islamic legal reform and the status of women in pakistan

8/12/2019 Islamic Legal Reform and the Status of Women in Pakistan

1/11

JournalofIslamic Studies11(1991)p p.45-55

ISLAMIC LEGAL REFORM AND THESTATUSOFWOMEN INPAKISTAN1CHARLES H. KENNEDYWake ForestUniversity,Winston-Salem, N.C., USA

The issueofthe statusofwomenhasfiguredprominentlyin thepolicyenvironment surrounding the implementationofPakistan's Islamizationprogramme. Criticsof Islamization have often focused their attentiononthealleged discriminatory effectsofthe programmeon therightsofwomen. Indeed, during the 1988 general election campaign BenazirBhutto promisedtorescindthehududordinances. And, oneofher firstacts after assuming office wastorelease all women convicts in Pakistan'sjails,save thosewhowere convicted murderers.2Asexplainedby thethen MinisterofJustice, Aitzaz Ahsan, this action servedtoredresstheinjustices metedout towomen convicted underthetermsofthehududordinances. Benazir's casewas strengthened during September1989,whenaseriesofdocumentaries were broadcastonAmerican and Britishtelevisionandradio. Eachofthese documentaries focusedon therightsof women in Pakistan, each argued that the Islamization process discrim-

1 Mostofthe materialforthis paper was gathered under the auspicesofthe Fulbright-Hays Programme (1984-85). Subsequently, support hasbeen provided by theArchieFund for Facility Excellenceof Wake Forest University;theResearch andPublicationFundof theGraduate SchoolofWake Forest University;and by theAmerican Instituteof Pakistan Studies. Earlier versionsofthis paper were presentedat theAssociationforAsian Studies annual convention, Washington DC (17-19 March 1989)andthe CanadianPolitical Science Association annual convention, Victoria B.C. (27-29May1990).1 Daum,4December, 1988.It isuncertainhowmany women were affected bythismeasure. Thenumber of women convicts and/or prisoners inPakistan issubject toconsiderable dispute.Astudy completedby theWomen's Divisionof theGovernmentof Pakistanin1982 revealed that there were only 70 women convictsin all ofPakistan'sjails: Pervai2 Naeem Tariq, Female Crime in Rural and Urban Areas ofPakistan(Women's Division, Islamabad, 1984). Conversely,theABC Documentary VeilofDark-ness'(September 1989) claimed that 'thousandsofwomen remain accused, not convicted,on the chargeofvna andthat 'thousands have been arrestedonxinffcharges.' Inquiriesmadeby theauthor inearly 1990disclosed that there were approximately 300400women prisoners in Pakistan's jailsat that time; with one-third toone-half convicts.Source: interviews with officialsofWomen's Division (Islamabad), Prisoner's Aid Society(Karachi),andPakistan Women's Lawyer Association (Karachi).


2/11

46 CHARLES H. KENNEDYinated against the rights of women, and each called for the repeal ofth e hudud ordinances.3 Nevertheless, Benazir's administration wasunable o r unwilling to halt the process of Islamization in the state. Theofficial explanation is that the government's hands were tied as Benazir'scoalition government controlled far less support than the two-thirdsmajority needed to am end Pakistan's con stitution. It also must be notedthat the government took few, if any, administrative steps to slow thepace of Islamization. In fact, several important issues pertaining toIslamization, dormant during the latter days of the Zia regime, wereaddressed by the Supreme Court during Benazir's tenure. Such findingsof the Supreme Court have expanded the scope and hastened the paceof the process of Islamization in the state. 4

This paper presents evidence which supports the following points.(1) The implementation of Islamic laws under Pakistan's Islamizationprogramme has not had a significantly adverse impact on the rights ofwomen. (2) Many of the charges levelled against the Islamization pro-gramme have either misrepresented the relevant laws or exaggeratedthe scope and pace of their im plementation. (3) Nevertheless, the intro-duction of Islamic laws in Pakistan has exacerbated existing socialinequalities in the state. Moreover, the political costs to Pakistan, bothdomestic and international, have been great.To demonstrate these contentions this paper will first examine twointerrelated sets of policies which have affected the rights of women:th e hudud ordinances; and gender-based testimony restrictions. Thesehave been the two most important and frequently discussed issuesbearing upon the rights of women in Pakistan, although in no wayexhaustive of all such issues. Throughout, the analysis will rely on caselaw, and the legal interpretations of Pakistan's superior courts withparticula r emphasis placed on the decisions of the Federal Shariat Co urt(FSC). Secondly, the paper will examine the political and social costsattendant on such legal reforms.

' Such documentaries dis tort the facts concerning the implementation of the Islamiz-ation programme. For instance, the ABC documentary 'Veil of Darkness' claimed thatthe badd penalty for adultery had been awarded eight times during 1989. In fact, thehadd penalty for adultery has been awarded only four times since 1979 by the districtcourts, and in all such instances the penalty has been set aside by theFSC.Also erroneousis the claim made in the same documentary that 'Pakistan law required four eyewitnessesfor the conviction of rape.' (See discussion below.)* For instance, the Court ruled in Federation of Pakistan v. Gul Hasan Khan All-Pakistan Legal(PLD)1989 SC 633 that provisions in the Pakistan Penal Code pertainingto bodily hurt (murder, manslaughter, etc.) were un-Islamic. Also, in Qazalbash Waqfv. Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab PL D 1990 SC 99 the Court found that ZulfikarAh' Bhutto's land reforms of 1972 and 1977 were repugnant to Islam.


3/11

ISLAMIC LEGAL REFORM 47HUDVD ORDINANCES

On 10 February 1979,Ziaal-Haq prom ulgated four ordinances, collect-ively referred to as the'Ipududordinances' which were crafted tomakesignificant revisions in Pakistan's criminal law system. Namely, revisionswere madein criminal statutes bearing upon sex-related crimes (zina1)and theft. Inaddition,new laws were introduced through thevehicleof the ordinances bearing on prohibition and qadhf the wrongfulimputation of zina').5 In keeping with the Islamic intent of theordinances, each established distinctions between hadd crimes (crimesexpressly defined in theQur'an andSunna),andtalztr crimes, bothinregardtopunishmentsandevidentiary requirements.Of particular relevanceto this study,the overwhelming majorityofcases tried undertheipudud ordinances have fallen undertherubricofthe zina' ordinance.' The zinc? ordinance specifies ten separatesex-

related crimes.'Of these crimes,twohave drawn mostof theattentionof wo me n's rights activists: adultery /fornicatio n (section 10[2]),andrape (section 10[3]).Adultery/fornicationCriticsof theformer provision have argued thattheenforcement of anadultery/fornication law discriminates against women because unmar-ried pregnant womenorwomenwhogive b irthtoillegitimate childrenwould be/have been singledout for punishment under the lawwhilemen (equally 'guilty') wouldnot be charged/would be set free owingto lack of evidence.' This argument was given credence and becamepoliticized through thetragic caseof Safia Bibi.

' The Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudud) Ordinance, PLD 1979Central Statutes 44;theOffenceofZma (EnforcementofHudid) Ordinance,PLD 1979Centra] Statutes 51;The Offence of Qadbf (Enforcement of Hudud) OrdinancePLD1979 Central Statutes 56;and TheProhibition (EnforcementofHadd) Order PLD1979Central Statutes33.' Charles H. Kennedy, 'Islamizarion in Pakistan: Implementation of the HududOrdinances,' Asian Surveyxxxiii,3(March 1988), 309-10 .7Adultery/fornication; rape; kidnapping; sodomy; enticement; attempted rape; abet-ment of xinS crime; hadd adultery/fornication; deceitful marriage;and conspiracy toengagein prostitution.* Seeforinstance, Anita Weiss, 'Implicationsofthe Islamizarion ProgramforWomen',in Anita Weiss,ed.,IslamicReassertioninPakistan(Syracuse U niversity Press, Syracuse1986), 100-1; Zia's Law Human Rights under Military Rule in Pakistan (Lawyer'sCommitteeforHuman Rights, New York, 1985), 98-9;andKhawar Muratai and FaridaShaheed eds.,WomenofPakistan:TwoSteps Forward,OneStep Back? ZedBooks,London, 1987),100.


4/11

48 CHARLES H. KENNEDYSafia Bibi,' a severely myopic, unmarried twenty-year-old womangave birth to a child in July 1982. After the birth Sana's father lodged

a complaint charging her with ziru?.Subsequently Safia testified thatMaqsood Ahmed was responsible for the pregnancy as he had rapedher nine months earlier. A case was registered by the police againstboth Safia and MaqsoodSafia for fornication and Maqsood for rape.In July 1983, the case was heard by Chaudry Mohammed Aslam, theAdditional Sessions judge, Sahiwal. He ruled that there was insufficientevidence linking Maqsood with the charge of rape, and that Safia'stestimony was self-exculpatory and accordingly inadmissable. He sen-tenced her under section 10(2) of the zinS ordinance to three yearsimprisonm ent, 15 stripes, and imposed a fine of Rs. 1000.Before the sentence could be carried out accounts of the case appearedin Pakistan's newspapers and news magazines, and in the internationalpress. Such accounts exaggerated the facts of the case. It was reported

that Safia Bibi had been awarded stripes (this punishment was nevercarried out as her case was immediately appealed); that she was onlythirteen years old; that she was wholly blind; and that she had beenthe victim of a multiple rape by Maqsood and other members of his'landlor d' family (Maqsood's family owned less than tw o acres of land).It was also argued that Safia Bibi's case was typical of the courts'interpretation of thezina' ordinance:zma'can only be committed by two persons, male and female. But whereas thefemale accused is being convicted, the male counterpart, who has contributed tothe crime and has often forced or cajoled the woman, goes free. This is causingpanic in society and making women vulnerable to terror. In a number of casescomplaints of rape are not filed anyway due to social taboos and the law andorder situation. Now the zinS ordina nce is making the riling of com plaints ofrape even more dangerous and problematic for the female victim.

10

On the basis of such publicity, the Federal Shariat Court called for thecase (a criminal appeal had already been filed) and set Safia Bibi freepending appeal. In December, the Federal Shariat Court heard the caseand ruled that the trial judge had erred in disallowing Safia Bibi'sstatement that she had been raped. Setting aside the conviction thecourt found that under SharFa'if an unmarried w oma n delivering achild pleads that the birth was a result of a commission of rape uponher, she cannot be punished.' The ac count t hat follows is based upon the complete FSC file of Safia Bibi v. State,Cr. appeal 123/1/83. As of March 1990, this case has not been reported in Pakistani lawjournals.10 Rashida Patel, hlam isation of Laws in Pakistan? (Faiza Publications, Karachi,

1986). 48 . Safia Bibi, FSC Cr. appeal 123/1/83, 7.


5/11

ISLAMIC LEGAL REFORM 49This decision merely reiterated a well-established precedent of theFSC's interpretation of thezina1ordinance. Namely, in the case of birth

or the pregnancy of an unmarried woman and in the absence of circum-stantial or corroborative evidence proving w ilfulzinc? 'doubt should gowith the claim ant '. Similarly, the Federal Shariat Court has also ruledthat the conditions for zina are not proven if a married woman givesbirth to a child when the woman's husband is in jail during the likelyperiod of conception,1* nor are the conditions forarts'met if a womangives birth to a full-term child shortly after marriage.1* Further, the FSChas also found that evidence of an unmarried woman's abortion doesnot constitute proof ofzina''15 nor does the registration of an illegitimatebir th .In sum, proof of zina' is dependent upon direct evidence of sexualintercourse committed by a man and a woman, not validly married toone another, and 'wilfully' committed by one or both of the partners. 17Proof ofzina'can also be determined by a confession. But, such confes-sions must be: (a) free of duress; (b) based upon legal council; (c) madeby an individual neither physically handicapped nor insane; and (d)repeated on four separate occasions.11The wholesale application of such legal precedents is borne out byan examination of sentencing under the terms of the zina' ordinance,controlling for gender. If the implementation of section 10(2) wasdiscriminatory to women one would expect that there would be morewomen convicted under this provision than men. The opposite is thecase. Of those convicted under the terms of 10(2) in district courts andin the FSC, 56% and 70% respectively are men.1 ' Therefore, to theextent that gender bias is present in the implementation of this provisionof law, it favours women.RapeAlso drawing fire from critics of the hudud ordinances have been therape provisions of the zina' ord inan ce. Section 10(3) of the zinS

11 See for example Zareena v. State, FSC Cr. appeal 12/1/83; Mubarik Ali v. StatePLC 1984 55; Rafaqat Bibi v. State PL D 1984 FSC 39; Zubaida Begum v. State PL D1986 FSC 268.

11 See for example Azmat Khan v. State PL D 1982 FSC 4; and Niamet Bibi v. StatePL D 1984 FSC 17. In the latter case the petitioner's husband had been in jail for fouryears in Iran. The FSC ruled that 'reasonable doubt' existed because he 'could haveescaped and returned to prison without detection.'

14 Sakina v. State PL D 1981 FSC 320.u Siarii v. State PL D 1984 FSC 122; Akhtar v. State FSC Cx. appeal 41/1/84. Itebar Jana v. State FSC Cr. appeal ?/I/8 3.17 Sukhan v. State FSC Cr. appeal 5/1784. Bakhan v. State PL D 1986 FSC 274. Kennedy, 'Islamization in Pakistan . . . ' (1988), 313; see Table.


6/11

50 CHARLE S H. KENNEDYordinance replaced section 375 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The disputeconcerns whether the new law adequately protects the rights of wom en.Critics contend that: (a) the testimony restrictions for haddconvictions(four adult male witnesses) preclude rape convictions; and (b) thatwomen do not bring charges of rape against their assailants becausethey fear being countercharged for an a0.11 Neither contention is sup-ported by relevant case law.

First, the superior courts have consistently ruled that the criminalcharge of rape (ta'ztr)can be proven based upon the sole testimony ofthe victim providing that circumstantial evidence supports the allega-tions. In this regard the courts have not departed in any significantway from the standard of proof that applied to section 375 of thePakistan Penal Code. Accordingly, the courts have awarded many con-victions under section 10(3). The average punishment for such convic-tions is quite severe: in District courts the mean sentence is twelve yearsimprisonment, and twenty two stripes; in the FSC the mean sentence iseleven years imprisonment and twenty stripes.23

Second, as demonstrated above, the courts have consistently notconvicted women of zina' if there is 'reasonable doubt' concerningwhether the woman was forced to submit to the crime. Indeed, ratherthan reducing the number of rape cases filed, the implementation of10(3) has actually increased the incidence of the charge. 24 This is anunintended (and perhaps perverse) consequence of the interplay ofprovisions of the zina' ordinance. Women fearing conviction undersection 10(2) frequently bring charges of rape (10[3]) against theiralleged partn ers. The FSC finding no circumstantial evidence to supp ortthe latter charge, but in possession of evidence proving zina', oftenconvict the male accused under section 10(2). Approximately thirtypercent of all convictions under section 10(2) originate as 10(3) cases.In such cases the woman bringing the charges is exonerated of anywrongdoing due to the 'reasonable doubt' rule.

n Weiss, 'Implications of the Islamization Program' (1986), 100. Mum taz and Shaheed,Women ofPakistan(1987), 98.11 Lawyer's Committee, 98. For example see Muhammad Ramzan v. StateP LD1982 FSC 151; Ghulam Rasulv. State PLD 1982 FSC 109. When no corroborating evidence is produced supportingthe claim of the victim, the superior courts have consistently overturned rape convictions,or reduced charges to adultery/fornication10(2). See Ghulam Muhammad v. StatePLD 1984 FSC 72; M hd. Iqbal v. StateP LD1983 FSC 9; and Jumma Khan v. State PLDFSC 207.u Kennedy, 'Islamiiation in Pakistan . . . ' (1988), see Table, 312.** Author's discussions with relevant lawyers and judges. Kennedy, 'Islamiiatio n in Pakistan . . .' (1988) see Table, 310.


7/11

I S L A M I C L E G A L R E F O R M 51Gender-based testimony restrictionsAgainit is contended thataclose examinationof distinctions betweenthe valueofevidenceofmen and women as sparked by the imp lementa-tionof Zia's Islamization programme discloses more smoke than fire.Muchofthe controversyandconfusion stem from draft ordinance sonevidence, andqisasanddiyat17 proposed by theCouncil of IslamicIdeology during 1980-84. Provisions within thedraft ordinance spro-posed that the testimonyofwomeninmost situationsbe equated withone-half thatof a man's. Such draft ordinances were highly publicized;onewaseven published in theGazetteofPakistan.Reaction to suchproposed legislation was swiftand consistently opposedtothe discrim-inatory provisions against women. Indeed, Zia's government quicklydistanced itself from the Council's draft ordinances. Working throughthe Law C ommission (attachedtothe Supreme Court) and the M inistryof Justice, the government encouraged the drafting of a farless radicalQanun-i Shahada,and putqisasanddiyat legislationonhold.In1984,the Qanun-i Shahada waspromulgated byZia. Inregardto thetesti-monyofwomenitdeparted from the provisionsofthe LawofEvidenceActof1872inonlyonesignificant parti cula r. Article17 of the newlaw provides that:a) In matters pertaining to financial or future obligations, if reduced to writing,

the instrument shall be attested by two men, or one man and two women,so that one may remind the other, if necessary, and evidence shall be ledaccordingly; and

b) In all other matters, the Court may accept, or act on the testimony of oneman or one woman or such other evidence as the circumstances of the casewarrant.

This article was substituted for article 134 of the 1872 Law ofEvidence whichhadstated: 'N o particular numberofwitnesses shallinany caseberequired forproofon anyfact.'Why article 17 was introduced into the new legislation remainsunclear. Most likely it wasintroduced as 'pro of that the Qanun-iShahadahad made significant departures from the'un-Islamic' Lawof Council of Islamic Ideology, Draft Ordinance, Islamic aw of Evidence (Printing

Corporation of Pakistan Press, Islamabad, 1984).27 Councilof Islamic Ideology, Draft of the Offences Against Human Body (Enforce-

mentofQisasandDiyat) Ordinance, 1980. PublishedinGazette of Pakistan Extraordin-ary 13December, 1980); Council of Islamic Ideology, Draft Ordinance Relating to theLaw of Qisas andDiyat, June 1981 (Printing CorporationofPakistan Press, Islamabad,1982).

Based upo naclausebyclause com parisonof the Qanun-i Shahada Order, 1984 Xof 1984)and TheEvidenceAct 1 of 1872).


8/11

5X C H A R L E S H . K E N N E D YEvidence of 1872. The clause may also have been included in order tomaintain support from the and the Council of Islamic Ideology.

In practice, the imp lementation of Article 17 has had at most a m inorimpact upon the legal system of Pakistan. Article 17 has not had amaterial bearing on any PLD-reported case brought before the HighCourts, theFSC,or the Supreme Court of Pakistan since its introduction(19 84- 198 9). Nevertheless, Article 17 remains a major focus of criti-cism, and Benazir called for its repeal during the 1988 election campaign.Also deemed discriminatory tow ards women are gender-based stand-ards of evidence in the budud ordinances. Proof for the imposition ofhadd penalties in each of the four ordinances excludes women's testi-mony.Zina'liable tohaddrequires four adultmalewitnesses; similarly,hadd penalties for prohibition, property, and qadhf each require thetestimony of two adult male witnesses. In practice, such restrictionshave had only a minor impact upon the implementation of law in

Pakistan. As I have reported elsewhere,30

there have only been a handfulof hadd cases brought before the District courts, and only twohaddconvictions (both property cases) have survived appeal before the Fed-eral Shariat Court. Both of these were later overturned by the SupremeCourt.31 In none of these cases were women material witnesses. Never-theless, there is considerable sentiment within Pakistan's legal commun-ity, as well as support from the Benazir government, for relevantmodifications in the hudud ordinances.32 Rashida Patel, a prominentfemale attorney, has challenged the gender-based evidence distinctionsof thehudiidordinances in a series ofSharfa petitions before the FSC.Th e C ourt p artially rejected the petitions but the case has been appealedto the Supreme Court.33

From the auth or 's review of re levant PL D indices.10 Charles H. Kennedy, ' I slamizat ion and Legal Reform in Pakistan, 1979-1989' .Pacific Affairs, 63, 1 (Spring 1990) , 62-77.

11 Ghu lam Ali v. Sta te PL D 1982 FSC 259, overturned by Ghulam Ah' v. Sta te PL D1986 SC 741. Zah id Iqbal v. Sta te FSC Cr. appe al 163/1/82 was la ter overturned b y theSupreme Court , a l though as of July 1989 the case ha t not been reported in Pakistanil a w journa l s .

1 1 An excellent discussion of the testimony issue from a Qur'anic perspective is foundin Aftab Hussa in, Status of Wom en in Islam (Law Publ ishing Co., Lahore , 1987) ,242-349. Useful accounts of the pol i t ica l environment surrounding the issue is providedby H . Minrge s , A New Debate on 'Women and Islam' in Pakistan (Christ ian StudyCe nt re , Ra w a lp ind i , 1984) , 40- 7 ; a nd M um ta z a nd Sha he e d , Women in Pakistan (1987),esp. 1 2 3 - 4 2 . Begum Rashida Pate l v. Federa t ion of Pakistan PLD 1989 FSC 95.


9/11

ISLAMIC LEGAL REFORM J3SOCIAL AND POLITICAL COSTS

So far it has been argued that the implementation of Zia's Islamizationprogramme had only minor deleterious effects on the rights of women;and that many of the charges brought against it exaggerated the scope,pace, and intent of Zia's legal reforms. But such an argument is onlypart of the story. From a more general perspective we contend that theIslamization programme proved politically costly to Zia's regime. Itsimplementation also exacerbated class conflict in Pakistan as well asprovoking other social costs.First, Zia's Islamization programme became a target of internationalhuman rights organizations. Such groups focused their attention on twoalleged aspects of the programme: discrimination against women; and'cruel and unusual punishments'. In regard to the latter, Pakistan's legalsystem was charged with having imposed barbaric punishments, includ-

ing amputations, stoning to death, and arbitrary floggings. As was thecase with th e wo men's rights issue, such charges were often exaggerated.N o officially-sanctioned stoning to death nor am pu tatio n has ever beenmeted out in Pakistan. Nevertheless, the damage to Pakistan's interna-tional image has been severe.Second, the Islamization programm e provoked considerable domesticcosts.From the introduction in 1979 of Zia's Islamic policies, politicalopponents have taken square aim at them as they proved so easy atarget. Th e issues were technical and co mplex, subject as a consequenceto considerable distortion in the press and manipulation by relevantpoliticians. Moreover, Zia's government w as reluctant to openly counterits opponents' charges, for fear that such denials would be construed asan admission of the slow pace of implementation of his policies. 14Whether one argues that the Islamization programme discriminatedagainst the rights of women or not, it is undoubtedly the case that theimplementation of the hudiid ordinances discriminated against Pakis-tan's lower socio-economic classes. Those accused ofhudiidcrimes arcfor the most part employed in semi-skilled, unskilled, or menial jobs.Between 1979-1986, 42% of the males accused were cultivators; 17%common labourers; and most of the others were beggars, rickshawdrivers, fruit-sellers, or servants. Over9 5%of the accused women wereemployed in the household. Of the accused, 75% dwell in rural areas.The overwhelming majority of the accused are illiterate. Conversely,very few middle-class individuals have been accused ofhudiidcrimesless than 2%. A similar pattern holds for victims of such crimes.

M For a more detailed argument see Kennedy, 'Islamizarion and Legal Reform inPakistan (1990). Kennedy, 'Islamization in Pakistan . . . ' (1988), 313 -5.


10/11

54 CHA RLES H. KENNEDYIt is also undoubtedly the case that the implementation of the hududordinances has introduced a much used vehicle to express intra-family

and inter-family enmity. Most of the cases brought before the superiorcourts dealing withhudud laws, in which women were principals, areinitiated on private complaints brought by the woman's father, brother,former spouse, or mother. In such a situation the possibility of abuseis great. Also, it is not uncommon for intcr-family grievances to resultin charges of zina' being brought against the relevant target of one'senmity. Indeed, the reading of cases filed under the provisions ofhududdiscloses that many of the cases brought before the courts lackedsubstantive merit. The extraordinary rate of acceptance of appeals bythe FSC bears this observation out.3* Seemingly, such weak cases arepursued in order to: (a) punish a disobedient daughter, son or otherrelative; or (b) to harass or threaten an enemy. It is also very likely thatthe mere threat of bringing charges under budud may exert a potentform of social control.Unfortunately, even if such suits are ultimately dismissed by thecourts at original or appellate levels the costs to those accused may bequite severe. Obviously, those accused must bear the financial costs ofmounting a defence as well as suffering the emotional torment of facinga lengthy prison term. Also, it is not uncommon for those accused ofhudud crimes to await their trial in jail. Although most of the offencesthat fall under hududare bailable, many of those accused cannot raisesufficient funds to post bail, and many do not know their legal rights.Moreover, in the context of Pakistan's traditional social structure, themere charge ofzina regardless of conviction, carries a significant stigma.The consequences of the latter can be catastrophic for women.A strong argument could be made that justice would be served by

actively and enthusiastically enforcing the qadhf ordinancedesignedin part as a legal remedy against false charges of zina'. Curiously, thecourts have entertained very few qadhf cases, and they have rejected itas a remedy for slander in overturned zinS cases except in instances inwhich ahadd crime is alleged.37

** Bakhtiar Said Muhammad v. The State PL D1986 FSC 187. For the conditions ofa successful qadbfplaint see Abdul Rashid v. Safia BibiP LD1986 FSC 10.17 In Begum Rashida Patcl v. Federation of Pakistan PL D 1989 FSC 95 the Courtdirected that charges of zina' not liable to hadd (ta'ttr) not be designated aszinabecause, if so designated, failure to convict the accused could result in counterchargesof qadhf against the complainant.


11/11

ISLAMIC LEGAL REFORM 55CONCLUSIONS

This paper has sought to show that the relationship between women'srights and Zia's Islamization programme is quite complex and does notlend itself to easy analysis, nor snap judgements. Clearly, the perceptionthat Zia's programm e significantly discriminated against wom en's rightsis fundamentally flawed. We contend that a more useful analysis ofZia's Islamic policies should be cast in a broader context, taking intoaccount the social, political, and religious consequences of its imple-mentation. In any case, the legacy of Zia's Islamic policies is likely topersist in Pakistan for the foreseeable future. No government, regardlessofitsideological predisposition, will be able to dismantle the program mewithout incurring considerable, and possibly fatal, political costs.

islamic legal reform and the status of women in pakistan

Documents