Criminals -- or Victims of an Unjust System?

Omair: I agree with you to a point about feudalism again, however some of your comments do not seemr ealistic. While I agree BB`s running of the PPP is very feudal in style the Party has undergone something of a transformation over the last 4 years. It`s candidates have become increasingly middle class. I believe this is in part to do with the loss of it`s former ``bad boy`` reputation..yesterdays bad boys are todays distinguished gentlemen for the lack of a better term.

In case of the unlamented Nawaz Sharif, many things can be said of the man but being a feudal is not one of them, he was a handpicked favourite because he was from a business family. In fact many of the people drawn to the the PML-N after 1993 especially in Sindh were leftists who felt he was the best chance against feudals. His style however was distinctly feudal, again that was in part because he was not groomed to work within the democratic process.

The problem is the selective application of the law and that precdent was set equally by corrupt politicians, the Military and civil service as hang overs of colonial rule. Again this is a mentality ...

Zakk #19: A furthur comment regarding Bhuttos not being the largest feudal family in Pakistan. You are correct. Though the Bhuttos are a very large one.

Feudalism is almost like an organization. It doesn`t matter which party they belong to. PPP and PML MNAs regularly change loyalties. They usually reprsent the two most powerful feudals in a constituency - one on one party, and one in the other. They are part of one clan, with similar views.

If you look at the statistics of Pakistan`s National Assembly, you will notice that generally balances around 60-66% feudal members. That range has been constant for a long time. This indicates that it is quite stable. Bhuttos are the unofficial leaders and interface for feudals. They hold the feudal flag. Jatoi maybe a bigger landonwer, but he does not have the charisma of a Zulfiqar or Benazir Bhutto. So the feudals have wisely kept the Bhuttos in front. Jatoi cannot talk to Hillary Clinton, in her language, but Benazir can.

These feudals, and especially their kids, are now amongst the most liberal elements of Pakistan. They write poetry, and work for NGOs. I think a few regularly visit Chowk. They appear to be, personally, the most enlightened people in Pakistan. And probably are, in their personal lives. But they need to keep the ancient feudal system in place, to remain in control. Hence, at a social level, they will always push that agenda, despite pushing secularism, personally.

So much so, that many urbanites, like the Chowk crowd, have bought into the arguments of these parties. They completely ignore the fact that, in their own constituencies, these same, ``secular`` feudals are far more suppressive towards women, than the maulvis.

With maulvis, what you see is what you get. They treat their own women in the same manner as they want all women treated. Feudals, in many cases, treat their own women one way, and all other women in another way.

Islam, even in its most repressive interpretation, cannot be as suppressive towards women, as the feudal social system. And Bhuttos stand right at the top of that feudal social system, and are its biggest beneficiary.

What is needed in Pakistani politics, more than anything else, is an internal revolution in these parties, themselves. Because PPP and PML will always have a majority of the vote, since the majority lives in rural areas. Until PPP gets taken over by its urban members, nothing will change. It doesn`t matter how, ``secular`` it may be. And ditto for PML. PML does have some urbanites now at the top, even though its power base is still feudal.

If people want the condition of women to improve in Pakistan, they have to dump these feudal parties, even if they are led by a woman, and have Sherry Rahman as a member. Sherry Rahmans of the world, and the Aitezaz Ahsans of the world, will always be on the sidelines of PPP. They will never become its chairperson, because they don`t represent the feudal class. They are mere decoration pieces, that these parties need to provide a sophisticated interface to the Western public.

Support any other party (except PPP, PML, MMA) and the condition of women will improve. PTI, TI, MQM etc. According to a survey, the most popular political leader, amongst women voters in Pakistan, was Imran Khan.Even in case of MMA, while the condition of women will go down in urban areas, if will improve in rural areas, where most of the women live.

Unfortunately, many of the people on Chowk are amongst the biggest supporters of these feudal parties. They like them because they feel these parties are, ``secular`` and ``democratic.`` In my opinion, Musharraf will do far more for women (and minorities) in Pakistan than any Bhutto, Fahim, Qazi or Jamali. He already has done a lot more.

Zakk #19: I don`t think I can agree with your argument, within the context of this article. It makes sense, if we just look at attitudes, in general. But this article is specifically about women`s rights. On that issue, what you have to look at is how these individuals treat the women in their own families. That is the best clue.

The civil servant may be corrupt. And the Army general may be arrogant. But their wives, daughters etc. are not victims of the suppression against women that exists in feudal lands. Go to any Army or Navy or PAF cantonment, and it will be obvious. If there was ever an honor killing of even the wife of a janitor, the commanders would have hell to pay. Similarly for civil services.

I doubt Imran Khan, despite his arrogance, would ever advocate or defend honor killings and the suppression related with it. Musharraf`s own lifestyle is a clear indication of his views on women. As is Jamali`s and Fahim. I have yet to see the wives of the later two, in public. Have you?

These problems have two prime culprits:

1) At the top of the list are feudals. They are now, generally, themselves educated and westernized. But they need to ensure that their lands remain feudal and caught up in customs that supress women. I can make a bet that Jamali and Fahim would not support laws in favor of women. They would have hell to pay in their tribes, if they did.

2) Maulvis are the second problem. Maulvis do not kill women. But they do want to segregate them, and to keep them covered. So they will send them to school, but not to co-education. They will let them work, but not where men work. etc. So they are not as bad as feudals. But still bad.

``Women`s bill splits Pakistani MPs

The split goes right to the very top.

An official commission set up by the government recommended that the Hudood ordinance should be repealed and President Pervez Musharraf backs the move.`` (www.bbc.co.uk/urdu)

Omair I agree with some points of your argument, but let`s remember a few facts when talking about Feudalism. Contrary to what people think the Bhuttos are not the largest Feudal family in Sindh, I believe that title is with the Jatois and the present CHief minister`s family.

Another reason for the status quo is the failure of institutionalising the political system. Whenever Pakistan faces it`s eternal problem of institutional instability, it is people with money who survive(not neccessarily feudals). People like the Chaudhries of Gujarat, the Akhtar Rehmans and Ijaz ul Haqs or Saifullahs were not from landed families. Your party leader the skipper is famous for his arrogance does that mean he has a feudal mentality?

Again examples abound..you have senior Army officers from self made backgrounds who when retired become landlords and become hee epitome of the feudal.

In the civil service you have the Political agents and old DC`s who again excercised power like a feudal ruler.

All the people mentioned are from more middle class backgrounds and truth be told our middle classes are as rotten as everyone else, again push comes to shove it`s a question of mentality.

Zakk #17: You are correct in saying that it feudalism is a mentality. However, those who possess just the mentality cannot do much harm. It is only when the mentality is combined with the power of actual land ownership, that it becomes extremely dangerous. This is the tragedy of Pakistan.

Now it is becoming even more dangerous, because the mentality and land ownership, is slowly being combined with high-level foreign education, by the next generation off-spring of the feudals. This has allowed Pakistan`s feudal parties to actually become the flag-bearers of secularism and liberalism in Pakistan. This gives them the required cover to ensure that what they do in their own lands remains hidden. They now have a daughter who works for an NGO, and is a Harvard grad. A son, who is Chartered Accountat and is a graduate of another foreign university, and writes poetry. Goras love them, because they speak English with an accent.

The Bhutto family is a prime example. All of them are graduates of the most elite schools of the world. Listening to them, one would think they are the epitome of liberalism. Yet they are the flagbearers of a system and group, which is entrenched in some of the biggest suppressions of the women in the world.

Unless a woman is the wife or daughter of a feudal, she will always be at the receiving end of all of this. This is why I have always felt that anyone who feeds the feudal parties (PPP and PML) by joining them or voting for them, to a great degree, loses the right of talking about women`s rights. Since he/she becomes a part of the problem. And not a part of the solution.

I am actually quite convinced that if the maulvis took over in feudal areas, they will introduce more rights for women in those areas, then the feudals ever would. This does not make the maulvis the solution, but it does highlight the extreme-ness of the problem. The PPP and PML govts. could have finished off all these Hadood laws in one hour, with one vote. They did that for the 15th Amendment. The fact that they did not do so, should tell us something.

If you want to see the society any ruler will set up in the whole country, just go and see what kind of society he prefers in the land he is elected from (or in the case of feudals actually owns). Go to rural Sind, and you will find out what the PPP values. And go to Southern Punjab and you will find out what the PML values. Jamali and Fahim will run Pakistan like they run their tribal lands. Go there and see the status of women......

Omair: feudalism/colonialism is more a mentality than a title. Anyone can have a feudal mentality..because pakistani society and it`s laws prerfer people who have that mentality.

I personally think there should be complete amnesty announced for all women in Pakistani prisons. And it should be carried out through a dictatorial order. This is one of the reasons I supported the LFO, despite all the complains against it. It authorized 1/3rd seats for women in elected houses.

Pakistanis need to figure out what they want. On the one hand, they cry for constitutions and democracy. On the other hand, they want Musharraf to undo Hadood ordinances and what not, through dictator-like commands. On the one hand they oppose the LFO for overstepping democracy, on the other hand, they support it for the rights it gives to women.

Technially speaking, all the rights recently given to women (and minorities) are illegal, if one looks at it from a Constitutional point of view. The women`s seats in the National Assembly are as, ``illegal``as the National Security Council. And as illegal as the coup, itself. One cannot pick and chose.

People need to get over Zia. He died sixteen-seventeen years ago. One cannot keep bringing him up for all the problems in the Pakistani society. Why didn`t anyone solve these problems in these years after his death? We did have, ``democracy`` in the 90s. Zia is now, no more than a convenient excuse.

The reason womens` condition in Pakistan, is amongst the worst in the world, is simple. One word. F-e-u-d-a-l-i-s-m. Not Islam, not MMA, but feudals. Armywallahs treat the women in their cantonments quite well. Just go and see. I have never heard of a honor-killing in the military. Maulvis force their women to wear niqabs and hijabs and what not. But they educate them and marry them off, and they even let them become MNAs (like Qazi Hussain`s daughter).

How are the women in feudal lands living?

Barring the daughters of the feudals themselves, who are supermodels and Harvard grads, and Prime Ministers, the rest are in bad shape. Much worse shape than the women living in Jamaat-i-Islami`s Mansoora.

The worst crimes against women are committed in the constituencies, with the approval, of the top-most political leaders of PPP and PML. Honor killings take place in the Sindhi stronghold of PPP and the southern Punjab stronghold of PML. Interestingly, these are considered the, ``liberal and secular`` parties of Pakistan.

A country: whose elected Prime Minister (Jamali) in unwilling to step out in public with his wife. And whose main opposition leader (Amin Fahim) is unwilling to do the same, alongwith having four sister married to the Quran. And whose most famous governor (Khar) has a son, who allegedly threw acid on a girl: is not going to treat its women too well. Why in the world will these powerful gentlemen improve the condition of women in Pakistan, when they go out of their way to keep them suppressed in their own constituencies?

There is an easy solution to solving all these problems. Stop voting for PPP and PML, and stop trying to portray them as a group of women-friendly liberals. If people cannot do that, then they need to stop complaining about the condition of women in Pakistan. They, themselves, are a cause of it.

Rafay: Thanks for the comments..most of the female lawyers I know in Peshawar have gone into the judicial system..because there is almost no decent place for a female lawyer. Also I can understand why female clients would have problems approaching male lawyers having seen some of the problems they face first hand (not knowing who to trust or even the difference between a civil and criminal lawyers)

As far as the client problem you mentioned, the solution could be the same as First Womens Bank. While women should be preferred at all times the firm need not be restricted to them. In the end it`s function would be to make a profit but it`s charter would have to include free legal aid.

I am not against the HAGS (love that line lol) providing their input either , but the perception of being non political should be the priority in building the credibility of the kind of organisation I am talking about.

Beena: This is an important issue. My late father had written an article on the subject where he demonstrated how the hadood ordinance is a violation of the Quranic injunctions themselves. While I am not sure of this particular article, i know that some other articles my father wrote that were used in the Lahore High Court to challenge things like the constitutional amendment that Nawaz Sharif was trying to pass to become virtual dictator by having himself declaring to be a mard-e-momin and thus implicitly answerable not to the electorate but to God (in other words, to no one but himself). I have the article available in hard-copy for only, and so can fax it (or will even transcribe it to email-able form if someone really intends to use it). Just let me know at tauheedahmed@hotmail.com. Regards.

In re Zakkk #12:

I don`t think the government setting up an all-female law firm would be of any use. And, the private sector is too competive for a women`s only chamber. AGHS (which is an acronym for the names of Asma Jehangir, Gul Rukh, Hina Jilani and Shehla Zia - imagine if they had named it HAGS!!) remains operational as a law firm because of its narrow scope of expertise: criminal and family law. And as far as I know, this aspect of Ms. Jehangir`s workk remains unpoliticized. Ms. Jehangir and Ms. Jilani may be called politicized for their work with the HRCP or other civil society and women`s rights groups, but not because of their law.

Nonetheless, Zakk, the point is valid. An all-woman`s law firm would attract female clients if only because, given Pakistani society and it`s ``norms`` (and I`m taking a wild chouvanistic guess here), women would find it easier to communicate to other women. However, the suggestion attracts some practical problems.

First, an all woman law firm would not attract wealthy clients. The upper classes are not given to litigating their private lives. So economics is a factor, and an all-woman`s law firm would have to survive on handouts from foreign donor organizations. Second, Pakistans male-dominated society seems to have brain washed women into believing that they can`t litigate in court. This is, of course, untrue (my wife is a practicing litigator), but the ``I-can`t-do-it`` thinking amongst the already few many women lawyers persists. Thirdly, even if you had a female law firm with female litigators, they would still be arguing cases before a male judiciary. Which brings you back to square one.

Still, the suggestion is good. But better one would be to have more women in the judiciary (especially the subordinate judiciary - the civil, sessions, district courts etc). It would also be an idea to train male judges in gender sensitivity (this exercise was carried out, I am told with some success, in Nepal).

Rafay Alam

Slightly unrelated, I think either the private sector or government should set up a National Female only law firm on the lines similar to the First Women Bank.. which should have offices wherever there is a High Court or Supreme Court bench and before anyone says Asma Jehangir`s group..that doesn`t have offices nationally and it is politicised ..

``Killing of women and kafirs is legitimate if the killing is carried out properly and the meat is not wasted but distributed to poor Muslims. .....???????``


never thought guys could justify cannibalism like that? This is sheer satanism.

Ms. Sarwar,

Can`t argue with the facts. This is a good bit of reporting. I hope it is read by the right people. I think that for a previous article of yours, I had remarked about the nature of human rights rhetoric in Pakistan. If you can recall that point, allow me to continue in that vein: It would be great to read an investigative peice on Islamic interpretations towards adultery and rape. One of the Question which could be asked is whether the Hudood Ordinance in its current form comforms with Islamic law and whether Islamic law.

Keep up the good work.

Rafay Alam

These are the hypocrisies that are simply depressing.

It`s great to highlight them, since in Pakistan there are many who believe that the western media tries to portray a bad picture of their culture and every thing is hunky dory. Many have a very hard time dealing with the fact that issues like this exist in their society.

Well, the irony is that all the governments have more time, energy and resoucres to invest in cricket matches and other hull gulla stuff, but when it comes to taking the bull by its horns, it takes them a decade to even get to the bottom of any major issue.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Congrats, Ralph! You obviously like to lump together everything Islamic. I`m assuming that for some reason you brought up the distribution of meat after Baqra Eid in the same line as you mention that its ok to kill people.``

Or are you suggesting we eat the meat of supposed evildoers? I`m pretty sure that`s not in the Quran.

And I`m not sure that the Quran goes out of its way to enumerate the way and whys of killing women in particular.

And, of course, I`m assuming that you ARE a Muslim and not Jay/Arjun et al taking the piss out of us.