Women’s Protection Law: Federal Shariat Court verdict due today

Petitioners challenging the act say it is against constitution, Islam.

ISLAMABAD: The Federal Shariat Court (FSC) is expected to give its verdict on Tuesday on whether the Women Protection Law is against Islamic injunctions.

The matter has been under debate before the FSC for several months.

During proceedings, the FSC also examined two laws pertaining to Zina (adultery) and Qazf (levelling untrue allegations of Zina) commonly known as the Hudood Ordinance of 1979, promulgated by military dictator General Ziaul Haq.

The chief judge, Agha Rafiq Ahmed Khan, along with two judges of the FSC, Justice Afzaal Haider and Jutice Shahzado Shaikh, are examining the Women Protection Act adopted by the parliament in 2006.

Four identical petitions challenging the act were filed before the FSC between 2007 and 2010.

The petitioners argued that the act in question is against the constitution, which states that “Islam will be the state religion” and “no laws will be passed which are repugnant to the Quran and the Sunnah.”

The previous government of General Pervez Musharraf had termed the legislation of Women’s Protection Act as ‘historic’ and claimed that it was not against Islam.

The said act had omitted few clauses of the Hudood Ordinance about Zina, Zina bil-jabr and Qazf.

The ordinances have been subjected to harsh criticism by the US, UK, European Union, Pakistan’s civil society, human rights activists and women’s rights organisations.

Following the passage of the act, the punishment of whipping had been removed from the ordinance. However, the sentence of stoning to death remains part of the controversial law.

Critics say the ordinances had made rape victims liable to prosecution for adultery in situations when they are not able to produce four male witnesses to the assault.  Women are routinely jailed for adultery on flimsy evidence, often when a former husband refuses to recognise a divorce.

The legislation of General Zia led to thousands of women being imprisoned without proof. Architects of the act had maintained that it will provide relief and protection to women against misuse of the Hudood Ordinance.

Under the Protection of Women (Criminal Laws Amendment) Act of 2006, only the sessions court (on a complaint) may take cognisance of such cases. The offence has been made bailable so that the accused is not jailed during trial.

The act also restricted the police from detaining people suspected of having extra-marital sex unless directed so by the sessions court. Such directions cannot be issued except either to compel attendance in court or in the event of a conviction.

After the amendments, adultery and non-marital consensual sex is still an offence but now judges would be allowed to try rape cases in criminal rather than Islamic courts. That does away with the need for four witnesses and allows convictions to be made on the basis of forensic and circumstantial evidence under the Hudood Ordinance.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 23^rd, 2010.