This week, I begin working as a volunteer with Women Against Abuse, an organization in Philadelphia that provides shelter, legal aid and other resources to victims of domestic violence and their children. At the orientation for volunteers, they emphasized that domestic violence encompassed all cultures, creeds and backgrounds. At the same time, our training materials mentioned the variety of attitudes that a culture can have towards domestic violence. They include but are not limited to: outrage, denial and acceptance. For as long as I can remember, I’ve placed Pakistani culture in the category of indifference/acceptance when it comes to the matter of protecting women and children from the effects of domestic violence.
As a child, domestic violence was an inextricable feature of the culture in which I grew up. My parents, who emigrated from Pakistan in the eighties, settled in a small town in New Jersey where we interacted little with the Pakistani Christian community. But I recall clearly the time I was six years old and we went to Philadelphia for some kid’s birthday party. I tugged at my mom’s blue dupatta. “Hey mom, what happened to Aunty N.’s arm?”
My mom looked at the aunty’s cast-covered arm and then at me. “Her husband broke it,” she said calmly. For the rest of the party, I kept peeking in shock and horror at Aunty N. and her husband, who I adored because even though he pinched my cheeks like the other uncles, he always followed it up with some candy.
I wish that was the last time I encountered something like that. It wasn’t. From my parents, I continued to hear stories of women whose husbands and fathers slapped them around. And when I went to high school, I heard similar stories from other South Asian classmates. But I’m pleased that Pakistan is (finally!) making a small step in the right direction when it comes to treating domestic violence as a punishable crime as opposed to a private family matter.
Pakistan moved towards outlawing domestic violence when lawmakers approved a bill Tuesday that will punish those found guilty of beating women or children with jail terms and fines. The law was passed unanimously in the lower house of parliament or national assembly, Yasmi Rehman from the main ruling Pakistan People’s Party told AFP, hailing what she called a “big day” for Pakistani women. It will come into effect after the senate, or upper house of parliament, approves the law and President Asif Ali Zardari signs it into legislation. Those found guilty of beating women or children would face a minimum six months behind bars and a fine of at least 100,000 rupees (1,205 dollars). “Domestic violence against women is not considered a major offense in our society. I hope this bill will provide protection to our women against all types of violence in their homes and living places,” Rehman said.
[Link.]
I hope so too, Rehman. I hope so too. It all depends on whether or not the police actually enforce it.
This is a small yet great step for your country.The law must be enforced and not abused ( 120,000 husbands in India became victims of their wives harrassments) -http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3125931
Thanks for writing about this. I wish there were a collective feminist desi blog somewhere out there. Will settle for an assortment of posts from different places for now.
A serious post about a serious topic affecting millions of battered women. Strangely you choose to use a silly blog handle that undermines your message. It is a flippant, fliratious, irreverent but ultimately jejune “phillygrrl.” Paradoxically you attack males using analogous handle as immature.
Women empowering women is what’s needed.
@ sarada_ap: thanks for selecting such a serious blog name. I am certain that the mere selection of your name and use of big SAT level words will stop the majority of domestic abusers in their tracks – because yes, the world is that simple.
This law, and the recent government announcement restoring the 5% quota for religious minorities in government jobs, shows maybe that the PPP may actually stay a left-wing party while in government.
Sorry you feel that way. I’ve used it for a year now. No need to confuse my readers by changing now. And if readers choose to focus on that instead of the message, their loss.
Paradoxically you attack males using analogous handle as immature.
I didn’t see her “attacking males” in this post, just telling a story and mentioning a recent news item in relation to the issue at hand.
America?
This is very good news. it will take time maybe even a generation or two but is the right step.
When it comes to names in life or handles. America is the land of the free, be called whatever you want.
There is!
And another one.
I know embarrassingly little about punishment for domestic abuse, so I apologize if the answers to these questions are obvious. I realize they’re applicable wherever perpetrators of domestic abuse are prosecuted. If the perpetrator is the only earner in the household, what happens to the family during the time spent in prison? Assuming the perpetrator can pay the fine, who gets it? After serving the sentence, is there forced reconciliation? Can the family get a permanent separation?
Here’s the bill:
http://www.na.gov.pk/passed_bill/domestic_violence2009.pdf
So it seems that after the perpetrator is found guilty, the court can issue a restraining order.
It’s the violation of this order that can land the perpetrator mandatory jail time and the fine, which goes to the aggrieved.
From what I can tell, the bill doesn’t have anything to say about custody of children in the case of spousal abuse, and it’s ambiguous who has to move out if the court issues a restraining order (at the court’s discretion?).
Adil Najam in Pakistaniat
sarada_ap, Jejune eh. Here’s another ten dollar word, etymology. Google is your grrlfriend.
!!
Indeed. “Nor is it difficult to see what is the tie between man and man which replaces by degrees those forms of reciprocity in rights and duties which have their origin in the Family. It is contract. Starting, as from one terminus of history, from a condition of society in which all the relations of Persons are summed up in the relations of Family, we seem to have steadily moved towards a phase of social order in which all these relations arise from the free agreement of individuals. In [] Europe the progress achieved in this direction has been considerable. Thus the status of the Slave has disappeared — it has been superseded by the contractual relation of the servant to his master. The status of the Female under Tutelage, if the tutelage be understood of persons other than her husband, has also ceased to exist; from her coming of age to her marriage all the relations she may form are relations of contract. So too the status of the Son under Power has no true place in the law of modern societies. . . . The movement of the progressive societies has hitherto been a movement from Status to Contract.”
Henry Sumner Maine, Ancient Law (1861).
Just curious if there are conflicting laws in play. NWFP has Sharia law, so I’m guessing this does not apply there.
I’m curious about the rest of Pakistan. India, for instance has the Muslim personal law, which undermines social reform (most infamously for divorce). Does Pakistan have simlar religion based personal laws and, if so, does this ruling apply to them?
In the blog phillygrrl.com blog phillygrrl specifically writes “grrl/girl” is kosher but not boy because it’s immature. Makes phillygrrl come across like an aunty who secretly tells her son to keep the daughter-in-law in her place. Such practices in Desi culture are endemic and widespread.
I’m curious about the rest of Pakistan. India, for instance has the Muslim personal law, which undermines social reform (most infamously for divorce).
India has personal laws for Hindus, Christians, Muslims and Parisis. Wife beating, dowry etc are covered by the Indian criminal law and not religious personal law. Divorce is especially problematic under Muslim, Christian and Parsi personal laws in India. I think the Hindu personal law has mostly been reformed since 47. For example, it is almost impossible for Pari women to get divorced. Plus until a few years back, the divorce under Muslim personal had devolved into men divorcing on text messages. They are trying to reform it but the All India Muslim Personal Law board is too slow and conservative to bring change.
I meant Parsi.
That only applied if you’re emailing about a potential date. But if you want to go with “Auntie PG,” I’ll answer to that as well.
Thanks for posting the link to the bill. Not an expert, the attempted far reach of the bill is prima facie evidence of being too disconnected from the society it’s attempting to legislate upon to come up with effective solutions.
That said, there are three real strenghts I see regardless – 1) that it establishes a legal framework for assistance for DV victims, including houehold employees, etc. – even if this is never used, it is there; 2) it firmly states ‘for educative purposes’ that the government believes that domestic violence in the thankfully broad definition used here is unacceptable, so hopefully that provides some credibility for the argument; and 3) it creates protection committees, uses protection officers, and includes NGOs. The extent of this bill to deal with domestic violence will depend and vary, I think, on how effectively those people and bodies are willing and able to carry out their jobs.
i too am curious about the relationship between this law and the Federal Shariat Court, etc. Are criminal laws exempt from examination for being islamic/unislamic or do they receive the same treatment as divorce law has. i suppose i should know this 🙂
anyway, before i forget, thanks for the links phillygrrl and mr. x.
So the sister writes a blogpost about DV in Pakistan and in desi communities in the U.S. and is almost immediately accused of being juvenile (a classic), attacking men (too predictable), sekritly supporting the patriarchy (original! yet flawed!) At least the backlash proves the post had an impact – keep writing, Bhain PG! 🙂
Palin supporters no doubt.
@sarada_ap : get a life
@phillygrrl: great article!
Dizzy, Religious Personal Law is a legacy of British colonial rule and can be found in Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh. The differences lie in the frequency of reform. Muslim law in Bangladesh reflects the very progressive Ayub-era reforms. In Pakistan the law has moved forward (Ayub, Musharraf) and back (Zia). India has been stagnant on Muslim Law, its legislature leaving the issue virtually untouched since 47.
In contrast, Hindu Personal law is unreformed in Pakistan and Bangladesh — for example, both allow polygamy for Hindus, as was the case in India before paritition. India has reformed its Hindu personal laws. No-one has touched the Parsi or Christian laws.
Religious personal law does not hinder reform in theory, but in practice, the minority communities in each country never get their laws updated.
It’s all moot anyway. This is a all-Pakistan criminal law reform, applicable to all faiths, not a personal law issue.
(Oddly, Paagal admi is inaccurate on a legal issue here. The AIMPLB has no statutory authority on Muslim law in India, and has recently fractured into 4 different groups — Deobandi, Barelvi, Shia, and Womens. Religious law is interpreted by secular judges of all faiths accordng to common-law principles).
what the heck does phillygrrl’s username have to do with the substance of what she wrote, which by the way is 100% accurate?
i mean if her username was “slapabitch” or something awful like that you might have a point, sarada_ap, but in this case? Nope, you’re wrong.
and i think the fact that you posted something so silly and tyhen disappeared says all i need to know about you. Did one of the billy goats gruff knock you back under your bridge?
Ikram – you cannot have this sort of debate without reading up. Just google “Shah Bano”.
Ikram: You are correct. AIMPLB seems to be an advocacy group only. I guess I should stick to pontificating on US law only 🙁
Sulabh — I am familiar with the case, and the utter confusion so many Indians have on the issue. We’ve discussed personal law issues on this site many times.
Are you claiming that Muslim personal laws are reformed in Pakistan and Bangladesh to ban polygamy and it is just the Hindu personal laws that are not?.
No — it’s that in Pakistan and BDesh, Hindu Personal Law predates partition and the progressive reforms made in India, such as banning Hindu polygamy, have never been put in place. In Bangladesh (to a lesser extent Pakistan), Muslim polygamy is governed by the 1961 ordinance. Not banned, but made less practical (requires permission of first wife) as well as changes to divorce rules, etc. Morehere.
I don’t know enough about pre-partition Hindu-law, as implemented in Pak/Bdesh, to tell you how it compares to reformed Muslim law. I’m commenting more on the frequency of reform, not the extent of it.
Why Hindu Personal Law in Pakistan and BD has not been reformed ? Was there an attempt to reform Pakistan’s Hindu personal law in past? Do Hindus in Pakistan oppose these reforms ?
In Bangladesh (to a lesser extent Pakistan), Muslim polygamy is governed by the 1961 ordinance. Not banned, but made less practical (requires permission of first wife) as well as changes to divorce rules, etc. More here.
So technically in Pakistan and Bangladesh
prior to 1947 1. polygamy is allowed for Hindus 2. polygamy is allowed for Muslims
now 1. polygamy is allowed for Hindus 2. polygamy is allowed for Muslims
So it is not a complete statement that all over India, Pakistan and Bangladesh minorities did not have their personal laws reformed in a significant way.
A truer statement is that there were no reforms of significance in both Pakistan and Bandladesh (both for majorities and minorities) whereas Hindu personal laws are consideably reformed for the better in India.
nice elision of the facts to your convenient world view, when ikram has explicitly stated the details.
It’s good that those countries that ignored domestic violence are taking actions to prevent or atleast subdue it but at the end, it is the women who still have to deal with the emotional and social backlash. There should be a program to help them with this aspect.
Thanks for shining a light on this development and the domestic violence problem through the blog. Even though U.S. laws on domestic violence are much more advanced, there are still too cases like the one you wrote about in our community. However, there are organizations that are trying to help AND change cultural attitudes about intimate partner abuse so that abuse victims feel comfortable and empowered to seek help.
Washington, DC: ASHA for Women (www.ashaforwomen.org) New Jersey: Manavi (http://www.manavi.org/) New York: Sakhi (http://sakhi.org/) Bay area: Narika (http://narika.org/)
There are many, many more. Check them out. If you care enough, support them. At minimum, stand up and say that domestic violence is unacceptable.
I’ll say!
Thanks for sharing that list, Bish.
This is not accurate, at least as far as my professor of personal laws (Werner Menski) in South Asia stated and provided evidence for with court cases. There have been court cases that have addressed, e.g. Christian divorce law (Mary Roy, Arundhati Roy’s mother), and a gradual harmonisation of minority laws with Hindu law, which itself has changed. Furthermore, the way that Hindu law has been interpreted has taken on a more pluralistic understanding away from the Anglo-Indian conceptions of the law, which were focused on specific high caste traditions like the saptapadi – there is now more acceptance of any custom that exists ‘for a long time’ I think was the wording, which goes further in embracing the diversity of practices governed by Hindu law in law.
Most relevantly, the Muslim pesronal law has been LESS reformed than other personal laws, but there have been changes made, such as the Protection of Muslim Women Divorce Act and the subsequent verdict in Daniel Lathifi (I think it was) in 2001. My professor notes that the court (and Parliament too) used the opportunity in the weeks after the 11th September terrorist attacks to change several minority laws (the Muslim personal law on divorce noted above as well as others). And as you noted, there can be (and have been) changes to the criminal code that affect these types of laws.
The more relevant point in the context of this post, though, is that separate personal laws on communal grounds DOES make reform more difficult if one takes the wrong approach. Rather than the Hindutva approach – which is to demand a uniform civil code legislated from above (and presumably in accord with Hindu principles) what it calls for is what has been done – a gradual harmonisation. What has not been done adequately and needs to be done is for WOMEN and OTHER SEXUAL MINORITIES in those communities to organise and articulate their own standpoints on personal laws, rather than having competing patriarchies (‘Hindu’ ‘modernist/state’, ‘Muslim’ etc.) decide what laws should govern family structures. In this sense these laws and more broadly, women, children, and others are completely left out of the debate, and isntead we get an ideological struggele rather than enough consideration of what the most pertinent needs are. i.e. we need more democracy with an eye towards inclusion and empowerment of women and others disempowered within ALL communities rather than continued court-based, parliamentary, and ultimately political activity on these.
my two cents.
Another way to frame this is:
polygamy is still legal in Pakistan (not sure abotu Bangladesh but I assume it is) and in India under Muslim law, but it is not in Tunisia or Turkey under any law.
A second consideration is that the quranic verse which is used to legalise polygamy specifically intends for it to be a measure of relief for widows and orphans, to my understanding (I read it in translation over a year ago). So I would guess that if this were very narrowly rather than broadly applied, with tests ensuring that the circumstances reflects the spirit of the quranic injunction, it would significantly restrict polygamy.
A third consideration is whether the state can eventually assume the social welfare functions that justify polygamy even under Muslim personal law. I see no reason why not, over time, and with an increase in the wealth of the societies under consideration. Yes, it would be a protracted ideological battle and a reenvisioning of what it means to have a properly ‘Muslim’ law, but feminist struggles always are. But that’s an outsider perspective – it’s not my inheritance.
A fourth consideration is the undue focus given to polygamy. It is an issue, but not the only issue. divorce, marriage, annulment, succession (including property), and other matters are all, from an American progressive vantage point, extraordinarily retrograde in how they treat women in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh.
A final consideration is that regardless of the laws, social practices continue unabated. Whatever the law says about polygamy or domestic violence or dowry killings or eve-teasting (sexual harrassment) or other problems, these practices continue in India and Pakistan at least, and possibly in Bangladesh (I say possibly only because I don’t know)- so very practical steps that are feasible and go as far as possible and not further woudl help restore some sense of faith that the legal system can address these issues in conjunctionw itht he types of intereventions i noted above (protection officers, ngos, etc.). Without that, the laws, like the Indian constitutional guarantee of freedom from pollution, hunger, etc., are practically meaningless, though they still have some effects in articulating and framing the aspiratinos of the state. So the angel is in the details, and the devil is in the ideological capitalisation on these issues.
Oh, and two last things – In India (and I would assume Pakistan and Bangladesh), (I believe) Sikh and Jain personal laws don’t exist – they are lumped into Hindu personal law. Which seems like it should be an issue – those groups should have their own personal laws which are integrated into the broader system.
Also, India has a separate system of civil marriages outside of the personal law system, which no one uses.
Huh, if you read the comments it is Ikram who seemed to imply religious personal laws of the majorities are reformed all over South Asia whereas religious personal laws of minorities are not..
I just pointed out it is untrue. If you don’t believe me read Dr. A’s comments on how Christian personal laws have been reformed in India (though only recently, not like the Hindus in 1955). Banning polygamy is just one aspect, the key reform I think is in the inheritances of property, land etc.. and Hindu women have equal rights as Hindu men now.
First, one has to accept that it is not all the same all over South Asia. If you do not accept that it is part of the problem.
If you are writing about registering marriages using the special marriages act, yes people do use it. It is used for registering marriages between inter religious couples and I have even signed a witness signature for one such wedding.
Um. . . why exactly?
It’s not an issue and Sikh and Jain people have obviously gone the past 60 years or so without caring. Why “should” it be an issue if nobody is worried about it?
Such unflinching rationality on Hindu rituals.
Such sympathetic multiculturality on other religious practices.
And so much vigilant censorship. 😉
Dr.Amonymous — Yes, courts in India have been Sotomayor-esque on Muslim Personal Law. Judges continually reinterpreting, with recent changes including the transformation of the iddat payment as applying after the iddat period (the Latifi case).
I don’t think judicial interpretations are an adequate substitute for statutory amendments (as the Shah Bano case showed!), but the lack of statutory legal reform reflects the lack of legitimacy South Asian legislatures have in this area. For example, to answer Sulabh — what right do a bunch of Muslim Pakistani Parliamentarians have to legislate on Hindu law?
And (to repeat myself), I see no reason to harmonize personal law in India. If Muslims want to permit cousin marriage and prenuptial agreements, and Hindus do not, why should one community follow the rules of the other?
Ponniyin — Really? Why pretend to be stupid when you aren’t. Anyway, details on family law in South Asia, including the various civil and criminal reforms (good — MFLO, and bad — Zina ordinance) can be found at the Emory University Family Law Project site. There is also an article on domestic violence on that site, to bring this back on topic.
Ikram: At some level, you do need to harmonize the personal laws with a minimum floor of basic rights. You do not need to legislate on cousin marriage but the rights of women, children have to be protected. For example, pre-nupital agreements (maher) are woefully inadequate in protecting the rights of women. Some form of American style alimony laws are necessary for Muslim women.
I know of at least 3-4 cases in the US, where people have gone to US Courts to have their rights originating from the Nikah agreement (specifically the maher provision) enforced. Unfortunately, most nikah agreements do not satisfy the requirements of a pre-nup and the Courts have mostly decided on the matter on a case to case basis.
Nikah: Islamic marriage contract Maher: Pre-nup amount to be paid by husband to wife on divorce.
FYI, It is common and usual for Hindus to have cousin marriages in the south and even within my family. It is a regional difference. In the north it is a taboo and it is not so in the south and they qualify as Hindu marriages too. Well, if telling the truth makes me stupid I’ll be glad to be called so. 🙂
Reforms have to do much with the specific religion involved and its adherents than the majority – minority dynamics as I pointed out .