Images

For a sexist society, no victim can ever be perfect

Even as we celebrate the verdict in Noor Mukadam's case, we're reminded that judges aren't there to judge morality.
29 May, 2025

The Supreme Court upheld on May 20 the death sentence awarded to Zahir Jaffer in the murder of Noor Mukadam, a move celebrated as a win for women across Pakistan. But even this rare victory was tempered by a dark cloud, courtesy some observations made during the course of the proceedings.

During one hearing, the nature of the relationship between the victim and the perpetrator was brought up by the defence counsel. In response, Justice Hashim Kakar, who headed the bench hearing the appeal, opined that a man and woman living together out of wedlock was against religion and morals. This happens in Europe, not here, he reportedly said.

Judges are not there to judge morality — their only duty is to judge the criminal charge. The observations may have been in response to the defence counsel and said about both the victim and perpetrator, but it is undeniable that women shoulder a larger portion of the assigned blame and stigma when it comes to even the implication of romantic relationships.

It is indefensible that responses to violence against women continue to be dominated by dangerous ideals of the “perfect victim”. The victim’s character is made a central topic in courtrooms, and absurd examples of “western” culture are invoked to question the decision-making of victims.

Words matter

Judges must be more gender sensitive about their language and remarks. From the police to the defence counsel to members of the bench: confronting our judicial system often comes with the worst type of re-victimisation. It does not matter what happens in Europe, it matters how our system treats victims of gender-based violence. Dangerous stereotypes are perpetuated in our judicial decisions.

For example, in Amir Razzaq vs The State (2019), while hearing a case of alleged sexual assault, the Lahore High Court held that the woman was aware of her actions and showed “voluntary participation” while “exercising a choice between resistance and assent and this can be safely assumed given her age and previous matrimonial experience”. A court dismissing a case due to lack of evidence is acceptable. However, the reality is that courts in Pakistan do not just dismiss cases for evidentiary reasons, but perpetuate harmful stereotypes in their decision-making process. A woman’s age or the fact that she has been married before has nothing to do with allegations of sexual violence.

In Muhammad Javed vs The State (2022 PCr. LJ Note 45), the Lahore High Court acquitted a man of rape, and in doing so held, “I am conscious of the fact that age of the victim was about 16 years but for that reason no premium can be given to her because she appeared to be a mature lady who used to work as maid in Lahore….her hymen was old torn.”

Courts continue to bizarrely rely on the ‘maturity’ of a victim, her prior marital status, her relationship with the perpetrator. This has no relevance to cases of sexual violence, and shifts the focus to the victim, when the victim is not on trial. The reasoning in the above cases shows that our courts decide what makes a victim an “actual” victim, and who is more worthy of being considered a victim. This is not justice.

While Noor Mukadam’s case is a stepping stone, it has also once again brought to light the need to confront biases that are deeply embedded within our system.

The ‘perfect victim’

To be considered deserving, “the victim should be physically weaker, there should be no previous relationship, the victim must be acting or doing something considered respectable, and the victim cannot be blameworthy in any way,” wrote Hannah Bows in Revisiting the ‘Ideal Victim’: Developments in Critical Victimology. The approach shifts the burden onto the victims — she shouldn’t have spent the night out, she shouldn’t have been with a man, and she should have known better. Per Catherine MacKinnon, “Virtuous women, like young girls, are unconsenting…rapable”. Whereas, “Unvirtuous women…are consenting, unrapable”.

The ideal victim our society keeps searching for does not exist. By proposing how a victim could or should have acted differently, the implicit suggestion is the brutal crime could have been avoided. The burden must not and cannot be on victims to alter their behaviour.

Women are subjected to gender-based violence in their homes, at their workplace, in the middle of the day, and in the dark of the night. Women are subjected to gender-based violence by family members, acquaintances, and total strangers. Even when a victim does everything right — and in many cases of domestic violence — she is still told it is a ‘private matter’ that does not belong in the courts.

In Muhammad Imran vs. The State (2024), a man accused of rape attempted to rely on a prior relationship with the victim. The accused and the victim had been arrested in an earlier case under a section which criminalises engaging in obscene acts, or singing, reciting or uttering obscene songs in a public place. Justice Ayesha A Malik, dissenting from the majority judgment, held that the prior incident “in no manner…suggests that the Petitioner and the Complainant were involved sexually based on their willingness and consent”. In the same dissent, Justice Malik holds that a victim’s sexual history is irrelevant.

While Justice Malik wrote a dissent, the principle had already been reinforced by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah in 2021. As far as precedent goes, our courts have established that the conduct of the victim is not on trial. Regardless of her past sexual history or moral character, a woman is entitled to equal protection of law.

Since our courts have held that the moral character of a victim is of no relevance in cases of gender-based violence, there is no excuse for judges in the highest court of the land to continue giving sermons on ethics. It is crucial for victims as well as their families to have confidence in the system. It is not just the result that matters; the process of reaching the result is of equal importance. For now, in many respects, the legal process itself constitutes re-victimisation and character assassination of the victim.

Gender sensitisation

In our justice system, cases of gender-based violence are predominantly heard by male judges. It is crucial for judges of the trial court, high courts and Supreme Court to undergo gender sensitisation training. Words matter. Language matters. The atmosphere in the courtroom matters. It makes all the difference. The Constitution guarantees the right to dignity, and the right to privacy.

The right to dignity is an absolute right, for which there are no exceptions. Especially at a time when judicial remarks are widely reported, judges must be mindful of the language they use.

At times, there may be an unconscious bias. It is important for judges to be aware of pre-existing beliefs and stereotypes influencing their conduct. These pre-existing stereotypes must always be questioned.

It is, however, heartening that there is an acknowledgement from male judges regarding the importance of recognising and confronting unconscious bias.

In Shahzad Ahmad vs. The State (2025), Justice Babar Sattar held: “It is equally imperative for a judge to bear in mind, especially while deciding criminal cases involving sexual abuse, that judges, like all human beings, are the products of their own experience and the gender identity of an individual does have a role to play in informing the social consciousness of such individual. Bearing this in mind it is also essential because women are disproportionately represented in the judiciary … A judge must be aware of his own construct of the social reality as a means to preventing his own lived experience from interfering with the discharge of adjudicatory authority.”

Gender sensitisation training is vital to confront the biases that exist, and manifest, in the courtroom. In large part, the shape the legal discourse takes begins with judges. In order to uphold constitutional guarantees of non-discrimination and equality, not only does the judiciary need to be more representative, but sitting judges must also be more gender sensitive. Judges must intervene and manage a hostile courtroom environment when defence counsel crosses the boundaries of acceptable conduct.

Gender-based violence is pervasive, and the cases where the victims or their families manage to fight right till the end are a small exception.

From the investigation to the trial, rather than searching for “perfect victims”, the focus must remain on justice and ensuring the conviction of perpetrators of crime.

Her.

Comments

Zeeshan May 29, 2025 06:52pm
absolutely horrific article, dawn is stooping to new lows day by day, the judge was absolutely right.
Recommend
Taj Ahmad May 29, 2025 07:15pm
As we grow from birth to adulthood, all men’s and women’s must know to respect each other’s until their death. So please be mindful to our duty in this world and be nice to each other during lifetimes. ❤️
Recommend
Ehsan May 29, 2025 07:20pm
A perfect victim in our society is a dead victim
Recommend
Dr. Salaria, Aamir Ahmad May 29, 2025 07:24pm
Why are the judges changing their stance from time to time about identical cases?
Recommend
Laila May 29, 2025 07:56pm
As long as females are considered as second class citizens, property or objects to be controlled/owned/objectified/traded and not treated as equal citizens in our society with agency and autonomy, not given their legal and religious rights, denied justice, safety and protection, expected to always compromise, show patience and always held accountable for all societal and domestic ills with no room for making mistakes or show judgement, whilst males are treat complete opposite, and not held accountable, not raised to be responsible, upright or to be men, but allowed to roam free, do whatever they wish with impunity, because "men will be men" and their victims are shamed and blamed and our society, media, courts and law enforcement remain all complicit, things will never change. As it stands I no longer believe things will change. The disparities, inequity, gender double, honor culture, patriarchy and misogyny will remain deep rooted and rule us. In religion accountability and rules of modesty, morality and piety exist for both. In Pakistan it exist only for females. When women hate women and oppose their empowerment, you know, misogyny has won. We will continue this farce of denial and halt(ignorance). Noors, Zainabs etc will come and go. Some outrage and the forgotten. Until the next case. Any solution to this must emerge from men and women uniting and becoming allies against patriarchy and misogyny. Majority males refuse because they know they will lose power to oppress and even kill females for sake of "honor".
Recommend
Ahmed May 29, 2025 08:07pm
Judges can judge morality if it is enshrined in the penal code as public immodesty. Which it is in our law. Babars words have no value. They make no sense. Woman being raped or murdered is wrong. Her having sex outside marriage is wrong even if done with all her consent.
Recommend
Rishad May 29, 2025 08:33pm
What a brilliant piece of writing. It should reach everyone not only in Pakistan but in South Asia. Reminds me of an Indian movie “Pink” in which the judge simply awarded the verdict in favour of victim by saying “no means no” in every situation. The world will be a better place if lot more men accept this as way forward and better for society.
Recommend
Zeeshan Ahmed May 29, 2025 09:38pm
Amazing how feminists have been silent about the murderer not fitting the conservative stereotype they otherwise propagate.
Recommend
Jaswinder Sandhu May 29, 2025 10:10pm
For his comments "In response, Justice Hashim Kakar, who headed the bench hearing the appeal, opined that a man and woman living together out of wedlock was against religion and morals. This happens in Europe, not here, he reportedly said" justice Kakkar should tender his resignation from this job. He is supposed to make a judgement on the basis of his country's law, not according to any emotions or rituals.
Recommend
rizwan May 29, 2025 10:42pm
This is with reference to the article " For a sexist society, no victim can ever be perfect. In Noor Mokadam case , during one hearing, the nature of the relationship between the victim and the perpetrator was brought up by the defence counsel. It is understood that defence counsel always tries to use all the ways to have some soft corner in the eyes of judges . In response, Justice Hashim Kakar, who headed the bench hearing the appeal, opined that a man and woman living together out of wedlock was against religion and morals. This happens in Europe, not here, he reportedly said...... Here we can say that judges aren't there to judge morality. their only duty is to judge the criminal charge. The victim’s character is made a central topic in courtrooms. Some one can ask even if a woman who has relation with different men, does it means due to her character any one can assault her, torture and kill her. Does her character will work as a shield for the criminal. Should a judge discuss her character in the court, in front of her family, and media people. Can the women organizations and humanitarian organization raise their voices against this behaviour.
Recommend
Sajid May 29, 2025 10:43pm
It's defense job to discredit the victim. Sometime victim is not really the victim and they level allegation that are not true so we should give the benefit of doubt to the accused.
Recommend
M. Saeed May 29, 2025 10:58pm
Justice is believed to have no ears, no eyes and no sentiments. It works only on facts presented, defended convincingly and left to be judged entirely in accordance with books, without any reservations.
Recommend
Yaser May 29, 2025 11:22pm
Men, women, judges, public should all follow Islamic guidelines. Oppressor must be punished, victim should get justice without delay, moral values of society must be up held, any open relationships must be punished, abusive martial relationships must be dealt by Islamic courts as well.
Recommend
The Anonymous May 29, 2025 11:55pm
Though the perpetrator committed a horrendous crime yet this traumatic experience could have been avoided if those who were involved ,including the servants ,followed the golden principles of their religion. Call me an old-school but if pre-marital relationships are forbidden they're for a reason,we shouldn't let our progressive mindset neglect this basic rule.
Recommend
JAMIL SOOMRO May 30, 2025 12:21am
"Women are subjected to gender-based violence in their homes, at their workplace by family members, acquaintances and total strangers." Well said by Rida Hosain.
Recommend
apg May 30, 2025 04:34am
It is strange that with men as judges and jury a women will never get true justice. To understand the mental attitude of a victim, the jury and judges should experience to be in victim's shoes. When women are denied education and treated as baby making factory what else to expect? Thanks apg
Recommend
Ammar Shabir May 30, 2025 08:23am
You are right in your words, but crime harms society. Both fathers should have taken moral responsibility to prevent their children from such a tragedy. If there are restrictions in Islam, they are ultimately meant to ensure safety to some extent. Such incidents don’t happen overnight. Even in Europe, there are preventive laws to reduce crime. Zahir met his fate, but the role of society remains crucial.
Recommend
Fatima May 30, 2025 10:13am
great read
Recommend
shariq May 30, 2025 11:02am
what a pathetic peace of writing - judge is absolutely right - writer is under the influence of western culture - and believe that whatever there is; is best -however, its not - rather discussing the brutal murder of so called modern elite by a west worshipper rather lover. twisting the story that judge said this and that is crazy - shows slavery of western world.
Recommend
zhenga May 30, 2025 12:13pm
The focus should not be on finding "perfect victims" but on justice and ensuring that perpetrators are convicted
Recommend
Laila May 30, 2025 01:25pm
@Ammar Shabir Both fathers? The implication is you are blaming the victims father for not protecting his adult daughter from pursuing a relationship with a man who turned out to be a monster, just because they were not married? Many people in Pakistan get married after they already had a relationship. Even if such relationships are non sexual. For context, many husbands have also raped, tortured and killed their wives. So are fathers also responsible then for not protecting their daughters by not vetting the husbands before marriage? Are fathers also responsible for not protecting their daughters from themselves when they kill their own daughters for "honor"? How about fathers and mothers raise their sons to be decent human beings who don't rape, torture and kill women? Many men dont behave like this. But many do. Let us not shame the victim. If Pakistan was islamic, this society would not be in free fall and corrupt allowing culprits to evade accountability and denying justice to victims every single day. The only person responsible is Zahir himself, and those who enabled him and aided him in covering up his crimes. The crime here is rape, torture, kidnapping and murder. It did happen overnight. Study the case. Not a woman and mans relationship. Zahir has not met his fate. 4 years he has delayed his fate. He will walk free just like other rich murders and criminals do. The above article was written by a barrister. Pay heed to her words, sir.
Recommend
Rukhsana Shama May 30, 2025 01:32pm
Very well said. I often wonder if Zahir Shah would have been convicted if the brutality of his acts was not so obvious and unfortunately I dont find a very positive answer to that.
Recommend
x May 30, 2025 01:33pm
@ Sajid you must be joking??? The victim is not alive to level any allegations because she was brutally murdered. Zahir was convicted of her murder and rape long ago. If you read more about the case, you'll know that the defence made the allegations about her character to imply they were in a relationship and therefore the rape and abduction charges shouldn't stick. zahir deserves no benefit of the doubt, and even if he did, he was proven guilty long ago
Recommend
x May 30, 2025 01:35pm
@ Zeeshan Ahmed who has been silent? no one has been silent at all?
Recommend
x May 30, 2025 01:37pm
@ Ahmed why would Justice Babar's words have no value? He too is a member of the judiciary, whether you like it or not – clearly you don't.
Recommend
rizwan May 30, 2025 02:49pm
" From the investigation to the trial, rather than searching for “perfect victims”, the focus must remain on justice and ensuring the conviction of perpetrators of crime. " Above mention paragraph is the best conclusion and analysis of Noor Mokadam case. The respected judge should have taken the feelings and emotions of victim's family, and could have comment like " Parents should have paid attention to their children's education as well as their social development. " Parents should pay attention to their children's education as well as their social development.
Recommend
Ahmed May 30, 2025 02:52pm
@X They don't have value because he hasn't said anything. They are just words. Don't add anything to the debate. All he said was that there should be no bias. I don't know him personally.
Recommend
Zeeshan Ali May 30, 2025 03:19pm
When you think you know better...
Recommend
Pro West May 30, 2025 03:58pm
Activists are using this case to push an agenda, which no one should object to, whilst at the same time trying to relegate the moral crimes to not even a footnote. I think on the whole the public discourse has been measured, with as usual the imbalance coming from the activists who want to push a secular agenda and normalise such relationships. They should expect a reaction and push back.
Recommend
H.I. May 30, 2025 08:14pm
My sister was murdered by her husband. But through out the police investigation and trial, total focus was on the character of victim and victims family. The absurd kind of questions which were asked by police, lawyers, judges, court staff were a laughing stock for themselves and clearly depict the mentality of this society and sheds clear light that why a women is cold blooded murdered every day in Pakistan.
Recommend
Asad May 31, 2025 05:42am
Gender sensitisation is really important and it can only be ensured if the individuals aspiring to become judges of highest court are trained through such a discourse. Topics like these should regularly be part of Dawn Newspaper, because Nothing but ourselves can Free our Minds
Recommend
Laila May 31, 2025 04:55pm
@Rizwan, Yes, parents should teach their sons to not murder, throw acid on, rape, mutilate, torture, oppress, revile, degrade, abuse, burn or behead females, whether they are family or stranger, whether married or not. Also Rach to find suitable activities at home and not roam the streets, harassing females or running amok with impunity. Teach them common decency and that they don't own females and no means no. It's very simple. End misogyny and patriarchy and stop blaming victims. Respect sanctity of life. In Pakistan, it is always the females fault. Until that narrative changes, new victims every day.
Recommend
Laila May 31, 2025 05:13pm
People need to actually read the article and understand the author is not just some random reporter. Ms Rida Hossain is an accomplished barrister and Advocate of Pakistani High Court with speciality in Constitutional Law and rights. She both knows the law and the courts first hand. She is absolutely right.
Recommend