An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right

Pakistan Is Going Down The Tubes…

First they let the Taliban lay claim to part of their country and now an insane rape law that is so incredibly disgusting you seriously won’t believe it.

From Ali Eteraz comes this:

The women’s protection bill of Pakistan — which will dramatically alter the rape laws of Pakistan — has a chance of being passed this coming Monday. The bill is an attempt to reform the draconian rape laws of Pakistan from 1979, passed by then dictator Zia ul Haq under the auspices of the religious establishment. The laws require that for a woman to make an allegation of rape she must produce four male witnesses. If she is unable to put forth the witnesses she herself is liable for adultery (and can be imprisoned or put to death for adultery). Absurd. In one case, a blind girl, Safia Bibi, who had been raped was convicted on charges of adultery because she could not identify her attacker.

Please, forgive my language, but this is so insane we simply can’t ignore it. Four male witnesses? Is Perez Musharraf giving the country over to the extremists?

UPDATE:
Please forgive, but I reacted to a few points in the post and didn’t read the whole thing. For that I sincerely apologize. As many of you have pointed out, Musharraf is trying to alleviate some of this, not sanction it. Egg on face entirely. I feel really, really stupid. It won’t happen again.



10 Responses to “Pakistan Is Going Down The Tubes…”

  1. Swaraaj says:

    Yeah! Now you see the cultural background and the legal nuances that govern Pakistan, our next door neighbour. Such cultural approach, religious fundamentalism and falsehood make for a deadly combination.

    Slowly and steadily an average American would realise the merit in India’s assertion for the past two decades that the US adminsitration’s support of Military Dictators/Rulers in Pakistan is spawning terrorism worlwide.

    Another thing India finds most irritaing/dangerous is falsehood spread by Pakistani leaders, including regarding Kashmir.

    Now there seems to be a competition between the US administration and the Pakistani military rulers as to who tells lies better!!!

  2. Dexter says:

    umm, from my reading of the article, the laws you’re outraged about were passed in 1979, and Musharraf is trying to get them repealed.

    The reason some are unhappy is that the repeals don’t go far enough.

  3. Swaraaj says:

    Musharraf the Great Reformer! Bush the Great Peacemaker! Hurrah!

  4. Tano says:

    Hello?

    As Dexter points out, the new law REPEALS the four witness outrage.

    I think it was pretty adequatly explained on the Donklephant site, where you actually commented on it.

    Go back and read it a bit more carefully.

  5. jjc says:

    The link doesn’t say much specific about the women’s protection bill. It does seem clear that Zia backed the old law. Can’t tell where Perez Musharraf is.

    I think we can all agree that it’s a scary thing that Pakistan has The Bomb.

  6. Chris Bell says:

    Dexter and Tano are right, you’re describing the OLD law. (Which is pretty standard in many Islamic-based law systems.)

  7. Laura says:

    And how is a blind woman supposed to identify her rapist? How sick and twisted islamic law is.

  8. Jim S says:

    I’ve been hearing about this for a while now. Please note that the law might pass. The religious establishment in Pakistan is very conservative and opposes the law.

  9. Joe says:

    Note that I’ve removed a word I would like to avoid on this site from the post and from one of the comments. Neither are compromised at all by snipping the word out.

  10. Kim Ritter says:

    Pakistan is not a democracy- the Taliban was very popular there before 9/11 and still has wide-spread support among the population. There is no reason to expect moderation there. As I understand it, after 9/11 then Sec of State Powell gave Musharaf a list of demands that he needed to accede to in order to forestall an American invasion. He could cooperate with us in our hunt for Bin Laden and our fight against the Taliban, or we would attack. He agreed to cooperate-that doesn’t mean they have any more of a foundation for human rights than the Saudi’s, Iran, North Korea or Iraq (under Saddam).

© 2003-2011 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Mode Equity