It is a tale that is more reminiscent of the cruel callous punishments meted out to women in medieval times. And yet sadly it is a case that is making headlines in the 21st century.
For those of you who are not aware of the story, an 18-year-old girl from Qatif went to meet a man she had had a prior relationship with to reclaim photos that he threatened to blackmail her with. While they were standing outside a shopping mall, they were abducted at knifepoint. She was gang raped 14 times by seven men. The man accompanying her was also raped. In an extraordinary ruling, she was sentenced by the courts to 90 lashes for having been with a man who was not her male relative. When she appealed this verdict, expecting leniency under the extenuating circumstances, the court increased her sentence to 200 lashes and six months imprisonment. This increased sentence was delivered under the spurious pretext that the judiciary would not be “aggravated and influenced” through the media. Her lawyer has been suspended from the case, has had his license confiscated and is now being threatened with disciplinary action.
I will never forget reading about this case when it was first documented several months ago. I blinked hard in disbelief at the ridiculous contents of the article and the trite absurdity of the allegations. It was enough to offend the sensibilities of any reasonable minded human being and yet, it seemed at the time, that those who are in charge of our judicial system were totally devoid of any sense of justice. It is this peculiar irony that has subsequently subverted and distorted the outcome of a trial that will no doubt characterize the level of injustice that we can expect to be afforded through the courts.
Here is a young woman who has had to suffer the unimaginable ordeal of being brutally raped by seven men 14 times but nonetheless decided to take the remarkably brave step and approach the authorities expecting at the very least a fair trial and perhaps, albeit unrealistically, a degree of compassion.
Indeed, as has been shown by the insanity of the proceedings she would have been well advised to privately deal with the physical and psychological scars that this heinous act had incurred. Instead of being applauded for breaking social taboos and enduring the consequences of revisiting the trauma that she must have acutely suffered in bringing her case forward, she now stands in the same dock as her rapists accused of being complicit in perpetrating the crime. According to the courts, she should not have been with a man who was not her male guardian in the first place. The judges looked into their crystal ball and saw that she had “the intention of doing something bad” and this therefore constituted a very good reason for her to be gang raped. Always the woman’s fault, but of course!
How does any of this make sense when practically all women in the Kingdom rely on the services of a man who is not their guardian? We live day and night in the closest of proximity with our drivers who by no means can be classified as eunuchs, having been deprived of the company of their wives for up to two years. And yet such a close relationship is deemed OK by the very same men in power who can punish a rape victim for being out in public with an equally “strange” man only because he doesn’t happen to be employed by her. Even though the judgment in this case is shocking, it is hardly surprising when you analyze the twisted reasoning it is based upon.
To add grotesque insult to injury, the lawyer defending the victim is now perceived as being public enemy No. 1 because he is producing tangible evidence supported by Islamic precedents and principles to show how ridiculous and contrary to the faith the ruling is. Rather than accept their failings, and redress the situation by backing down after the second hearing requesting a reduction in the girl’s sentence, the courts have amply demonstrated that the process of appeal is tantamount to begging for a tougher punishment. It also extends a warning to lawyers not to defend victims of such heinous crimes lest they lose their right to practice at all.
So what is the wider message being delivered to us citizens who may, God forbid, find ourselves at the mercy of the justice system here? Stay at home and keep our mouths shut. And to the outside world? I will leave this to your imagination. Suffice it to say that no amount of money spent on PR is going to be able to whitewash the irreparable damage caused by grave injustices such as this.
