Karzai fights back as storm grows over rape laws
Jailed student Sayed Pervez Kambaksh defiant as Afghan government forced to answer critics over women's rights
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
Jerome Starkey
Sayed Pervez Kambaksh, originally sentenced to death for an article which questioned Islam's treatment of women
enlarge
As Afghanistan's president grappled with some serious damage limitation yesterday over an incoming law that legalises rape, a student jailed for trying to improve women's rights issued a defiant message of hope: that one day both sexes might be equal in his country.
Sayed Pervez Kambaksh, who was accused of blasphemy and sentenced to death for questioning Islam's treatment of women, said he dreams of an Afghanistan where women are free to live as "human beings".
"I want an Afghanistan where the mothers of this country and the daughters of this country have the same rights that you and I have as men," he said in an interview inside the Walayat prison where he has languished since June. "They should have the right to education. They should have the right to work in any organisation they want, and they should have the right to live as human beings in this society."
Justice Minister Sarwar Danesh was yesterday dispatched to meet female MPs as part of a snap review ordered by President Hamid Karzai. However, MP Sabrina Saqeb, who attended the meeting, said officials had tried to impose a media blackout and refused to give a timeline for their review, prompting fears it will be buried and forgotten until after the presidential elections in August.
The law eliminates the need for sexual consent between husband and wife, tacitly approves child marriage and restricts a woman's right to leave the family home. Some Nato countries have threatened to withdraw troops and withhold aid unless the law is repealed.
Last night it emerged that the United Nations was quietly seeking emergency funds from donors to provide bodyguards, cars and safe houses to protect MPs who had dared to speak out against the legislation. Wenny Kusuma, the head of the UN Development Fund for Women in Afghanistan, said a number of activists had already received death threats. "There's no other country in the world where working for women's rights puts you at a higher risk of death," she said.
Analysts believe Mr Karzai signed the legislation to win support from Afghanistan's minority Shia leaders, but instead he scored a spectacular own goal as talk of its draconian clauses dominated Nato's 60th anniversary summit in Strasbourg, alienating his already-weary Western backers.
Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the issue had been raised in no uncertain terms with Mr Karzai. "I made it absolutely clear to the president that we could not tolerate that situation. [Karzai] responded by saying this law would not be enacted in the way it has been presented," he told Sky News.
Afghan women who campaigned against the legislation said they would keep up the pressure. MP Shinkai Karokhail, who described the law as "worse than the Taliban", said: "I get around 12 calls a day threatening me, but I don't even listen. I don't care. I have been branded a bad Muslim. I have been accused of being against Shias. It's not true. I am a woman and an MP."
Sabrina Saqeb, who at 28 is Afghanistan's youngest MP, added: "Politics in Afghanistan is very risky. Especially if you are a woman talking about women's rights, human rights or anything to do with Islam."
Mr Kambaksh knows just how dangerous it can be, after being locked up for downloading an essay on women's rights from the internet. He was originally sentenced to death in a closed court without a lawyer, but his punishment was commuted to 20 years on appeal after the only prosecution witness withdrew his testimony. That sentence was upheld in February by Afghanistan's Supreme Court, which met in secret and refused to hear his defence.
Speaking from inside prison, for the first time since the legal process was exhausted, he made a personal appeal to president Karzai to pardon him.
"I am a son of this land and I should have the right to live here freely," he said. "Everyone knows I have done nothing wrong. I am asking president Karzai to review my case. He is the president. The constitution gives him the right to pardon me. He is the only one who can save me."
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
It's bizarre that in order to burnish one's credentials be re-elected, Karzai feels he must adopt social policies much like the previous ruling Taliban. The Pushtun's must be made to understand that western aid is contingent upon female suffrage and that additional troops will enforce female equality and women's rights need be non negotiable should Afghans hope to continue to enjoy the the existence of their second largest revenue source; foreign aid.
So it seems there are influential voices inside Afghan government who oppose this law. And Karzai also appear to oppose the law.
So what's all these argy-bargies about ?!
But it's an outright BLACKMAIL, when NATO threatens to withraw its forces from Afghanistan unless this women law is moderated.
NATO should not forget this: Afghanistan has provided a base for you, from where you are fighting your own enemy. Therefore, you must be thankful to Afghans.
But if NATO think of themselves as Afghanistan's saviours, and so without them Afghanistan will fall in the hands of Taliban, is just a bullshit "be grateful to me ploy". Because, Afghanistan is already in the hands of Taliban. You have done nothing during last seven years for which Afghans be grateful to you.
And this self-righteous western reporter who pretend to be so angry about the proposed women law, must note: Afghanistan has been indoctrinated with Islamic faith for more than 1300 years. More over, Afghanistan is deeply a traditional society. So it's totally imposible to bring the country up to european standards within just seven years. I understand that you are trying to do anything and everything in order to make a name for yourself, BUT, try to be impartial, and keep the balance.
It would certainly be great to see men and women are treated equally in Afghanistan. But that will not happen in Mr Kambaksh life.
An afghan in London
" You have done nothing during last seven years for which Afghans is grateful to you. "
Not quite sure who you are referring to - who is the You in the above quote? The world in general or?
Should Canada not spend $50 million to rehabilitate the Dahla Dam and irrigation system then ?
Shall we forgo spending $60 million toward the elimination of Polio?
Is education a sore spot spot for you? Canada is spending $12 million to help build capacity in the Ministry of Education to deliver quality education services and to build, expand, or repair 50 schools in Kandahar .
There are many cultures as old or older than Afghanistan who have evolved and are not threatened by Human Rights - in this context a womens right to her own body (not to mention leaving the house !). Human Rights are a Right to which all humans are entitled : Civil and Political Rights. The Right to liberty, freedom of expression. Equality before the Law. The Right to Food. The Right to Work. The Right to education .
Sayed Pervez Kambash needs our support!
infuriatus: how will banning headscarves in the UK help Muslim women? The majority of Muslim women wear headscarves through choice, so you want to take away that choice? Will you also suggest that followers of other religions are banned from wearing their crosses, bangles, turbans... By the way, my gran wears a headscarf when it's windy - will you want her banned too?
I feel so angry about the terrible way some women are treated in some middle eastern countries, but unfortunately that has always been the way of things. Sometimes there really isn't anything you can do to help and it's heartbreaking. I wonder if Mr Karzai would like to know his Mother, Sister or Daughter was being raped every night by the man who is supposed to cherish her, and that he legally approved it. It's sickening.
"....but unfortuanately that has always been the way of things."
" TO MOVE THE WORLD WE MUST FIRST MOVE OURSELVES." ( Socrates)
Start a petition, sign a petition , e-mail His Excellency President Karzai (President@afghanistangov.org)
google for other sources on-line for sites set up on behalf of the young and so so brave journalist , Sayed Pervez Kambaksh, who was just exercising his freedom of speech rights . Become a member of RAWA for example - feminine martyr whose organization desperately needs funds to run schools in refugee camps and Malalai Hospital . One person can make a difference.
Julia Shaw-Lawrence gmail
Secondly Aghanistan's Constitution claims freedom of expression " shall be inviolable"
With those thought in mind there is a petition to be signed at
info@centerforinquiry.net
I have also sent an e-mail to address below and am assuming it will not be returned :
consulate@embassyofafghanistan.org
Attn: Ambassador Said Jawad
1. Rape as understood by Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, even by Atheists and Communists is 'forced' sex between a 'male' rapist and a 'female', not his wife!
2. The so-called 'rape' is only one of several 'articles' in the 'Laws' being objected to. So, why is the total 'law' being marketed under the 'rape' title/misnomer.
Or so I thought.
You then go on to claim that it doesn't apply between a man and his wife. Would you care to enlighten us as to why you think this is the case? Because you find yourself entirely at odds with the law of every western country. Forced sex is a crime quite rightly punishable by a lengthy jail sentence regardless of whether the perpetrator happens to be married to the victim.
As for your second point, the notion of a rape law being 'marketed' is patently absurd. Most of the civilised world has been up in arms about one part of this proposed law because it's so self-evidently barbaric. Frankly, who cares what the rest of it contains- so long as it legitimises rape, then it seems like an appropriate name for it.
Need anything more be said ?
In fact rape of boys is the most common occurance of rape in Afghanistan.
Alexander the Great left his habits in Afghanistan many thousands of years ago.
What are you barking about ?!
You are a Pakistani and am sure you are ashamed of your origin.
I am an Afghan man and very proud of my country, history, race, religion and tradition.
We afghans have 50,000 years of history and 6000 years of recorded civilization.
What have you got ?!
Chicken Tikka Massala ?
"I am an Afghan man and very proud of my country, history, race, religion and tradition.
We afghans have 50,000 years of history and 6000 years of recorded civilization".
The Afghan man you may be, but mature you are not. Even though you may have a valid point that social change in Afghanistan will take time to occur, you have not answered to any VALID questions posted by "barbaramurphy".
It is too bad that with all that history, you are only good at throwing insults (though not very original).
I am afraid that during 50,000 years of history of human habitation in that region different human groups migrated, moved in and out of that area, so claiming ethnic continuity with the original inhabitants is laughable. Furthermore having 6000 years of recorded civilization is not the same as being civilized, which you just have proved.
Best Regards
Jari
Rape within marriage was only recognised as a crime in the UK about 10 to 15 years ago. Was the UK living in the stone age prior to that event?
Islamic law concerning marriage is much closer to modern Western secular law. Divorce, pre nuptual contracts and a right to sexual pleasure and maintenence after divorce are all rights that both parties in a marriage have. In fact, Western marriage laws are getting closer to Islamic laws where marriage is concerned.
In those countries that are occupied by the West such as Saudi Arabia and Afganistan, Islamic laws concerning womens rights are interpreted against women. In those countries, unpopular dictators use women's rights (or lack of) as a means of keeping power by placating extremists. In fact, the Taliban, a Saudi invention, were funded directly and indirectly by the West before they were in power and during the time they ruled Afganistan. The Taliban and other extremist groups are still being funded by the West through Pakistani intelligence. Their interpretation of Islam is alien to the area and is basically extreme Saudi ideology (rulers intalled by uK and kept in power by the West).
Just as in the West, women's rights in some Islamic countries as well as the West are being compromised for power and financial gain. So next time oomigoolies, when you are being sick in the street after 'a good night out' and date raped by a stranger, think about exactly where the 'filth' is coming from. It's not down to any religion, it's from people who want to exploit your gender for gain.
Neither you have the intelligence nor the necessary rationale to talk about Afghanistan.
We do not flog women in public as your barbaric people do in Pakistan.
So why don't you just shut up ?!
Also they do flog women in Afghanistan, so the Afghans are just as barbaric as the Pakistans if not more so.
His only contribution to world politics is his skull cap and striped coat.
Karzai does not have the intellect to lead a nation out of the clutches of the tribal warlords.
Sadly all who enter Afghanistan perish; Alexander the Great; the British; the Russians and now the current occupiers are destined for the same; Afghanistan will only continue to be a drug barons paradise ever since the British converted it into a massive poppy field to suppy the Chinese Drug Barons who inturn intoxicated their own population into drug dependency.
views,praising all terrorist acts against the outside world. Even the Hazar minority whom we are told suffered the most from the Taliban now claim Bi Laden as a type of hero and blame Russia and the west for all the ills that have befell Afganistan.
I do not know what the answer to the problems is but of all the refugees that we have here they are the most discontented.
MMC
Its called trade, or aid etc..... Its not blackmail, if they want the law thats fine they can have it but they get no Nato troops. If they dont want it they can have the troops. How is that blackmail? Its not its showing Ethics, responsibility etc.... Nato might have done nothing that afgans have been grateful for for 7 years, but its been a hell of a lot longer than that since Afgan did anything anybody was grateful for! If you want our help there are compromises it was which allways thus. Its up to your govt/nation to decide if it wants the law....or the aid...
Sounds fair to me!
Saudi Arabia, Afganistan, Pakistan are all controlled by the USA.
When thugs and bandits are put in power to assist in the rape of a nation's wealth, they're not going to be too bothered about raping their women.
A man does not have the right to rape his wife under Islam although rape is not recognised in marriage as consent, or lack of, is difficult to prove. However, buggary is forbidden in an islamic marriage and the result is an instant divorce.
If true Islamic law is applied accross the board in Islamic countries, then the present Western sponsered rulers cannot have legitemacy, and therefore those countries will cease to exist as client states, subservient to Western governments.
Taking the above into account, it seems to be a simple choice. Low oil prices and drugs and therefore legalising rape, or freedom and no legal rape. If put to a vote, what would most people in the UK and the US choose?
Sura (33:37) - "But when Zaid had accomplished his want of her, We gave her to you as a wife, so that there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished their want of them; and Allah's command shall be performed." No doubt millions of young Muslims, trying to outdo one another at memorizing the Qur'an, have wondered about what this verse means and why it is there. In fact, this is a "revelation" of convenience that Allah just happened to hand down at a time when Muhammad lusted after his daughter-in-law, Zaynab, - a state of affairs that disturbed local customs. The verse "commands" Muhammad to marry the woman (following her husband's gracious divorce). As for why this should be part of the eternal word of God...?
Sura (33:50) - "O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war, and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts, and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who fled with you; and a believing woman if she gave herself to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired to marry her-- specially for you, not for the (rest of) believers; We know what We have ordained for them concerning their wives and those whom their right hands possess in order that no blame may attach to you; " This is another special command that Muhammad handed down to himself that allows virtually unlimited sex, divinely sanctioned by Allah. One assumes that this "revelation" was meant to assuage some sort of disgruntlement in the community over Muhammad's hedonism.
Sura (33:51) - "You may put off whom you please of them, and you may take to you whom you please, and whom you desire of those whom you had separated provisionally; no blame attaches to you; this is most proper, so that their eyes may be cool and they may not grieve, and that they should be pleased" Muhammad may sleep with whichever wife he wishes without having to hear the others complain... as revealed in Allah's literal and perfect words to more than a billion Muslims.
Sura (66:1-5) - "O Prophet! Why ban thou that which Allah hath made lawful for thee, seeking to please thy wives?..." Another remarkable verse of sexual convenience concerns an episode in which Muhammad's wives were jealous of the attention that he was giving to a Christian slave girl. But, as he pointed out to them, to neglect the sexual availability of his slaves was against Allah's will for his life!
Sura (4:24) - "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." Allah even permitted Muhammad and his men to have sex with married slaves, such as those captured in battle.
The Muhammad of myth and Islam had sex with girls as young as 5. He just married Aisha at age 8 (some give the age at 9). It is and was child abuse and rape. So much for the Holy Man and Prophet of Allah.