As per the statistics collected from all over Pakistan, How many men killed women for honor killings and how many women killed their men for honor killing in last year alone ?
Many men have been killed in honour killings.....Not by the women but by the relatives of the women. In Sindh, where there is a
Kari, there is always a
Karo. So you want to protect the
Kari but leave the
Karo at the mercy of his opponents? (I know it's about Punjab but I gave an example).
And FYI, many men kill their wives/Ex GF's in the West as well, it's not called honour killing though but the motive/reasons for those murders are pretty much similar.
There are always two sides to a story. You cannot make sweeping statements based on one side only. In Pakistan, in some incidents, women threw acid on the faces of men however, most people applauded their actions instead of condemning them just because the males had cheated them. At times, there are emotional reasons for domestic abuse as well, because sometimes the women tend to cheat as well.
As I said above, you have already assumed that every man is abusive and every woman is oppressed....While completely ignoring other possibilities/circumstances.
And for domestic abuse and honor killings, laws were already enforced. Instead of strengthening those laws, Punjab Govt has done a funny thing.
1. Eviction of the abusive husband from the house, irrespective of who owns it, is meant to be a protection for the wife and a deterrent for the perpetrator of the crime. A woman should not have to worry about where she will have to sleep and live (especially if there are children involved) after reporting an abusive husband to the police. The fact of the matter is that in most societies, especially Pakistan, men will be safer and more easily able to find accommodation outside their own home than women will. The burden on children who will have to also leave the house with the wife to escape an abusive husband will be enormous. The law, while not being perfect on this particular point, is taking the least damaging route in requiring the husband accused of abuse to be evicted.
Laws were already there for domestic violence. I don't know why the proponents of this bill are assuming that Pakistan was a lawless country having no laws for the victims of domestic abuse. There was a need to strengthen those laws which already existed instead of going through the hassle of formulating new ones. You have already assumed that every thing will be fair and free, but it won't be like that. It's not always the man who is at fault, although the image of Pakistan in the West is that we oppress our women and throw acid on their faces. You are only considering the ideal condition with the application of this law. Laws were already there for domestic violence which were already giving the females certain advantages, like making the husband pay compensation to his wife etc.
Small issues of husband/wife won't be resolved by throwing the man out of his house just because he will be able to find a place to sleep. A man who could have been counseled would be more abusive after being kicked out of his house. Woman will escape her abusive husband---forever. There will be more divorces. There are many emotional, psychological and societal issues related with the application of this law which can't be ignored. Many couples who used to fight, finally adjust with each other with the passage of time as an understanding is developed but this law will only distance the husband from his wife.
And it's not always the man who is at fault. Issues are sorted out by talking to each other, not by maintaining a distance.
2. Confiscating the firearms of any individual suspected of violence and abuse is the correct thing to do. Domestic abuse situations involve extremely high emotions, especially if children are involved. The government cannot take the risk of an alleged abuser using firearms in a fit of rage.
And what if a property dispute or tribal fued is going on ? The man who loses his firearm will be at the mercy of his opponents.
There must be a strict criteria for declaring someone a psychotic, not just a lame accusation.
3. Tracking bracelets are in fact a good option if the courts determine that the abusive husband poses a significant enough threat to the victim. The law doesn't automatically mandate their use but appears to leave it to the courts.
Only if he poses a significant threat to the victim. However you are ignoring the possible abuse of this law.
In my view arranged marriages are a significant part of the problem with respect to the opposition to the law you are seeing from some quarters. All this talk about ' the wife will do X just so she can get the husband evicted' only makes sense in the context of an emotionally barren or emotionally negative husband and wife relationship.
Most of the love marriages end up in a break-up in Pakistan---You will come to know this fact if you visit a
kechehri.
Most of the arranged marriages are successful, as the family members intervene and are able to talk sense into the couple before any mishap.
Arranged marriages are significant part of the problem only if the young ones want to marry someone else, which is not always the case.
so bro what are you saying is just to provide security to one gender its right to take few of the most basic rights of other gender. thats outright sexism have you read the bill it say that it can even restrict the sale of property on abuse grounds.do you think it is fare to attack right of one gender to provide preferential treatment to other.i think it is wrong and government should find other ways to overcome this problem instead of taking away one genders right.
they have a good alternative in the bill in which they can make husband pay for his wife rental expense if she had to evict the house thats far better option as it held husband accountable for his action while protecting his rights and giving his wife a proper place to live.
my point remove the eviction clause if property is solely owned by husband.
you can't force anyone to wear gps tracker unless he is under house arrest it is invasion of his privacy unless he is a national security risk you can't legally invade his privacy .
bro i know all of you guys means good but we can't undermine one gender to provide rights to the other we have to protect rights of both genders that the purpose of legal system it should be equal for every one. it the government law makers responsibility to find the middle ground
so does it make it right to take away our rights because our gender don't get killed enough.bro do make female feel safe but don't take our rights in the process.
so if the marriage is emotionless the only possible explanation for this can be that husband wants it that way.
have ever though that the marriage are also be forced on guys.pressure is exerted not as much as females but still it is enough in many cases to force him to marry a girl he never liked.i have seen few cases through my own eyes where a father forced his son to marry his cousin of he should get ready to pack his bags.bro i doesn't mean if one gender is suppressed for centuries now you should start suppressing other one for the compensation.its equality that should prevail now
The proponents of this bill have already assumed that it's
always the fault of men.
