While the world is fixated on the case of Malaysian model Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno who was caught by religious police for drinking alcohol in public and sentenced to 6 lashes of the cane plus a fine, let’s not forget that another woman is also facing caning in Sudan. But there are differences in these 2 cases.
Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno pleaded guilty, paid the fine, wants to be caned and refused to appeal against the caning sentence. Sudanese widow Lubna Ahmed al-Hussein, a former journalist who last worked for the media department of the UN Mission in Sudan was charged under Article 152 of Sudanese law which imposes 40 lashes for anyone “who commits an indecent act which violates public morality or wears indecent clothing.” She was wearing a pair of trouser at a restuarant on July 3. Unlike Kartika, Lubna Hussein pleaded not guilty and she intends to appeal if the judgement goes against her.
While Kartika wants her caning to be carried out in public to educate others against drinking alcohol in public, Lubna Hussein wants the remove caning from Sudanese law. To that end, Lubna Hussein voluntarily waived her immunity as a UN worker by resigning from the UN Missions. She said she is ready to fight this case all the way to the Constitution Court, adding: ”And if the constitutional court says the law is constitutional, I’m ready to be whipped not 40 but 40,000 times.”
Lubna Hussein feels that Article 152 discriminates against women and should be repealed. On the day of her trial there was a rare and unauthorized public protest outside the Khartoum court room. Dozens of protestors, both men and women, carried banners declaring “No return to the dark ages” and “Lubna’s case is a case for all Sudanese women” protested until they were dispersed by tear gas firing and baton wielding riot police.
Why do people protest? One woman protestor, Zainab Badradin, said: “We are against this law. It is against women, against Islam and against human rights.” Added Nusayba Abdel Mahmoud, who wore a pair of jeans to the protest rally: “I want to send a message to the government to stop harassing women. This is what I wear. It is normal.” Lubna Hussein, who joined the protestors later outside the courtroom wearing the same clothes when she was first arrested said: ”I want to change this law, because this law doesn’t match in constitution. It is important that people know what is happening.”
Perhaps the last words should go to Lubna Hussein: “If some people refer to the sharia to justify flagellating women because of what they wear, then let them show me which Koranic verses or hadith (sayings of the Prophet Mohammed) say so. I haven’t found them.” The case has been adjourned till September 7.
Earlier posts:
Why Different Standards For Caning?
Model Caning Case – Latest Developments
You know, after reading all of this, I wonder why can’t Islamic law be agreed by all Islamic nations!
I was watching TV1 during Malaysia’s National Day celebration, many Muslim women left their head uncovered on national television, and they weren’t criticized nor were they caned.
I’ve seen Muslims men consuming alcohol and smoking away publicly in Melaka and there weren’t even a big fuss. Weren’t alcohol forbidden in Islam completely?
Sigh, if you ask me, I say humans (male or females, does it matter still?) seem to enjoy using religion as an excuse to smooth their own PERSONAL egos.
there is no point in caning these people, what i feel is that they are drawing the world’s attention via willingly going with the punishment.
I wonder what is the point these two governments are trying to make here. And is their interpretation of the religious law correct.