Western Resistance

« Philippines: Four Islamists Killed In Clash | | India: Why Are So Many Muslims in Prison? »

October 29, 2006

India: Muslim Cleric Slammed For Rape Fatwa

A year ago, in June 2005, a young married woman from Charthawal village in western Uttar Pradesh state in northern India was raped. Her husband, a rickshaw-puller who also worked in a brick-kiln, was away from the home working when the rape occurred. The rapist was her husband's father, Ali Mohammed. There has been no doubt that Imrana's father-in-law raped her.

A local village council, or panchayat, issued a fatwa which was bizarre, to say the least. Imrana then went to the Darul Uloom seminary, which follows the strict orthodoxy of the Deobandi sect of Islam. The clerics were qualified to issue binding fatwas, and she hoped the clerics would over-rule the panchayat's condition. Instead, they upheld the fatwa. They ruled that, as Imrana had already had a "physical relationship" with the 65-year old rapist, her marriage to her husband, Noor Ilahi, was consequently annulled. This was despite the fact that the couple had five children.

The panchayat fatwa had ordered that thenceforward, she should declare her husband, Noor Ilahi, to be her "son". In this aspect, the Darul Uloom fatwa differed. For them, the father-in-law could not be Imrana's husband. Their fatwa was issued by Mufti Habibur Rehman at the Darul Uloom headquarters (pictured) in Deoband on June 24, 2005. This is the second-largest Islamic seminary in the world, after Cairo's Al-Azhar University.

According to Hard News from August 2005, the decision on the fatwa derived from the fiq'h (jurisprudence) of the Hanafi sub-sect of Sunnis. The relevant explanation of this is contained in the following extract of the fatwa:

"If someone has committed adultery with the wife of his son, and if this has been proved by the depositions of witnesses or if his son confirms it or if the woman herself admits and confirms it, the wife of the son becomes haram forever for the son. If the father copulates with a woman either legally after marriage, or illegally without marriage, in both cases it becomes haram for man (son) to keep her in his marriage."

"It is mentioned in the Quran 'wa la tankihoo ma nakaha aaba-o-kum' ('And marry not women whom your fathers married.' Quran, 4:22), i.e. the son should separate himself from his wife and never go to her. The contention of the panchayat people that the wife of the son has now become wife of the father and her wifehood has changed is not correct, or to say that the wife of the son is divorced is also not correct. Neither can she be married to her father-in-law."

Imrana was not prepared to accept this, and decided to make a stand against the Islamic clergy. At first her husband remained quiet, but eventually decided to support his wife in her attempt to get some justice, and to over-rule the fatwa.

The news is carried by One World South Asia, Short News and the Pakistan Christian Post and The Peninsula.

The decision to have Imrana abandon her husband was supported by other clerics. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) originally approved of the fatwa.

Hindu nationalists usually criticise religious rulings which contradict the values of the secular judiciary. The Hindu reported last year that members of the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) condemned both the fatwa and the AIMPLB.

Finally on 19 October, more than a year after the attack, Imrana managed to see her father-in-law, Mohammed Ali, convicted of rape in a secular court. The rapist was sentenced to ten years' jail by a district court in Muzaffarnagar.

District Judge R. D. Nimesh ordered that the rapist should also be fined 10,000 rupees ($222). Imrana should be awarded 8,000 rupees ($178) from this money.

AIMPLB welcomed the verdict, but the issue has divided Muslim representatives. Maulana Imrana, who heads the local shariat court in Muzaffarnagar, has said that the court decision will have no bearing on the original fatwa. He said: "After being raped by her father-in-law, Imrana ceased to remain Noor Ilahi's wife. Instead she acquired the status of Ilahi's mother. So irrespective of the court order, the Shariah would not permit her to cohabit with Ilahi. The court verdict could not override the view of the Shariah and according to that Ilahi must leave Imrana."

A member of the AIMPLB, who heads the Firangi Mahal Islamic seminary in Lucknow, Maulana Khalid Rashid was ambiguous in his response. He said he welcomed the verdict of the court, as it sentenced the rapist to a lengthy jail term. Rashid said: "According to the AIMPLB and the Sharia, the victim cannot marry a person who has raped her. No one can accept such a fatwa."

But when asked about whether Imrana should stay with the father of her five children, Rashid was evasive. He said: "That is a question which I am not empowered to decide, it can be dealt with only by a Darul-Qaza, which is the highest Islamic court."

The Daul Uloom seminary which pronounced the original fatwa is Sunni. A Shia cleric condemned the fatwa. Maulana Mohammad Yasoob of the All India Shia Personal Law Board said the notion that Imrana should have married her rapist and abandoned her husband as "distorted". He said: "Imrana continues to remain the legally wedded wife of Noor Ilahi and under no Islamic tenet is she disentitled to enjoy that status after what has happened."

Women's groups have welcomed the verdict of the court, but the issue is still a source of dispute among Islamic theologians. The newly-created All India Muslim Women’s Law Board (AIMWLB) welcomed the court verdict, but condemned those who had issued the fatwa. Shaista Ambar, head of AIMWLB said: "The ruling of the Maulanas speaks volumes of their mindset for discrimination against women. This proves why we need an independent personal law board for Muslim women."

Last week, AIMWLB issued a damning criticism of Kamal Farouqee of the Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) who still holds the view that Imrana's marriage to Noor Ilahi is still invalid. Parveen Abdi said his notions were "devoid of the principal of natural justice".

Ms Abdi argued that as Imrana was raped, she is a victim, who should be compensated and treated with sympathy. Additionally, she said Kamal Farouqee's view on Imrana was based on a misconceived and sexist interpretation of Sharia law, where the woman victim of a crime is punished.

She also wondered why Kamal Farouqee had not suggested that Mohammed Ali should be stoned to death - the Islamic punishment for adultery and rape (zina).

Zee News reports that clerics have told Noor Ilahi that he should still leave his wife. Mufti Zulfiqar of the Shariat court of Muzzaffarnagar declared that the husband should abandon Imrana. Ahsan Kasmi, a mufti at the Darul Uloom seminary in Deoband, also agreed that Mr Ilahi should leave his wife.

Mufti Habibur Rehman, who heads the fatwa department at the Deoband headquarters and who issued the original "official" fatwa, refused to comment on the case. He said he would only respond to questions submitted in written form.

The Darul Uloom ("House of Knowledge") in Deoband was formed in May, 1866 by scholars Hazrat Maulana Mohammad Qasim Nanautavi and Hazrat Maulana Rasheed Ahmed Gangohi. Deoband teachings are strict. They advocate the veiling of women. The strict outlook of the Taliban and their brutal repression of women in Afghanistan stems from their being educated in Deobandi madrassas. Mullah Omar and several other Taliban leaders were graduates of the Deoband teaching institution, the Haqqania seminary, located in North-West Frontier Province in Pakistan.

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at October 29, 2006 9:26 PM

Comments

Post a comment