http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012\04\14\story_14-4-2012_pg3_6
Saturday, April 14, 2012
OVER A COFFEE: The Domestic Violence bill —Dr Haider Shah
It is interesting to note that both Hindu and Muslim clerics showed uncanny
solidarity in opposing the new law as they argued that their scriptures fully
endorsed child marriages
Popular perceptions are generated when similar events happen on a regular
basis. In the last few days, the media’s attention was grabbed by the
relentless killings in Gilgit-Baltistan on the basis of religious beliefs and
the Senate’s rejection of the Prevention of Domestic Violence bill that aimed
at minimising domestic violence after members opposed the bill on religious
grounds. What perceptions such events shape about our religion and Pakistan is
not hard to imagine.
Social justice and equity can be defined as the removal of all obstacles in the
progress of all sections of a society. The obstacles can be physical, social or
legal. A progressive society is one that uses legal reforms to remove social
obstacles and help the less privileged sections overcome their handicaps. Only
a draconian society deems it appropriate to use laws and social taboos to
further exacerbate the pre-existing handicaps of a deprived section of society.
J S Mill once observed, “Among a rude people, the women are generally degraded,
among a civilized people they are exalted.” Unfortunately, inheriting this rude
social behaviour, we take it for granted that all vulnerable humans can be
dealt with with violence. What Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) leaders said about
the bill was not surprising; however, after listening to the comments made by
Khwaja Saad Rafique of PML-N in a TV talk show, I was extremely disappointed.
No piece of legislation has ever revolutionised any society. Real change only
happens when social norms change and reform is internalised by society. A new
law, however, serves a more important purpose. It is a solemn declaration by
the state that it is no more a party to any inhuman custom. The law declares
the intent of the state that it is not happy with the status quo and would use
all its resources to engineer the desired change. For instance, 15th-17th
century Europe was gripped with hysteria about witchcraft as thousands of women
were burnt at the stake or subjected to the ordeal of drowning in water to
prove their innocence. In 1735, the Witchcraft Act formally abolished
witch-hunts and associated trials but public persecution continued as it took
some time before people realised that the offence was an imaginary one.
Saad Rafique spoke on behalf of those who have inherited the mindset of Indian
sepoys of 19th century British India. A book detailing the apprehensions of
Indian sepoys regarding some changes in laws in the early 19th century mentions
that Hindu sepoys agitated the withdrawal of the right of refusing foreign
service and feared that they would be polluted if they crossed the sea. They
whispered to each other that the Lord Sahib (Viceroy) had given orders to all
commanding officers to destroy the religion of the country as a law had been
passed to allow Hindu widows to remarry. Similarly, in 1890 the government
introduced a law to raise the age of consent from ten to twelve, after the
death from haemorrhage of a very young Hindu bride when her husband consummated
the marriage. The majority of the then Indian intelligentsia strongly
criticised the new law as an intrusion into family life and interference with
religion. It is interesting to note that both Hindu and Muslim clerics showed
uncanny solidarity in opposing the new law as they argued that their scriptures
fully endorsed child marriages.
There is no better alternative to a happy family living peacefully. Our
religious sermonisers believe in seeing no evil and hearing no evil by shutting
their eyes and waxing their ears. But utopias do not exist and all families do
not experience ideal situations and the law has to take care of all possible
adverse situations. The bill tries to address this wilful gap in our laws and
envisages the mechanism of a conciliatory committee and protection team to
ensure the welfare of the victims of domestic violence. If the conciliation
efforts fail to bear fruit, it is the prime responsibility of the protection
team to not only ensure the safety of the victim but prosecute the perpetrator
of violence as well. The opponents are fidgety about including ‘verbal and
psychological abuse’ in the definition of domestic violence. The offence has
been clearly defined in the bill. Statutory law only provides the main skeleton
while courts flesh it out with their interpretations. It is unfair to assume
that while applying this provision of the law, courts would not be attentive to
the cultural context. Laws are organic in nature and if after implementation
any imperfections are observed in the proposed law, the legislature can always
modify or reform the law. The opponents of the bill have used a very generic
language rather than pinpointing which provision of the bill violated Islamic
principles. They must be reminded that we need to benchmark our laws against
the rest of the world and bring them at par with the needs of the modern world
in which we live today.
If the PML-N is genuinely imbued with religious fervour, it has ample
opportunity to exhibit it in Punjab by shutting down all banks as the holy
scripture clearly provides that those who deal in an interest-based business
are fighting a war against Allah and his Prophet (PBUH). If it is looking for a
point-scoring game against the federal government, it should avoid playing it
on such a sensitive issue. With Nawaz Sharif’s daughter and the golf playing
Marvi Memon coming to the centre-stage of the party, one hoped that the party
would be more sensitive to the feminist cause. But some dinosaurs in the party
still seem to be calling the shots. Natural selection laws, however, do not
favour those who fail to evolve.
The writer teaches public policy in the UK and is the founding member of
Rationalist Society of Pakistan. He can be reached at [email protected]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Post message: [email protected]
Subscribe : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : [email protected]
List owner : [email protected]
Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
