| November 19, 2008 | Wednesday | Ziqa'ad 20, 1429 |
|
Getting away with murder
BACK in early September, amid the uproar over reports that five (the figure has been disputed) women had been buried alive in Balochistan in accordance with the decision of a tribal jirga, one of the protesters’ demands was that Senator Israrullah Zehri be expelled from parliament.
He had caused offence by condoning as a ‘tribal tradition’ the abominable crime of so-called honour killings when the matter was raised on the Senate floor, and was later quoted as saying: “These are centuries-old traditions and I will continue to defend them. Only those who indulge in immoral acts should be afraid.”
That Zehri’s confected outrage was not exactly an isolated instance of a thoroughly warped sense of morality was demonstrated when the acting chairman of the Senate, Jan Mohammad Jamali, berated Yasmin Shah, the senator who had dared to raise the matter on the floor of the house, by suggesting she should “go to our society and see for herself what the situation is like there, and then come back to raise such questions”. As if any societal conditions whatsoever could conceivably serve as an excuse for unspeakable atrocities.
A press report noted that Jamali “appeared perturbed” over what he called “out of proportion” coverage of the incident and quoted him as saying: “It is not a matter of mere sloganeering. It pertained to five women. The media gave the matter such a colour as if the heavens have fallen.” Well, the heavens certainly did fall for the victims, but Jamali’s bewilderment was understandable at one level: a large proportion of such crimes receive little or no media coverage, and the likes of him would prefer to keep it that way. The same mindset makes it hard for them to comprehend why some of their compatriots consider such practices completely unacceptable.
If closed minds and medieval mentalities were to be made an electoral disqualification, Pakistan’s parliamentary ranks at every level would be sharply depleted. Needless to say, no action was taken against Zehri. None of his critics is likely to have suspected, however, that this votary of inhumane customs would actually be rewarded with additional perks and privileges. Yet that is exactly what happened earlier this month, when he was elevated to the position of minister for postal services. Granted, it’s just another superfluous slot — does any country really need a minister for ‘mail’ chauvinism? — in an unwieldy cabinet that is presumably intended to help sustain a disparate coalition. But the fact that Zehri can probably not do much harm in his new capacity offers little consolation.
Nor was his appointment the only one in blatant defiance of common sense. Among the numerous pirs, mirs, sardars, mians and makhdooms sworn in by President Asif Zardari as members of a now 61-member cabinet — a bizarre extravagance for a country that claims to be on the verge of economic bankruptcy — was Mir Hazar Khan Bijarani. Last year his arrest was ordered by the Supreme Court, under Iftikhar Chaudhry, on the charge of presiding over a jirga in Sindh that had ‘resolved’ a feud between two families by decreeing that one of them must hand over five girls, aged between two and six, to the other as ‘compensation’ for murder.
This level of injustice would be utterly mind-boggling even if one chanced upon it in a history book discussing the social mores of several centuries ago. Its occurrence in 21st-century Pakistan — and this was by no means an isolated instance — ought to be a matter of profound shame for every Pakistani. That, evidently, is not the case, else why would the alleged perpetrator-in-chief of this deed, instead of being stripped of the right to represent what still claims to be a progressive party, be promoted to the cabinet. His portfolio? Education. Believe it or not.
If you think this is beyond satire, consider the following: within days of the swearing-in ceremony, Zardari was once more treading familiar ground in New York, regaling leaders from 66 countries with a diatribe against Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry (with a by now obligatory plea for cash thrown in for good measure). All very commendable, no doubt, notwithstanding his rather rosy-hued description of his fief as “a tolerant society which offered equal opportunities to people of all faiths and to both men and women”. But that’s not all. Last Friday’s report in Dawn also noted: “The president said he believed there was nothing more un-Islamic than discrimination and violence against women.”
By that token, the political elevation of Zehri and Bijarani was not just an insult to Pakistani women, but verily an act of defiance against the nation’s official faith. In the light of Pakistan’s recent experiences, however, the dissonance between the president’s actions and utterances is no longer considered remarkable.
Practices such as karo-kari and vani are, at one level, undoubtedly the consequence of a lack of enlightenment, the product of a despicable attitude whereby women, as soon as they are born, are practically regarded as chattel. As often as not, the victims in honour killings are young women who display a degree of independence in the sphere of romance and marriage.
The homicidal urge stems in some cases from no more than a determination to deter challenges to male supremacy, but frequently it is related also to property matters.
On a practical plane, however, one reason why this barbaric practice persists across the nation, despite being outlawed, is because all too often the perpetrators face no penalty.
A brutal reminder of this outrageous reality recently came in the shape of information that a teenager in a branch of my family, the Hyats of Wah, had been shot dead by her brothers, ostensibly for an unauthorised dalliance with a young man. Inevitably, I wanted to know whether the mindless murderers had been taken into custody and would face appropriate punishment. That was extremely unlikely, I was informed, because under the Qisas and Diyat laws — a particularly despicable legacy of the Zia years — a murder victim’s family can legally forgive the killers.
It is absurd in the extreme that such a law should be considered applicable even in cases where the murderer and the victim belong to the same wretched family. Back in 2005, in the era of enlightened moderation, an attempt by Kashmala Tariq to close this ridiculous loophole was rejected by parliament on the ground that it was un-Islamic. Over the years, Sherry Rehman, to her credit, has been a vociferous proponent of women’s rights. Let us hope she is able to hold Zardari to his word and overrule the likes of Zehri and Bijarani.
The writer is a journalist based in Sydney.
mahir.worldview@gmail.com
