EDITORIAL : THE HINDU, INDIA

A disappointing verdict in Pakistan

Since the day in 2002 when she decided to seek punishment for the men who had gang-raped her, Mukhtaran Mai has been a symbol of Pakistani women's struggle against a feudal and patriarchal society in which brutal crimes against women are condoned in the name of honour and custom. In Mukhtaran's case, a panchayat in her village abetted the rape as “punishment” for her 12-year-old brother's alleged illicit relations with a girl of a higher caste. It was expected that, after the treatment meted out to her, Mukhtaran, in keeping with tradition, would conveniently commit suicide, and no liability would fall on any man. But this extraordinarily brave woman, unlettered at the time of the monstrous crime, decided to defy societal taboos to take her attackers to court. It is disappointing that Pakistan's highest court has ruled against her. On April 21, a three-judge bench upheld, by a majority of two to one, the Lahore High Court's acquittal of five men accused of the rape (while confirming the life sentence to a sixth) on the ground of insufficient evidence. The verdict is unsettling for several reasons. In most of South Asia, for reasons that are well known, it is never easy for a woman to make a formal complaint of rape. This verdict sets the bar for evidence so high — in contrast are the evidentiary requirements in a blasphemy case — that it can only act as further discouragement to rape victims seeking justice. It is also bound to add to the prevailing climate of impunity in which such crimes are committed, and serve as encouragement to parallel, anti-women systems of justice such as jirgas and panchayats. As for Mukhtaran Mai, the verdict has shattered the hopes she had placed in the judiciary all these years. With the men she named as her rapists now free, she apprehends danger to her life.

For the women's movement in Pakistan, the Supreme Court decision is a huge setback, and it is no surprise that, after playing an active role in the 2007-09 lawyers' movement for the restoration of Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhary and an independent judiciary, it should feel let down. In the nine years it has taken for the case to be decided, Mukhtaran has been an inspirational example of women's agency, discarding victimhood to fight her own battle and, alongside, help other women in similar situations. It would indeed be a travesty if her name were to become synonymous with justice denied. Thus far, the Pakistan People's Party government has shown little courage on issues that matter. But given its claim to a progressive vision on women's rights in Pakistan, the least it can do is to press for a review of this verdict.

Will Algerians get involved?

The Algerian predicament shows that the political situations faced by the peoples of North Africa and West Asia cannot all be seen in the same light, despite specific similarities. The current protests in Algeria have indeed been in support of changes similar to those demanded in the rest of the region — democratic reform, freedom from corruption, and civil rights. It also bears recall that the last presidential election — in which President Abdel Aziz Bouteflika took 90.2 per cent of the vote — was boycotted by opposition parties, who alleged widespread fraud. A key difference between Algeria and many of its neighbours, however, is that it has relatively free privately owned media organisations, apart from state-run media. Further, television broadcasts from France are widely watched, and internet access is generally unrestricted. Secondly, revenues from recently discovered oil and natural gas reserves have enabled Mr. Bouteflika to subsidise food and award public service staff huge pay rises.

The Algerian street continues to be wary of political involvement, and the protests have been on a much smaller scale than those in neighbouring countries. This caution is understandable in view of their country's terrible legacy of violence. In the liberation struggle against France, more than a million people died before the colonial power left in 1962. Later, the country went through a decade of civil war that followed the annulment of the 1992 election after the first round, which was won by the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS); about 150,000 were butchered. The military regained its political dominance, imposing an emergency that lasted until February 24, 2011. The armed forces continue to be involved in domestic security, and public protest is banned in the capital, Algiers. The President has acted to mollify public anger over inflation and runaway food prices through concessions. While such measures do not address the structural issues of corruption and unemployment, the evidence is that a substantial proportion of the 35 million population continues to be disengaged from public participation. When protest movements struggle to sustain their momentum, the government can claim they have little or no popular support. All this has international ramifications too: the European Union, for example, can maintain trade and economic relations with Algeria without too much controversy. But the clock is ticking. Algerians must show the courage, the clear-sightedness, and the wisdom needed to usher in democratic political reform without blood-letting. This will benefit not just Africa's second largest country but also the region beyond.