Convicting acid throwing cases
Stringent laws will be wasted unless standards of institutionalising such laws are improved.
The writer is a PhD in conflict studies and an independent security analyst who has published extensively about conflict and security. He has also taught at the University of Central Lancashire, UK
One of the most horrifying forms of gender-based violence in Pakistan, throwing acid (usually sulphuric acid) on women — with malicious intent to take revenge, disfigure and harm the person — has long-lasting physical and psychological consequences. Pakistan tops the list of countries with incidence of acid attacks on women. The perpetrators are most often relatives or rivals — sometimes for a woman's affections — or in non-gender-based attacks, opponents provoked by property disputes or other disagreements.
In fact, nearly 150 incidents of acid attacks take place every year in Pakistan, out of which about 50 occur in Balochistan alone.
Acid throwing is also a common phenomenon in south Punjab as well as in parts of Sindh, being randomly dispersed throughout the rest of the country. Acid throwing usually occurs when a male perceives that a female related/unrelated to him has indulged in dishonouring him, usually indulging in some act which is perceived to be outside the ambit of marriage or social norms. In retribution, acid is thrown on the face and exposed parts of the woman, disfiguring her for the rest of her life. There are two broad, though not exhaustive categories of acid throwing; one in which the woman and man are related in a relationship, such as in matrimony, and the other is in which the man and woman do not have such a close relationship. In the former, a husband usually perceives the wife to be cheating on him and disfigures her with acid, while in the latter, a man disfigures a woman because either she does not entertain his advances of marriage or other overtures, or he perceives that the woman is of 'loose character' and is 'contaminating' society. In either case, the accused are usually not very well-educated, though not exclusively, as acid throwing has been attributed to educated persons who were presumably spurred on by feelings of violated honour.
Acid attacks became illegal in Pakistan in 2010 when parliament passed the Acid Control and Acid Crime Prevention Bill; this can carry punishments of up to lifetime imprisonment. However, the law is rarely enforced in rural areas and acid attacks continue, even on the heels of the Oscar-winning documentary, Saving Face, which featured a number of Pakistani acid attack victims. Recently though,, acid attacks on women have started getting recognition as serious crimes. For instance, acid throwing has been scheduled as an Anti Terrorist Act offence in Punjab. Inclusion of acid throwing on women as a serious crime is a step in the right direction, but so far only Punjab out of all provinces has included this in the category of cases under the Anti Terrorist Act. However, this needs to be replicated by all the provinces, particularly Balochistan and Sindh, which have the highest rates of such offences. Following in the footsteps of Punjab, these offences should be included in the schedule to the Anti Terrorist Act 1997, as this grievous offence against women should not be allowed to go unpunished.
Despite such stringent laws, many examples of such cases going unpunished abound in our criminal justice process. The standard of investigation of such offences by police in Pakistan is low, even though this sort of crime should be an 'open and shut' case of medical evidence supported by motive; this still does not happen due to poor presentation of cases. The police stands at the broad base of the pillars of prosecution; it is the investigation which determines most of all how the case would look at the prosecution stage. The prosecution can only manage whatever investigative leads have been given to it, while the judiciary can only rule on how the case is presented to it by the prosecution. Thus, the biggest responsibility lies with the police to come up with cogent, acceptable levels of investigation that can be presented properly by the prosecution in court. This is exactly what the police in Pakistan is not able to do for so many reasons and that is precisely why many, if not most of such cases fail due to the inability of police to present its case through proper investigation or not following procedure.
Usually, an acid throwing criminal case depends upon direct evidence, which is corroborated by motive, medical documentation and recovery of corrosive material. These are three corroborative pieces of evidence, which are staple requirement in cases of acid throwing and should almost guarantee conviction. Many times the courts are sympathetic towards such cases but as this depends on how the case is presented by the police, flaws in presentation of cases makes them untenable. Also, there is continuing pressure on victims and their families to stop pursuing their cases. In this way, notwithstanding existing laws, many such cases will not go to conviction. Policymakers should sit down and examine the frequently recurring dilemma of the criminal justice process in Pakistan, which operates in acid attacks cases as well; stringent laws will be wasted unless standards of institutionalising such laws are improved.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 13th, 2013.
In fact, nearly 150 incidents of acid attacks take place every year in Pakistan, out of which about 50 occur in Balochistan alone.
Acid throwing is also a common phenomenon in south Punjab as well as in parts of Sindh, being randomly dispersed throughout the rest of the country. Acid throwing usually occurs when a male perceives that a female related/unrelated to him has indulged in dishonouring him, usually indulging in some act which is perceived to be outside the ambit of marriage or social norms. In retribution, acid is thrown on the face and exposed parts of the woman, disfiguring her for the rest of her life. There are two broad, though not exhaustive categories of acid throwing; one in which the woman and man are related in a relationship, such as in matrimony, and the other is in which the man and woman do not have such a close relationship. In the former, a husband usually perceives the wife to be cheating on him and disfigures her with acid, while in the latter, a man disfigures a woman because either she does not entertain his advances of marriage or other overtures, or he perceives that the woman is of 'loose character' and is 'contaminating' society. In either case, the accused are usually not very well-educated, though not exclusively, as acid throwing has been attributed to educated persons who were presumably spurred on by feelings of violated honour.
Acid attacks became illegal in Pakistan in 2010 when parliament passed the Acid Control and Acid Crime Prevention Bill; this can carry punishments of up to lifetime imprisonment. However, the law is rarely enforced in rural areas and acid attacks continue, even on the heels of the Oscar-winning documentary, Saving Face, which featured a number of Pakistani acid attack victims. Recently though,, acid attacks on women have started getting recognition as serious crimes. For instance, acid throwing has been scheduled as an Anti Terrorist Act offence in Punjab. Inclusion of acid throwing on women as a serious crime is a step in the right direction, but so far only Punjab out of all provinces has included this in the category of cases under the Anti Terrorist Act. However, this needs to be replicated by all the provinces, particularly Balochistan and Sindh, which have the highest rates of such offences. Following in the footsteps of Punjab, these offences should be included in the schedule to the Anti Terrorist Act 1997, as this grievous offence against women should not be allowed to go unpunished.
Despite such stringent laws, many examples of such cases going unpunished abound in our criminal justice process. The standard of investigation of such offences by police in Pakistan is low, even though this sort of crime should be an 'open and shut' case of medical evidence supported by motive; this still does not happen due to poor presentation of cases. The police stands at the broad base of the pillars of prosecution; it is the investigation which determines most of all how the case would look at the prosecution stage. The prosecution can only manage whatever investigative leads have been given to it, while the judiciary can only rule on how the case is presented to it by the prosecution. Thus, the biggest responsibility lies with the police to come up with cogent, acceptable levels of investigation that can be presented properly by the prosecution in court. This is exactly what the police in Pakistan is not able to do for so many reasons and that is precisely why many, if not most of such cases fail due to the inability of police to present its case through proper investigation or not following procedure.
Usually, an acid throwing criminal case depends upon direct evidence, which is corroborated by motive, medical documentation and recovery of corrosive material. These are three corroborative pieces of evidence, which are staple requirement in cases of acid throwing and should almost guarantee conviction. Many times the courts are sympathetic towards such cases but as this depends on how the case is presented by the police, flaws in presentation of cases makes them untenable. Also, there is continuing pressure on victims and their families to stop pursuing their cases. In this way, notwithstanding existing laws, many such cases will not go to conviction. Policymakers should sit down and examine the frequently recurring dilemma of the criminal justice process in Pakistan, which operates in acid attacks cases as well; stringent laws will be wasted unless standards of institutionalising such laws are improved.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 13th, 2013.