'Honour Killings' in Pakistan and Compliance of ... - Aurat Foundation

mitigation, compensation for the heirs of the victims were set aside, as the
victims were not ‘masoom ud dam’.
Self defence, as discussed above, was also an exception to qisas. Cases
came forward raising the issue of use of self defence. The courts invoked
the Quranic description of men as being quwwam (superior) over women,
that is, responsible for women including their safeguard and protection.
This concept went further to describe it as the basic right of men to
‘protect the honour of his women and to defend them from outrage,
disgrace and insult’ 35 . The merger of all these concept i.e. of self-defence
and the victim who is not masoom ud dam re-introduced the grave and
sudden provocation exception. In fact, in other cases, it was noted that
although the plea of provocation no longer existed in cases of murder due
to the changes in law, it could still be used as a mitigating circumstance in
cases under tazir 36 .
The Qisas and Diyat Act simply elevated elements of traditional justice to
statutory law and encouraged out-of-court settlements in accordance with
local customs, often involving monetary compensation or exchange of
marriageable girls, although the latter is invalid but not outlawed. While
there were a few forward looking positive cases with regards to honour
killings, the majority of the cases came out with negative conclusions.
Seemingly, the courts took advantage of the confusion to create wide
interpretations, which fit their own conservative and anti-women biases,
as opposed to providing justice equally to all citizens. The result was that
honour killings seldom led to conviction and imprisonment, which could
35 Ali Mohd v. Ali Mohd.
36 Abdul Haque vs the State
30