Frailty no More

[Muhammad Haseeb Khalid]

Frailty no More

After hue and cries, General Pervez Musharraf partially undid what General Ziaul Haq had done 27 years ago. In the name of Islamic laws
Ziaul Haq's so-called Hudood laws had made it almost impossible for a rape victim to seek justice. For the bearers of human rights in the country the passage of Women Protection Bill 2006 is a step forward, but with a price tag: the political opposition to Musharraf stands sharply divided.
Ironically, in the country, legislation on family and criminal issues concerning civil rights of individuals has been done during the military rules. In the 1960s, General Ayub Khan was the first to introduce family laws which, departed from the orthodox interpretation of Islam and tried to reconcile with modem requirement. They restricted polygamy and granted women the right to seek divorce and take custody of their children under specific conditions.
In the 1970s, in an attempt to seek legitimacy by courting conservative segment, of the society, General Ziaul Haq swung the pendulum back to religious orthodoxy. Ignoring the evolution of Islamic thought in recent times, he introduced medieval vision of religious jurisprudence title Hadood Ordinance. The Hudood laws about rape, known as Zina. Ordinance, were the most controversial among them. In all, they encompass five subjects: rape (including fornication), false 'accusation, using alcohol, punishments on theft and Islamic punishments like lashes to criminal convicts.
The women right activists have been struggling for the repeal of the Ordinance for more than 20 years since the first case of a woman tried under the Hudood law made a stir. Safia Bibi, a blind woman, was gang-raped in Punjab and sentenced to stoning to death by a trial court for as could not produce four witnesses in support of her allegation under the law. The then Federal Shariat Court, headed by a modern educated judge from Aligarh University, Justice Aftab Ahmed, had exonerated the woman by interpreting the law in an enlightened manner by taking into account different interpretations of Islamic injunctions by various schools of thoughts. According to women rights activists and the national commission on the status of women, the Hudood laws are so flawed that 'they need to be repealed altogether. The government however did not dare do so. Instead, it went for partial amendments in clauses regarding rape and fornication. Still, it faced immense opposition form the six-party’s religious political parties united. MMA, as the muscular lobby of orthodox ulema and aggressive vernacular press often ignored by analysts as an: influential political actor. But as the latest developments confirm, these influential may from time to time run into problems of their own. In the wake of the Women's Protection Bill, there are signs of a widening rift in the MMA. One of its main components Jamaat-e-Islami favours quitting the parliament, while its, chief partner, Jamiat-e-Ulema-Islam is reluctant to do so. The issue of registering a case and prosecution, in rape and fornication cases under the old Pakistan Penal Code, a rename of Indian Penal Code introduced by the British rulers, was simple. Fornication of two unmarried adults was not a cognizable offence. In case of a minor girl and a married woman (adultery) it was a cognizable offence. There were separate elaborate clauses for rape. Under the Hudood law, things got complicated because orthodox Islamic jurisprudence mixes up fornication and rape. Under this, when a woman complaining to be victim of rape comes to get her case registered, she is required to produce four witnesses in support of her allegation. In failing to do so, she herself gets arrested and convicted for admitting sexual intercourse out of wedlock or nikah and thus committing fornication.

The November 15 amendments have removed the restriction of four witnesses required for proceeding in a rape case. A separate clause of fornication has been added in the statute which requires two witnesses for prosecution and the accused has been provided relief in terms of bail that the police could grant him/her on personal surety.
Fornication has been a big concern of orthodox Ulema and self-appointed custodians of morality. The bill drafted by the Select Committee of the National Assembly did not include the fornication as an offence. The ruling party, PML-Q, had tried to get the clause included, but PPP MNA Sherian Rehman said her party 'resisted this at that stage because of fear of its misuse. However, before the passage of the bill from the National Assembly on November 15, this clause was introduced as a result of a bargain between the ruling PML and the opposition PPP. Thus, the parliamentary process partly accommodated the concern of the orthodox sections and took the sting out of their tirade against the bill.
Both the camps, liberals and Islamists, deem the newly-introduced amendments inadequate because they fall short of their respective positions. However, what both can't deny is the fact that these amendments have provided relief to women and improved the legal provisions about the prosecution of rape without coming in clash with Islamic teachings. Viewed in the perspective of Pakistan being a complex society with tribal, agrarian and urban social settings in place simultaneously and the conservative and the liberals existing side by side with a big swathe of pragmatist Muslims, the new amendments may not look like a bad deal.
The timing of the legislation, however, is intriguing. President General Musharraf has, as always, quite cleverly used it to firm up his political position outsmarting the opposition. He called the bluff of the religious front, the MMA, which had threatened to resign from the assemblies in case the women protection bill is passed. It has not to date. In fact, soon after the passage of the bill, leader of the opposition and MMA secretary general, Maulana Fazlur Rehman, has found excuses to soften MMA’s position. He said the government partly incorporated the recommendations of ulema in the bill and now religious experts would see whether it is according to Islam or in clash with it. In NWFP, the MMA government has passed the controversial Hasbah Bill in a bid to retain some sort of credibility. The fact is the passage of the women bill has dealt a blow to the MMA. If its members do not resign from the assemblies as per its declared position, it loses credibility. If they do, the religious alliance loses two provincial governments. It would also provide the Musharraf-Ied government an opportunity to hold by-elections in which the ruling party, traditionally stands much' brighter chances of winning. PPP chairperson Benazir Bhutto has already expressed this fear advising the MMA not to resign. In this scenario, the possibility of all main opposition groups, the PPPP, PML-N arid-the MMA, joining hands to form a united front against Musharraf has weakened. The PML-N abstained from the voting on the bill saying the bill's objective is not to improve the law but to make political gain by Musharraf. In fact, the PML-N has been traditionally close to the orthodox ulema in comparison to PPP's more liberal stance on various social issues.
The PPP, the largest opposition parliamentary party, has used this opportunity to insist on its modem and relatively liberal identity and to distance itself from the religious political parties. It has sent a clear message home and abroad. For some time to come, it will be hard for the two ideologically divergent camps of the opposition to join forces against Gen. Musharraf.
At least, it will be hard for them to justify their alliance in the eyes of general public, if they go for this at all.
President Musharraf has proved to be clever at manoeuvring and playing various opposition groups against each other. He has done this for the third time. First, in 2000, when Nawaz Sharif buried his hatchet against Benazir Bhutto by joining the ARD, Musharraf signed a compromise with him by agreeing to pardon his sentence and sent him in exile to the Saudi Arabia. Afterwards, he played the MMA against the rest of the opposition by striking a deal with it on the passage of the 17th Amendment. This took winds out of the PPP-PML (N)'s sails and ruined their chances of extracting some gain from the military ruler. This time, the general has embraced the PPP weakening the opposition's unity.

Whatever may be the public pronouncements, the PPP's support for the ruling party's bill has indicated the party has developed some sort of understanding with Musharraf, how so ever small it may be. What lies in store for the PPP remains to be seen. Musharraf did renege on the promises he had once made to the MMA - which he will take off his military uniform by the end of December 2004. There is no guarantee that he will not do the same to another political party.
By all indications, the government is preparing to use the 'women's card' in the next election - which will be detrimental to the interest of the PPP unless the party has some pre-election understanding with the regime. The latest give away from the government on the subject is its plans to introduce another bill aimed at eradicating wanni, watta satta and marriage with Holy Quran, practices steeped in a feudal culture that have taken a heavy toll on Pakistani women over the years.

ENDS