Pakistan Press on Anti-Rape Legislation and Pakistan, Bangladesh Relations: New Age Islam's Selection, 7 December 2020
By
New Age Islam Edit Desk
7 December
2020
• Anti-Rape Legislation Proposals
Wajahat Ali Malik
• Thaw In Pakistan, Bangladesh Relations?
By Kamran Yousaf
• Assassinations
Are Destabilising Pakistan’s Neighbourhood
By Shahid Javed Burki
• Have Liberals Failed Us? Part - II
By Themrise Khan
• Anti-Corruption Day
By Kamal Siddiqi
-----
Anti-Rape
Legislation Proposals
Wajahat
Ali Malik
December
06, 2020
A protest in Lahore
against the rape of a five-year-old girl in 2013 | AFP
----
To curtail
the number of rape incidents in the country, the federal cabinet has recently
approved two anti-rape ordinances: the Anti-Rape (Investigation and Trial)
Ordinance 2020; and the Pakistan Penal Code (Amendment) Ordinance 2020. The new
legislation will change the basic definition of rape as provided in Pakistan
Penal Code (PPC) 1860 and shall award exemplary punishments to rapists in the
form of chemical castration and hanging. It also provides protection to victims
of gang-rape and to transgender rape victims. The proposed law further
prohibits the controversial “two-finger” test. The cabinet committee on Disposal
of Legislative Cases has approved these two ordinances, which were already been
approved in principle by the federal cabinet.
Some key
recommendations on the proposed ordinances are as under:
Under the
present Pakistani law, in the case of rape, capital punishment shall be awarded
if a man has committed sexual intercourse with an adult woman or a minor girl
under 16 years of age. However, ‘sexual intercourse’ is not defined in
Pakistan’s penal law, creating ambiguity when sodomy is committed with a woman or
a minor girl or boy, because the act of forced sodomy is not mentioned in the
definition of rape under Section 375 of PPC. Courts then interpret ‘sexual
intercourse’ as mentioned in the definition of rape under PPC as only vaginal
intercourse. Moreover, the rape offence under PPC talks about adult woman and
minor girl victims, it does not address the adult man and minor male victims.
The offence does not either provide protection to transgender persons and
gang-rape victims. So, in the newly proposed anti-rape ordinances, the
definition of rape must be amended to include the offence of forced sodomy and
shelter from the offence must be provided to men, women, children and
transgender victims.
Section 377
of PPC talks about sodomy (unnatural offences) and penalises it with
imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term
not less than two years nor more than 10 years, along with a fine. In the new
anti-rape legislation, this issue must be addressed and punishment for sodomy
must be enhanced and made equivalent to rape offence under PPC.
Under PPC
1860, sexual offences against adults and children are mainly defined and
penalised in more than five different ways, including exposure to seduction,
child pornography, assault or use of criminal force against a woman with intent
to outrage her modesty or rape, unnatural offences (sodomy), and child sexual
abuse. The punishments of these offences are also prescribed in the same code
accordingly. The minimum punishment starts from one-year imprisonment of either
description or with fine which shall not be less than Rs100,000 in case of the
exposure to seduction offence and the maximum punishment is a death sentence or
life imprisonment and a fine in case of rape and assault or use of criminal
force against a woman to violate her modesty. Instead of focusing on different
definitions of sexual offences in PPC, the new legislation should focus on one
definition of sexual offence, which can classify sexual abuse into different
categories like seduction, molestation, pornography, vaginal intercourse,
sodomy, and assault or use of criminal force against woman, man or a child to
engage him/her in sexual activity. Similarly, the punishments must also be
categorised according to the severity of the offence. For example, in cases of
rape, the punishment should be equivalent to the punishment for heinous
offences, whereas in seduction, molestation or pornography offences, the
punishment can be less severe. This is similar to the murder (Qatl) offence, which
is classified into four types in the PPC: Qatl-e-Amd, Qatl Shibh-i-Amd,
Qatl-i-Khata, Oatl-bis-Sabab, and their punishments are also prescribed
differently depending on the circumstances and nature of murder.
By
incorporating the above recommendations in the newly proposed legislation on
the anti-rape issue, an exemplary legislation could be enacted and a landmark
achievement to address one of the gravest issues in our society could be
achieved.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2274916/anti-rape-legislation-proposals
-------
Thaw In
Pakistan, Bangladesh Relations?
By
Kamran Yousaf
December
06, 2020
Pakistan
High Commissioner to Dhaka Imran Ahmed Siddique recently called on Bangladeshi
Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed. The meeting was seen as yet another sign
suggesting easing of years-old tensions between the two countries. Remember,
the Bangladeshi PM refused to meet the Indian envoy despite efforts to seek an
audience with her, an unprecedented snub given the close ties between
Bangladesh and India. The meeting of Pakistani envoy with the Bangladeshi PM
was the result of quiet diplomacy being undertaken by the two countries for
months. The ice broke first in July when the Pakistani High Commissioner held a
meeting with the Bangladeshi Foreign Minister, a meeting that raised eyebrows
in India. Within a few days of that, Prime Minister Imran Khan and his
Bangladeshi counterpart spoke by phone. Imran invited Sheikh Hasina to visit
Pakistan while expressing his government’s willingness to rest ties with Bangladesh.
These
developments were important in the context of the tense relationship between
the two countries since 2009. The hiccup in their ties stemmed from Sheikh
Hasina’s decision to form a war crime tribunal to try her opponents allegedly
linked to the 1971 incidents. Pakistan opposed the trial, insisting that events
led to the creation of Bangladesh were past and closed transaction given the
trilateral agreement signed by Pakistan, Bangladesh and India in 1974. But
Sheikh Hasina’s government went ahead with the trial and key Bangladesh
Jamaat-e-Islami leaders were later executed. In 2016, Pakistan’s parliament
passed a unanimous resolution condemning the “politically motivated” trials.
Bangladesh objected to Pakistan’s condemnation and ties only deteriorated from
that point onwards. Meanwhile, the election of Narendra Modi as Indian Prime
Minister in 2014 gave a new impetus to ties between Dhaka and New Delhi. Indian
influence was so powerful that Bangladeshi politicians, who had a soft corner
for Pakistan, had been sidelined at the behest of New Delhi. In 2016, when
India boycotted the SAARC summit to be hosted by Pakistan, Bangladesh followed
suit.
But the
relationship between Bangladesh and India saw a dip when Modi government
introduced the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act and its overall
anti-Muslim policies. Amidst all that, China stepped in and deepened ties with
Bangladesh. It was because of this that Bangladesh did not even issue a
statement when at least 19 Indian soldiers were killed in bloody clashes with
Chinese troops in Ladakh. In the middle of all this, Pakistan reached out to
Bangladesh with a message that it was ready to reset ties with Dhaka.
The
prevailing regional environment is believed to have compelled Islamabad and
Dhaka to seek re-engagement.
Pakistan is
seeking the activation of consultation mechanism at the foreign ministry level
to improve the bilateral ties. The Bangladeshi PM told the Pakistani envoy that
there was no ban on such regular activities. The foreign secretaries from the
two sides may meet soon to take the next move. However, the statement issued by
the Bangladeshi PM Office said the incidents of 1971 cannot be forgotten and
forgiven. This shows that the Bangladeshi government is still adamant that
Pakistan must formally apologies over the events of 1971. Islamabad
nevertheless wants to bury the past and open a new chapter in ties with
Bangladesh. The two sides, however, need to seek a mutual closure of bitter
events that still haunt them both. In Pakistan, at least there is belief that
the new generation in both sides want to move on. Increased people-to-people
contact and revival of interaction between the two countries at the official
level can help address misgivings. The region and the world are undergoing a
transformation and this changing scenario provides an opportunity for both
Pakistan and Bangladesh to start a new beginning.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2274912/thaw-in-pakistan-bangladesh-relations
------
Assassinations
Are Destabilising Pakistan’s Neighbourhood
By
Shahid Javed Burki
December
06, 2020
There were
many differences in the way presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump looked at
the world. The one that mattered the most for Pakistan was their view of the
Islamic world. Obama worked to convince the leaderships in these countries to
move towards political orders that were representative of all segments of the
population. Several Muslim nations were hit by what came to be called the “Arab
Spring” two years after Obama had moved into the White House. This movement was
led by the youth who demanded popular participation in policymaking. Several
longstanding regimes fell including those in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and Yemen.
There was a civil war in Syria that continues to this day. Egypt, after a short
interregnum, saw military back in power this time under another strongman.
Trump was
comfortable working with strong men of which there were several in the Muslim
world. Both presidents supported Israel. Trump presumably under the influence
of senior adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner aggressively favoured the Jewish
state. Kushner is an orthodox Jew. This approach translated into extreme
hostility towards the Islamic regime in Iran that Israel saw as posing an
existential threat.
In 2015,
president Obama had worked hard with the world’s major powers to conclude a
deal with Iran that had Tehran give up its plans to build a nuclear bomb in
return for the easing of sanctions under which the country’s economy had been
placed by the president’s predecessors. Trump, soon after taking office, pulled
his country out of the 2015 nuclear deal and placed Iran once again under
severe sanctions. Iran responded by using its militias to attack America’s
supporters in the Middle East.
There was a
good chance that the change of administration in Washington would improve the
situation in the Middle East. President-elect Joe Biden who will be sworn in as
America’s 46th president will take office with a lot of experience in global
affairs. He served for eight years as vice-president in Obama’s administration.
America’s approach to the world was a part of his portfolio and he was often
sent out on missions to present Washington’s viewpoint to foreign
interlocutors. Trump, when he took office in 2017, had no experience in world affairs.
In his inaugural statement on January 20, 2017, he had vowed that America would
go alone and not work with other nations to pursue the country’s agenda. He and
his administration would work to “Make America Great Again”. His followers
picked up the MAGA slogan and put it on their red hats.
Trump went
to work the moment he took office and began to pull his country out of the
various international agreements the Obama administration had concluded. Among
those he gave up were the 12-counrty Trans-Pacific Partnership, the TPP; the
Paris Climate Agreement; and the Iran nuclear deal. In addition he walked out
of the decades-old World Health Organization and weakened the World Trade
Organization. He also indicated that he would pull out his country’s troops
from Iraq and Afghanistan. Most of these moves affected Pakistan’s
neighbourhood, making it even more volatile. It is the pullout from Afghanistan
that is likely to create chaos in the country the Americans had invaded 20
years ago. The pullout is being done even though the American military
leadership is not supportive of what Trump wishes to do in the last days of his
presidency.
Of
immediate consequence for Islamabad is the assassination on November 27 of the
Iranian scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh as he was traveling by car to his home in
Tehran. The attack, the Iranian news agencies said, involved a car bomb and
gunmen. Officials in Iran suspected that the Israelis were responsible for the
killing and that they carried out the assassination with the knowledge of
Washington.
This
killing was one of the series of assassinations of senior military personnel
carried out in the last few months. In January, a United States drone strike
killed Maj Gen Qassem Soleimani, Iran’s powerful military commander and head of
its special-operations forces abroad. In August, Israeli agents, acting on
behalf of American officials, assassinated a senior Al Qaeda leader in Tehran.
Iran has promised to retaliate to send a powerful message to both Israel and
the US that these actions are seen as serious violation of Iranian sovereignty
and cannot go unpunished.
The Iranian
scientist had been in Israeli sights for a long time. The role he was playing
in developing nuclear weapons in Iran was revealed by the disclosure of
thousands of Iranian documents that were stolen by Israeli infiltrators and
smuggled out of the country in 2018. Their content was revealed in a press
conference by Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister. They portrayed
Fakhrizadeh as the nuclear projects leader since 1998.
The timing
of the Fakhrizadeh killing is interesting in that it comes a few weeks before
President-elect Joe Biden is to move into the White House. The incoming
president has indicated that he will reverse some of the moves his predecessor made
to have America go alone in world affairs. Among those is the decision to walk
out of the nuclear deal that had slowed down considerably Tehran’s effort to
develop a nuclear bomb. Biden had announced that he would move to revive the
deal. That may become more difficult if the government in Iran retaliates by
taking actions to avenge the killing. As David Sanger wrote in The New York
Times, “that may well have been the main goal of the operation.” His conclusion
was based on a statement by the Israeli Prime Minister who said that “there
must be no return to the previous nuclear agreement.”
Iranian
President Hasan Rouhani spoke a day after the assassination saying that it was
aimed at causing turmoil before President-elect Joe Biden takes office and that
Tehran would respond at the right time. The reaction from Europe was also sharp
especially from the countries that had signed the 2015 deal. “The killing of
Mohsen Fakhrizadeh is once again worsening the situation in the region, at a
time when we absolutely do not need such escalation,” said German Foreign
Minister Heiko Mass. He called on “all those involved to refrain from taking
steps that could lead to a further escalation of the situation.” Expert opinion
in the US was also highly critical of what was deemed to be an Israeli
operation. Former CIA director John O Brennan tweeted that the attack was a
“criminal act and highly reckless”. It risks retaliation and a new round of
regional conflict, he wrote. “Iranian leaders would be wise to wait for the return
of responsible American leadership on the global stage and resist the urge to
respond gainst perceived culprits,” he concluded.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2274918/assasinations-are-destabilising-pakistans-neighbourhood
------
Have
Liberals Failed Us? Part - II
By
Themrise Khan
December 7,
2020
To be fair,
residents of DHA fully had the right to demand restitution. However, if they
truly espoused liberal values of equality for all, their demands should ideally
have been extended to the city as a whole. It is cases like this where we can
witness the efforts of liberals in confined silos based on individual
preference and class status.
Age and
generation gaps are yet another dividing line that create a barrier for
liberals to come together. Granted that the world has changed greatly over the
last few decades, and a newer, younger liberal base has emerged. But it remains
parallel to the older, existing liberal base who still hold the idea of a
progressive, free Pakistan very close to their hearts. But often there is a
tense standoff between the two because the expression and form of those ideas
are different from those who rally to the liberal cause today.
Then there
is also the dichotomy of those who struggle for their rights in rural Pakistan
and are even more distanced from the fight for social change in other parts of
the country. Such as the myriad of small farmer and village-based agrarian
groups or fisherfolk forums. These groups get very limited attention in the
urban centres of their districts, let alone the country. Are rural demands for
rights to land, markets, education, health and social security not liberal
values? And if so, are they specific only to those who live in rural areas and
so not the concern of the urban liberal?
Similarly,
the spate of protests that have been occurring during and as a result of the
impact of Covid-19 on low-income workers, students and health professionals are
another example of how we compartmentalize values and rights. The firing of
daily wage earners by several wealthy industrialists at the start of the
pandemic was an extreme violation of rights. The insistence of the PMC to hold
its admission tests for thousands of applicants during the pandemic, was
another. The demands of students in Waziristan for access to the internet so
they could study online was yet another. These are all liberal values in
action. But they took place in silos, rather than as part of a broader movement
on labour rights, internet freedom or citizen protection.
While many
urban, entitled English-speaking liberals (myself included) clearly write about
and even stand up for all these issues, very few of us actually indulge in
taking them forward (I stand guilty as well). That this article is being
written in English, for an English publication and English-speaking audience,
is also evidence of the fact that while we may be cognizant of the issues
facing people across a range of spectrums, we refuse to come out of the bubbles
we have created for ourselves. Hence, we continue to perpetuate dichotomies,
which goes against what liberalism stands for.
This is why
‘liberal’ has become a dirty word in Pakistan, because we all think that our
brand of liberalism is the right one. We prioritize our liberal values based on
our personal preferences, not as a national cause. We only support the views of
those who fall into our immediate ambit of liberalism (or social circles), but
not anyone else’s. Granted not everyone can take up every cause everywhere. But
there is a clear lack of solidarity and uniformity in how we express the causes
we do take up.
Most street
protests demanding social change have so far never been able to muster more
than a few hundred people. The tens of thousands have been reserved for PDM
demonstrations and religious rallies. That is not something that should make us
question only the state. That should make us question ourselves. We are
horrified by barbaric crimes being committed everyday but none of that brings
us ‘liberals’ out onto the streets to demand change. And even those who do attend
every protest and march have not been able to create a sustainable critical
following. Not yet at least. Lasting change never did come from taking to only
social media. Or from this article.
So, what do
Pakistan’s liberals need to do to ensure the value of liberalism doesn’t die a
fast death?
First, we
must recognize that all of us, wherever we are in Pakistan, if we believe in
rights and freedoms, are followers of liberal values. Creating silos will never
get us anywhere. Nor will being overly-defensive about who we are, where we
come from, if we are more liberal than others, or if we consider ourselves
elite or not. If we believe in equality, rights and freedoms, then these
questions are irrelevant.
We should
instead be coming together on one platform more coherently and collectively,
rather than dispersing our voices in a series of individual movements that are
disconnected from each other. For instance, if women in Pakistan want their
rights, then we need to somehow consolidate our efforts on a common platform
where all women fighting for these rights in different contexts across the
country can come together and formulate a plan of action (the efforts of Aurat
March notwithstanding). With greater coherency of message, we could have and
should have come together in Pakistan on the horrific rapes and sodomizing of
five-year olds taking place across the country.
If students
in under-privileged areas or public institutions want the state to improve the
quality of and access to higher education, then those in urban private
institutions must also make sure that they support them in this cause. This is
the only way momentum and coherency can be achieved. Change at the level we are
seeking, can only come from a physically vocal collective. Not an electronically
vocal one.
We need to
consolidate our liberal arguments and viewpoints across a vast spectrum and
truly come together if we want positive social change in Pakistan. Otherwise,
none of us deserve to call ourselves liberals. And, then, we will truly have failed
Pakistan.
Concluded
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/754748-have-liberals-failed-us-part-ii
-----
Anti-Corruption
Day
By
Kamal Siddiqi
December
06, 2020
The UN
marks December 9 as the International Anti-Corruption Day. The day is observed
to raise awareness about corruption and to emphasise the role of the United
Nations Convention against Corruption in combating and preventing it.
There is
much to be done. Pakistan is no exception to corruption. We have seen how
gradually this cancer has spread in our society — there are few exceptions now.
It was
amusing last week to hear the statement of our top politician who said that
only 10 years back he was a pauper and today he is a multi-millionaire. Such
are the ways of those in power. But to blame politicians for corruption
entirely is wrong. The problem spreads much further.
Instead of
reducing corruption, we see that the entities being set up to fight it continue
to increase with each passing day. Just like those who comment that crime goes
up in those localities where new police stations are established, the same can
be said of corruption and the anti-corruption apparatus. New anti-corruption
cells, units and agencies only add to the problem.
The
anti-corruption apparatus we see is also used to bring down opponents,
political or otherwise. The most convenient way to tarnish the record and
standing of someone holding public office or being an aspirant to it is by
accusing them of corruption. Image plays a more important part in this than
does reality.
While
successive governments have fallen due to allegations of corruption, what we
see is that in real terms there is little that has been achieved. Corruption
cannot be measured in absolute terms but one way to understand how it seeps
through is to see the rise in the cost of goods and services.
Governments
have been sacked based on newspaper stories alleging corruption. But time again
we have seen that nothing much comes out of it. Corruption allegations are
rarely proved and once a target has fallen, there is little or no follow-up.
Whatever happened to the numerous promises made to bring people to justice?
They seem to come back in cycles.
How do we
break the cycle? When we say that corruption is endemic in Pakistan, we are not
wrong. It is not just those who are at the top who are corrupt. The whole chain
is usually tainted. If we make a hue and cry of government functionaries on the
street who ask for bribes, we forget that they also must pay those above them.
We all
realise the problem. But what is the solution? In a country like Pakistan where
people have accepted corruption as a way of life, it would be difficult to root
it out entirely. The whole system can collapse. We are looking at
institutionalised corruption where entities take decisions instead of people.
One can take people to task, but how do you put an entity in jail?
This week
Prime Minister Imran Khan said the government will introduce a new system of
“reward and punishment” for the civil servants under which corrupt bureaucrats
will be sacked instead of just being transferred. This is a very good idea and
should have been done earlier. Sadly, it is something that has been tried in
the past as well but resulted in endless litigation and little else.
The best
way to combat corruption is through accountability. And the most effective way
to achieve accountability is to help state institutions that work towards
accountability and at the same time strengthen the media to hold people
accountable.
Entities
that deal with accountability must be seen to be fair. Otherwise the whole
anti-corruption effort comes to naught. Such entities cannot be politicised.
Equally
important is the role of the media. The media is the fourth estate — the
watchdog which looks over the other pillars of state. While one agrees that the
media in Pakistan isn’t perfect and has many problems, the only way it can do
its role effectively is if it is allowed freedom.
Of course,
there is corruption within the media. That can only be rooted out if it is
exposed. This is a long and painful road. In the past we have seen that leaders
who are genuinely trying to fix things end up getting lost in the details. Let
us not make the same mistakes again.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2274917/anti-corruption-day
-----
URL: https://newageislam.com/pakistan-press/pakistan-press-anti-rape-legislation/d/123678
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in
America, Muslim Women in
West, Islam Women and
Feminism