Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
121

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

I am just wondering how does any of these abovementioned affect us, citizens, in any way?

Musharraf overthrew an ‘elected despot’ well, bad for the despot.

Dismissed Judges. Bad for them, they are spineless anyway. Our judges only follow the tradition of Justice Munir there is no Cornelius among them.

Madrassas need to be merged with the mainstream education system. Instead of completely negating their existence it would be good to have some quid pro quo.

“Election rigging” is an allegation which is always alleged after every election.

I agree with the last two points. He shouldn’t have held a farcical referendum and he should don off his uniform.

Other than that Musharraf is a ‘Benevolent Despot’.

122

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

True. In 4 years of MMA rule in NWFP what have the maulana's done to improve the lot of women? Nothing.

123

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

Almost all of the above have been done at a much larger and in a more blatant manner by the earlier civil ( infact uncivil) rulers. Ironically another Pirzada (Abdul Hafeez) has played around for PPP.

How many judges have been fired by NS and BB combined? Or how many have been appointed out of nepotism?

Not all madrassah certificates are equivalent to a degree.
Plus all others want no conditions for contesting elections, graduation or otherwise, so that anyone from a *bhains *to a (God forbid) retard can contest elections if given a ticket based on loyalty.

Do BB and NS suddenly say that their claims about each other's poll rigging during the 90s were false!?

And btw, the current constitution allows the President to hold the COAS baton. which is more than reqd in a nation with a reasoning capacity or freedom to reason, lower than that of a majh.

124

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

Eating your words Zuberi? First you write,

""If one talks about the constitution, Mush actually did whatever he did through a legal process involving the legal experts and officials fit for the job through the SC.""

and then you say,

""Almost all of the above have been done at a much larger and in a more blatant manner by the earlier civil ( infact uncivil) rulers. Ironically another Pirzada (Abdul Hafeez) has played around for PPP.""

At least you have accepted his wrongdoings thus have come one step closer to sanity. Now one has only to prove how a bigger flamboyant deceiver and liar your little commando is. As far as NS and BB are concerned you can call them whatever you want, I don't care a fig.

You people vainly try to hide the shenanigans of your two-bit military dictator and deify him but when confronted with counter arguments you usually end up comparing him with none other than NS and BB and again try to prove, albeit in vain, how better a ruler he is comparing to these two idiots, a lesser evil than these two.

Facebook Friends
125

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

Reply to shawaiz_K:
[You people vainly try to hide the shenanigans of your two-bit military dictator and deify him but when confronted with counter arguments you usually end up comparing him with none other than NS and BB and again try to prove, albeit in vain, how better a ruler he is comparing to these two idiots, a lesser evil than these two.]

You look like an idealist Shawaiz, but idealism usually does not works in realpolitik. How do you defend democracy? Is it not also a lesser evil? Will of the majority may not be always right e.g. MMA or Hamas or Hezbollah. And how do you defend capitalism? Is it not also a lesser evil? By what right children inherit the property of their parents? They didn’t work to earn it.

But pragmatically speaking we know that both democracy and capitalism are best workable political and economic systems. By the same token Musharraf is a best possible leader for Pakistan. At least he has a liberal, secular and progressive vision for Pakistan. And he is not wedded to Zardari :)

126

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

[quote]

It is a bigoted approach to say that such and such thing is bad per se because “Islam mandates it”. You have to prove it by way of reasoning. And it’s ‘unfair’ to persecute people based on what they do in the public eye.

[/quote]

No it's not. To a large extent Islam defines the character of pakistani society, and as per the writ of the constituion, no law should be contradictory to the dictates of Islam.

That is itself reason enough. To a community that values Islam in the public sphere, it is what is desired. To those who think differently, they can move. Pakistan is neither a secular state, nor a secular society.

If anything, it is the height of bigotry to exclude Islam from this discussion simply because it does not suit you.

[quote]

If they are not harming the public in anyway, what does the public has to do with an individual and his freedoms?

[/quote]

Pederastry does not directly harm the public either. But then, it's not about obvious harms is it?

They are in fact harming the public, unless we are obtuse enough to think that society is an aggregation of individuals, and that the stability of a family has no net impact on society at large. So long as divorce is an option, adultry should remain a criminal offense, especially in societies like Pakistan where the family is probably the only functioning social institution.

Furthermore, you would spare me the patronizing lecutures on individual freedom, which is not a corner stone value of Pakistan, and is alien to most Pakistanis, especially if it means unrestricted sexual freedom.

[quote]

Public eye vs. An individual is the same as State vs. A citizen. This is why we have a Bill of Rights in every Constitution to protect the citizens rights and freedoms from the State and the public.

[/quote]

Such rights are also limited. The law is clear in that the state has no right to spy on the private affairs of it's citizens, but by the same token, the citizen has no right to flagrantly violate the laws of the land.

127

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

Now even bitterly anti-Musharraf PML (Nawaz) has said they will back the second women’s bill introduced by Shujaat. They were the only real opposition party to not support the first bill, and it’s obvious even they don’t want to be left out and associated with the lunatics of the MMA.

PML-N to back Shujaat’s bill in parliament
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006\11\29\story_29-11-2006_pg7_25

It’s also encouraging to see Shujaat telling the MMA that the WPB is here to stay!

**Shujaat rules out compromise over WPB
**http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/nov-2006/29/index5.ph

128

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

Whatever happened to the Balouchi rape victim, raped by one of Mushy's men? I have doubts that even this bill will do anything to imrpove the lot of women...

129

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

It is really strange to hear from people who believe in 1500 years old ideology that the constitution mandates such and such thing. Do you really believe in modern day constitutions, laws and grund norms of democracy? If so, how could you refute secularism and tolerance?

Religion is a personal faith. You are free to seek spiritual guidance from scriptures but involving religion into public sphere is destructive both for the religion and the society. If you want to apply strict religious code in the public sphere then how can you defend the rights of the women, the minorities and the dissenters?

Adultery can be made a ground for seeking divorce but it is not a criminal offence per se. This is the practice followed in modern nation-states.

Freedom is not all about sexual freedom. It’s about freedom of thought, freedom of expression and freedom of beliefs. Don’t tell me you also believe in these kind of freedoms. lol.

I agree that citizens not only have rights but also duties but draconian laws are unjust and they do not last forever.

130

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

More plaudits for the Musharraf govt from NGO’s and women’s groups.

NGOs hail passage of Women Protection Bill

The Karachi Women’s Peace Committee (KWPC) organised a forum on the Women Protection Bill inviting leading NGOs to deliberate on the clauses of the bill that are to provide protection and relief to the women. A statement on Wednesday said that this forum was attended by 26 women NGOs from different strata. As many as nine women leaders addressed the forum expressing their views on this bill. Opening the forum, chairperson of KWPC, Nargis Rahman, stated that half the population of Pakistan suffered due to the neglect of elected and non-elected governments for decades. Justice (Retd) Majida Rizvi, former chairperson of the Status of Women’s Commission, elaborated on the Hudood ordinances and that how rape and adultery had been removed from the Hudood ordinance to the Pakistan Penal Code to facilitate women to report the offence of rape without being harassed and without presenting for witnesses. The Qazf had also been automatically transferred to the PPC which prevented the victimization of women by vested interests, she added. Majida welcomed this bill but felt that more detail had to be added to it to provide more protection and relief to women.

Dr. Shamim Zainuddeen Director OPP, in her appraisal of Hudood Ordinance stated that 1979 ordinance was specifically directed to subordinate role of woman in society and specially keep her away from political leadership. She said that the poor women of Pakistan were directly affected by the Hudood. Ms Anees Haroon Director Aurat Foundation in her speech stated that the Hudood ordinance was unjust towards women. For 27 years women had struggled against this ordinance that demeaned the status of women and should have been repealed totally, she maintained. Rehana Afrose former member of city government welcoming the forum as opportunity for dialogue and debate on the WPO strongly felt that women consensus has to be achieved on the WPO or else the bill would be irrelevant. She felt that more work should have been done to address the problems of Talaq, inheritance and issues of working women. Mrs. Lalia Sarfaraz President of APWA, quoting Hadees said that relief for women suffering the offence of rape had been mentioned by certain jurist and ijtehad had been allowed in passing sentences therefore taking away the rape and adultery and qazf from, the Hudood ordinance. She congratulated President Musharraf’s government for the passing of this bill. Semi Kamal from the Status of Women Commission felt that the entire Hudood ordinance should have been repealed in total. Mrs. Rashida Patel President PAWLA referred to several cases where women had been victimized under the Hudood laws. She felt that the WPO was a first step in the right direction and the transferring of rape offences from inadequately equipped monitored police stations to judicial court would encourage women to report crime committed against them.

131

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!!

This bit of rheotric is nonsensical, as the idea of a constitution is about that old...

[quote]

Do you really believe in modern day constitutions, laws and grund norms of democracy? If so, how could you refute secularism and tolerance?

[/quote]

Secularism does not equate to the former, and all people advocate tolerance to only limited degrees. How forcefully moving society away from religion equates to toleration is beyond me...

[quote]

Religion is a personal faith. You are free to seek spiritual guidance from scriptures but involving religion into public sphere is destructive both for the religion and the society.

[/quote]

This is your opinion. Religion has public, or communal, aspects. The only way to change this is by supressing it, which is percicely what secular systems do.

What is and is not destructive is relative. Sexual degredation and deviance is a good thing to some, and bad for others.

[quote]

If you want to apply strict religious code in the public sphere then how can you defend the rights of the women, the minorities and the dissenters?

[/quote]

Shrug...quite easily. Strict religious codes does not equate to static or fixed interpretations in my mind. Needless to say, secularism is hardly an antidote to this. If anything, you automatically create friction with the religious populous by trying to corner off and regulate it's practice...all in the name of 'minorities' and 'dissenters'.

In any case, Islamic societies are the ones who adapt laws for minorities...consider drinking...secular societies refuse to do the same. The problem therin is mostly social...how do minorities integrate within a larger, dominating group that is very homogeneous? Laws don't help there, for the most part.

Also, why should religion-based societies bend over backwards to appease minorities, while secular ones are praised for expecting assimilation?

[quote]

Adultery can be made a ground for seeking divorce but it is not a criminal offence per se. This is the practice followed in modern nation-states.

[/quote]

Good for them. It's hardly worth emulating.

[quote]

Freedom is not all about sexual freedom. It’s about freedom of thought, freedom of expression and freedom of beliefs. Don’t tell me you also believe in these kind of freedoms. lol.

[/quote]

No, not unrestricted. I am not a libertarian. In particular, I see no problem using the coercive apparatus of the state to enforce social norms. Much like secularists do in the end...in spite of paeans to freedom.

[quote]

I agree that citizens not only have rights but also duties but draconian laws are unjust and they do not last forever.
[/quote]

Draconion to some, sacred to others...the pagan-like sexual mores secular societies seem to espouse is quite disgusting to those in the East...who decides what's better? I'd think each society would do what it thinks is best...

132

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

Following is the part of analysis of the new Bill (WPB) from chairman of moon sighting committee in Pakistan, Mufti Munibur Rahman, which is the translated and summarised version by myself.

Analysis of ‘Women Protection Bill’ in the light of Quran and Sunnah

Mufti Munibur Rahman (translated and summarized by myself)

Daily Jang Karachi, 26 November 2006

The Women Protection Bill which Pakistani Parliament has approved is against Quran, Sunnah and the objectives of shari’ah and since the constitution (of Pakistan) forces the parliament to legislate in accordance with Quran and Sunnah, this bill goes against the constitution as well as Qarardaad-e-Maqaasid (Resolution of Objectives) which has been declared as part of the constitution.

In my opinion that part (of this bill) which is against Quran and Sunnah is as follows:

  1. According to Quran and Sunnah, zina (rape, adultery) is a serious crime and to meet the legal requirements, it has been defined legally and Islamically. If such a crime is proven through Islamic standards (i.e 4 eye witnesses or criminal’s own confession) then it comes under hadd which is 100 lashes for the unmarried.

And for the married person the punishment for such a crime is rajm (stoning to death)

Quran doesn’t differenciate between the hadd for rape and adultery except that in adultery both parties would be punished while in rape the person which is proven to be innocent would be released with honour.

Therefore the accusation that the raped victim was also considered the criminal according to Hudood Ordinance is a clear accusation, lie and rumour. Hudood Ordinance doesn’t contain any such thing though offence (of rape) has to be proven in the court.

In the Women Protection Bill approved by the parliament, zina bil jabr (rape) has been removed from hadd and put under ta’zir. This matter is present in the bill presented in the parliament under act number 45, in the clause number 376 after addition of a new article with the heading of ‘Punishment for zina bil jabr’, according to what, ‘One who commits zina bil jabr, would be sentenced to death or imprisoned for for at least 5 years and at the most 25 years as well as fined. (Reference: Daily Jang, Thursday, 16 November 2006)

The above punishment clearly violates Quran and Sunnah.

Those who were doing this propaganda that zina bil jabr is a very serious crime so its punishment should also be severe, have left the punishment for zina bil jabr at the stake of Judge’s will i.e if he wishes he can sentence the criminal to death or 5 or 25 year imprisonment.

When the punishment for zina bil jabr has been softened in the present bill then this opens the door of concession for the people of influence and affluence.

In this bill approved by the parliament it is also mentioned that the person committing zina bil jabr would be fined which is an obvious opposition of Quran and Sunnah.

  1. In the light of Quran and Sunnah, to establish hadd of zina, 4 eye witnesses or confession of the crime is required but in this Women Protection Bill, eye witnesses have been completely neglected which is a clear violation of Quran, Sunnah and Islam. This matter can be viewed in the table number 4 of act number 376 of this bill.

  2. In the amendment number 14 of Women Protection Bill, article 6 and 7 of the ordinance number 7 issued in 1979 have been removed, therefore in the amendment number 14 of the approved bill it clearly says:

Articles 6 and 7 of Ordinance number 7 issued in 1979, from Offence of Zina Ordinance 1979 AD would be removed. (Reference: Daily Jang, Saturday, 18 November 2006)

According to this amendment, article 6 of ordinance number 7 issued in 1979 would be completely cancelled though in article 6 of Ordinance 1979, following punishment was suggested for zina bil jabr:

(a) If man or woman is muhsan (married), he / she will be stoned to death publicly.

(b) If man or woman is not muhsan (unmarried), he / she will be whipped publicly by 100 lashes as well as some other punishment which the court decides according to the circumstances, can be given which includes death sentence.

Now anyone with some common sense can easily understand that the removal of clause 6 in the Hudood Ordinance means nothing but rejecting Hudood of Allah.

  1. In the Women Protection Bill, adultery liable to hadd has been removed from congnizable offence. This matter can be checked in the table number 8 of Women Protection Bill. It means that government (or state) has no responsibility to arrest and produce the offenders of adultery in the court as well as it is not the job of state to collect evidences of the crime, this job has been given to suiters. Therefore like all such cases which are directly dealt by courts are not heard for weeks and months, so it provides a good opportunity to destroy all circumstancial evidences of the crime.

  2. In the Woment Protection Bill, the punishment for adultery has been suggested for muhsan (the married) as stoning to death and if not muhsan (unmarried) then whipped upto 100 lashes (please see table 8 of WPB) which means if the judge wishes he can sentence non muhsan to be whipped by less than 100 lashes e.g 50 and this is tahreef (tampering) of Quranic command.

  3. In the WPB, article 3 of ordinance 7 issued in 1979 has been removed, please see amendment 12 of WPB, which is

‘Article 3 of ordinance 7 from the Offence of Zina (Hudood Ordinance) would be removed.’ (Reference: Daily Jang, 18 November 2006)

Article 3 of the Ordinance in question is as follows:

‘The Ordinance would override other laws.’

And therefore because of this article 3, the Hudood Ordinance was given authority / overriding effect over all other laws relating to such crimes. And because of the removal of article 3, the legal status of Hudood of Allah is equal to that of any other penal laws.

The ‘Ulama Committee suggested that the following article should be included to the suggested bill (WPB):

‘Quran and Sunnah will override the interpretation of the suggested bill (WPB) in contrast with any other laws.’

But this suggestion was rejected.

  1. In the Women Protect Bill, the word validly from article 4 of Ordinance number 7 issued 1979 has been removed. Please see amendment number 13 of WPB, which is:

‘The word validly from the article 4 of the Offence of Zina Ordinance, 1979 and the explanation in the end of the article in question (4) would be removed.’

To be continued

133

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

Questioning Hudood Laws and answers to them

There is some confusion in the matter of Hudood of Allah expressed by people so I would like to throw some light on them, inshaAllah.

  1. The issue of Four (4) eye-witnesses

People say that no one does adultery or rape in the presence of 4 eye witnesses and so the idea to produce 4 eye-witnesses is not practical or it doesn’t make any sense.

The answer is that 4 eye witnesses are not the only way to bring the culprits (rapists or adulterers) to justice but they are to establish hadd punishment only i.e if there are really 4 eye witnesses to the crime then the culprit(s) would either be (1) stoned to death or (2) whipped by 100 lashes with or without other punishments.

  1. While there are no 4 eye-witnesses

In the vast majority of rape or adultery cases, there are no 4 eye-witnesses of the crime, and if the culprits don’t confess their crime, hadd punishment would not be issued rather they would be dealt by tazir punishment:

According to Hudood Laws, 1979

Quote:
10. Zina or zina-bil-jabr liable to tazir.
(1) Subject to the provisions of section 7, whoever commits zina or zina-bil-jabr which is not liable to hadd, or for which proof in either of the forms mentioned in section 8 is not available and the punishment of qazf liable to hadd has not been awarded to the complainant, or for which hadd may not be enforced under this Ordinance, shall be liable to tazir.

(2) Whoever commits zina liable to tazir shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years and with whipping numbering thirty stripes, and shall also be liable to fine.

(3) Whoever commits zina-bil-jabr liable to tazir shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than four years nor more than twenty-five years and shall also be awarded the punishment of whipping numbering thirty stripes.

(4) When zina-bil-jabr liable to tazir is committed by two or more persons in furtherance of common intention of all each of such persons shall be punished with death.
3. Why the 4 eye-witnesses?

The best only Allah knows but apparently there are some reasons why 4 eye-witnesses are required to prove someone of guilty of rape or adultery.

(a) The punishment of stoning to death or 100 lashes is really a severe punishment, especially the stoning to death. This is such a horrible punishment that you can’t even imagine someone being stoned to death, such a painful punishment.

The question is if there are cases where a rapist assaults a woman in the presence of 4 (or more) men? The answer is yes. I have read some news that Chaudhris (feudals) or criminals in Panjab (or Sindh) province drive women naked in streets and rape them in public. For example there was one case of gang rape with a lady named Mukhtaraan Maai who was sentenced to be gang-raped by a Jargah (local system of justice in tribes).

Tell me, wouldn’t there be at least 4 eye-witnesses to this crime?

In Desi movies we do watch some scenes where the sister of the hero is publicly raped by villain(s). I am sure there must be some truth in such shoots.

There are cases where a burglar breaks into a house or building, ties all members of the family with something and rapes a woman in front of all of them.

To my understanding, stoning to death, which is such a horrible punishment, is guaranteed for a criminal who is so cruel and shameless that he rapes a woman in front of other people.

Since 4 eye-witnesses are rare to produce in a rape case, the punishment of stoning to death is also rare in a state like Saudi Arabia where most of the Islamic Laws are enforced compared to other so called Muslim countries.

(b) The second and very important reason to produce 4 eye-witnesses is to stop the way of false accusation on someone as being a rapist. It is not impossible for a woman to falsely accuse a man of raping her for certain reasons like revenge, or personal interests etc. Same is true for a man to accuse a woman of rape though unlikely or rarely.

Therefore if I am a judge and a woman lodges a complaint that she was raped by a guy, then I wouldn’t believe her unless I would see all the evidences required.

People say, since she can’t bring 4 eye-witnesses (as is a routine in most of the cases), the police imprisons her and she is put under a trial for adultery, even that she is raped by the police officials in their custody.

Well, if really such a crime is done against an oppressed woman in our police and judiciary system then this is not the fault of Hudood Laws, but this is the flaw in the British and Secular laws which are enforced in our Police and Judiciary systems.

Now those who use this mistreatment of women by Police and Judiciary, do so as an excuse to oppose Hudood of Allah, and we see that such opposition to Hudood is done from Enemies of Allah in our secular political parties like Pakistan People’s Party and Muttahida Qaumi Movement as well as Non Governmental Organisations e.g one of their activists as Asimah Jahangir.

When women are mistreated and oppressed by the Police and Judiciary then why the hell these Munafiqeen don’t call for a amendment in British and Secular Laws governing judiciary and state affairs?

Why the hell they bark against Hudood of Allah which doesn’t govern Police and Judiciary in Pakistan?

There is not a single ordinance or a clause in the Hudood Laws 1979 which promotes such crimes against women by the hands of Police and Judiciary but all these crimes against women are the legacy of the British-Agents who founded Pakistan, who deceived Muslims of India in the name of Islam and their heritage which is preserved by the rulers like General Parvez Musharraf in order to make dollars from their Christian masters.

It is not strange that the present puppet parliament of Parvez Musharraf and all Munafiqeen amended Hudood Laws which don’t have any part in the Police Crimes against woman, and they didn’t call for any amendments in the British and Secular Laws which are in fact ruling in Police and Judiciary systems of Pakistan.

What should I call this?

This is a pure Hypocricy and Opposition to and Mocking at Allah and His Hudood.
That these munafiqeen whose god is power and money, are the part of all crimes which are done by the Police, Judiciary and in general the Pakistani Ignorant Society.

  1. What happens to a rapist in the absence of 4 eye-witnesses

This is the responsibility of state to make a rapist confess his crime in the absence of 4 eye witnesses. There is a method of investigation which can be practiced and the culprit can be brought to justice.

  1. DNA testing versus 4 eye-witnesses

I have seen people talk about DNA testing that it is better or more practical than 4 eye-witnesses. Well, whoever says so do so in ignorance. Allah is the most learned, He knows what people don’t know. If Allah has suggested 4 eye-witnesses to the crime of adultery or rape then no one can dare change it.

To my understanding there are reasons why DNA testing is not reliable.

  1. For example if you are a rapist and want to escape from the punishment, you will do everything possible to have a fake testing results because this is the point of your life and death, you will spend all your money in order to have fake test results, you will buy people, you will buy laboratory technicians, you will buy computer personnel, you will stage a drama that your DNAs were injected by your enemies to the woman raped, and so you can play a game and accuse the woman of false accusation upon yourself.

  2. Another possibility is that a woman can play this game to any innocent man. DNAs of the man are obtained from any source and injected to the woman’s body in order to make a false accusation against him of rape. Everything is possible in this world of corruption.

  3. In any case, 4 eye-witnesses from pious men is no doubt the best evidence in a rape or adultery case considering the seriousness of hadd punishment. 4 pious men can’t lie easily but a DNA testing can easily be forged or made up.

  4. I have just viewed jinnzaman’s points regarding DNA testing and consent of the parties in adultery or rape, mashaAllah he presented them so beautifully. I agree with him.

  5. Punishment of Rape versus that of Adultery

Some people say punishment of Rape is (should be) different from Adultery as Quran doesn’t mention punishment of rape exclusively.
In fact this is a misunderstanding. Rape is by nature Zina (Adultery) on part of the Offender (rapist). The assault or terror involved in Rape is an additional crime; for example in rape cases

(a) the rapist kills the victim or
(b) doesn’t kill but steals from her house
(c) neither kills, nor steals from her house but hurts the victim physically and mentally.

The nature of crime of rape would be determined by circumstances or the consequences e.g the victim (or her family member/s) can (try to) suicide or become mentally sick.

All this would be an additional crime along with rape and so the punishment would be more severe than that of rape only.

Secondly either it is rape or adultery, in both cases the woman and the man both lose their honour, though in rape this honour is lost through the use of force and terror and this is why the rapist is punished to death or flogging while the victim of rape is considered innocent unlike in adultery where both the man and woman are considered culprits.

134

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

The momentum is being kept up to rid Pakistan of customs or laws that are used to oppress women.

Relief for victims of under-age marriage: New bill to amend family laws

The federal cabinet on Wednesday approved a draft bill seeking amendments to the country’s family laws with a view to enabling women who are married as minors to settle long-running family feuds to obtain divorce upon reaching puberty. Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz presided over the four-hour cabinet meeting which discussed a whole range of economic and political issues, notably the threat of Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal legislators to resign from the National Assembly. Federal Minister for Information Mohammad Ali Durrani told newsmen that the Family Laws (Amendment) Bill 2006 had been drafted in compliance with an order by the Supreme Court which, hearing a constitutional petition, had directed the government on April 24, 2006, to suitably amend Section 310-A of the Pakistan Penal Code.

Titled “Compounding of Qisas (Sulh) in Qatl-i-Amd”, the relevant section of the PPC says: “In the case of Qatl-i-Amd, an adult, sane wali may, at any time on accepting badl-i-sulh, compound is right: provided that only giving a female in marriage shall not be valid badal-i-sulh.” Federal Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Dr Sher Afgan Khan Niazi explained to Dawn that the draft bill sought to provide relief to women who were married by their parents or guardians against their will to settle old disputes. **Answering a question, he said the draft bill provided for no punitive action against those who married under-age girls to settle family feuds. **He added that it only gave women a right to obtain a divorce upon reaching puberty. Dr Niazi said the draft bill would be tabled in the National Assembly in its next session.

http://www.dawn.com/2006/11/30/top1.htm

135

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

A good step, but I'm afraid it's superficial until the real culprit is nipped in the bud...and that's the feudal. Pakistan needs serious land reforms.

I would wager that the vast majority of sexual assaults, and indeed the majority of crimes against women in general, are done on feudal territories.

All is not well among the serfs.

136

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

CII (council of Islamic ideology) decision shows that some Mullahs can also think and are not completely blind like Paji and his party Jamaiet-e-Havani :smiley:

From Dawn, Karachi: http://www.dawn.com/2006/12/01/top3.htm

RAWALPINDI, Nov 30: The Council of Islamic Ideology has supported the government’s move on the Protection of Women’s Rights Bill and termed it a step in the right direction.

During a meeting with President Gen Pervez Musharraf here on Thursday, the CII chairman and members said the law would remove anomalies in the existing laws on women’s rights, and stressed that the process of protecting women’s rights should continue.

They said the government should take more initiatives to protect and empower the weakest segment of the society.They said that the council strongly recommended that women should not be kept in jails and the CII would continue to review all laws and make suggestions for improvements.

They said the CII was a recommendatory body and parliament, being the supreme body, has the authority to enact laws.–PPI

137

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

Interesting explanations however i refute some of the arguments you have given

4 eye witness condition ensures that no one can be charged of commiting adultery inside 4 walls discreetly. Their punishment rests with Allah, state does not have the authority to punish someone doing this act discreetly. However at the same time if a couple commits this act outdoors like beaches or public places where the society is affected 4 witness will be readily available and the crime checked.

Hudood are the laws that are defined by Allah, he has left no room for changing these laws, he has even produced the requirement of proving the charge as in case with 4 witnesses. Tazeer is what is left by Allah for society to decide, if it decides to hold something accountable so be it, if it does not so be it.

The whole basis of tazir & Hudood as parallel judiciary is wrong. This means that if you do not have enough evidence for hudd you charge him under tazeer, this is absurd. Tazeer is to supplement Hudood where there is no clear cut injunction in huddood, but running both of them parallel is stupidity. either you have hudd or tazeer for one crime.

No where in sociology you will equate adultery and rape, these are crimes of different nature and therefore rape is wisely left untouched in Quran to be dealt by Tazir & on the evidence producing methodology from time to time. No where Quran or Sunnah uses the term bil jabar or bil raza. these terms are devised by faqihs & to ordinary muslims look like islamic. Neither we can switch any other methodology of evidence other than 4 witnesses in adultery nor imposing this requirement in rape will be Islamic injunction. Rape can always be proven with DNA testing etc etc. Rape is a crime of oppression nor lust beyond doubt. Therefore rape falls in Tazir and not hudd.

If all the faqih's of old times have declared rape as part of hudood, so be it. Their collective word cannot become a word of Allah, it was their opinion. Sociology has progressed much ahead from those times. Please learn to differentiate between Shariah and Fiqah

138

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

Analysis of Women Protection Bill in the light of Quran and Sunnah
(translated/edited by myself)

Daily Jang, Karachi, November 27, 2006

Mufti Munibur Rahman (last episode)

The ordinance number 4 of Hudood Ordinance from which the word ‘validly’ has been removed is:

A man and a woman are said to commit 'Zina' if they wilfully have sexual intercourse without being validly married to each other.

In the above ordinance the word validly is before married which means the marriage would be according to shari’ah requirements. In the absence of the word validly, a verbal statement or fake document would be enough to deceive the law and the culprit would easily be released.

(8) After the addition of a new ordinance 375, in the act 45 of 1860, in the Women Protection Bill, title ‘Section 5 of zina bil jabr’, it states:

With or without her consent when she is less than 16 years old..

(Reference, Daily Jange, Thursday, 16 November 2006)

According to the above ordinance if zina is committed with a girl who has reached her puberty but is less than 16 years old (e.g 15 years, 11 months and 29 days old girl), the male partner would be convicted as a rapist and punished but the girl who did zina with her consent would be considered innocent even if she confesses her crime to do zina with her consent.

This is totally against Quran and Sunnah and it will promote adultery and fornication in the society and this is the same legal position which is in American and Europe.

(9) According to Hudood Ordinance, if there is a case registered against a person for ‘zina liable to hadd’ and the requirements of hadd are not met in the case but on the whole the crime is proved, he could be punished liable to tazir under Ordinance 10 (3).

But according to the new bill (WPB), ordinance 203 has been added to the Criminal Procedure Code whose section 6 says:

A charge of adultery or fornication can’t be registered against him who has been acquitted from the charges of ‘zina liable to hadd’. It means that if a woman has a case registered against a man for zina bil jabr, and if there are shortcomings in the evidences, the accused would be released and no action even under Lewdness ordinance could be taken against him.

Now this is confirmed that the crime has been commited and the plaintif has a case registered with police of rape, what hasn’t been proven is that the crime was forced (zina bil jabr) or was with consent. It would have two reasons:

(1) The criminal (rapist) was the man of influence and power, and using his powers and money he had the circumstantial evidences destroyed, the police either destroyed or hid the evidences because of the fear of the criminal (of influence) or the criminal is such a gangster that no one can dare be a witness against him, therefore according to the above section of the so called Women Protection Bill, he would be acquitted from the charges of zina bil jabr (rape), not only this but you can’t even have a case registered against him of Lewdness so that he couldn’t be punished at all. I am sure now the Women would have great protection under this bill.

(2) The crime was committed out of mutual consent but in order to protect her honour she put rape charges on him, now since the woman has to be protected from any kind of punishment, the man would also be saved because of her blessings. The least punishment which they could deserve for under the ordinance of Lewdness has also lost its effect in this case.
Surely this will promote Lewdness (adultery and fornication).

(10) In the Qazaf Ordinance 14 (Hudood Laws), it states the principle of Le’aan from Quran, that if a man accuses her wife of adultery and can’t produce 4 witnesses, he will have to bear witness by Allah ,on demand of his wife, that he is telling the truth. And after the wife does the same, their marriage would be made cancelled and they would be separated forever.

Qazaf Ordinance says that if the husband doesn’t agree with the action of Le’aan, he would be kept in the custody (of police) unless he agrees for Le’aan.

In the WPB, the above line has been removed which means if the man doesn’t agree on Le’aan, the woman would remain helplessly suspended, neither she will be able to prove her innocence nor she can have her marriage ended up.

This ordinance has been included to WPB because in the secular philosophy of law, you cannot force a person to confess or deny a crime, he is not required by the court to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ but he can only say ‘no comments’ and he wouldn’t be questioned anymore. This Secular Philosophy of Law has been given an overriding effect upon Islamic principle of Le’aan.

Qazaf Ordinance also says that if during the proceedings of Le’aan, the woman confesses to do adultery, she would be sentenced to punishment for zina. In the approved bill (WPB) this part has also been removed. Though after confession there is no way that the punishment of zina can’t be issued, white the procedure of Le’aan starts on request of the same woman but she can’t be forced to do confession.

to be continued (inshaAllah)

139

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

Longg live Musharraf!
Long live Pakistan!

Musharraf signs women’s bill

President Gen Pervez Musharraf signed into law the Protection of Women Bill, 2006, which amended the widely criticised Hudood laws in the teeth of fierce criticism from religious parties that held protest demonstrations throughout the country on Friday. The bill places rape laws under the penal code and does away with harsh conditions that previously required victims to produce four male witnesses and exposed them to prosecution for adultery if they were unable to prove the crime. The National Assembly voted in favour of the bill on Nov 15 and the Senate approved it on Nov 23. A parliamentary bill becomes a law when it receives the presidential assent under Article 75 of the 1973 Constitution.

“President Musharraf today gave his assent to the Women Protection Bill,” federal Parliamentary Affairs Minister Sher Afgan said. “It has become a law and would immediately be enforced all over the country. The credit goes to President Musharraf for the passage of this bill because he is the only leader who has shown tremendous courage and determination to amend a piece of legislation that had been a bane for women since 1979. I congratulate the nation and all political parties who supported the bill which would benefit the women of Pakistan.”Human rights groups, who have long campaigned for a change in the law, hailed the bill. “This is a step in the right direction,” said Hina Jillani, a vice-chairwoman of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. But her group wants the law, introduced by Gen Ziaul Haq to make Pakistani legislation more Islamic, repealed.

http://www.dawn.com/2006/12/02/top7.htm

140

Re: Hudood Ordinance Amended!!! (Merged)

bin adam bhai

whatever you are writing makes sense, but please first of all tell me how on earth(except few countries like Pakistan) crime can be charged selectively, i mean if you have sufficient evidence you charge under this law and if you do not have sufficient evidence you charge under this law. This means you are hellbent on charging someone and finding excuses. This tantamounts to making mockery of Quran. Either Apply Hadd or Tazir, This is absolute rubbish that if you have four witness charge under hadd and if you do not have four witness than go for tazir and use DNA.

Yaar un do nay tumhara kiya bigara hai agan unhon nay yeh karwai indoors kee hai.

Was there Tazir applied in Rasool's days. He told the confessor to go away on first confession. As first confession is the equivalent of the first witness, why no tazir was applied.

These old mullahs once are finished from their wordly desires go after the young generation with draconian laws. No body says that it is allowed in Islam but it is not punishable by state in Islam with less than 4 witness. Only Allah will punsih the wrongdoers on the judgement day. State has no authority to go spooking into people's bedrooms on the behest of few useless ulemas & Mashaikhs.