans made a law as dumb as this and associated it to Allah?

What Quran says (and it is very clear)?

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.

Obviously, above ayah is regarding guilty women and not accused (accuse are those against whom, someone accused and registered an FIR, but verdict is not given). To become guilty, she has to be known guilty. Still, four witnesses are required as stated in the ayah, for punishment.

It is impossible to find four reliable witnesses for such act, other then in rare situations where woman is prostitute. That is how she is guilty before witnesses are found, as all knows about prostitute being prostitute and thus the women can be considered guilty, but still four witnesses are required that saw the penetration, else finding witness of someone already guilty become meaningless.

Finding four witnesses is possible if she is not ordinary prostitute but does prostitution openly (to have possibility of finding four witnesses, logical). Even than, it is impossible to find pious witnesses, rather known and reliable witnesses, and even that is difficult.

Actually, and according to Quran, these four witnesses do not have to be pious, as long as they are known and reliable. Making their number four means, that individually, they might have been witness of such act at different times (that shows that woman is involved in such acts regularly and openly, at public places).

Next ayah actually saves the women from these accusing ‘shaitans’ who become witnesses against her. [Chaste women means all those women, against whom guilt is not proven]

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 or accuses her) should produce four witnesses, and if they do not (or cannot), than government should give them accusers plenty of thrashing (regardless there accusation is true or not, as when one cannot bring four witnesses, one should not accuse, as Allah calls them accusers, wicked and transgressors).

This ayah does not say that if FIR is registered or she is charged; than put her behind bars (in prison) and start punishing the woman, as happens under Pakistan hudud ordinance. Where these crooks in the name of Islam brought such Shaitanic law (and worse, called it shariah law)?

One should note that according to Quranic ayahs, accuser and witnesses should get automatic punishment, if accuser could not produce four reliable witnesses (regardless of accusation was right or wrong). Meanwhile, punishment for accused woman depends on her being found guilty by four witnesses and is not automatic. This shows that in this respect, Quran tells all to mind their own business and do not accuse anyone, unless things are so bad that four witnesses can be produced easily (like cases where open prostitution is happening, at public places).

Pakistan hudud ordinance made punishment on accused woman automatic, by putting her in prison, while accusers and witnesses, even if found false (or they could not bring four reliable witnesses), are not automatically punished, as they can be only punished, if woman complains. Is that hudud ordinance, law of Allah or Shaitanic law?

** Now, according to Quran, what should happen if husband accuse her wife of adultery? Law is most clear, most fair and very logical and a slap on hudud ordinance that Zia introduced.
**

** Here is what Quran says:**
***
Surah Al-Noor (24), ayah 6-9

*****And for those who launch a charge against their spouses, and have (in support) no evidence but their own,- their solitary evidence (can be received) if they bear witness four times (with an oath) by Allah that they are solemnly telling the truth; **

***And the fifth (oath) (should be) that they solemnly invoke the curse of Allah on themselves if they tell a lie.


***But it would avert the punishment from the wife, if she bears witness four times (with an oath) By Allah, that (her husband) is telling a lie;


**And the fifth (oath) should be that she solemnly invokes the wrath of Allah on herself if (her accuser) is telling the truth. **

That is it, all is clear from Quran itself, no interpretation needed, case finished (no prison, no punishment), unless woman wants punishment of adultery, that only insane would do. In such situations, after such accusation by husband (right or wrong does not matter), result at most could be (and should be) divorce and nothing else, and I believe it is duty of government to make that divorce binding. [Apnay apnay ghar jao aur khush raho].

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

Subhanallah! Couldn't have stated all this any better.

Re: Hadood ordinance Amended!!

Haris asked a very good question, and you answered it the way you do.

I merely gave him the right answer, as to why the halwa-party was against the DNA tests. Simple isnt it?

Re: Hadood ordinance Amended!!

Halwa is more like it ;)

Re: Hadood ordinance Ammended!!

Lo kar lo baat, aik aur… I missed this one before…

So if the Government and opposition members shake hands, it means assumed theres ‘paisey’ khaney involved? Aik aur bongi.

Re: Hadood ordinance Ammended!!


try reading some sarcasm/humor, may be you will understand... not everything has to be fully 'political' statement.

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

youre hardly funny, do you know what a 'sarri' in Urdu means?

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

^ I know, if a joke goes against your thoughts/beliefs then you don't like it.... its okay, happens.

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

ok how does your 'lame' sarri/joke go against my belief? Do you honestly think I support the mardood laws? puttar abhi tum naye naye aye ho, go back and read my posts against hudood laws, sarri-master