What
lessons do we learn from Du’a’s murder?
Ata Mala Karim UK
30 Apr. 07
Du’a Khalil Aswad, the 17 year old Yezidi Kurdish girl was murdered by stoning to death for the so-called
honour killing on or around
7 April 2007, according to a public statement by
the
Amnesty
International on 27 April
2007. Honour killing is not new and it
is not limited to a certain ethnicity, nationality, religion or region, but it
has been practised in many parts of the world. It is apparent that these kinds
of killings are widely practiced in Eastern and especially Muslim communities;
however, there are evidences of other cultures such as Sikh and recently Yezidi
religion.
The case of Du’a
was one of the cruelest killings of this kind as she was stoned to death by a
group of eight or nine men, according to Amnesty International, at the presence
of a huge crowd of hundreds of people in the town of Bashika,
near the city of Mosul.
However, the video film which was widely published on the internet and the wide
media reactions to this brutal killing, made it to look as a unique crime which
have never been heard about it before. The bitter reality is that this crime is
not unique as there are many crimes which go under carpet because there is
nobody to film it or report it. Nowadays, at the age of information and
globalization, technology and media can reach many remote parts of the world,
people may hear or see things that otherwise they could not hear about it at
all, or at least until few years later.
The Amnesty International declares that:
There
are frequent reports of "honour crimes" in Iraq - in particular in the
predominantly Kurdish north of the country. Most victims of "honour
crimes" are women and girls who are considered by their male
relatives and others to have shamed the women's families by immoral behaviour.
Often grounds
for such accusations are flimsy and no more than rumour.
These kinds of
crimes have deep roots in our culture, in our way of thinking, in our
relationship with women and in our general view of the role of women in the society.
It can be argued that, there is no one single reason for them or one single
group, religion or ethnicity which can be held responsible for such crimes. It
is a notion of power and control from men over women. Geraldine Bedell, in an
article published in the Guardian, Sunday 21 November 2004, states that:
There is a
deeply embedded notion in our culture that men experience passion, while women
excite it - which meant that, until recently in Britain, men who killed their wives
could claim provocation. There is also a common idea that it is possible
to own another human being.
Although,
nowadays many good people condemn these acts, however the unjust treatment of
women by men is still widely accepted. There are few women and girls who revolt
against the norms of the traditional society, otherwise the outcome could be
much more. This could be now more widened because of the imbalance development
of the information technology which does not come in line with the traditions
of some communities. To be more specific, satellite dishes and internet
connections reach every corner of the globe; however, the other necessities of
economic, cultural, educational and social development remain as they were
decades ago. This imbalance development may bring clashes between people or
generations, and may stimulate acts which are not accepted by the traditional
society and cause chaotic incidents. At
the same time, women are also responsible for a great deal of these acts. Women
were supporters, whistleblowers or even perpetrators in many occasions. Aisha
Gill of the University
of Surrey noted, from her
work experience with South Asian women, that ‘female loyalty to honour-related
violence is deemed to be a sign of warmth and goodness. Women in
particular are brought up to believe that the welfare of the group should take
precedence over that of the individual’. Although this view is about the South
Asian women but it exactly fits the position of the Kurdish women in the
traditional society also. Bedell argues that honour killing is about the
position of women in the society in general:
"Honour
killing is not about one woman, or about 10, it is about an entire
gender," Diana Nammi says. "What honour killing does is to make
women's lives conditional - on wearing the right clothes, on not speaking too
loudly, on not being seen with the wrong person, not even being the subject of
rumour, for rumour is enough to stain the family's honour.
Honour killing
is mostly accepted by the community, or at least by the majority of members of
that community as a ‘collective decision’ on those women who violate the
traditional values of their community. Many states, openly or tacitly may
sanction honour killing, however they may close an eye on the act, as Bedell
mentioned:
The Turkish
penal code has no specific clause relating to honour killing, but the judiciary
commonly hands down lesser sentences or even acquittals where there is
"assault on a family member's manhood." The Jordanian penal code
specifically accepts that the "purifying" of wrong to a tribe is
necessary: when honour killings come to court (which they do infrequently), the
sentence averages about 6 months.
In The Kurdish
region of Iraq,
it can be argued that there are many developments and many respectful people have
been working to eradicate honour killing and to abolish such an excuse and make
murder the only word for killing a human being, no matter be a male or female.
However, as Amnesty International reported, ‘while the Kurdish authorities
introduced legal reforms to address “honour killings” they have, however,
failed to investigate and prosecute those responsible for such crimes’. The reason is that legislation and law are
not sufficient and there are much to be done in order to change the mentality
of the legislators, politicians, leaders, police and the wider community
towards women’s position in the society. In this respect, it can be argued that
the problem of honour killing is the responsibility of us all. We are all
guilty for the deliberate killings of women and girls as long as it finds
grounds in the society and we cannot do something about it. The victims of
honour killings, even in the Western societies rarely receive the justice they
deserve:
What is it about
the power of shame that drives a father, brother, even a mother to slaughter a
close family member? In the UK alone, 117 murders are being
investigated as "honour killings." But over-sensitivity to
cultural differences means that many victims are denied the justice that they
deserve.
It is virtually
impossible to estimate the international scale of honour killings; the UN has
estimated as 5000 cases a year, however, there are so many cases go unreported
or unregistered. Bedell continues to comment on honour killings as part of an
international injustice against women, by saying that:
Honour killings
are, clearly, specific to certain communities. But not so long ago,
British women could be locked in mental asylums for getting pregnant out of
wedlock; in living memory in the UK, it was preferable to have a daughter who
was mad than one who was bad.
However, these
reports and not brought here for making an excuse for honour killing and making
it more acceptable and normalizing it. The aim behind it is that honour killing
cannot be eradicated by legislations or campaigns only. It is a social
construction that, unfortunately, supported by many people, despite the wider
condemnation of a single brutal killing which is filmed and published. Honour
killing should be eradicated in the mentality of our children, in the daily
routine of our young girls and boys and in the streets, markets and
neighbourhoods, through better education and teaching the principles of a
civilised society. If we only react to a video film or a brutal killing and
neglect the daily incidents which indicate that there are grounds for such
acts, we cannot learn any lessons from any honour murder, including Du’a’s.
Many groups campaign for women rights but they need more support from
governments and the public:
The most effective
campaigners against honour killings have been South Asian, Middle Eastern and
Kurdish women. Murder is murder and, as Mike O'Brien pointed out when he
was Home Office minister, in the matter of honour killings, multiculturalism
has too often become an excuse for "moral blindness." [Bedell,
2004]
These acts can
be abused for other ends and by other groups who could be in favour of such
killings if it happens to them. They may answer killing by killing innocent
people because they belong to that religion or group. The Amnesty International
reported the killing of ‘23 Yezidi workers’, as retaliation by a ‘Sunni armed
group’, as the statement announced, which means that there are people who try
to use such acts as an excuse for their sectarian or tribal hatred. Du’a’s
murder is not the first and there are no indications to show that it will be
the last. In order to eradicate honour killings in a society different
government and non-government agencies should work together in order to control
the mentality which provide the ground for such atrocity to grow. The
government, it is argued has a big responsibility to organize investigation
committees and to enforce law and order, however government decision or law is
not sufficient if it is not supported by a wider sector of the society, Bedell
concludes by saying:
In the end,
honour killings will only be eradicated when power over women is not seen as
central to a man's self-respect, and domination of women and girls is not seen
as reassuring social glue.