Honour’ killings are an entrenched social issue in many parts of the world, including Sindh. This involves killing mostly women for allegedly bringing shame or dishonour upon their families or communities.

The perceived transgressions against cultural or religious norms, such as women choosing their partners, engaging in premarital relationships, or seeking a divorce, are seen as threats to the established male-dominated order. Honour killings are viewed as preserving the male honour and control over women.

The murders are committed mostly to protect the family’s reputation within the community. Families fear being stigmatised if a member is perceived to have violated cultural or religious norms. The concept of izzat (honour) holds great significance, and perceived transgressions, even if unfounded, can lead to extreme measures being taken to restore it.

In cases where women experience domestic violence, seek a divorce, or express desire for autonomy, they may be subjected to violence by their birth families or in-laws in an effort to maintain the social order and uphold notions of honour. Such killings are often justified using cultural/ religious interpretations of tradition prioritising male authority.

According to a police study, as many as 769 people, including 510 women, were murdered in the name of so-called honour in Sindh between 2014 and 2019. Police pressed charges in 649 cases and the courts awarded sentences in 19 of the cases. The accused in 136 cases were acquitted. The conviction rate thus stood at a mere two per cent and the acquittal rate at 20.9pc. According to the data compiled by Sindh Suhai Organisation (SSO), at least 217 people, including 152 women, were killed in honour-related crimes across Sindh in 2022. As many as 36 people were targeted in Jacobabad district alone; 27 people were killed in Kashmore district. According to the breakdown, 23 people were killed in Ghotki; 16 in Shikarpur; 14 in Larkana; 10 in Khairpur; five in Sukkur; and 86 in other districts.

The challenge is to identify the factors and take suitable measures to prevent the killings in the name of so-called honour. “Once a woman is declared a kari, family members consider themselves authorised to kill her and the co-accused karo in order to restore family honour.”

Certain amendments were introduced in relevant laws through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, such as increasing the punishments, and allowing courts to award punishment on account of the principle of causing fasad fil arz (disorder in society) when the right to qisas has been waived or compounded and minimum imprisonment for ten years in case of honour crimes. Other amendments in the laws related to removing the possibility of the murderer being the wali and allowing the state to take the role of wali if necessary. Others involved in or ‘validating’ such killings like jirgas, panchayats, etc, were not made equally liable to penalty under the law.

There are several factors behind the failure to eliminate this heinous crime. Centuries-old practices, deeply rooted socio-cultural factors, under reporting of such cases and covering those by reporting these killings as suicide or accidental death and silent social acceptance of such killings are just a few factors contributing to the practice’s continual use.

Other contributory factors are loopholes in the laws, faulty investigation, a low rate of conviction, ineffective deterrence of the law and criminal justice system, collusion between offenders and witnesses and unwillingness to enforce the law due to the overwhelming social acceptance of the crime and the influence of power holders. A majority of the cases are settled out of court.

In the matter of ‘honour’ killing, the Supreme Court of Pakistan in a judgment reported as 2019 PLD 218 Supreme Court (National Commission on Status of Women vs Government of Pakistan through Secretary Law and Justice), held that “Jirgas’, ‘panchayats’ and ‘council of elders’, settlement of disputes through honour killings for retribution and compelling women to be wed without their consent, such acts violated Article 4, 10-A and 25 read with Article 8 of the constitution which enjoined that no custom in derogation of any fundamental right could prevail under the law.

Formulating and implementing a comprehensive strategy comprising sustained educational and awareness campaigns, filling the loopholes of existing laws and implementation of law in letter and spirit by all stakeholders of government and civil society is necessary to eliminate the practice.

On January 23 a woman, who left her home in Pirabad, to marry a man of her own free will, was shot dead allegedly by her father Ameer Jan Mehsud, in the name of so-called ‘honour’ at the entrance of the City Courts, Karachi, where police brought her to record her statement before a judicial magistrate. The trial for the said murder was held by the Additional District and Session Judge-I/ Model Court District, South Karachi, in which vide order dated 25 May 2023, Court after hearing of application under Section 345(2) CrPC and under Section 345(6) CrPC filed by the legal heirs of deceased and in presence of two injured, who stated on oath that they had forgiven the accused Ameer Jan in the name of Almighty Allah and did not want to pursue the matter further. For this the accused was acquitted under Section 345(6) CrPC. The case showed that the offenders can still kill in the name of ‘honour’ and be acquitted because legal heirs of the victim can pardon the murderer, often a family member.

The judges have a crucial role in addressing ‘honour’ killings by providing a legal framework to prosecute offenders. The legal system has made some strides in recent years to combat ‘honour’ killings. The enactment of the Anti-Honor Killing Laws in 2016 and subsequent amendments have increased penalties for perpetrators and created specialised tribunals for expedited trials. The judiciary’s role in upholding and interpreting these laws is essential for effective implementation.

The judiciary is responsible for ensuring that victims and their families have access to justice in ‘honour’ killing cases. This includes providing legal aid, protection and support to victims, particularly women, who often face societal pressures and threats that discourage them from seeking justice. The judiciary can establish mechanisms, such as women-friendly courts and safe houses, to facilitate the reporting and prosecution of ‘honour’ killings.

The judiciary can also challenge and reshape regressive cultural norms that perpetuate ‘honour’ killings. By delivering verdicts that condemn such acts and strictly enforce the law, the judiciary can send a strong message to the society that ‘honour’ killings are unacceptable and punishable offences. Additionally, judges can use their positions to educate the public, dispel misconceptions and promote gender equality through judicial decisions and public statements.

The writer is an advocate of the Sindh High Court and a PhD scholar