3 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Rape -- Sorry, Mr Currmally; arguments not convincing

Reader comment on item: Ban Islam?
in response to reader comment: BAN ISLAM-REPLY TO SUSAN

Submitted by Romesh Chander (United States), Sep 11, 2007 at 16:51

Fazal Habib Curmally (Pakistan), Sep 9, 2007 at 11:54 wrote " We have what is called the Shari'at Act that became law in the late 1970s. In Islamic law, to prove adultery, you need 4 witnesses. This requirement was also applied to rape under the Sharia't Act in my country Pakistan. I don't think it applies to other Islamic countries.They have their own laws on the matter.

Now if there are 4 witnesses to a rape, then he quaetion arises "Are they reliable witnesses or are they accessories to the crime?" Happily, this requirement was undone in 2006 and today a woman has to go and report her being raped and that is enough for law to take it's course and there is no requirement of witnesses. Obvioiusly no one standsby and watch an act of rape.".

Mr. Curmally:

Now wait a minute. Is the Rape being tried in Civil court or Shariat courts ( Pakistan has established Shariat courts)? If trial is in Shariat courts, then you cannot waive the requirements of 4 pious muslim men witnesses; to waive it will be against the Holy Sharia law and hence against Koran? If it is in civil courts, then has Pakistan disbanded Shariat courts (which will be DeIslamization, which is not happening in Pakistan). Rape is part of the Family Law and hence part of Sharia (and not civil law) and fundos like Fazal Rahaman in Pakistan will not allow it.

So, is Pakistan following Sharia law or not?

Your arguments are not convincing. Some of us are quite knowledgeable what goes on in the rest of the world. You will not be able to fool us that easily. Do your research before you write.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Rape -- Sorry, Mr Currmally; arguments not convincing by Romesh Chander

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)