The decade of the 1980s has truly
been a decade of the women of Pakistan.
A powerful women's movement made
a dramatic impact on Pakistan's
political scene. The concrete achievements
of the women's movement in its struggle
against policies of General Zia's
military regime which were directed
against women in the name of Islamisation,
have not been inconsiderable. A
number of women's organisations
in the country came together in
this struggle, which included the
Women's Action Forum (WAF) which
has been the leading and the most
effective of these, the Democratic
Women's Association, the Sindhiani
Tehrik and the Women's Front as
well as the All Pakistan Women's
Association (APWA) the oldest of
these which has been run by wives
of senior bureaucrats and politicians
and has had a reformist but rather
a patronising orientation.
The
decade of the 1980s was also a decade
of degradation of Pakistani women.
The Zia regime, in its search for
legitimacy, in the name of Islam,
embarked upon a series of measures
that were designed to undermine
what little existed by way of women's
legal rights, educational facilities
and career opportunities - as well
as the simple right for freedom
of movement and protection from
molestation by males. That galvanised
women of the country into militant
action in defence of their rights.
The military regime's actions, rhetoric
and propaganda created an atmosphere
which encouraged bigoted and mischievous
individuals to take the 'law' into
their own hands and harass women
under the pretext of enforcing 'Islamic'
norms of dress or, indeed, for simply
appearing in public. Such lawlessness
was allowed to go on with impunity.
Women had to defend themselves not
only vis-a-vis the state but also
against hostile mischief makers
in the society at large. Such attacks
still continue. The women have fought
back.
These
developments must be viewed against
the background of quite far-reaching
changes in Pakistan society in the
four decades since independence,
that have affected women's place
in it, both in the rural society
and the urban It is the latter,
the urban society, with which we
shall be most concerned here, for
this is where the changes challenge
most forcefully established social
practices and attitudes.
It
must be kept in mind, however, that
everywhere, in both the rural as
well as the urban society, Pakistan
remains a rigidly patriarchal society
in which women are treated as chattel,
'given' or 'acquired' through arranged
marriages, to spend their lives
in the service of a male dominated
social system. By and large women
are married within biraderis (lineages)
and the biraderi organisation provides
a framework within which women's
lives are ordered. In the case of
corporate biraderis the power of
the biraderi panchayat (council)
derives largely from control over
decisions about whom a woman is
to marry. It is not only a single
patriarch, the head of a nuclear
family, but the whole male dominated
kinship organisation which has a
stake in the subordination of women.
(for an account of biraderi organisation
cf.Alavi, 1972). No woman, even
one with an independent career in
a city can set up a home on her
own, without the 'saya' (lit: shade
or protection) of a male. A divorced
woman or a widow must turn to her
father or brother, if they will
have her. unless she has a grown
up son under whose protection she
can live. This is a powerful factor
of control over women. Furthermore,
not altogether infrequently, especially
amongst the poorer sections of the
society, especially in cities and
amongst kammis or 'village servants'.
a daughter is 'sold' for money to
a prospective husband and likewise,
husbands divorce and 'sell' their
wives. A woman who is not prepared
to accept such a fate has little
choice. She is a valued object,
a prized chattel.
Demographic
statistics provide a measure of
the effects of discrimination against
women. Pakistan is probably unique
in the world in having a lower number
of women in its population than
men i.e. 906 women for every 1,000
men (Census of Pakistan - 1981)
as against a world average of 111
women to every 100 men. In the population
segment of 15 to 40 years olds there
are 75 per cent more female deaths
than male. This is attributed to
nutritional anemia that affects
most women in the country resulting
from discrimination against women
in the sharing of food. They are
given less and have often to make
do with left-overs. Because of the
lower resistance of their underfed
bodies women are more susceptible
to killer diseases; malaria, gastro-enteritis
and respiratory diseases, especially
tuberculosis. Repeated pregnancies
also take a heavy toll by lowering
their resistance to disease. In
the case of urban lower middle class
women their condition is aggravated
both physically and psychologically
by their incarceration within the
four walls of their appallingly
confined and insanitary homes. They
get little of the sun and fresh
air and no recreation at all while
their men go about everywhere freely
and are not affected therefore quite
so much by their poor housing conditions.
When
attention is drawn to the subordination
and oppression of women in Pakistan
and demands made for improvement
in their lot, Pakistani ideologues
are quick to rebut such charges
by painting an idealised picture
of the high status of women in Islam.
But this is a non sequitur, a specious
line of argument that is intended
to obscure the real issues, those
of the actual conditions to which
women in Pakistan are subject. It
is against such a background that
questions about women in Pakistan
society need to be looked at. Changes
of a variety of kinds are under
way, some improving their condition,
others worsening them.
In
rural areas, the place of women
in society and their role in the
division of labour in production
differs very widely from region
to region and also between different
classes. And there have been far
reaching changes everywhere. To
give only two instances, in the
Potohar area of North West Punjab,
for example. which is a region of
fragmented bankrupt farms, massive
numbers of men of working age have
left the villages for jobs in the
army, in factories all over Pakistan
and, not least, as migrants, for
work in Britain and Western Europe
and especially in the Middle East
where they are not permitted to
bring their families to live with
them. This has brought about an
extra-ordinary situation in villages
of the region, many of which are,
as a result, inhabited mainly by
old men who are past working age,
young children and women. It seems
that in these cases women have to
carry the main burden of working
the land over and above their customary
share in the farm economy and their
domestic responsibilities.
By
contrast, in the rich canal Colony
districts of the Punjab. in the
wake of the Green Revolution, many
women have been withdrawn from the
farm economy and confined within
purdah. Until these developments
in recent decades (with the exception
of landlord families) women have
always had an active role in agricultural
production in weeding, harvesting
and threshing of crops, and other
operations. It is their duty to
cut fodder and to look after farm
animals. Accordingly these women
enjoy freedom of movement and are
not confined behind purdah. A custom
that gives them a degree of economic
freedom is their exclusive right
to pick cotton . This is being undermined
by recent changes). For this women
are paid in kind. The cotton that
they receive in payment is ritually
sacrosanct, their privileged property
which men cannot lay their hands
on. After the cotton harvest it
is a common sight to see women walking
to town with a bundle of cotton
perched on their heads, going shopping,
to barter the cotton for something
for themselves or, more likely,
their children, without having to
ask the husband for permission.
But after the Green Revolution of
the 1970s many well to do peasants,
who had prospered, withdrew their
womenfolk from the labour force
and confined them, to the purdah,
secluded and isolated within the
four walls of their homes, as a
mark of their new higher social
status. In the course of research
in Punjab villages my wife and I
found that far from rejoicing in
this partial relief from the burden
of work, the women resented this
change. Many of them described their
new situation to my wife as the
equivalent of being locked up in
a prison. They had lost the small
degree of economic freedom and with
it their freedom of movement. When
one considers the implications of
such a change, one is led to a conceptual
distinction between exploitation
of a woman's labour and a woman's
oppression. While the burden of
labour on women has eased, though
only slightly, their oppression
has increased enormously, a change
which the women themselves see as
one which has left them feeling
greatly deprived.
It
is in the urban context that women's
contribution to the family economy
has changed beyond recognition,
as compared to conditions forty
years ago. These changes seem to
be having a greater impact on lower
middle class families than either
working class families or upper
class ones. A large component of
the working class, in Pakistani
cities consists of migrant workers
from the north of the country whose
families have been left behind in
their villages. We know too little
about the consequences of that fact
on the life of single male workers
in the city nor about the families
left behind in the villages. In
the case of workers whose families
live with them in the cities, many
of the women either do unskilled
work in factories or operate in
the so-called 'informal economy'
or are engaged in domestic employment.
They often prefer such employment
over home-based work, for waged
employment pays better. Despite
the great increase in their burden
of work and their independent contribution
to the family budget, judging from
evidence brought up in court cases
during the last decade, it seems
that the women continue, nevertheless,
to be subject to patriarchal domination.
By
contrast problems of the majority
of upper class women are different.
They have servants to do their chores
and they do not need to (or are
not allowed to) take jobs and have
careers. Their worries stem from
their total dependence on the husband
and consequently insecurity for
fear of being abandoned by the husband
in favour of a second wife. In the
absence of the possibility of an
independent job or career, compounded
by extreme difficulty for women
in setting up an independent household
without the 'saya', or protection,
of a male head of family, their
dependence on the husband is total.
They are therefore reduced virtually
to the status of well fed, well
dressed and well ornamented slaves
who depend absolutely upon the whim
of their husbands. Where the husband
ill-treats or abuses them they must
put up with it. Because of the difficulty
in setting up an independent household
even women with careers share this
problem.
Amongst
the nouveau riche, in particular,
a familiar pattern is one of a first
'traditional ' marriage to a woman
from the biraderi (lineage), possibly
not very well educated or fashionable.
This is often followed later in
life by a marriage to an attractive
socialite, a fitting spouse for
the arriviste, a woman well endowed
to perform the duties of a sophisticated
hostess who can receive and entertain
his friends and associates, businessmen
and bureaucrats, in style. The first
wife is discarded like an old shoe.
She dare not insist on a divorce
for, generally, she has nowhere
to go and virtually no prospects
of building a new life in a society
that despises a divorced woman who
is invariably blamed for the failure
of her marriage. She is lucky if
she has grown up sons who might
make it possible for her to set
up an independent home. But in general,
given such prospects, upper class
women are likely to live out their
lives in insecurity and anxiety.
How common such situations are,
would be difficult to quantify.
Nor
is the problem of dependence upon
husbands absent in the case of women
of the lower middle classes or the
working class. However, in their
case, as well as in the case of
members of upper classes to a lesser
degree, pressures from biraderi
(lineage) members and elders tend,
to some degree, to restrain husbands
from abandoning wives, daughters
of their kinsmen. In Pakistan, unlike
the West, the social life of most
people functions within frameworks
of extended kinship, and the values
and norms of kinship obligations
cannot be flouted without penalty,
except by the rich and the powerful
or those who live in cosmopolitan
circles. On the whole one gains
the impression that the risk of
a woman being abandoned by her husband
in favour of a more attractive woman
is less common, though by no means
absent, in the case of lower middle
class husbands, who can less afford
two wives and are in any case ground
down by the humdrum daily routine
of their rather ordinary lives for
such fanciful indulgence.
In
the case of lower middle class families
we can identify a two-fold division.
On the one hand there are families
whose women are educated, sufficiently
at least to hold down a 'respectable'
job. On the other hand there are
more traditional families whose
women have not received a good education
who therefore do not qualify for
'respectable' salaried jobs. In
these latter cases women contribute
to the family economy by taking
in home-based work under a putting
out system operated by entrepreneurs
who are only too happy to exploit
this extremely cheap source of labour.
General Zia's Islamisation policies
threatened most directly the first
category of lower middle class women,
triggering off the militant women's
movement of the 1980s.
Underlying these developments is
the growing crisis of the lower
middle class household economy over
the last forty years. At the time
of independence it was the normal
expectation that man was the provider
for the family. Joint families were
favoured because of economies of
scale in the domestic economy. A
patriarch and his brothers, with
his sons and nephews would all go
to work and bring in the income
needed to keep the family. Burdened
with domestic labour, women of this
class were not classified as 'economically
active'. It might be said that urban
lower middle class women were amongst
the most oppressed of women in Pakistan.
being confined to the 'purdah and
char diwari' or the four walls of
their home. In villages even those
women who are confined behind the
purdah nevertheless have relatively
easy access to the company of other
women of the village which is very
supportive for them. Likewise, in
old cities the layout of the mohalla
(wards) has provided a similar possibility
of social interaction amongst women.
But with the explosive expansion
of Pakistan's cities such patterns
of spatial organisation of society
seem to have broken down. In such
circumstances urban lower middle
class women became virtually prisoners
in their diminutive homes for going
visiting would entail an elaborate
logistic operation reserved for
very special occasions.
The
continuous inflation in the cost
of living in Pakistan over the decades
has brought about a situation where
a man's wage is no longer sufficient
to keep the family. There was therefore
a continuous pressure to broaden
the base of the family economy.
Gradually and steadily, more and
more women were forced to find jobs
to supplement family incomes. The
change is visible and quite striking.
Initially only a few occupations
were thought to be respectable enough
for such women. As the pressure
for jobs increased the concept of
a 'respectable job' was progressively
broadened to take in a wider range
of jobs. Initially, apart from high
status professional occupations,
notably that of a doctor , what
better), jobs in the teaching profession,
especially in girls' schools and
colleges, were considered to be
respectable enough. About a third
of the doctors and an equal proportion
of school teachers were women. Gradually
this changed. The mantle of respectability
was now to cover also clerical jobs
in open plan offices where women
could work with men, but in public
view. The role of the personal secretary
was initially suspect although it
was much better paid, because it
entailed a close relationship with
the boss. But that too has changed.
Today one finds women in a wide
range of occupations, including
laboratory assistants or ticket
clerks at railway stations or clerks
at post office counters and so on,
as well as lawyers, architects,
engineers, journalists and broadcasters.
Needless to add, the numbers in
the latter categories of occupations
are extremely small. With more and
more women taking up salaried jobs
and in keeping with an increasing
number of women taking to higher
education, new values have emerged.
Women now desire jobs and careers
for their own sake so that an increasing
number of wives of well heeled professionals
and women from the upper classes
take jobs not out of economic necessity
but for self-fulfilment.
Education is the key to acceptable
and respectable jobs and careers.
Lower middle class families would
find it degrading to let their women
take up jobs as domestic servants
or to work on the factory floor
(though some are driven to this
out of desperation) i.e. jobs for
which education is not a pre-requisite.
But families who expect their women
to take up jobs as teachers or office
clerks (or better) tend therefore
to put a higher value on women's
education than was the case before
- though financing the education
of sons still takes precedence.
There was a time when women's education
was thought to be mere indulgence,
wasteful of the money spent on it.
There is demand for women's education
also from professional men who want
to marry reasonably educated wives,
although not too highly qualified.
There is a concept of an 'over-qualified'
woman i.e. a woman who has better
qualifications than her potential
spouse. Such a woman is positively
at a disadvantage. Far too many
engagements have been broken when
the fiancee has done too well at
college or university. Where both
spouses are professionals or academics,
if the wife's career advances more
rapidly it becomes a threat to the
false pride of the husband. Because
of the heavy price a woman has to
pay if her marriage breaks down
sometimes she holds back to keep
her marriage safe. But some marriages
do break down on this account.
Given
these social changes and the high
degree of functionality of women's
education for middle class and lower
middle class families the threat
to women's education that was posed
by Islamic fundamentalism and General
Zia's so-called 'Islamisation' policies
was a threat to the family economy
and to the new values and attitudes.
These families have therefore tended
to subscribe rather to liberal social
philosophies or 'modernist' interpretations
of Islam. They tend to be sceptical
of dogmatic versions of Islam propounded
by ignorant and bigoted Mullahs.
There is therefore a considerable
and growing social base of secularism
in Pakistan's political as well
as social life, a fact that is reflected
in the repeated routs of the Islamic
fundamentalist Jamaat-i-Islami in
three successive elections in the
country namely those of 1985, 1987
(local bodies election) and, again,
in 1988.
There
are, however, many lower middle
class households in Pakistan where
women have been given no education
that could befit them for 'respectable'
salaried jobs. Traditionally they
were relegated to the role of 'housewives'.
But, gradually and with increasing
rapidity new avenues for exploiting
the labour of these women have opened
up. There are factories with women
only work force, notably in the
ready made clothing trade, where
they can go and work as seamstresses
or similar tailoring and finishing
jobs, which are woefully underpaid.
There is, however, another alternative
too whereby the labour of women
of this category is exploited without
their having to leave their 'char
diwari' i.e. the four walls of their
home. This is by way of development
of a classical form of 'putting
out system' whereby orders for the
work to be done and the materials
that are required are brought to
them in their homes and the finished
goods are later collected. For their
long hours of labour, carried out
in the midst of the demands of a
variety of domestic chores and clamour
of a multitude of children, they
are paid a mere pittance - much
less even than the outrageously
low level of wages for women who
go to work in factories. But for
women who have families to look
after there is often no choice.
We can identify two patterns in
such cases, although there are no
data available that can allow us
to quantify their relative importance.
One is that when the family patriarch
controls the operation. He mediates
with entrepreneurs brings home the
materials and work orders. delivers
the finished goods and, most important
of all, pockets the money paid by
the entrepreneurs. In effect the
women of his household are virtually
his slaves. He guards their subordination
quite as jealously as any slave
owner, deploying ideological weapons
against the women by a constant
invocation of Islamic values, as
interpreted by himself and the Mullahs.
On the other hand he builds up images
of the 'modern' ordinary working
women who take up outside employment
as corrupt and un-lslamic, which
he contrasts with that of his own
enslaved kinswomen who are good
and pure, unsullied by the eyes
of strange men. Ideologically fundamentalist
interpretations of Islam reinforce
the authority of the patriarch over
his enslaved womenfolk.
There is also another pattern of
the putting out system. In this
case the entrepreneurs employ women
agents who go around houses (especially
in katchi bastis or shanty town
homes) distributing orders and materials
for work and collecting the finished
goods. In this case they are said
to make payments directly to the
female head in the household. In
the absence of research one can
only speculate whether in this case
the balance of power in the household
is shifted thereby (even if only
partially) in favour of women. In
an interesting study of Muslim women
'beedi' (cheap 'cigarettes' made
of rolled tobacco leaves) makers
in Allahabad, Zarina Bhatty found
that as a result of contributing
substantially (over 45 per cent)
to the household incomes, the women
acquired a "greater importance
in household decision making process.
... (i.e.) an increased say in spending
money" (Bhatty, 1981: 45).
It would be hazardous to extend
such a conclusion drawn from a study
of a community of Muslim rural labourers
in India to urban lower middle class
families in Pakistan. Clearly there
are a number of issues located here
which invite systematic investigation.
Home-based women workers, denied
the freedom of movement and relative
independence of their sisters employed
in salaried jobs, rationalise their
own predicament in ideological terms,
through a self-image of their moral
superiority. Frustrated by their
increasingly straitened circumstances
and lack of freedom, they are easily
mobilised by their men against women
who go out to word. They are even
made to join public demonstrations,
suitably enclosed in the chaddar
or burqa (the all-enveloping women's
overalls that covers them from head
to foot). They parrot the complaints
of their men that women's employment
takes jobs away from men and undercuts
their salaries and that, in any
case, it is quite shameless and
un-Islamic for women to go about
the city and work in offices with
men. In their own minds as well
as in the minds of the men who control
their lives, their confinement to
their homes offers a gain in respectability.
The
life of lower middle class women
in salaried employment is subject
to rather different kinds of pressures.
Her working day starts early, for
she must feed her husband and children
and send them off to school before
she herself rushes off to work.
Traveling to work is itself quite
a battle, given the state of public
transport in Pakistan cities, especially
Karachi. In order to attract women
workers whom they need, many large
companies maintain fleets of minibuses
to pick up their women employees
in the morning and take them home
after work. In the case of a woman
who is the first to be picked up
or the last to be dropped home this
can add an hour, or even two, to
the long day spent at work. She
comes home tired. Whilst her husband
relaxes with a cold drink under
a fan, she has to rush straight
into the kitchen to prepare the
family evening meal. And there are
umpteen little chores to be attended
to, young children to be looked
after and the family fed and put
to bed. Some chores, such as washing
clothes and cleaning the house,
are inevitably put off for the weekend
which therefore is not time for
rest nor for demonstrations in aid
of women's rights. Given the race
against time only a very few working
women can afford the time to go
to meetings and demonstrations even
though they sympathise solidly with
their aims; women who happen to
have particularly enlightened and
helpful relatives (e.g. a mother-in-law)
or a co-operative and politically
committed husband (a rare commodity)
who is willing to take over some
of their chores during their short
absence. Only those who are sufficiently
well off to have servants to take
care of the domestic front can play
an active and continuing part in
such activities. Mobility is another
major obstacle in their way so that
only those women can take part in
such activities without too much
difficulty who have their own cars
or who have women friends or close
male relatives who can give them
a lift (going with unrelated males
is unthinkable).
It
is because of these difficulties
that the vast majority of lower
middle class employed women cannot
take a regular, not to say an active
and leading part in the women's
movement. But this does not mean
that the vast majority of working
women who are not blessed with the
advantages which make such activities
possible- 'lack consciousness' or
that they are unaware of the issues
that confront women in Pakistan.
One has only got to go and talk
to some of them to get a measure
of the depth of their feelings and
the clarity with which they themselves
see the issues. Under these circumstances
the activists and the leadership
inevitably comes from women of better
off families especially those whom
can afford servants and cars, mainly
professional women in their thirties.
But it needs to be emphasised that
they, nevertheless, articulate by
and large attitudes and demands
that affect all working women. These
relatively small number of activists
are like the tip of a huge iceberg,
their inarticulate sisters being
submerged, for the time being, in
an ocean of work.
The women's movement in Pakistan
thus revolves around educated women,
both professionals and those who
take up salaried jobs. Official
propaganda under the long years
of the Zia regime tried to discredit
the women's movement by caricaturing
it as a movement of English-educated,
Westernised, upper class women whose
heads are filled with foreign imported
ideas and who, the propaganda claimed,
had no roots amongst true Pakistani
women. The fact of the matter is
that the vast majority of activists
in the women's movement are closer
to working women of all classes
than either the bureaucrats in government
or much of the political leadership
or journalists, who all sit in judgement
over them. Most of these activists
are new to the tasks that they have
taken upon themselves in organising
and leading the movement. In taking
up these unfamiliar tasks they have
demonstrated quite remarkable qualities
of leadership -- not only ingenuity
and flexibility but also a noteworthy
personal humility. This last quality
is reflected in the commitment of
WAF members to non-hierarchical
organisation.
The
Zia regime itself had much to do
in creating conditions that precipitated
the movement and caused it to break
out with much force. Problems that
confront women in Pakistan today
have been accumulating over several
decades. The reason why the women's
movement suddenly erupted into action
in the 1980s has much to do with
the outrageous attacks that were
actually undertaken or were contemplated
by the Zia regime, in the name of
'Islamisation', a policy that was
designed (unsuccessfully) by the
regime to gain political legitimacy.
These policies were calculated to
degrade the place of women in Pakistan
society and to erode such legal
rights that they did possess, and
to put up barriers in the way of
women's education and their freedom
of movement and to obstruct their
access to jobs and professional
careers.
Among
the new 'Islamic' laws that were
enacted by the Zia regime was a
change in the law of evidence, enacted
in October 1984, purportedly to
bring the existing law of evidence
in line with prescriptions of Islam.
Except in the case of the Hudood
Ordinances of 1979 (prescribing
'Islamic' punishments) which laid
down their own special rules of
evidence for hadd offences, the
new law of evidence provided that
two male witnesses or in the absence
of two male witnesses one male and
one female witness would be required
to prove a crime. This law as well
as other proposed legislation, equated
one man to two women. This was so,
for example, in the proposed new
laws of Qisas and Diyat which provided
for financial compensation to be
given to the injured party by an
accused in lieu of punishment in
cases of murder or bodily injury,
it being held that in such cases
the 'Islamic' remedy lay not in
punishment of the offender but in
compensation to be paid to the victim
or his family. This law was proposed
by the Council of Islamic Ideology
and passed by the Majlis-e-Shoora
(Zia's legislative institutions).
The compensation in the case of
women was to be fixed at half that
for men. Such laws that put the
worth of a women at half that of
a man, were a powerfully symbolic
factor that set the women's movement
into action.
Besides these blatantly discriminatory
laws that reduced a woman's humanity
by half, there were policies undertaken
or contemplated by the Zia regime
that threatened the life and prospects
of working women more directly.
Although the militant activities
and demonstrations of the women's
movement were, in the first instance,
directed against the new laws, there
were some no less weighty and more
directly felt underlying concerns,
especially about the future of women's
education. In general laws and policies
pursued by the Zia regime were directed
towards discouraging women from
taking an active part in activities
outside the home and to limit the
scope for their self-expression.
There
were proposals, for example, that
threatened women's access to higher
education. Perhaps the most important
of these was the idea of segregating
women within 'Women's Universities'.
As proposed by Zia's University
Grants Commission, the existing
three colleges of Home Economics
located at Karachi, Lahore and Peshawar
were to be upgraded to University
status. Women were to be given the
education that was thought to be
appropriate for them, namely to
be trained as housewives. They were
to be denied a wider education that
might prepare them for professional
or academic careers or jobs in government,
commerce or industry. Obstacles,
such as higher required grades,
were placed in the way of women
seeking admission to science courses
in Universities or places in medical
colleges.
There was an attack too on women's
participation in sports. Pakistani
women athletes and the women's hockey
team were prevented from participating
in international events. Zia's Federal
Minister for Sports and Culture
explained that women could participate
in sporting competitions only before
an exclusively female audience or
one in which only mehram males and
no others males were present ! Reporting
this, the press translated the term
mehram inaccurately as 'blood relatives'.
That is not the case. The category
of mehram defines relatives whom
a Muslim may not marry. A woman's
mehram comprise her siblings, ascendants
and siblings of ascendants, descendants
and descendants of siblings and,
amongst some sects, sisters' husbands.
A first cousin, such as father's
brother's son is not mehram though
a 'blood relative'. As mehram defines
an ego centred kindred, which would
be differently constituted for each
woman, male spectators are effectively
ruled out. Women could engage in
sports only in purdah ! This ridiculous
and meaningless rule illustrates
only too well the arbitrary and
cavalier manner in which religious
symbols were invoked to restrict
women's activities.
The
issues of higher education and sports,
in a society such as that of Pakistan,
affect mostly upper class, middle
class and lower middle class families.
There are other policies of the
Zia government that bore down relatively
more heavily on the most vulnerable
component of Pakistan society namely
women of the poor. It must be said
that degradation of women in Pakistan
is nothing new and is not the result
solely of the so-called 'Islamisation
' policies of the Zia dictatorship.
But it reached abysmally low levels
in the wake of its legislation and
policies.
In
the name of fighting against 'obscenity'
and 'pornography' the Zia government
set in motion a mass campaign against
women seen in public. An atmosphere
was generated in the country in
which attacks against women became
commonplace, legitimated in the
name of religion. Such campaigns
against women are led by mullahs,
the custodians of ignorance, and
by criminals and mischief-makers
in general, who all seem to derive
a kind of perverted psychic pleasure
from molesting women under the pretext
of enforcing morality. A spate of
directives were issued by the Zia
regime ordering female government
employees, women teachers and girls
at schools and colleges to wear
'Islamic' dress and the chaddar
or burqa. As a direct result of
such campaigns against women who
are depicted as a threat to male
virtue, the morality of Pakistani
males sunk to new depths. They do
not seem to be able to resist the
temptation to interfere with and
manhandle women, posing as guardians
of public virtue. Violence against
women has been on the increase behind
the cloak of 'Islamisation'. The
most obscene examples of such hypocrisy
are numerous, widely publicised,
incidents where women's noses have
been cut off or they have been disrobed
and paraded in the nude in public
to 'teach them a lesson'. As a result
of public outrage aroused by such
incidents, the Zia regime announced
punishments for such actions. But
his so-called 'Islamic' regime did
little to track down the culprits
and punish them. Nor did it engage
in any public campaign to denounce
such actions and arouse public opinion
against those who perpetrate them.
Such incidents and attacks on women
still continue.
The
Zia regime introduced Hudood Ordinances
purportedly to lay down 'Islamic'
punishments for certain crimes.
These were barbaric punishments
such as cutting off of hands and
stoning to death. There has been
some controversy in the country
whether these are truly Islamic
prescriptions. That, as such, is
not a matter that we need to pursue
here except to say that even where
these were not actually carried
out in all cases, they carried a
symbolic charge and provided a rallying
point to mullahs who demanded their
full implementation. Public lashings
however, were carried out before
vast crowds and TV cameras, quite
savagely - members of the crowd
urging the 'executioners' to hit
'the bastards' even harder. These
were incredibly degrading sights
to watch. The law that concerns
us here most directly, however,
is the Zina (Enforcement of Hudood)
Ordinance of February 1979. This
Ordinance provided a new basis,
as we shall see, for intimidation
and terrorisation of women by husbands
or male relatives, especially amongst
the urban poor, but not amongst
them alone. Ironically, the Ordinance
has also created a situation in
which women victims of rape dare
not even complain about the sexual
violence done to them for fear of
penalties that they themselves invite
under this iniquitous law, while
the culprits go Scot free because
of its extra-ordinary provisions.
The
Ordinance provides new weapons to
men against women by virtue of making
Zina i.e. adultery and fornication,
crimes against the state, cognisable
offences for which the police can
take action. Previously that was
not the case, for then adultery
was a matter of personal offence
against the husband by the male
party to adultery and extra-marital
sex was not a penal offence at all.
Now where a wife leaves her husband,
it has become all too easy for the
husband to go to the police and
file a complaint against her for
committing zina whereupon the wife
is arrested and jailed. Given police
corruption and the interminable
length of time that it takes for
such cases to be adjudicated by
courts of law (often years) the
woman is effectively punished without
even going through the due process
of law. The husband can bail the
wife out of jail. But when that
happens. she is totally at his mercy.
for he would threaten to withdraw
bail which would return her to prison.
Thus the woman's position is made
worse than that of a slave. According
to Asma Jahangir, a distinguished
Pakistani woman lawyer and Secretary
of the Human Rights Commission of
Pakistan: 'it has now become common
for husbands to file complaints
of Zina against wives wanting separation.
There are hundreds of cases every
year where women are arrested for
Zina on complaints filed by husbands'
(SHE. March 1989: 81). It is likewise
in cases of elopement, where a father
refuses permission to his daughter
to marry the man of her choice.
The father brings charges of 'abduction'
in such cases and the law presumes
zina unless the couple can prove
lawful nikah or marriage according
to Islam.
The
Zina Ordinance has created a 'Catch
22' situation for women victims
of rape. This arises from the fact
that the ordinance brings both adultery
and fornication (zina) on the one
hand and rape (zina-bil-jabr) on
the other, under a single law in
a manner that is unsafe. Secondly,
the problem arises from the type
of admissible evidence that is prescribed
under the Ordinance. The offence
of rape is defined as sexual intercourse
against the will and/or without
the consent of the victim or with
consent if the consent has been
obtained under fear of death or
hurt. It also includes under the
category of rape sexual intercourse
with consent of the victim where
the offender knows that the consent
is given by the victim because she
(or he) believes that she (or he)
is validly married to the offender
although the offender knows that
they are not.
The catch in this law, that affects
women victims of rape cruelly, is
the specification of the type of
evidence that is admissible for
hadood or 'Islamic' punishment for
zina and zina-bil-jabr which is
stoning to death (under certain
conditions lesser punishments called
tazir would apply). The evidence
required is either a confession
on the part of the accused (for
an unmarried woman pregnancy is
self-evident proof) or the testimony
of 'at least four Muslim adult male
witnesses about whom the Court is
satisfied ... that they are truthful
persons and abstain from major sins
... (who) give evidence as eye-witnesses
of the act of penetration necessary
for the offence.' This is a type
of evidence that is most unlikely
to be found except perhaps in the
vast open spaces of the Arabian
desert.
In
effect, therefore, the offence of
rape is unprovable and rapists now
go about without fear. Reports of
such offences have become widespread.
The law excludes the testimony of
women, so that evidence of the victim
of rape counts for nothing. But
if she complains of rape (which
she cannot possibly prove, according
to this law) she is taken to have
admitted to having had sexual intercourse
with a man who is not her lawful
husband, hence guilty of zina. For
this she invites the heavy penalty
of this law. A woman has not only
no remedy under this iniquitous
law for the sexual violence done
to her; she herself becomes a victim
of the law.
In one way or another, women have
been victimised under the Zina Ordinance.
Documenting the phenomenal increase,
during the 1980s, in the number
of women who are languishing in
Pakistani prisons as a consequence
of this law, Asma Jahangir points
out that about 40 per cent of the
convicted women whom she interviewed
in Multan Jail had been sentenced
for the offence of zina. Most of
the women whom she interviewed belonged
to low income families; out of 37
women 16 had a family income of
only Rs. 500 per month (the wage
of a single labourer) and no one
had a family income of more than
Rs. 3000 (the salary of an office
clerk). Newspaper reports of victimisation
of women under this law are legion.
For want of space, we will give
only a couple of examples to illustrate
the different ways in which women
are victimised under it.
The most notorious case is that
of Safia Bibi, an 18 year old virtually
blind girl, the daughter of a poor
peasant, who was employed in the
house of the local landlord as domestic
help. She was raped by her employer's
son and then by the landlord himself.
As a result the girl became pregnant.
Her illegitimate child is said to
have died soon after birth. The
girl's father filed a case with
the police alleging rape. The Court
acquitted the landlord and his son
for lack of evidence as required
under the zina Ordinance, the evidence
of the girl not being admissible
and four pious Muslim witnesses
to the repeated acts of rape not
being available. But by virtue of
her accusation the girl herself,
being unmarried, was found guilty
of zina, her pregnancy being proof
of it, and she was sentenced to
three years in prison, public lashing
(15 lashes) and Rs. 1000 fine. In
passing this sentence, the Court
said that it was being lenient in
view of her age and disability !
This case created an uproar and
turned out to be an issue on which
the Women's Action Forum began campaigning.
In the light of public outrage,
General Zia himself intervened and
got the Federal Shariat Court to
take over the case, suo moto. An
exceptionally liberal judge quashed
the outrageous conviction of the
girl on the ground that if in the
case of rape the man (or men) were
acquitted due to lack of the required
evidence, the woman too was to be
given the benefit of doubt. But
there was no question here of prosecuting
the rapists and bringing them to
justice.
A
rather different type of case illustrates
the way in which the law is used
by male relatives or husbands to
terrorise and control women. A young
woman of 25, Shahida, got a divorce
from her husband, Khushi Mohammad.
The divorce deed was signed by the
husband and was attested by a Magistrate.
Under the law as it stands, however,
the divorcing husband is then required
to register the divorce papers with
the local council. That he did not
do. This was possibly a deliberate
omission which was to give him a
hold over his ex-wife. Shahida,
after spending the prescribed period
of ninety six days of waiting (iddat),
as prescribed for a divorcee, with
her parents, married Mohammed Sarwar.
Khushi Mohammed, meanwhile decided
that he wanted her back or, in any
case, he would not allow her to
marry again. So he took the matter
to the law, charging her with zina.
Although Shahida produced before
the Court the attested copy of the
divorce document which was signed
by Khushi Mohammad and attested
by a magistrate, the Court did not
consider it to be admissible as
it had not been registered with
the local Council. The Court decided
that the divorce was invalid and
therefore that the second marriage
illegal. As the two accused, Shahida
Parveen and Mohammed Sarwar had
'confessed' to living together as
husband and wife, the Court found
them guilty, under the convoluted
provisions of that extra-ordinary
Ordinance, of raping each other
! Accordingly they were both sentenced
to stoning to death. Happily, due
to campaigning by the women's movement
that extreme sentence was eventually
commuted- but not all victims of
this extraordinary law have been
so lucky
.
In cases of eloping couples, parents
deprived of the money that they
would get for marrying off their
daughter (bride price is not a normal
custom) file a complaint with the
police for abduction. Even if the
girl has found refuge with the family
of the boy or some supportive family,
sexual intercourse is presumed in
such cases and both the girl and
the boy are penalised for zina.
It is by no means unusual in such
cases, especially if the young couple
cannot be found, for the police
to arrest the families who are believed
to have given them support, as accomplices
to zina.
The fact is that all such cases
have affected not only the parties
directly involved but have intimidated
Pakistani women in general, for
they dare not leave an oppressive
and cruel husband or greedy and
grasping parents wishing to sell
them, for fear of the consequences
for them under this terrible law.
Sadly,
the eleven years of the so-called
policy of 'Islamisation' under General
Zia, have produced in Pakistan a
culture of intolerance. This culture,
above all, has persecuted women
and subjected them to all kinds
of humiliation and ill-treatment,
not to speak of inhuman punishment
under the Hudood Ordinances, as
described above. The Government
embarked upon a mass publicity campaign,
through all the media, exhorting
people to order their lives in accordance
with Islam, but as interpreted by
Zia and his bigoted mullahs. Far
more mischievous was Zia's call
to the 'people' to ensure that their
'neighbours' did likewise. This
was a charter for the mischief-makers
and the bigots who took upon themselves
the task of chastising women, total
strangers, and molesting them under
that excuse. For example, Mumtaz
and Shaheed quote an instance, which
is by no means unique or isolated,
when a woman who entered a bakery
in an upper class Lahore neighbourhood,
was slapped by a total stranger
for not having her head covered
( Mumtaz and Shaheed, 1987: 71).
A much publicised and quite horrendous
case is that of a congregation leaving
a mosque after Friday prayers who
found a new born baby on a nearby
rubbish dump. The mullah promptly
concluded that it was an illegitimate
child and, in accordance with the
laws of Islam, as he understood
them, led the congregation of the
pious Muslims in stoning the child
to death. Such outrageous conduct
was the direct result of incitement
by the propaganda of the Zia regime,
which has created an atmosphere
of bigotry and intolerance.
It
was hoped that the democratic Government
of Benazir Bhutto would reverse
this and, in particular, repeal
the Hudood Ordinances (including
the Zina Ordinance. But a year after
it was put in office the Government
has shown no inclination to change
the laws. This is in part due to
the paralysis of the Government,
due to a complex set of political
factors which we cannot go into
here. Meanwhile the terrible legacy
of the Zia regime lives on. Prospects
before Pakistani women remain uncertain
and threatening.
By: Hamza Alavi
Taken from: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/sangat/pakwomen.htm