Stoning remains to be an approach
utilized by Iran as a form of punishment for adultery. Even if there isn’t
widely reported incidents of stoning in countries like Iran, the act itself
provides an inhumane attempt to punish women or men who have committed such
crime. These along with other injustices remain to influence the reality of
women in Iranian society. Recognizing these problems, the abolishment of
stoning as capital punishment can be a valuable approach to consider due to its
symbolic representation of women’s rights. Given the conservative stance of
Islamic laws and traditions, discontinuing stoning as a practice can be a good
step in opening up possible changes and complement the continued pressure and
influences from the West and other concerned organizations to end the practice.
What
is stoning?
Stoning
is defined as a process of punishment where an individual is subjected to death
by a group of people who throws stones. The term is also referred to as
lapidation and is practiced in different Islamic countries. Stoning can also be
considered torture because the person has to endure the pain before dying.
Looking closely, the process is a form of capital punishment. Arguably, this
has been a practice of various civilizations and influenced the application of
the judicial system and punishment. For old civilizations, this is a good way
to promote deterrence as well as control the behavior of its citizens. A good
way to show the relationship between stoning as a capital punishment and
history is the quote provided by violenceisnotourculture.org:
“Although it takes many different forms, stoning has
been used throughout history and in many religious and cultural traditions as a
kind of community justice or capital punishment. For instance, the practice has
been documented among the ancient Greeks to punish people judged to be
prostitutes, adulterers or murderers” (1).
The process of killing somebody during
stoning does not necessarily put the blame on the individual who threw the
stone that killed. Rather, it comes from the moral burden of the group who
participated in such act. Here, all of them have some degree of moral blame
that they have to live with for the rest of their life. In the Muslim context,
it also shows the willingness of the people to engage in such actions in order
to promote specific religious ideals and customs despite the brutality of the
act committed. The next section highlights why ending such approach remains to
be symbolic and a good stepping stone to promote women’s rights in Iran.
Why is it symbolically Important?
Based
from the context and definition of stoning, it remains to be symbolically
important because it highlights the continued problems experienced by Muslim
women in society. It depicts the harsh application of violence and torture
against women with or without sufficient evidence to support such allegations.
Even if the numbers cannot attest that the act remains to be prevalent, the use
of this approach remains to be show the how gruesome and inhumane some acts can
be.
Similarly,
stoning is symbolically important because it gives direction where change can
be initiated. By addressing these brutal and visible practices of Muslim
societies against women, it can give provide the necessary direction to improve
human rights practices in Iran. Abolishing this mandate opens up different
possibilities for Iranian women to fight for their equal rights. For example,
the abolishment of stoning would mean better opportunities for women to fight
for oppression and inequality of treatment. Likewise, by advocating a more
humane approach towards punishment increases the opportunity for women to
engage and develop a specific process in dealing with issues pertinent to the
group. In essence, allowing Iran to transition from a state that supports
stoning to opening ways to promote change can be a valuable step in looking
into the bigger picture associated with human rights and policy development in
Iran. It also empowers Muslim women to have a specific voice over this issue.
Women’s
Rights in Iran
Considering the context of women’s
rights in Iran, there remains to be unequal ways that the group is treated in
society. Specifically, there continues to be both cultural and legal traditions
that have shaped the manner that Iranian women should act, behave and respond
to society. In general, this deeply rooted traditions consider women as only
secondary to men and are specifically deprived of certain rights and subjected
to unequal treatment. A good approach come from Iran Human Rights Documentation
Center where they argue that:
“Although the attitudes of the Iranian public to
women's rights are far more varied, the government of the Islamic Republic
promotes discriminatory policies and has responded to the peaceful activism of
Iran's women's rights movement with systematic oppression. In recent years,
many women have been subjected to prison sentences or corporal punishment for
their participation in the campaign for One Million Signatures for the Repeal
of Discriminatory Laws” (1).
There
have been many instances that Iranian women were deprived of their specific
rights due to their specific sex and/or gender. Examples of critical areas that
really need attention include electoral participation, ethnic rights of some
women in Iran, executions such as stoning, treatment of prisoners, religious
rights. Arguably, each area brings forward specific challenges for women as
they have either been neglected or subjected to abuse by people in power.
To better understand the disparities
between male and females in Iran, one can look into the common cultural
features, roles and expectations given to both. Placing this for example in the
context of stoning, the application and use of evidences are often biased or
specifically favor men. Specifically, Gissou Nia in her article contends that “the real issue is that despite the propensity of Iran’s
courts to hold women accountable for sex crimes and other moral offenses, when
it comes to the evidence that will be used against them to secure such
convictions, the testimony of a woman is worth half of that of a man’s” (1). Equally, the same features
can also be seen in the actual act of adultery. “The real issue is that a husband
is allowed to kill his wife and her lover if he catches them in
the heat of passion, whereas no such exemption from a murder charge exists for
a wife should she catch her husband in a similarly compromised position” (Nia,
1). These clearly illustrate that so much work has to be made in order to
improve women rights in Iran.
Stoning
as Capital Punishment in Iran
Applying the process of stoning in Muslim
culture, the practice has been an approach utilized as a form of capital
punishment. This particular feature is associated with the crime of adultery to
both male and women. In Islamic countries, the practice of adultery is
considered a capital offense and remains to be punishable by death.
In particular, the legal practice of
capital punishment in Muslim countries remain to be sanctioned by its Penal
code. Within these provisions is the mandate concerning stoning and how it is
implemented to both men and women who have been proven to commit adulterous
behavior. Specifically, it follows the Muslim concept of Rajm and has been enacted to a law in Iran back in the 1980s. The
provisions provided under different articles of the Islamic Penal code (e.g.
102, 105, 221, 172 and 198) all put forward specific provisions for the
legalization of stoning. The group Violenceisnotourculture.org highlights the
process of implementation by stating the following approach taken from Shadi
Shadr, an Iranian human rights lawyer:
As
long as adultery is a crime, judges have to sentence the defendants who are
accused of committing adultery. As the punishment for adultery
won’t be found in the written laws, Article 221 of the new penal code obliges
judges to ask the Supreme Leader to issue a religious order (fatwa). This in
effect means that Ayatollah Khamenei, the Islamic Republic’s Supreme Leader who
has never issued a fatwa, neither about the punishment for adultery nor about
any other criminal matters, is supposedly about to decide” (6).
This
quote means that though there are existing legislation that support stoning as
capital punishment, there have been no fatwa
initiated. Though it does not also remain to be a guarantee that such actions
would not be re-issued.
Stoning
in Iran Outside the Proper Judicial Procedure
Stoning as a practice of punishment
can also be understood from its application extra-judicially. This means that
the people themselves initiate the practice without proper judicial procedure.
Arguably, this is where the discrimination and abuse among women happens. In
this approach, women are subjected to various forms of questioning that results
to the same guilty verdict. Though there are not that many accounted case of
extra-judicial stoning, the reality that it happens in some areas in Iran is
troubling. In some cases, these women
were raped and interpreted by people as acts of adultery. Similarly, the
majority of the cases reported happened in areas where hardline Muslims are
located. They are the ones who follow Muslim traditions and do not necessarily
show sympathy to women who have been subjected to either abuse or violence.
Why
Iranians Can’t Stop Stoning
The practice of stopping stoning
remains to be difficult to Iranians because of the embedded Islamic culture and
practices that is associated with the practice. Equally, there is the role that
women play in Muslim societies that provide emphasis as to expectations and
obligations they need to play. Looking closely, living in a Muslim environment,
women have little rights and remain to be subjected to their husbands.
Arguably, these limitations make them susceptible to abuses or false
accusations where they can be subjected to harsh punishments such as stoning. A
good example to demonstrate this comes from the quote, “in the Iranian Penal
Code, a married woman has no right to divorce, a privilege which is reserved
for the husband. Women have no custody rights of their children after age
seven; as a result, women who can obtain a divorce by proving their husbands
are either abusive or addict, choose not to do so fearing the loss of their
children” (Violenceisnotourculture.org, ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ 1). Using
the quote as context, women are hesitant to become critical about their role in
society because of fears related to persecution and being left alone. Even if
these women wanted to be treated in a fair manner, they remain to be hesitant
because of the potential problems it can create to other members of society who
tend to think differently.
What
the West Can and Can’t Do
In response to the continued
practice of stoning in Iran, western societies have initiated different
approaches that have sought to promote awareness and influence better
protection and promotion of human rights in Iran. However, it can be argued
that the West can only promote change to a certain extent. Looking closely, the
West can initiate efforts to condone the practice of stoning both judicially
and extra-judicially. Similarly, they can also lobby for international agencies
such as Commission for Human Rights (CHR), United Nations, etc. to create
international standards that embrace Western ideals. Equally, Western states
can engage with Iran to talk about its policy. For example, diplomatic and
bilateral treaties among others, can be used to promote the commitment against
stoning.
On the other hand, the approach of
the West to provide strategies to abolish stoning only goes to the extent of
either prescriptive or suggestive. This means that the implementation of change
and policy still corresponds to the role of the Iranian government. Due to
sovereignty and legitimacy of Iran, Western powers cannot readily impose its
culture and practices to the state. Similarly, the same concept applies to
international organizations such as CHR whose purpose is to expand the
promotion of women rights in Muslim countries. Specifically, Redpath contends
that “although there is a consensus within the international community that
stoning violates a host of UN treaties and international human rights laws –
including the fundamental right to freedom of torture – there is no legally
binding commitments at the international level with regards to stoning”(1).
Despite having limitations in the promotion
of change, the West remains significant because they serve to provide influence
and pressures to Muslim states such as Iran to abolish stoning. This clearly
opens up possibilities for the women in Muslim countries to realize that this
act is not universal. Rather, there are societies that condemn such inhumane
acts of torture. There will be ways where an appropriate response and procedure
is in place to help address their individual needs and interests. A good
example for this is highlighted in the next section where it details the story
of Soraya M and her fate due to the brutal act of stoning.
The
Stoning of Soraya M.
In
seeking appreciate the issue of stoning and how it continues to undermine women
rights in Muslim countries such as Iran, the movie the Case of Soraya M can
serve as a basis for analysis. The story depicts Soraya who was charged with
committing adultery. The duration of the film examines the lack of effective
ways that Soraya is able to protect her interests or tell the truth. Here, it
gives emphasis on how Muslims continue to discriminate such act and how women
remain to be affected the most by this culture. The end of the story depicts
the actual stoning and her death because of a crime that she did not even do.
It gives a chilling and sad ending to the woman who lost her right to live and
dignity without the proper legal procedures to determine if the accusations
given is the truth or not.
One
critical component that makes this film related to the overall argument is that
Soraya was a victim of an unequal and discriminating system. Here, she was
sentenced to stoning because people think she had committed adultery but the
truth really comes from his husband trying to get rid of her. The story then
exposes the lack of proper procedures and due process in addressing the issue
of adultery. It created controversy because it allowed viewers to recognize
that such actions against women continue to happen in Muslim societies.
Another
context worth exploring is the ability of the story to convey the reality from
a different perspective. Specifically, the participation of the French journalist.
If not for this person, Soraya’s story wouldn’t have been publicized. This is
critical because in Anthropology, there is an issue where the marginalized do
not necessarily see the disparity or unequal treatment because it remains to be
a norm. Applying this to Soraya’s case, the issue of marginality can be a
factor for her inability to speak for herself. Given a society that provides
strict and traditional roles for women, Soraya’s interaction with the French
journalist complemented the process of revealing such inequalities and
injustice. It provided a new perspective that considered stoning to be an
inhumane act in Western standards and should be discontinued within Muslim
practice.
Equally,
the film remains to be valuable because of its ability to demonstrate a harsh
reality that continues to happen among women. The case of Soraya shows that
despite today’s modern values, there are still brutal approaches that influence
policy development. Here, Bradshaw contends that “no reasonable person can
doubt that the sharia practice of stoning a woman to death for supposed “adultery”
is utterly grotesque – as is the cringing reluctance of some on the western
left to condemn it, for fear of being branded Islamophobic” (1). This quote
brings forward an interesting quote pertaining to cultural differences and
normative rights. Arguably, in drawing the line between the two, the former
must always reflect the identity of the people but not without sacrificing
rights that should be common for all. This means that people should remain to
be sensitive to cultural differences but should also bear in mind that specific
roles and practices should not undermine the ‘humanity’ of an individual. It is
through such perspective that stoning should be abolished because it is
detrimental to the rights of Muslim women but not necessarily to the Muslim
culture in general.
International Pressure and Public Embarrassment on Iran
It
was indicated in the previous sections that the practice of international
pressure is one attempt used by the West in order to promote changes or
abolishment of stoning as capital punishment in Iran. For example, the United
State and other agencies such as Commission on Human Rights (CHR) have sought
for better approaches that would seek to improve human rights practices in Iran
as well as end stoning as a course of punishment. Specifically, the actions of
Iran were presented as inhumane and violent in nature. The image created by the
West considers a society that is resistant in promoting changes. A good example
to demonstrate this public embarrassment comes from how the Ayatollah
recognized international pressures. In particular, “in December of 2002, the
Head of Iran’s Judiciary, Ayatollah Shahroudi, succumbed to the pressure of
human rights activists – who were in the midst of negotiations with the
European Union – and imposed a moratorium on stoning”
(Violenceisnotourculture.org, 8).
Where to go from here
Based from all the information
presented, there are clear indications of discrimination and inequality among
women in Iran. Using this perspective, the approach then to abolish stoning as capital
punishment remains to be a good step and symbolic towards change. It remains to
be a victory for groups who advocate for women’s rights due to its ability to
create the necessary step and momentum to promote changes to the traditional
beliefs and customary practices of Iran.
Likewise, the West and other
concerned groups need to examine ways to increase pressure to Iranian leaders.
There must be a commitment to agree upon approaches that can help legitimize
the process of abolishing stoning. Specifically, continued influence must be to
Iran’s leaders in order to create a sustainable approach that would not only
tackle stoning but other human rights issues faced by women. Though it would be
a long and difficult process, the change brought forward by ending stoning in
Iran can be a good way to improve human rights practices in Iran.
Conclusion
In
the end, the abolishment of stoning as capital punishment in Iran can be a
significant way to promote changes in a society that continues to promote
unequal treatment of women. The process can be a good step to recognize not
only other humane forms of punishment but also bring forward ways to improve
how women are treated in the country. Even if the act of stoning itself is not
prevalent, its abolishment is symbolic because it can open up new possibilities
in promoting change for women in Iran. It gives opportunities for new
developments to come in especially in a society where Islamic culture remains
to be traditional and conservative.
Work Cited
Bradshaw, Peter. ‘The Stoning of Soraya M – review’ the Guardian. 2010 Web Available from
<http://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/oct/21/the-stoning-of-soraya-m-review>
Iran Human Rights Documentation Center. Women’s Rights. 2013 Web Available from
<http://www.iranhrdc.org/english/womens-rights.html>
Nia, Gissou. ‘Why Iranian Women Can’t Have Any of it’ Open Canada.org 2013 Web
Available from < http://opencanada.org/features/the-think-tank/comments/why-iranian-women-cant-have-any-of-it/>
Redpath, Rhiannon. ‘Women around the World are being Stoned to Death. Do you know the
Facts?’ PolicyMic. 2013 Web Available from <http://www.policymic.com/articles/68431/women-around-the-world-are-being-stoned-to-death-do-you-know-the-facts>
Sadr, Shadi. ‘The ‘End of Stoning’: Islamic Republic Style’ The Huffington Post. 2012 Web
Available from <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shadi-sadr/iran-stoning_b_1335809.html>
The Guardian. Stoning in Iran: Brutality pure and simple. 2010 Web Available from
<http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/jul/09/stoning-death-penalty-iran-editorial>
Violenceisnotourculture.org. Frequently Asked Questions About Stoning. 2011 Web Available
from <http://www.violenceisnotourculture.org/faq_stoning>
Violenceisnotourculture.org. Mapping Stoning in Muslim Contexts. 2012 Web Available from
<http://www.wluml.org/sites/wluml.org/files/Mapping%20Stoning%20in%20Muslim%20Contexts_Final.pdf>
No comments:
Post a Comment