Why is there a condition for each of these horrific crimes against women as a prerequisite that sets an act of crime in motion?
For instance, in the case of honour killings, one cannot help but wonder how loosely and callously is this term defined in the first place. It is a crime committed by a male family member, mostly the patriarch of the family (be it a father, brother, husband) to remove the dishonour and disgrace brought about by the female member of the family (be it a daughter, sister, wife). Now let us explore how these women bring "dishonour" to the family.
Often, it is by running away from home to purse education and career of their choice, or to marry the man of their choice. They dishonour the family by running away from their abusive father, brother, or husband. They dishonour the family by running away from marital rape, rape by their brother, father, and uncle. They run away because they do not want to continue in a forced marriage that sometimes befalls them due to a marriage within the same community, caste and creed. So, each time a woman “runs away” to fulfill some of the extremely basic human rights, like the right to education, the right to live a life with freedom and liberty or the right to marry the man of her choice, she brings much in the way of a bad name and dishonour to the whole family.
Interestingly, when a man runs away to fulfill all these basic human rights, it is not doubted for a second if he has done anything wrong. Instead, if a boy pursues education by travelling to another city (with or without parental consent), he is celebrated as the noble warrior whose return is celebrated with even more fervour. Similarly, if a father abandons his family and moves to greener pastures for any financial or personal reasons, he is welcomed with open arms if he chooses to return home ever. In none of these cases does a man ever bring shame or dishonour to the family.
Last but not least, an important reason of honour killings is a special bucket of profanity, videos or indecent attire of a girl released on any social media platform for the entire world to see. Surprisingly, here also a boy goes scot-free and is not subjected to honour killings.
According to some very painful statistics, Pakistan has the highest number of documented and estimated honour killings - at least 1,000 women per year. About one-fifth of the world’s honour killings are committed in Pakistan. Clearly, lack of education and awareness of basic human rights, the state’s negligence in providing basic shelter and protection to women as well as loosely knitted and implemented laws - collectively contribute to such high statistics.
One of the most high-profile cases of honour killings was that of the social media starlet Qandeel Baloch. She was famous for her outrageously bold content where she questioned the status quo and spoke her mind the way she wanted to.
In 2016, she was targeted and killed in the name of honour by her brother Mohammad Waseem. When he was arrested, he had admitted to committing the crime and he was convicted under the Section 311, the law of qatl-e-amd (which means murder according to his own free will). In 2019, Waseem was sentenced to life in prison.
Two days ago, Waseem was acquitted by the Lahore High Court after having spent less than six years in jail. His release has sent shock waves around the worldwide media because his life sentence had provided a somewhat decent closure to the memory of Qandeel Baloch, who was mercilessly strangled to death.
In 2019 section 311 was invoked by his parents, allowing him to be forgiven so that he could be released. This allowance should not hold true because three months after her murder, the Senate passed the anti-honour killing laws and anti-rape laws simultaneously. According to the anti-honour killing laws, if a woman is murdered in the name of honour by a family member, the accused will still be subjected to strict punishment even if he is granted a pardon from the family member(s) of the deceased. This new law would then treat honour killings as just as any other homicide and the investigations and the trials will be conducted without any pre-determined prejudices laid down by cultural stipulations such as “honour.”
Waseem was convicted even though his parents pleaded a pardon for their son: the final verdict announced by the trial court was life imprisonment. Further, to bolster the case against him, the anti-honour killing laws were already in place to ensure that he is not acquitted. That is why it is very troubling to see how despite all the legal efforts and due diligence, the accused (Waseem) was eventually acquitted.
A very thorough and robust review of these laws is needed urgently to identify the gaps and errors that can be rectified in a timely manner, to prevent injustice in the future. It saddens the nation at large to see him acquitted because his acquittal will give rise to countless Waseems who up until now may have restrained themselves.
Lastly, I would like to add that there is nothing honourable about killing a woman to save one’s empty honour. It is about time that the state and judiciary walk hand in hand to re-define the narratives surrounding honour killings. It all starts with removing the word “honour” from this crime and just define it as a murder.