Reality of Zia and his Hudood ordinance (A thread)

The ordinances manifested in numerous forms of discrimination against women and minorities due to their provisions as well as the manner and method for which they were used
Despite this strong opposition these laws were considered ‘un-touchable’ for 27 years due to their 1/

Islamic nature. The Hudood Ordinances are a set of five ordinances promulgated that were never debated in parliament. Some of the examples are given below

1) Testimony of women and minorities excluded as a whole
2)Rape and adultery were equated: With rape being considered a ‘form of adultery’
3) Law of evidence made discriminatory: The law required four adult Muslim men to witness the entire act of ‘adultery’ vis a vis rape

thereby leading to the lack of prosecution and impunity given to rapists.
4) Distinction between ‘attempt’ to rape and ‘preparation’ to rape with the latter carrying a lighter penalty.
5) Pregnancy can be used as proof against women: Cases of rape were converted into cases of

adultery in case a woman could not prove the rape. Her pregnancy and her reporting of rape were taken as her admission of fornication.

6)Discriminatory definition of adult: A female is considered an adult at 16 or puberty – puberty being interpreted as physical maturity (i.e. age of menstruation, which can happen as early as 9 or 10 years) as opposed to mental maturity, and thereby entitled to adult punishment.

Ironically, while a girl child cannot be a valid witness for awarding a Hadd punishment she is considered an adult for the imposition of one.

7) A permanent state of harassment for women: the law as used to harass, exploit and control women throughout its existence. Women were imprisoned under the charge of Hadd and remained imprisoned for years. Investigation shows that women in jail on charges of Zina had been put

there by their fathers, brothers and husbands.

Supporters of the law claimed that the intention behind the ordinance was to protect women from heinous crimes such as rape, but the practical application does the opposite.

In reality, it was used to torment women who marry of their choice, wives wishing to get a divorce, divorced women wishing to re-marry or who try to get custody of the children etc — it is a power tool compromising women’s fundamental rights.