Women in Afghanistan often jailed for "moral crimes"

   Even though the Taliban government in Afghanistan fell more than ten
years ago, the justice system is still discriminatory in its treatment
of women as is the legal system.

Al Jazeera reporter, Jennifer Glasse reports from Herat at a women's jail. Many in Afghan

jails are in jail for fleeing domestic abuse or violence. Even rape
victims are jailed for what are called "moral crimes" as the appended
video shows, Afghanistan is unique even among those countries which base

 their judicial system on Sharia law in that Afghanistan is the only
jurisdiction which claims there is a crime of fleeing. Heather Barr,
 Afghan Researcher, at Human Rights Watch said: "Afghanistan is the only
 Islamic government in the world that specifically criminalised running
away." There is no mention of the offense in Afghan law. The problem of
running away could be solved if Afghanistan had more women's shelters
and other programs.

A report issued
 by Human Rights Watch last year, claims that hundreds of women and
girls are imprisoned for the moral crimes of running away from home, and
 sex outside of marriage.The report had called for an estimated 400
women to be freed so that the Afghan government would fulfill its
obligations under international human rights law.

Kenneth Roth,
 executive director of Human Rights Watch said:"It is shocking that 10
years after the overthrow of the Taliban, women and girls are still
imprisoned for running away from domestic violence or forced marriage."
  Actually, it is not that surprising. Many of the former warlords whom
the west helped triumph over the Taliban were just as violent against
women if not worse than the Taliban. Also, there are so-called reformed
Taliban in the government. They probably hold the same views about women
 as unreformed Taliban but support the government.

The criminalisation of "running away" results from a certain latitude given judges under article 130 of the Afghan constitution:
 "When there is no provision in the Constitution or other laws regarding
 ruling on an issue, the courts’ decisions shall be within the limits of
 this Constitution in accord with the Hanafi jurisprudence and in a way
to serve justice in the best possible manner."

Afghan judges and prosecutors say that this allows judges to
interpret Islamic law and justifies their ruling on fleeing. Heather
Barr says that the judges and prosecutors are ignoring the limits of the
 section in that the interpretations should be consistent with other
provisions of the constitution and lead to a just outcome. Heather Barr
thinks that the decisions violate article 130 of the constitution which
says: "No person can be punished but in accordance with the decision of
an authorised court and in conformity with the law adopted before the
date of offense". Some local Afghan rights workers were critical of the
report for not examining the laws more carefully upon which distinctions
 are made and not interviewing women who have run away and are actually
in shelters to determine the different circumstances that determine
legal outcomes.

Ahraf Nemat, an Afghan human rights campaigner, said that the Human
Rights Watch report would be taken as a general statement of impunity
for the 400 or so women imprisoned. Nemat said that it is equally
important that women who commit crimes should face justice.

   Even though the Taliban government in Afghanistan fell more than ten years ago, the justice system is still discriminatory in its treatment of women as is the legal system.

Al Jazeera reporter, Jennifer Glasse reports from Herat at a women's jail. Many in Afghan jails are in jail for fleeing domestic abuse or violence. Even rape victims are jailed for what are called "moral crimes" as the appended video shows, Afghanistan is unique even among those countries which base their judicial system on Sharia law in that Afghanistan is the only jurisdiction which claims there is a crime of fleeing. Heather Barr, Afghan Researcher, at Human Rights Watch said: "Afghanistan is the only Islamic government in the world that specifically criminalised running away." There is no mention of the offense in Afghan law. The problem of running away could be solved if Afghanistan had more women's shelters and other programs.

A report issued by Human Rights Watch last year, claims that hundreds of women and girls are imprisoned for the moral crimes of running away from home, and sex outside of marriage.The report had called for an estimated 400 women to be freed so that the Afghan government would fulfill its obligations under international human rights law.

Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch said:"It is shocking that 10 years after the overthrow of the Taliban, women and girls are still imprisoned for running away from domestic violence or forced marriage." Actually, it is not that surprising. Many of the former warlords whom the west helped triumph over the Taliban were just as violent against women if not worse than the Taliban. Also, there are so-called reformed Taliban in the government. They probably hold the same views about women as unreformed Taliban but support the government.

The criminalisation of "running away" results from a certain latitude given judges under article 130 of the Afghan constitution: "When there is no provision in the Constitution or other laws regarding ruling on an issue, the courts’ decisions shall be within the limits of this Constitution in accord with the Hanafi jurisprudence and in a way to serve justice in the best possible manner."

Afghan judges and prosecutors say that this allows judges to interpret Islamic law and justifies their ruling on fleeing. Heather Barr says that the judges and prosecutors are ignoring the limits of the section in that the interpretations should be consistent with other provisions of the constitution and lead to a just outcome. Heather Barr thinks that the decisions violate article 130 of the constitution which says: "No person can be punished but in accordance with the decision of an authorised court and in conformity with the law adopted before the date of offense". Some local Afghan rights workers were critical of the report for not examining the laws more carefully upon which distinctions are made and not interviewing women who have run away and are actually in shelters to determine the different circumstances that determine legal outcomes.

Ahraf Nemat, an Afghan human rights campaigner, said that the Human Rights Watch report would be taken as a general statement of impunity for the 400 or so women imprisoned. Nemat said that it is equally important that women who commit crimes should face justice.

- See more at: http://digitaljournal.com/article/344667#sthash.A60Fj9Pe.dpuf

Afghan women jailed for "moral crimes"

Even though the Taliban have long been out of power in Afghanistan some of the strict moral prohibitions characteristic of their rule remain under the Karzai regime. Afghan women have been jailed for crimes such as running away --often from domestic abuse, and having sex outside of marriage.

Human Rights Watch claims that the Karzai government has not met its obligations under human rights laws. The executive director of the group said:“It is shocking that 10 years after the overthrow of the Taliban, women and girls are still imprisoned for running away from domestic violence or forced marriage,” Actually it is not all that surprising since the culture is not that easy to change and Karzai wants to keep the support of very conservative groups including the so-called reformed Taliban.

The human rights report claims that there are 400 women in prison and younger girls in juvenile facilities for offenses that include running away. The report noted:“Some women and girls have been convicted of zina, sex outside of marriage, after being raped or forced into prostitution,..Judges often convict solely on the basis of ‘confessions’ given in the absence of lawyers and ‘signed’ without having been read to women who cannot read or write. After conviction, women routinely face long prison sentences, in some cases more than 10 years.” Obviously these are odious miscarriages of justice carried out solely upon women. Even worse, many of 58 inmates who were interviewed feared they would be murdered by their family members if released in so-called honor killings.

The report cited a woman sentenced to three years in prison after fleeing a father-in-law who raped her : “I am happy in here. Here I am not afraid because I know no-one is coming in the night to kill me.”

Karzai to his credit has often issued pardons to women convicted of moral crimes. However, it is rather incongruous to give a pardon for something that should not have been a crime in the first place. For more see this article.

International dismay as Karzai backs law ravaging women's rights

We already count as allies countries that consistently restrict women's rights including the big oil producers Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. Afghanistan already has condemned one of its citizens to death for converting to Christianity and kicked a female parliamentarian out of the legislature for uttering the obvious truth that there were former warlords who had violated human rights in the government. No wonder the socalled moderate Taliban might find a place in the government.
It is understandable that feminists should ride their moral high horses when such a pernicious law is presented but it is quite another thing to think that foreign occupation and force from outside is the way to change anything. The Soviets also contributed considerably to advancing the rights of women in Afghanistan but ultimately they were forced out with the help of the West of course who at the time considered these same jihadis with the same anti-feminist values as freedom fighters!


AFGHANISTAN CONFERENCE: 'THIS WILL CREATE SERIOUS DIFFICULTIES FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA': HILLARY IS NOT IMPRESSED
International dismay as Karzai backs law ravaging women's rights
Law would legalize rape within marriage, UN says, putting damper on summit hopes and outraging ministers

DOUG SAUNDERS

April 1, 2009
THE HAGUE -- An effort by ministers from the United States, Canada and other members of the 42-nation coalition fighting in Afghanistan to put an optimistic face on the war's progress came close to collapse yesterday when Afghan President Hamid Karzai was publicly accused of supporting a law that dramatically limits the rights of women.
Attended in total by 72 countries and organizations interested in rebuilding the country, The Hague summit was meant to be a "big tent" show of support for U.S. President Barack Obama's new Afghanistan war plans. But by day's end the participants had been forced to confront the reality of a government riddled with corruption and committed to legislating sexual inequality.
According to United Nations organizations that have seen it, a law backed by the Karzai government would legalize rape within marriage and would forbid women from going to the doctor or leaving their home without their husband's protection.
It also reportedly grants custody of children only to fathers or grandfathers.


When the law was brought to the attention of the summit by the Finnish Foreign Minister yesterday afternoon, forcing U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to back away from her optimistic message, it marked the culmination of a day in which public statements of progress in Afghanistan were contradicted by private expressions of deep concern.
"Things are going worse for us than they have during the past four or five years - the Taliban controls more of our territory than before, and we have made no progress at all on corruption," a Canadian official said moments before Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon told the summit that he was "immediately able to see the results and impacts of our efforts" in Afghanistan.
The rape-law allegations were an especially severe blow to a conference meant to be what Ms. Clinton called a "blank slate," in which the 42 countries in the coalition would commit themselves with renewed vigour to the eight-year-old UN-mandated campaign, with support from 4,000 additional U.S. troops and a long-term commitment from Mr. Obama.
Faced with questions about the law yesterday afternoon, Ms. Clinton expressed dismay. She is said to have upbraided Mr. Karzai, whose presidency has been backed and promoted by the United States for years, in a private meeting.
"This is an area of absolute concern for the United States," she told reporters. "My message is very clear. Women's rights are a central part of the foreign policy of the Obama administration."
Officials from other countries had even more trouble hiding their disappointment with a government that was meant to signal a turn away from the sexual oppression of the ousted Taliban regime.
In Ottawa, Trade Minister Stockwell Day, chairman of the cabinet committee on Afghanistan, suggested that if the reports are true, Canada's support for the Afghan government will be affected.
"If these prove to be true, this will create serious problems for the government of Canada, for the people of Canada," Mr. Day said. "The onus is upon the government of Afghanistan to live up to its human-rights responsibilities, absolutely including the rights of women. If there is any wavering on this point ... this will create serious difficulties, serious problems for the government of Canada."
Spousal sexual assault is an offence in most parts of the Western world, and became a crime in Canada in 1983. In its 1993 declaration on the elimination of violence against women, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights established marital rape as a human-rights violation.
For many officials, the reports of Mr. Karzai's support for the law making rape exclusively an extramarital crime mark the culmination of years of frustration with the corruption, inertia and culture of impunity for which his government is known. One Canadian official said that Mr. Karzai no longer has the support of any country fighting in Afghanistan, but nothing can be said in public because he is likely to win the presidential election scheduled for this summer.
A British cabinet minister was more explicit. "We are caught in the Catch-22 that the Afghans obviously have the right to write their own laws," Lord Malloch Brown, the foreign secretary for Africa and Asia, told the Guardian newspaper yesterday. "But there is dismay. The rights of women was one of the reasons the U.K. and many in the West threw ourselves into the struggle in Afghanistan. It matters greatly to us and our public opinion."
With 2,800 soldiers fighting in the most dangerous part of Afghanistan, Canada has suffered the highest casualty rate of any coalition member, and has an important leadership role in the country's troubled south. Mr. Cannon was able to proclaim a Canadian victory in having built a new agreement between Pakistani and Afghan border officials, after talks organized by Canada. But there was a distinct sense that Canada is no longer being treated as a major coalition partner now that both the governing Conservatives and the opposition Liberals have made it clear that they will withdraw all combat troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2011.
Canada did not share in the major international development of the day, a public diplomatic contact between the United States and Iran for the first time in 30 years. Signalling a possible rapprochement between Iran and the West, Iran sent a mid-level official to the meeting and held talks in which Tehran agreed to co-operate with drug-eradication schemes in Afghanistan and allow non-military supplies to be sent across its borders - in both cases solving difficult logistical problems for the coalition.
With reports from Campbell Clark in Ottawa and Caroline Alphonso
dsaunders@globeandmail.com