Mukhtaran Mai appeal: Delayed and denied

Dismissing an appeal by gang rape victim Mukhtaran Mai, the Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the Lahore High Court’s decision to acquit five of the six accused in the rape case.

Mai, now 40, was gang raped in June 2002 on the orders of a “panchayat” in Meerwala town of Punjab as punishment after her younger brother was wrongly accused of having illicit relations with a woman from a rival clan. The boy was 11-years-old at the time.

A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Justice Mian Shakirullah heard the case on Mukhtaran Mai’s appeal against the Lahore High Court (LHC) Multan bench judgment on March 3, 2005. The other two members on the bench were Justice Nasirul Mulk and Justice Mian Saqib Nisar.

In its written order, the apex court directed the immediate release of the five accused if no other cases were registered against them. The death penalty for the sixth man, Abdul Khaliq, was changed to life in prison.

“I’m disappointed. Why was I made to wait for five years if this decision was to be given?” a sobbing Mai told Reuters by telephone from her village after the court announced the decision. “The police never even recorded my own statements correctly,” she told the BBC.

“I don’t have any more faith in the courts. I have put my faith in God’s judgement now. I don’t know what the legal procedure is, but my faith [in the system] is gone.

Mukhtaran Mai was an illiterate villager at the time but she defied taboos and shot to global fame by speaking about her ordeal accusing 14 attackers and taking them to court.

As the case got global attention and pressure from the international community increased, former president Musharraf’s government was forced to decide the matter speedily.

Within a span of three months, a local anti-terrorism court (ATC) sentenced six accused to death, while acquitting the other eight for a lack of evidence. However, the Lahore High Court acquitted five of the men in March 2005, and commuted the sentence for the main accused, Abdul Khaliq, to life imprisonment. The decision was challenged in the Supreme Court in 2005.

In its order, the court also discharged its suo motu action taken on March 14, 2005 in the matter. The court in its decision found the prosecution case to be weak.

Earlier, Aitzaz Ahsan had argued before the Supreme Court that the complainant party was under constant threat from the accused to not disclose the incident. He argued that the fundamental and crucial testimony in any rape case is always that of the victim. However, the court found that the testimony of the complainant lacked corroboration and observed deliberate delay by Mukhtaran Mai in the registration of an FIR.

The prosecution witnesses and Mukhtaran Mai, during their testimonies had referred to the threats held out to the complainant party after the incident to prevent them from reporting to the police.

The judgment authored by Justice Saqib Nisar held that there are ten issues arising out of the LHC judgment, eight are the appeals (four each) against the acquittal of the accused having been initiated by the complainant and the State; one appeal has been filed by the convict and the last is the suo motu action by the Supreme court refraining the Federal Shariat Court from taking up the issue.

The lawyer for Mukhtaran Mai informed the court that the very act of bringing the complainant to the panchayat to seek forgiveness for her brother and raping her instead, demonstrates the power of the Mastoi community against the complainant.

Mukhtaran Mai in her testimony, which the Supreme Court produced in its detail judgment, said: “I (Mukhtaran Mai) stated to the police that after the accused committed Zina, I came out in nude condition and called out my father Ghulam Fareed. I had not put on the shalwar as it was without string, nor I covered the same on my body, and my father had arrived just then”.

The woman celebrated by human rights activists for her courage, runs a school for girls in her village, and has vowed that Thursday’s ruling will not force her to leave her home.

“Life and death are in the hands of Allah… I will not shut my school and other projects,” she told Reuters news agency.

WITH ADDITIONAL INPUT FROM THE BBC AND REUTERS

Published in The Express Tribune, April 22nd, 2011.

Comments: The Express Tribune Blog 22nd April 2011

Even though the history of Pakistan SC has been dubious at best but this decision by the “independent” SC sets new lows in its history. When Mush in the US was making fun of the women who were raped in Pakistan, nobody thought that these judges for whom we all struggled would do the same. Mai is not raped once but once again by the Lahore HC and now by the SC. Shame is the best to describe this decision.

ad day for our judicial system, may Allah grant her true justice……

8 out of 14 were released earlier, 5 more have been set free. So only 1 person is involved in gang rape and his punishment is life imprisonment. And this too after 10 years of court processions, interviews on national and international media, autobiographies, parlimentary resolutions, and support of team of top lawyers lead by Aitzaz Ahsan. I think she is right, only God will provide her justice in the life hereafter.

So you think that the best way to bring parity between Pakistan and USA is for Pakistan to catch up with the rape rate of USA???????????

How you can abruptly change your stance regarding Azaad Adliaa. It was Musharaf who correctly recognized corrupt and dishonest biased judiciary system and wanted process to be completed by Supreme Judicial Council but Nawaz Sharif politicize this matter. He likes to interfere with his likes and dislike of Judiciary. It was proved that Nawaz and his coronies attacked Supreme Court when it did not like it. And when their own pet judges were involved, he came onto streets. What a non-partial judiciary.

You have not left your enimity against Musharaf to alleg him to defame Pakistan Females. Can you preciesly send me a non-biased link for the readers to read what was actual statement given by Musharaf.

This is non-Azaad Adlia and if any body believes that it may give a non-biased decision, one is living in fools paradise. There will be more Mukhtaran Mais who will be cribbing for a non-biased decision but will disappointed.

Please stop blaming judiciary. This matter was more politicized and publicized by the so called human right activists than its actual basis. Most of the so called human rights activists present before the court never went to her native area. The actual purpose of this case achieved was to get the women empowerment law in to play and repeal Hudood laws that has been achieved and women of Pakistan have been empowered now. Why are they still complaining?

FIR was registered by Mai after one week with vague allegations, 14 people were falsely implicated in this case as it was clearly not a case of gang rape as stated but more individual revenge of the rape committed by Mai’s bother for which Abdul Khaliq has been Punished.

If you insist that justice is what women victim says that should be acted upon without any standard and basis of proof then this kind of justice is not prevalent anywhere in the world and this brand of justice can not be tolerated in Paksistan as well. Open your eyes many of the activists became millionares and many benefited from bestseller book of Muktaran Mai on amazon who do not know one word of english.

Human right activists please when you blame people and judiciary of Pakistan of this decision please consider that you are playing with the reputatiopn of Pakistan so be careful and do not use issues to fill your pockets.

Please tell me how many of you went to her village and how many of you studied this case. Where did you get the idea that overwhelming evidence is present on record. I do not support the rapist or anyone else criminals for this matter but it is wrong to disrespect judiciary. Your opinion should be based upon actual knowledge not gausses.

The court has to pass a verdict after considering the relevant questions of law involved in a case. We all know that proceedings in ‘special’ courts- like the Anti-Terrorism court which initially sentenced six people to their death- leave much to be desired. Fact is, the initial police investigation was shoddy and did not adequately collect the evidence needed to fully establish the culpability of Mukhtaran Mai’s alleged molesters. Of course the LHC and the SC released these men, because these are higher courts which are given to a more sober assessment of issues than the anti-terror court which decided the case in the heat of the moment. I for one am looking forward to seeing what the detailed SC judgment has to say.

P.S. The mark of a free judiciary is to not bow to self-righteous public passion. All that the SC has to do to establish its independence is to present a well-argued legal judgment, as opposed to trying to win some sort of a public popularity poll.

Don’t worry Mukhtar Mai… there is a much greater judicial system these sick people will have to answer to, where they will not be able to hide any evidence or use their influential links..and that justice will come on the day they stand before God!

I think its a shame but only if the persons were responsible. Beside this if we look at the overall attitude of men towards women in the society so it is evident that women are in trouble. In big cities which should be more organized the behaviour is limited to passing comments on passing by females which surely intensifies in smaller cities and villages.

It extends to physical responses from men in the villages. It is everyone’s responsibility to discourage disrespect females at each level. Women do not have clothing independence. If someone wears a little misfit clothes, she becomes the center of attention in a public place. The whole society is infected with this curse. Nation should accept now that it has got beauty and it has to learn how to respect it.

As 5 out of 6 are innocent, our supreme court thinks that 1 man can do “gang rape”.

Has anyone noticed that?

While Pakistan’s judicial system has serious flaws and issues, the judgement in this case seems to be correct. The record does not justify the award of death penalty and the case was decided on the basis of available evidence. Concerns have been raised in this case that Miss Mai did succumb to the traditional behaviour of Pakistan society and included names of people who did not commit the act in question. While this may be untrue and she may be right but the investigation did not provide any tangible evidence of their involvement. Rule of Law does not come merely with the judiciary; the police , prosecutors and most importantly victims have an important role to play and if any one of them goes awry so does the judicial system.

Vow Jamshed Dasti and SC thinks alike that gang rape never happened.

we should avoid any derogatory language against the Judiciary especially when we are not aware what happened in the Court of Law, none of us ever read the verdict or witnessed the proceeding in the court. It may be a little disappointing for some of us because the verdict is not in line with our expectations – but our expectations should not be governing the justice system but the other way around.

The judiciary has done so much for the well being of common people especially they tried to get the answers about the missing people, Haj scam, Pakistan Steel Mills, Rental Power Plants are only some of the examples where common Pakistanis were molested and the Judiciary is doing the needful.

Human rights groups have expressed outrage after most of those accused of the gang rape of Mukhtaran Mai, who was assaulted on the orders of a village council, were freed by Pakistan's supreme court.

Nine years after the gang rape, Mai's struggle for justice ended with the court ordering five of the six accused to be freed. A distraught Mai, who has won international acclaim for her bravery in a deeply chauvinistic society, said that the release of the men had put her life in danger.

Pakistan Supreme Court acquits five in Mukhtar Mai rape case
Take it Mukhtar, that’s how we treat our daughters!

The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Thursday Apil 21st upheld the Lahore High Court's decision to acquit five of the six suspects in the Mukhtar Mai gang-rape case which caught global attention as an instance of a tribal council ordering the rape of a woman to atone for an alleged crime committed by her brother in the summer of 2002.
One suspect - convicted by the Lahore High Court and sentenced for life - will have to complete his prison term, according to the Supreme Court verdict which drew immediate condemnation from women's rights and human rights organizations.
While remaining non-committal on whether she would seek a review of the Supreme Court's verdict, Mukhtar Mai was quoted by the local media as stating: ``I did not receive justice today, hence I have left my fate in the hands of God. The release of the suspects has put my life in grave danger.''
Still, she tweeted an hour after the verdict that ``No court can weaken my resolve to stand against injustice''. Tweeting on the judgement, she added: ``The verdict proves that police dictates the justice system in Pakistan.''
With the case drawing international attention, the then Musharraf Government granted monetary compensation and fast-tracked the trial as a result of which six men were sentenced to death by an Anti-Terrorism Court within three months. Five of them were acquitted by the Lahore High Court and the sentence of the sixth was reduced from death to life. In the wake of further condemnation, they were rearrested.
Mukhtar Mai herself used the money that came for her assistance to open a girl's school and a women's welfare organisation. Serenaded by the international media for challenging the male-dominated social structure, she has travelled widely since and even spoken at the United Nations Headquarters. The attention that her case attracted also got Pakistan's Parliament to amend the rape laws but Mukhtar Mai, according to her website, still lives in fear as the very same villagers who tormented her continue to trouble her.


What would Mukhtar Mai be thinking right now? That’s one question my mind is still asking me after around ten hours of the ‘landmark’ verdict made by the Superior Court of Pakistan in Mukhtar’s case.

It was probably January this year when I got a message from Farzana Bari, a veteran human rights activist, to come to the Supreme Court for Mukhtar’s moral support at the case hearing. Such was the environment of hostility that sitting there for more than ten minutes seemed the worst possible punishment. I saluted Mukhtar Mai for her resilience, patience, strength and forbearance. She had been facing it for almost a decade!

After the legal proceedings that span over a period of three years, a three-member bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan upheld the earlier decision of the Lahore High Court (LHC) whereby five of the accused were acquitted for lack of evidence while convicting one of them.

Gang raped in 2002 by local influentials after a decision by the village Panchayat, Mukhtar did not succumb to conventional conformity expected of a victim, especially a rape victim, in Pakistan. She made a hard choice: fight for justice, come what may. She did it despite all odds for the last nine years during which her case snaked through many crests and troughs.

The Anti Terrorist Court in Dera Ghazi Khan convicted six of the 14 men accused by Mukhtar of the gang rape, while acquitting eight of them in 2002. The conviction was challenged in a review petition before the LHC, which acquitted five of these six convicted men while upholding acquittal of other eight.

This was the time when the Federal Shariat Court (FSC) took it upon itself to assert its parallel authority over the judicial machinery of Pakistan, like it has routinely done whenever it came to the cases of violations of women’s rights.

The most recent example was in December 2010 when it issued the judgment about four sections of the Women Protection Act which were brought under its jurisdiction from that of the Supreme Court. This tussle of jurisdiction between the two parallel systems of justice exacerbated itself in this case too, when in 2002 the FSC took suo moto action and in 2005, it overturned the LHC verdict whereby five men accused in Mukhtar’s case were acquitted. The Supreme Court immediately took suo moto action in its own discretion against the convictions the same year.

This musical chair by the courts belonging to parallel justice systems turned out to be more than just the quest for justice. Those who have been witnessing the proceedings of the case over the years in court rooms of the apex court would bear me out on how derogatory and insulting an attitude Mukhtar Mai had to bear at the hands of not only defence counsel but of the Lordships too.

At every hearing, human rights activists would come out of the courtroom with heavy hearts and battered hopes for justice. All through these years, we have been sure of one fact, Mukhtar is going to be the loser in a justice system where worst of the terrorists get acquitted while elected prime ministers could get death sentence on scanty evidence and unproven charges. But a weak hope, in whatever shaky justice we could have in this case, kept us going.

Those who were present in the courtroom on the day of final verdict, another day of sheer embarrassment to Pakistanis – April 21, were shocked to see people (including a section of media) clapping after this horrible verdict. It is more than the complete breakdown of moral ethos in a society that overlooks heinous crimes against humanity while trumpeting its inflated sense of ‘honour’ when it comes to selective political issues.

Mukhtar Mai, a woman with an unusual character and determination, remains my hero forever. But there is something extremely grave to worry about. It’s a complete erosion of faith in us as society, in our state as sovereign authority to prevent crime against my specie and in our judiciary as an institution that would dispense nothing but justice.

Just to remind you readers, we are a society that creates around 3,000 Mukhtars a year. A recent HRCP report informs, we raped 2,903 Mukhtaras in 2010 alone. We very successfully murdered 791 women in the name of honour. Where is the honour in raping and killing women? And where are those flowing beards and intimidating black robes that came out on streets in thousands for a murderer who assassinated Governor of Punjab Salman Taseer early this year?

Every woman of these 2,903 was not Mukhtar. Neither in terms of strength nor in terms of getting international lime light (which only helped Mukhtar in “speeding up” the process of “justice”). This year’s balance sheet on Supreme Court’s website tells some 1,443 criminal petitions were still pending at the Principal Seat, out of total 3,964 instituted. Of the disposed off petitions (2,521) only eight were human rights cases including rape and gang rape. Not a Pythagoras theorem to make out the number of rape cases that would be still pending before the courts of law. The number of Mukhtars we create but do not report in police-stations, could be even astounding had it been survey- able.

I wonder how anyone associated with this case would be sleeping after this “landmark” verdict. Would there be an internal review of our shaky justice system by the authors of ambitious National Judicial Policy? What would Mukhtar be like right now? What column would come out of that ghairat-infested columnist who reasoned our defeat in the recent World Cup Cricket semi-final as the result of our collective sins? Does this shameless show of insensitivity and moral impoverishment raise some eye-brows?

Well, only if our Ray-ed justice and Davis-ed honour could allow!

The writer is a right’s activist and political commentator based in Islamabad.

...............................................................
Pakistani rape victim is Glamour's woman of year
The Guardian, Wednesday 2 November 2005 11.54 GMT Article history

Mukhtaran Bibi, a Pakistani rape victim, is to receive a "Woman Of the Year" award today from the US magazine Glamour.

The 31-year-old Punjabi villager will also receive $20,000 (£11,350) at a ceremony in New York's Lincoln Centre alongside 11 other nominees including Catherine Zeta-Jones.

"This is a story that I think is going to shock everyone who hears it," said Cindi Leive, editor-in-chief of Glamour.

Mukhtaran, also known as Mukhtar Mai, shot to prominence three years ago for her court testimony against neighbours who gang-raped her on the orders of a council of elders. The rape sparked international outrage and a legal saga that is now before Pakistan's supreme court, where 13 men could face the death penalty. US media and civil rights groups have showered Mukhtaran, who is barely literate, with plaudits since she arrived from Lahore last week.

She has given talks in Chicago and Washington and was named "person of the week" by ABC news. The New York Daily News described her as Pakistan's answer to Rosa Parks, the civil rights pioneer who died last month.

Glamour magazine's previous women of the year include former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, pop star Britney Spears and actor Ellen DeGeneres. Former president Bill Clinton will present the award, the BBC reported. Mukhtaran's case has embarrassed the Pakistani establishment whose attempts to silence her have only fuelled more publicity.

An earlier attempt to visit the US last June was blocked by President Pervez Musharraf, who told reporters she would "bad-mouth" Pakistan's image abroad. Her passport was returned after protests.

But Mr Musharraf became mired in controversy again in September with claims that rape had become a "money-making concern" in Pakistan. Mukhtaran has promised to give $5,000 of her prize money towards earthquake relief; the remainder will be spent on schools and a women's shelter.

Pakistan successfully test-fires nuclear capable Hatf-9

Pakistan on Tuesday successfully conducted the first flight test of the newly developed short range surface to surface multi tube ballistic missile Hatf IX (NASR), a statement issued by the Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) stated.

According to the statement, the missile has been developed to add deterrence value to Pakistan’s Strategic Weapons Development programme at shorter ranges. NASR, with a range of 60 kilometres, carries nuclear warheads of appropriate yield with high accuracy, shoot and scoot attributes. This quick response system addresses the need to deter evolving threats, it said.

Military sources said that the new missile system belongs to the category of tactical nuclear weapons and is a low yield battlefield deterrent, which is capable of inflicting damage on mechanised forces such as armed brigades and divisions.

With the development of this multi- tube, ‘shoot-n-scoot’ capability, Indian planners will now be deterred from considering options of limited war, the sources said.

According to ISPR’s statement, the successful test has also been appreciated by President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, who have congratulated the scientists and engineers on their outstanding success.

Good for Balochistan

The announcement by the army chief that the last of the military battalions posted in the troubled Balochistan district of Sui will be withdrawn within two months is news that will be welcomed by the people of the province. So will General Kayani’s assertion that there will be no further intervention in the province by troops, except with the permission of the provincial government. The deployment of troops in Balochistan has, over many decades, added to the anger and angst which runs through the territory and is added to each time a civilian is stopped at a barricade manned by uniformed personnel. The realisation of the problem had come some months ago, when the central government had ordered the cancellation of new barracks planned for Balochistan. The army chief’s decision takes this further — though he still seems to be somewhat out of step with reality when he speaks of the part played by the army in the development of Balochistan, and especially the educational institutions set up there. This is not a role everyone in the province welcomes.

The issue of Balochistan is not only that of development, but also of the manner in which resources to it are allocated and utilised. It is important for the people of the province to be treated as decision-makers in the process. Had this role been granted to them earlier and greater wisdom exercised by both the military and political leadership in the handling of affairs in the province, we may have averted the crisis we see there now. Of course, much more still needs to be done to redress the grievances of the poeple of the province. That said, the gesture of the troop pullout is a significant one. The expanded recruitment of Baloch youth in the army may also help address the unemployment crisis in the region. But these actions are not enough on their own. There are many complications in the Balochistan situation; positions have become more and more entrenched over the years. Some nationalists are unwilling to consider anything less than complete autonomy. Political dialogue is essential to resolve these issues, and, alongside the military withdrawal, move towards finding lasting peace in a province where chaos prevails for now.

A very positive step taken by Gen Kayani to normalise conditions in Balochistan and sincerely hope that he doesnt change his mind too soon.

I guess it’s a bit late for these kinds of gestures to work really as a lot of water has flown under the bridge since Bugti’s Assassination. Of course, such acts of financial assistance and economic opportunities would have gone a long way in diminishing the sense of economic deprivation prevalent in the province a decade ago perhaps. But as things stand today, they are nothing more than peanuts to our dejected and disappointed brethren.

I personally feel that greater provincial autonomy and political freedom could still resolve the issue. In this connection, the re-election of the Balochistan assembly would be a step in the right direction as the present assembly not only lacks the support of the majority of the Baloch people but, due to the conspicuous absence of the nationalist parties, is also contributing towards further alienation of the Baloch youth from the present government set-up.

Remembering Dacca Fall.

The Last Days Of United Pakistan

By Mashuqur Rahman

On December 16, 1971 the Pakistan army in Bangladesh unconditionally surrendered to the joint Indian and Bangladeshi forces. With the signing of the Instrument of Surrender, Bangladesh came into being and united Pakistan was at an end.

However, in Pakistan the state-controlled and censored media was in denial. The day after General Niazi of Pakistan had surrendered all 93,000 soldiers and paramilitary units under his command in Bangladesh and the guns had fallen silent in the East, the Dawn newspaper, published from Karachi, declared: “WAR TILL VICTORY”. The story of the Pakistani surrender was contained in one sentence of an article entitled “Fighting ends in East Wing: PAF hits in West”. The surrender was spun as follows:

Latest reports indicate that following an arrangement between the local commanders of India and Pakistan in the Eastern theatre, fighting has ceased in East Pakistan and Indian troops have entered Dacca.

While newspaper headlines around the world announced the surrender of the Pakistani army and the creation of Bangladesh, the Pakistani population were presented with an alternate reality. This alternate reality would continue for four more days until the collapse of the military regime of Yahya Khan. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the man who failed to win the prime ministership of a united Pakistan a year ago at the ballot box, would now take over as leader of the remaining wing of Pakistan.

Below are the front pages of the Dawn newspaper from December 4, 1971 to December 20, 1971. The headlines chronicle the unraveling of the false reality created by the military regime in the last days of united Pakistan. [Click the images for a PDF of the front page.]

December 4, 1971

India enters the war on December 3, 1971 to stop the genocide in Bangladesh.

All the best Mullah XI - Pakistan Cricket Team - The Cricket World Champions in Cheating, Betting and Gamling

All the best Mullah XI - Pakistan Cricket Team - The Cricket World Champions in Cheating, Betting and Gamling

Is your Islam better than mine?

I was taught to think about whether my religious beliefs are rational.

Growing up, I studied about the history of Islam, religious battles and tales of bravery in our compulsory Islamic Studies class at school. I was taught to learn and believe in the religion – and so I did.

Then, I went to college.

My romanticized opinions were shattered when I took a course on religious studies. As I entered a new discourse, one that compared Islam to Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism, I found myself questioning my preconceived notions of righteousness.

The class taught us the difference between “rational thought” and religion. When I looked around my class I felt orthodox, but certainly not superior.

By comparing rationality to different religions, I was required to question the validity of religion. This was difficult for me. A voice in my head kept saying

“Hello? This isn’t what you are here to learn. You should believe – not question!”

But I continued and completed the courses.

At the end of the semester, I started questioning some old beliefs. When I heard a professor talk about Islamic history I realised reverence was personal. Islam was sacred to me only because I believed in it.

I learned that other religions – which earlier lessons had taught me to regard as ‘false’ – are sacred too. Not for me, as a Muslim, but for those who believe in the sacredness of their respective religions.

We spend our lives protecting our religion, trying to maintain its sanctity, while we miss out on the most vital part that Islamic history can teach us: universality.

Tell me, is your Islam better than mine? If no human is created superior than another, there should be no better sacredness; after all spirituality is personal.

To the contrary, Islam in Pakistan is being misused to control and to deprive.

Personally, I choose to remain confused…

Is the veil not cool enough for France?

Whose concept of modernity are Muslim women supposed to accept and adhere to?

Is it difficult to be a woman, a Muslim and a self-proclaimed fighter of gender discrimination – and not support the French government’s ban on the burqa?

Nope, no problem. In fact, I feel I am in a position of advantage as a member of a religion that has come under fire from the world’s democracies as well as an outspoken advocate for equality for both sexes. Let me iterate here: I do not support the ban on the face veil. It is tantamount to human rights violations against minorities.

What is French culture?


The French government’s ban says that the face veil is discriminatory against women and a symbol of oppression and servitude. A veil doesn’t allow women to integrate into society (French society in particular) and distances the Muslim population from adopting French culture and values.

In the drama that has followed the arrest of a woman who dared not to bare, the one question that keeps nagging me is this: What is French culture about? Is it just Guccis, Pradas and other designer brands that cater to a ‘Westernised’ concept of beauty?

Whose concept of modernity are the Muslim women supposed to accept? If they give up their full body shifts and adopt jeans and shirts, would they be representatives of a modern French society? Do they need to have shimmery cosmetics and leather bags? Do women in French provinces and villages really have similar clothing choices? I doubt it.

When in Rome…

The ban is imposed on one tiny section of an already tiny Muslim population. Roughly 2,000 of the 5-6 million Muslim population in France prefer to wear veils. If a dress code is being enforced, let it be uniform. Perhaps the government should codify the dos and don’ts of what is appropriate or inappropriate to wear in France. Then we can all follow the dictum: when in Rome, do as the Romans do.

Whither democracy?

Some feminists have strongly supported the burqa ban, saying it’s an anachronism and outdated tool of patriarchy. Honestly, I agree with them. From a religious viewpoint, it’s clear that the Holy Quran doesn’t make any reference to a full body or facial veil at all. It suggests that women and men dress modestly. It’s no one’s fault that power-hungry clerics decided to interpret and twist those wordings to their own benefits.

However, face veils and head scarves are not just religious. They also form a part of many other cultural and ethnic traditions around the world. How can a democratic government force a minority population to give up their cultural and ethnic identities or signifiers? Why shouldn’t citizens have the right to express their religious affiliations through their clothing when it really doesn’t affect public discourse?

Veiled by choice

Why don’t all of us who are fighting for the rights of the ‘oppressed’ Muslim women take a vote of confidence first? Let’s ask them if they want to be represented by us. The so-called progressive, anti-religious, anti-cultural feminists who want to push their agenda and their idea of equality on to women who might have different viewpoints about equality. Do we ever pause to think about those women who willingly choose to adopt religious symbols or outward signifiers as a mark of their practice?

Don’t criticise religion

It is against the values of fraternity and tolerance to criticise religion as an outdated institution and champion the cause of a non-religious, secular existence. Every human being belongs to a group, community, class, idea, ideology, circle or affiliated to institutions and clubs.

What would your first reaction be if your membership to a club was denied or revoked on account of your clothing, religious background or the language you speak? For women who do not want to wear the veil, all measures must be taken to support them with resources in the form of helplines, NGOs, civic institutions that reach out to distressed women, etcetera.

The French government should focus on issues of illiteracy, poor economic index or other kinds of abuse that might occur in Muslim households as in other non-Muslim families.

The French ban on the face veil is nothing more and nothing worse than bullying. French Muslim women and men are not forcing their customs on non-Muslims. French Muslim women – unlike their Saudi Arabian counterparts – have access to professional and career choices, education and literacy, social and political participation, financial independence and what not. Give them the freedom to dress as they please.

On the face of it, it is the ‘liberals’ who are behaving like those frequently labelled as ‘orthodox’. I smell fear, and it is against Islam.

10 things I hate about designer lawns

"Designer collaborations lend legitimacy to lawn since they are transporting the fabric into the realm of high fashion" - Gul Ahmed’s Director, Ziad Bashir

1. Paying over Rs4,000 for an outfit that you could probably not even pull off at a fancy dinner. This especially stings after you invest an additional Rs1,000 on getting the stitching done from the nikumma tailor who will probably have the outfit ready by summer 2012.

2. No matter how exclusive and special the print may be, come June 1st, your maid is going to walk into your home wearing an exact copy of the same.

3. The group of women present at every freaking exhibition. I call them the lawn mowers. They mow out each and every lawn suit before you even read the billboard! How many outfits do these ladies need?

4. How every struggling, not-struggling, successful, unsuccessful, living, dying, barely-breathing designer has come up with his/her own lawn collection. Why don’t they go back to making super-expensive, un-wearable clothes that nobody ever bought?

5. The way they offer all these different laces and frills with the jora to make your life easier but with 50 extra things per outfit, they usually end up confusing you and Nikumma.

6. And this may very well be the reason that each year Nikumma will always put the wrong lace on the wrong jora making you look like Ugly Betty without the glasses.

7. After visiting two exhibitions, they all start looking the same.

8. The life-size billboards with giant models in every freaking position that keep distracting my driver every time we pass the roundabout. Yes, I almost had an accident — Vaneeza is to blame!

9. How they’re all sold out on the very first day. I think they just make up some posters and write ‘sold out’ on them to make it look like their launch was exclusive and successful.

10. With every passing year, the material for lawns keeps getting sheerer and sheerer. Pretty soon we’ll be in crepe paper but, the designers will convince us, it’s extremely high quality, flown in from Florence, extra-breathable and wrinkle-free. What more do you want?

Spy summit fails to resolve U.S.-Pakistan differences

The Pasha-Panetta puzzle

A summit of spymasters this week eased tensions but failed to resolve issues over U.S. drones and espionage that have imperiled the vital relationship between the CIA and Pakistan's main intelligence agency.

The United States and Pakistan have an uneasy alliance as U.S. soldiers fight the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan and the fragile government in Islamabad faces internal threats from Islamist militants and anti-American sentiment.

The case of a CIA contractor who killed two Pakistanis sent anger boiling and threatened the CIA's campaign of aerial drone strikes against militants hiding in Pakistan's tribal areas.

The U.S. spy agency is willing to expand consultations with Pakistan over drone operations, U.S. officials told Reuters after CIA Director Leon Panetta hosted Lieutenant General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, chief of the Inter-Services Intelligence agency.

ISI chief Ahmed Shuja Pasha, fresh off obtaining his second one-year extension, went to Washington for a meeting with his CIA counterpart Leon Panetta making demands that are completely unobtainable. Leaks to the media, as the Pasha-Panetta talks got underway,indicate that the Pakistan Army wants a complete halt to drone strikes in the tribal areas and the removal of all CIA agents currently roaming the country.

On the face of it, both demands are the right ones to make. Drone attacks, while being promoted by the US government (always through anonymous sources since the Americans do not officially confirm that it is using drones) as the most effective way to kill militants, is effective only in the sense that is risk-free for the country using them. Unmanned drones ensures that no American lives are lost in the hunt for militants; the lives of Pakistani civilians do not factor into the equation. Equally, no Pakistani patriot likes the idea of trigger-happy spooks traipsing around, bound by no law.

Let’s get real though. Making demands is one thing. Expecting those demands to be fulfilled is quite another. The alliance between the US and Pakistan is often called a “transactional relationship.” The US pays for what it wants and we give it to them, holding our nose and counting the cash. In such a relationship you don’t get to have your complaints heard.

Before making demands, we need leverage. Cash-strapped as we are, we cannot tell the US to keep its foreign aid and we’ll keep our sovereignty, thank you very much. The problem is we do not have any other kind of leverage either. The US has two fears about Pakistan: that the country will be taken over by terrorists or that they will get their hands on our nuclear arsenal. As much as we use the Taliban threat – and it is a very real threat, although not one that will take over the government, as panicked Westerners fear – to wring more strings-attached aid out of the US, ultimately everyone knows that it is equally in Pakistan’s interest to keep the Taliban at bay. Sure, we may use them and keep them alive to bolster our misguided policy, but the Taliban is as much a threat to the military and civilian leadership here as it is to the US. Similarly, we cannot bluff the Americans into agreeing to our demands by implying that we will hand over a nuke or two to the militants. Basically, it all boils down to having no leverage.

There is one negotiating tactic the military could use, although its chances for success are slim. Pakistan is a vital supply route for Nato forces in Afghanistan, one that the army could threaten to shut down if some of their concerns aren’t addressed. It would be inconvenient for the US to rely solely on Central Asian routes to supply the coalition forces so perhaps this threat could get us a minor concession or two. For that, too, the window of opportunity is narrow. If President Barack Obama follows through on his promise to begin withdrawing troops from Afghanistan next years, Pakistan’s role as a hub will diminish.

The army, for its part, knows that its complaints amount only to public posturing. We went through this whole charade with army opposition to the Kerry-Lugar Bill, where it was made clear that the army did not like being dictated to by the US. Yet it, and the country, ended up accepting the aid and the conditions attached to it and the issue is a forgotten one. As was the case then, the army’s main motive was to make its displeasure known domestically. This essentially boils down to the army trying to maintain its sense of self-pride by telling everyone that they know they have to accept American control but they certainly don’t like it. Everyone fretting about the US-Pakistan alliance should just keep that in mind and tone down the alarmism.