by Faraz Omar
The recent attention to the Qatif court case in which a gang raped
victim was penalised with lashes and imprisonment has re-surfaced criticism of
the Saudi Judicial system in the media. However, the view circulated is to an
extent distorted, biased and one-sided. How often does one get misled by
looking at just one side of the coin. International newspapers carried the
story with various headlines but they all had one common theme – ‘A gang raped
victim sentenced for lashes and imprisonment’. A common reader might be
disgusted by the very thought, “How could a victim of a gang rape be penalised?
Could there be anything more inhuman than punishing an oppressed victim
herself? And all her guilt lies in being with a man she is not related to.”
These thoughts would be sufficient for most of us to come to a very satisfied
conclusion and justify the international media remarks such as ‘Barbaric Laws’
and ‘Inhuman interpretation of laws’.
Having lived in Saudi Arabia and knowing it
personally, I attempt to present the other side of the coin. To give a
background first, Saudi
Arabia’s judicial system is largely based on
the Islamic Law. The Religious Scholars do accept that it’s not purely based on
Islamic Law and has its shortcomings, but yet largely and fundamentally it
follows the Islamic Law. One of the basics of Islamic Law is, not only are all
type of crimes prohibited, but all things that lead to such crimes are
also prohibited. And on the other hand, good things which prevent these crimes
are much encouraged. For example, Islam prohibits adultery and fornication i.e.
sex outside marriage, premarital sex etc. It views them as one of the biggest
social crimes. So it prohibits all things that lead to them such as gazing or
staring at the opposite sex, immodesty, dating etc. On the other hand it
promotes and encourages marriage. It doesn’t deny the basic instinct of a human
being but it regulates it into a manner that would preserve the well-being of a
family; promote modesty and protect the society from sexual crimes.
Having said that, let us now look at the Qatif
Girl’s case. She is a young married woman who had an illegal relationship with
a man. And this man threatened her that he would publicise her pictures taken
with him during the relationship. She was with this man when they were abducted
and raped. The pictures were handed over to the police later on. So the Saudi
judges first gave 10 months to 5 years imprisonment to the rapists and 90
lashes to the woman as punishment for her involvement in an illicit
relationship. The atmosphere of Saudi
Arabia is very different than most
countries. It is a very conservative and religious country. Rapes are
especially unheard of, however, as we see the society become more western, such
crimes are now increasing. Saudi religious leaders take every step to preserve
modesty and stop youth from getting into immoral relationships. We know
that most of the sexual crimes are done by ‘known people’. ‘Date Abuse’ and
‘Date Rape’ where women are subjected to the most sexual abuse is a major
problem in the western world. After clear evidence that pointed towards the
illegal relationship of the Qatif Woman surfaced which could have also been the
cause leading to the horrific gang rape, it became incumbent upon the Saudi
authorities that they also punish her for violating the country’s well known
law. When the appeal for this matter was publicised to create sympathy and draw
criticism over the law, the punishment was raised to 200 lashes and 6 months of
imprisonment for the girl. [The Appeals court also increased the punishment of
the rapists to 2 – 7 years imprisonment]. This raise of punishment, according
to official sources, was due to “her attempt to aggravate and influence the
judiciary through the media” which is a pretty valid point.
The punishment by lashes is also misunderstood as
‘barbaric’. As per law, while lashing, the hand should not be raised to a level
that the underarm would be seen, which means that one cannot lash with force.
We see so much from the western hypocrisy that they allow ‘the accused’, who
is not yet convicted, to undergo severe torture. Pain, extreme temperature
conditions, psychological trauma and more unspeakable tortures in prisons like
‘Guantanamo Bay’, Abu Ghraib etc are pretty common; all of this even before being
convicted. This is their hypocricy, they have a law but their practice is
different. Islamic Law is direct and straight forward. It has clear described
laws and punishments for those who violate it without infringing their rights.
Again everyone may not agree with this side of
view, but there are many others who agree to it. We keep talking about
tolerating others views and accepting diversity, but in practice we are really
forcing our view of liberalisation and freedom. So if some differ they are
labelled as intolerant and oppressors.
Copyrights iNarrators.com
You may circulate this for free giving credit to iNarrators.
|
Middle East 
