September 7 – that’s the date everyone who is following Lubna Ahmed al-Hussein case in Sudan will be watching out for. Lubna Hussein has a date with a court in Khartoum – the third time – which is hearing a charge against her for indecent dressing in public under Article 152 of the Sudanese criminal laws. If found guilty, she could be punished with 40 lashes of the cane. She was arrested for wearing a pair of trousers at a restaurant.
A widow and former journalist, she was working with the UN Mission in Sudan when she was arrested. She claimed trial, but at her first court hearing a month ago, the judge adjourned it for a month in order to seek clarification from the the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on whether Lubna Ahmed al-Hussein had immunity from prosecution. On hearing this, Lubna Hussein said: “I told him that I respect the agreement between the Sudan government and the UN, and because of that I will resign from the UN, so I don’t violate the agreement and that’s what happened. I have resigned from the UN because I belong to this nation, and because there are ten of thousands of women who are being lashed every day and the have no immunity and don’t work for the UN.”
Last week the case came up for a second hearing before the court. However the judge adjourned it again, this time to September 7. Lubna Ahmed al-Hussein told Reuters this: “They want to check with the UN whether I have immunity from prosecution. I don’t know why they are doing this because I have already resigned from the United Nations. I think they just want to delay the case.” she told Reuters. The judge apparently wanted the UN Mission in Sudan to confirm that it had accepted Lubna Hussein’s resignation.
There appeared to be some behind the scene maneuvering to try and find a face saving formula for the government to drop the case against Lubna Hussein. Options proferred include asking her to claim UN immunity, and having her give an undertaking not to wear trousers in public again. But Lubna Ahmed al-Hussein has rejected all these.
What will the verdict be on September 7? There are at least 2 possibilities. One is that the trial will be postponed again, because the date is right in the middle of the holy month of Ramadan. Ramadan is when Muslims are supposed to renounce violence and refrain from all intolerant behaviour, dedicating the fast to peaceful contemplation. This is what happened to Malaysian model Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno who was sentenced to 6 lashes of the cane for drinking alcohol in public. Her caning was deferred because of Ramadan, and her case is now under judicial review.
A second possible outcome is for the judge to rule that she has immunity afterall. This could be based on the fact that at the time of her arrest she was employed by the UN Mission in Sudan, and she had immunity from prosecution at that time. Her subsequent resignation from the UN Mission in Sudan is therefore, arguably, not a factor in determining whether she has immunity or not.
Think about it. At the end of the day, the whole case is about whether women can wear trousers or not. Why should this be a case punishable by caning? If Article 152 of the Sudanese criminal law is based on Syriah law, then why were non Muslims women arrested at the same place with Lubna Hussein also caned? And if it is based on Syriah law, does it provide for caning for wearing trousers? Lubna Hussein is disputing this. Now we await the court’s judgment.
Related posts:
Sudan Woman Caning Case – Update
Why Different Standards For Caning?
Caning Case – Latest Developments
Sharia law is just evil. Anyone who thinks sharia law is ok seriously needs their head examined.
I hope sharia law CEASES to exist.
Can’t wait to see what the court’s verdict is. This world sometimes tend to get so legalistic that the laws of Man is so unreasonable and distorts the truth.