Equality Now

I worked with Equality Now for the summer as a legal intern. It is an international human rights organization that works for the protection of the rights of women and girls worldwide. It campaigns against trafficking and sexual violence. The organization also supports and publicizes selected laws prevalent in legal codes and statutes of different countries addressing the most common and significant gender based discriminations in law. 

Summer is a great time in New York. The city presents a different sight even for its residents. Tourists from all over the world pour in and there is a sense of festivity in the air. There is a lot to do for whatever your interests are. Although New York gets that all around the year but during summer it just doubles. I always loved this so-much-to-do air and international character of the city and living here has been a interesting experience. I had never worked in New York before nor even thought about it before coming to Fordham. It was my first experience, working in New York and I found it as impressive as living here. There is always so much to do and my work had an international character.

I was assisting Equality Now’s staff under its two main programs; discrimination in law and Sexual violence against women. I worked on cases of rape, kidnapping, police abuses, and discrimination in law. However, as I sit to down to write this blog, I ask myself this question- what did I learn? Reflecting and recollecting the past weeks, I think I just learnt one word during this summer.

 E.Q.U.A.L.I.T.Y

This one word describes how this summer taught me eight valuable lessons in advocacy and campaigning of human rights issues.

E for Everyday life at a nonprofit: This summer gave me a chance to see what everyday life is in a nonprofit. It was a practical exercise in advocacy and campaigning of gender issues. There is a sense of satisfaction when a change occurs through your work. There is frustration when despite efforts nothing comes through. It was also a lesson in the working dynamics of a nonprofit. Moreover, Equality Now highlights abuses of women rights around the globe. The cases that I worked on came from different regions, cultures and legal systems. It broadened my understanding of the gender issues and related laws.

Q for Quality of work matters for advocacy: My work as an intern was closely supervised. I had two supervisors who were constantly giving me feedback. I researched and they highlighted the missing links in my research. I drafted communications and they got back to me with the changes. I could see where I went wrong in my draft or what was missing in my research. It gave me a good tutorial in improving quality of my work.

U for Unequal world, we live in: I worked on cases from different countries and researched on local laws of those regions that exposed me to the prevalent gender discrimination in laws around the globe. It is alarming to see how women are exploited in the name of culture, religion and society. Every society discriminates against women in some way. We are still a long way short from giving women their rights.

A for Advocacy in a different region: Equality Now usually works in collaboration with a local partner and provides the support it needs to pursue a case. I learnt about the importance and mechanism of collaboration with the local groups. Advocacy is better served when you empower the people and there is a struggle from within. It is a valuable aspect of advocacy and campaigning of human rights issues. 

L for Legal research: I was researching on cases from different countries at Equality Now. I would also look for local laws and relevant facts of the case. This research was a unique experience. Facts of a case were often conflicting. Not many countries have data-bases to look up for relevant laws. Finding the most updated version of laws was another challenge. I had to check twice or thrice before passing on my research. It was a good (but tedious) practice in refining searching skills.

I for Intelligent ways of communication for advocacy: Equality Now issues Action Alerts on cases to create awareness about an issue or discrimination in law. It also sends out communications to governments and human rights bodies. I assisted the program officers with these communications and saw how important writing and drafting is for advocacy. I also worked on preparing fact sheets for the cases to authenticate the details relevant to cases. These intelligent ways to communicate could make a lot of difference.

T for Tools of social change: Legal advocacy respects and tolerates local courts and customs. It approaches the local laws with a sense of tolerance and strives for setting a legal precedent in that system. Equality Now supports cases that have precedent setting value in legal systems. It supports victims and helps them come forward to bring about this legal reform. I realized how a case could give justice not only to one victim but also to many others.

Y for Your voice can make a difference: Equality Now issues Action Alerts to draw attention to cases of abuses. It emphasizes much on creating awareness and generating a voice. It pushes for action and provides support by circulating these communications. This awareness and understanding of the people serves an important role in advocacy. These voices can push authorities for action if generated and communicated in an organized way.  

It was a great summer experience learning these lessons in advocacy and human rights campaigning. I expect this word EQUALITY guides me through as a human rights advocate. 

Lal Bibi… More than just ALP at Stake

Lal Bibi is 18 years old and the youngest daughter in a Kuchi family, who are semi-nomadic herders. She and her family live in a tent in the outside the city of Kunduz and raise sheep for their livelihood. Unfortunate events brought her to limelight recently. Lal Bibi says that she was abducted and raped because her cousin offended a family linked to a local militia commander, Ishaaq Neezami. She says that Commander Nezaami’s men kidnapped her and took her to the home of one of his sub-commanders, Sakhi Dad where she was chained to a wall, sexually assaulted and beaten. Lal Bibi spent the ensuing five days in a dark room being tortured and repeatedly raped. According to her, this ordeal ended a week after her capture when she was dumped, bruised and battered, outside her home in a remote village in northern Konduz Province. She was taken to Kunduz hospital and subsequent medical examination proved that there was reliable physical evidence consistent with her account.

The case came to attention because of the involvement of personnel from Afghan Local Police, an American-financed program that aims to convert former insurgents into village self-defense forces, distinct from the existing national police force. During a meeting of the country's National Security Council, President Hamid Karzai ordered the Interior Ministry to arrest the suspects in this case and disarm the police unit in Konduz. In a statement released on the same day, the Interior Ministry confirmed that two men had been arrested and that a "young woman" had been "harassed" and not raped. Commmder. Muhammad Ishaq Nezaami who disappeared shortly after the discovery of the incident was later arrested. One of the accused, Khodaidad says that they could not have raped the girl because a local cleric had married them and that the girl was given as ‘baad – the practice of trading women as a payment to resolve disputes between families, clans or tribes. Typically, when a girl is given in baad, it happens after the meeting of elders and consent of families. 

 

The events occurred in Kuduz province that is one of the most turbulent in northern Afghanistan. The case brought to fore the problems facing the Afghan Local Police program. It is a favorite initiative of the NATO commander Gen. David H. Petraeus. Afghan police officials see it as an easy-on-the-pocket way to beef up their forces in remote areas. The ALP is trained by American Special Forces units in collaboration with the Afghan authorities and attached to the government through the Interior Ministry. The Afghanistan National Army and National Police are expected to expand to a combined 352,000 personnel by the end of the year, but even that force cannot cover remote. The ALP is supposed to cover this gap. But the forces of ALP have been involved in abuses over the years even before this incident. Bibi's case is just the latest in a long line of incidents where more than 10 local policemen have been arrested and charged since 2010 on various accounts of abuse, ever since the launch of the initiative.

More importantly, the case is critical for Afghanistan’s law on Elimination of Violence Against Women (EVAW). President Karzai signed the new set of laws in August 2009, criminalizing violence against women, including rape, battery or beating; forced or underage marriage; practice of baad; humiliation; intimidation; and the refusal of food. Article 17 of the EVAW law specifically punishes rape with life imprisonment. The law also punishes the "violation of chastity of a woman that does not result in adultery with imprisonment of up to seven years.

Earlier Courts prosecuted cases of adultery and rape solely according to Articles 422-433 of the 1976 Penal Code that do not explicitly criminalize rape and were insufficient to deal with the matter. Article 427 of the Penal Code states that a person who commits adultery or pederasty shall be sentenced to long imprisonment and in case of aggravated conditions, such as deflowering a maiden; the strictest punishment will be meted out to the offender. Article 429 provided that the punishment for a person who, through violence, threat, or deceit, violates the chastity of another (whether male or female), or initiates the act, shall be sentenced to long imprisonment, not exceeding seven years. According to a report by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child the laws were insufficient. The cases were dealt through Sharia law, which was interpreted in the local context and influenced by tribal customs. Although it was un-codified but it impeded successful prosecution of rape cases punishable by stoning to death or 100 lashes of the whip.

The accused in this case claims that he had married the girl.  Nevertheless, forced marriage is illegal under Afghan law. In Afghanistan, marriage laws are based both on the Afghan civil code and on Sharia law that applies to issues not covered by the civil code. Marriage laws prescribe a minimum age of 16 for girls and 18 for boys, though a girl of a younger age may be married with the permission of her father or guardian. Consent to marry is explicitly required for individuals who are 18 or older. Under Sharia law, marriage is not valid without the consent of parties between ages 15-18, and the consent of both individuals is required, not just the guardians. Furthermore, Elimination of Violence Against Women (EVAW) bans forced marriages. In 2007, the Supreme Court certified a new official marriage contract that both parties must sign, but it has not yet been implemented widely. Moreover, Article 517 of the Penal Code states that someone who forces a girl or widow into marriage “contrary to her will or consent” shall be given a short-term prison sentence, the duration of which is not specified but is unlikely to be more than one year.

Some members of Afghanistan’s National Security Council argued that pursuing the allegations could tarnish the image of the Afghan Local Police that they view as vital to maintain security and keeping the Taliban at bay. There is more at stake in this case than just the sake of necessity of Afghan Local Police. This case is critical for the EVAW and Afghan political will to implement such laws.  According to a United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan Report in 2011Government’s implementation of the law, in particular by police and prosecutors, was limited and that much greater efforts were needed to improve enforcement. In many regions, police and prosecutors continue to refer cases of violence against women to mediation and traditional dispute resolution mechanisms that do not enforce the EVAW law or the Penal Code and failed to adequately protect the rights of women. Often these incidents go unreported. The case might set a precedent for Afghani women and its legal system to deal with these issues without recourse to alternative methods of justice and help Afghan society develop laws to counter sexual violence against women.

An Opportunity for Women Rights in Zambia

The time is crucial for Zambians. Their decisions today will determine the years or perhaps decades ahead. The country is drafting its new Constitution. Zambians especially women should be more watchful as the choices made now will decide the kind of life they and their next generation will be living. The Constitution Review Committee’s proposal to repeal gender discriminatory Article 23 should be welcomed whose clauses (4)(5) and (7) allowed for discrimination on the basis of custom and other traditional practices in areas of marriages, inheritance and death (burial rights). The Committee has taken a step to repeal the Article 139 (13) that subsumed feminine gender in the masculine gender and rendered women invisible. But there is more that can done for the women of Zambia.

Women must be provided full rights relating to their health and reproduction. First draft of the Constitution provides contradictory provisions for the reproductive rights of women. Article 52 states that without limiting any right or freedom guaranteed under the Bill of Rights, women have the right to reproductive health. But in Article 28 (1), the proposed draft says that a person has the right to life, which begins at conception. Determining the point of fertilization is medically difficult and if assumed that life begins at conception, it would compromise the human rights of women. These two articles contradict each other and if read with Article 317, the latter can lead to restrictions as a result of which reproductive health services and procedures may become unconstitutional in Zambia.

Photo Credit: Richard Mulonga/IPS

Other African constitutions have provided women these rights too. In South Africa, although the Constitution does not mention abortion but the two sections of the bill of rights give women these reproductive rights. Section 12(2) and section 27(1)(a) implicitly guarantee this right to women. Constitutions of Tanzania and Uganda also accept the rights if the life of a woman is in danger. Kenyan Constitution approved in 2010 accords women this right in Article 43 (1) (a).

The Republic of Zambia is also under international commitment to guarantee this right to women. Article 12 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) that Zambia ratified in 1985 provides that states Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in the field of health care in order to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, access to health care services, including those related to family planning.

The Constitution must also provide equality and non-discrimination as a non-derogable right. First draft does not expressly mentions equality or proscribes unfair discrimination as a non-derogable right. Article 69, relating to non-derogable rights and freedoms proposes does not mention equality or nondiscrimination as a non-derogable right. Other African constitutions have guaranteed provision of such equality among genders. Constitution of South African expressly provides against unfair discrimination and counts it as a non-derogable right. Article 9 says there cannot be any discrimination on the grounds of race, color, ethnic or social origin, sex, religion or language. This article is a part of the Table of Non-Derogable Rights. In Malawi according to Article 45.3 of the Constitution women rights are non-derogable rights that are included in the Chapter IV.

The Constitution does not provide for specific women representation in National Assembly and District Councils. Article 136 of the proposed draft that deals with the composition of the National Assembly does not specify any seats for women. Although the initial draft ensures women representation in Parliamentary Service Commission, Judicial Service Commission, Provincial Assembly but it does not guarantee women representation in National Assembly and District Council. The constitution is vague on women representation and it is possible that there won’t be enough numbers in Parliament if the Constitution does not specifically provide for the seats for women. The proposed draft is also vague about representation of women in political parties.

The number of women in National Assembly has declined over the years. In the 2011 Elections, there were only 17 women elected as compared to 141 men that make for 10.76% of the total seats. Zambia is a party to the SADC Declaration on Gender and Development (SADCGD (1997) which provides for, amongst other measures, the achievement by member States of a minimum target of 30% women in politics and decision-making positions by 2005. It is time to fulfill the commitment now.

Moreover, some Constitutions in Africa do ensure women representation in their Parliaments. The Constitution of Tanzania allows for reserved seats through its Article 66. 1(b) and Article 78.1. Ugandan Constitution also ensures women representation in Parliament for each district through Article 78(1) and one-third membership in its local governments through Article 180. The new Kenyan Constitution passed in 2010, through its Article 81 (b) of maintains a one third requirement for either gender in elective bodies giving women of Kenya at least 1/3 minimum in elective public bodies.

The proposed draft must also specifically include the right to be free from ‘gender-violence’. It does not mention gender violence expressly in the Bill of Rights. Its Article related to security rights does not include ‘gender violence’.  Although addition of “gender violence” was considered and reviewed by the Constitution Review Committee (mentioned in report on page 136,137) but it was recommended that the provision should be maintained without addition.  

Zambia is required by Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women to ensure measures to eliminate violence against women. Although CEDAW does not contain an explicit reference to violence against women, the CEDAW Committee has issued a General Recommendation (No. 12 eighth session, 1989) that states that violence directed against a woman recognized and addressed as discrimination under the convention.

The proposed draft interestingly, does not guarantee provision of socio economic rights. The language is vague is Article 61, which provides that Parliament shall enact legislation that provides measures, which are reasonable, to achieve the progressive realization of the economic, social and cultural rights and in such matters, where the state cannot fulfill its duty, the constitution court cannot interfere. Zambia is under commitment to ensure provision of socio economic and cultural rights especially to women. Article 3 of CEDAW says that States Parties shall take in all fields, in particular in the political, social, economic and cultural fields, all appropriate measures, including legislation, to ensure the full development and advancement of women.

The making of the Constitution is a choice to decide about the future. The proposed draft should reflect the future goals and aspirations of Zambians especially its women. Zambia also has this opportunity to fulfill its international commitments and follow the leading examples of other African constitutions. The making of this Constitution is a chance to rectify discriminatory elementsembedded in customs, laws and mindsets and Zambians, should view this as an important opportunity.

Dichotomy of Laws in Pakistan

Equality Now is an international human rights organization that works to  protect and promote the rights of women and girls worldwide. I focus specifically on promoting the legal rights of women and advocacy against sexual violence. Through its Discrimination in Law program, Equality Now supports and publicizes selected laws prevalent in legal codes and statutes of different countries addressing the most common and significant gender based discriminations in law.

Rights and benefits arising out of citizenship are an essential concept to every legal framework. It is the duty of the State to treat all its citizens equally and guarantee the provision of rights they are entitled to. These duties of the State are also referred to as fundamental rights. However, sometimes these fundamental rights are violated  by the parallel set of laws framed to achieve a particular purpose. Such a contradiction exists in Pakistan, for example, where the Citizenship Act of 1951 violates the basics of the Constitution. Its section 10 provides for the process married women can acquire citizenship in Pakistan. A married man can earn citizenship for his spouse but a woman cannot do the same. She is not entitled to pass on her [the right of citizenship to her spouse even by fulfilling all the other requirements, if her spouse is a foreigner.

The Constitution of Pakistan, the supreme law of the land, provides for non-discriminations on the basis of sex. Article 25(1) states that all citizens are equal before law and entitled to equal protection of law. Its Section 2 prohibits any gender discrimination and prescribes that there shall be no discrimination on the basis of sex alone.

The Citizenship Act should not withstand this paradox however it still exists. There had been efforts in Pakistani Parliament to change it but they all ended in a pigeonhole. Dr. Attiya Inayatullah, a PML-Q member, introduced a private member bill to amend the Pakistan Citizenship Act, 1951 on June 10, 2008. It sought to amend the section by adding that a man who is married to a Pakistani woman shall be eligible to apply for registration as a citizen of Pakistan after fulfilling the conditions as laid out in section 10 of this Act, for a foreign woman. A private member bill was also tabled by the ANP member National Assembly Bushra Gohar on February 17, 2010 that sought to amend the section to provide the married women right of citizenship for their spouses. The Ministry of the Interior opposed both bills in the house. They are now pending in Parliament either because committees have not taken any action or members did not show further interest in such legislation.

In 2006, Federal Shariat Court in its original jurisdiction took suo motu notice using its powers under Article 203-D after a news item reported that citizenship was denied to a Pakistani woman’s foreign husband. The court asked the Ministry of Law, the Ministry of the Interior and the Attorney General for an explanation on the matter. The ministry responded with the approval of the Ministry of Law, Justice and Human Rights and gave the following bizarre concerns for upholding the provision:

1.     Afghan refugees and Biharis will misuse it.

2.     Unemployment will go up.

3.     After divorcing Pakistani women a foreign man will be able to roam around in Pakistan freely.

4.     Foreign women marrying Pakistani men cannot be equated to foreign men marrying Pakistani women in our society

5.     It will provide ingress to Indian male citizens into Pakistan.

However, the Court rejected these concerns and decided on December 19, 2007 that the Act is discriminatory against women and asked the President of Pakistan to amend the Pakistan Citizenship Act within six months so that a Pakistani female's non-Pakistani husband could also get Pakistani citizenship, just like a foreign woman married to a Pakistani man. Although the Federal Shariat Court is an apex level court for Islamic laws in Pakistan, still the aforesaid act will remain the same until Parliament/President approves changes to it.

Citizenship of any country is a sacred and earnest commitment of allegiance towards the constitution and laws of the State. It cannot be ensured if laws relating to citizenship are not appropriately designed or are discriminatory. This dichotomy of laws and discrimination do not hold valid ground as it violates the Constitution of Pakistan and the country’s international commitments under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discriminations against Women (CEDAW). One can only hope that Parliamentarians and the Commission on Status of Women (a body formed to recommend laws related to women) with its new powers will take note of this to ensure that women in Pakistan are guaranteed their legal rights.

This blog reflects the personal views of the author and not necessarily those of Equality Now.