THE DEATH OF AQSA PERVEZ: A reflection on Canadian Muslim-Pakistanis
Nauman Mir
Updated: 07 January 2008 -This is a modified version of my original article that I posted on 16 December 2007. I have added a new section, section # 2, to the article and have also included endnotes. [NM]
“When the young girl who was buried alive is asked: For what crime was she killed?” (Qur’an 81: 8-9)
[1]
A young Mississauga teenager, Aqsa Pervez, was killed by her father who later called the police and confessed. Mohammad Pervez is in police custody and his case hearings are ongoing [2]. Most media reports have linked Ms. Pervez’s refusal to wear the hijab as the issue that led to her murder.
It is highly unlikely that the hijab was the only issue though the media attention that the hijab has received in this murder case is not surprising. The friend and her family with whom Aqsa stayed the week before her death have indicated that hijab was not a main factor in the dispute between Aqsa and her father [3]. There are several issues that have been raised in the media by this whole affair and it is important to discuss these at some length.
1. Was it an honour killing?
2. Does Islam allow honour killings?
3. What should be done if the hijab is forced upon a girl or woman?
4. Is this a particularly Muslim issue?
5. What is to be done?
I would like to state that I am not a religious or legal authority on any issue. What I am about to say in the following passages is strictly my personal opinion.
1. Honour Killing
Killing girls and women to restore and preserve the family honour has unfortunately been a poisonous tradition that still exists in parts of some Muslim countries. Women are killed for actual or suspected behaviour and actions which are seen as causing loss of face or dishonour to the family. These can include having contact with any male outside the family, having a boyfriend/lover, disagreeing with the family’s choice for spouse, marrying someone against the family’s will, going against family requirements of any kind, having sexual relations outside of marriage (pre-marital or extra-marital), being raped, and many other flimsy reasons. Some have said that the murder of Ms. Pervez was Canada’s first honour killing hinting that perhaps there will be more. From the few details that are available about the case (there is currently a publication ban on the case proceedings) it seems that it was indeed an honour killing. But it was not the first such crime in Canada and those who claim otherwise indeed have short term memory spans. Unfortunately, there have been other similar cases in the past in the Muslim-Canadian as well as other communities. There is no need to go into the details of those other incidents here because my purpose in this article is not to document the incidents of honour killings in Canada, though I intend to write on that separately. From my preliminary research, it seems there have been about a dozen such reported cases of honour killings in the past twenty years in Canada. It is certainly possible that there have been more deaths than the recorded number and each life lost due to such a dishonourable and horrendous act is one too many. But honour killings are neither the norm in Muslim countries nor will they be here in Canada. Ms. Pervez’s family is of Pakistani background. In parts of Pakistan where honour killings do happen, the acts sadly have some unofficial social acceptance that allows people to consider them different from a murder. In urban cities of the country, such killings have also been reported though less than rural areas. At times, they have happened among educated middle class families. It is a sad fact that with some people, even higher education does not change their traditional tribal attitudes related to women and the family. Most Pakistanis however do consider such acts as heinous crimes as do Pakistani-Canadians. So the fear that some try to dispel that Muslims will commit honour killings everywhere in Canada is baseless and absolute non-sense. And that is made clear by the reaction that the Pakistani and Muslim community in Toronto has displayed in response to this murder; one of utter disgust and condemnation of the act.
2. Islam and honour killings
The answer to whether Islam allows honour killings depends on whether you view Islam from a legal perspective or a cultural perspective [4]. Let us discuss both.
From a legal perspective, the sacred texts of Islam (The Qur’an and the Prophet Muhammad’s traditions known as Sunnah) do not address the issue of honour killings. They do not discuss or sanction the issue at all. From this perspective, a male member of a family who has killed a female member has committed murder and murder is punishable by death according to the sacred texts. In other words, Islam does not allow the killing of any person (Muslim or non-Muslim). An oft-repeated verse of the Qur’an sums up Islam’s position: “if anyone kills a person…it shall be as if he killed the entire humanity” (5:32). So theoretically, Islam does not sanction honour killings; it does not allow any man or the state to kill a woman because of supposed loss of “honour”.
From a cultural perspective, it is true that honour killings are an ancient tribal custom that has existed in the Arab and Muslim world for centuries, even before the advent of Islam. So Islam certainly did not start this practice. However, since Islamic texts or Muslim scholars did not explicitly forbid it, the practice remained acceptable in most societies. Here rulers as well as Muslim scholars are to blame. They are the ones who have cultural influence of what is seen as right and wrong in a society and have the power to implement change. But they did no such things as far as honour killings or other issues related to women were concerned. In most societies where Islam became the major religion were and are very patriarchal societies. Though Islam’s written texts seek equity between the sexes, such equity was only minimally implemented in the written laws of Muslim countries or in actual practice. Patriarchy that was deeply entrenched in various cultures before Islam, became even stronger because it was then given religious justification. The major interpretations and exegesis of the Qur’an and Sunnah that were done, even in the 20th century, all were done by men and were done through the prism of sexism, as far as women’s issues were concerned. A re-interpretation of the verses and passages that concern women in particular according to an inclusive non-sexist perspective is especially needed, the process of which was started by Amina Wadud in her excellent book Qur’an and Women: Rereading the Sacred Text from a Woman’s Perspective [5]. I do not mean to give the impression that Muslim women have silently accepted their fate and have not done anything to change it. The opposite is true. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, women’s movements across the Muslim world were successful in gaining many rights for women in their respective societies. But from the late 1970s onwards, women’s rights group have faced tremendous pressure and many defeats on previously won rights because of the rise of Islamic fundamentalism. The last battle of the Cold War (the Afghan war from 1979-1989) was an American war fought with Muslim blood. And it was won because of the strong fundamentalist groups that were created, trained and funded by the governments of the United States, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Egypt. That fundamentalism didn’t remain in a vacuum in Afghanistan. As the 1990s began, a wave of religious fundamentalism (not just Islamic) swept through most parts of the world (including the United States where Christian fundamentalism gained political strength, and it is no surprise that one such fundamentalist currently resides in the White House). One main target of all religious fundamentalisms (be they Muslim, Hindu, Christian or Jewish) is women. They use religious ideology to justify oppressing women and in the case of Islamic fundamentalism, this area has been distinctly pronounced. And it is for this reason that most women’s rights groups in the Muslim world see fundamentalism as their main enemy, not Islam.
From a secular point of view, Islam does give the male more social power in the family institution. It rests the economic responsibility of the family on the male and the domestic responsibility on the female. And it cannot be denied that the way our world is structured, the person who has the economic power inevitably has the social power too in both the private and public spheres. From an Islamic perspective, this is seen as justified because, Islam wants gender equity not equality [6]. Equity implies complimentary but different spheres of influence within the family for both men and women. Equality on the other hand means women being on an equal footing with men without any distinction of roles or spheres. Most progressive interpretations of Islam seek equity. Secular feminism in both the West and the Muslim world seeks equality. Despite this distinction and the fact that Islam gives more social power to the male, it still does not allow a man to kill the womenfolk of his family for any reason whatsoever. So Islam clearly does not allow honour killings but culturally in many countries of the Muslim world, a mixture of an unwritten ancient tribal code of honour has been in practice and validated by cultural interpretations of Islam. These interpretations imply understanding Islam in terms of the culture while ignoring the legal written texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah. A case in point is the debate that has ensued in Jordan’s parliament over honour killings where the government backed religious leaders have tried to change the penal code to criminalize honour killings but have faced hard opposition from Islamic fundamentalist MPs who see honour killings as part of Jordanian and Islamic culture and thus changing the practice as an attack on Islam [7]. Here is a good example of scholars interpreting Islam legally and thus condemning honour killings and fundamentalists interpreting Islam culturally and seeing honour killings as a man’s right or at most a minor crime which can be punished with a light jail sentence. Both sides claim that Islam is on their side but it is generally the cultural interpretation that seems to be more widespread amongst people who consider honour killings to be justified.
Due to a whole variety of reasons (not mentioned here) secular feminism has very low popularity in the Arab and Muslim world at the moment. It gained some popularity in the 1960s and 1970s, but since the 80s, it has become widely suspect and is seen even by many Muslim women as being a Western ideology that is perhaps not suited best to a Muslim environment. Given the current social and political environment in the Muslim world, the approach that many Muslim women have taken to gaining better social and legal treatment for women is through a progressive, non-sexist legal re-interpretations of the sacred texts of Islam that form the backbone of the law be it in countries where Sharia law is practiced or where separate legal codes exist which have been influenced by both Sharia and ancient customs of the particular country. In my personal opinion, secular feminism (with all its flaws) is what would provide true equality to Muslim women, but that is an ideal. One has to see the situation on the ground; whether a particular ideology will actually work in a given environment and it seems Islamic feminism [8] (feminism that seeks an egalitarian interpretation of Islam) is the approach that seems to work more. So despite the fact that legally Islam does not condone the practice of honour killing and culturally it has acceptance in many Muslim societies, it is the legalistic Islamic approach that is being used in order to bring about effective change in the laws concerning honour killings. Thankfully, there are many people in Muslim countries who are trying to stop honour killings clearly because they consider it morally wrong and a disgrace upon the name of Islam. It is a long struggle but with persistence, it will bring change for the better. The real challenge however is changing the cultural attitudes towards honour killings; that is not an easy task because ideas that have been held for centuries cannot be changed in the blink of an eye. And it is not just the lack of formal education that is the cause of such attitudes. As stated earlier, honour killings have some social acceptance even in educated middle class people. Only social education alongside formal education has the potential to change people’s attitudes towards honour killings. This is an extremely slow process but it is the only way forward to bring about change.
3. Hijab
The second question has led some like Canadian columnist Barbara Kay (of the right-wing newspaper National Post) to suggest that the hijab should have been banned here in Canada like it was in France [9]. She even goes to say that it might have prevented Aqsa’s death and she thinks it is apt-time to ban it now so such crimes do not happen again. “Progressive” Muslim Tarek Fatah of the Canadian Islamic Congress agrees with Kay and has written on the death of Ms. Pervez. He too suggests that the hijab ban is the real solution to ending honour killings and adds that it is the rise in Muslim extremism that is leading to honour killings [10]. I do not defend extremism of any religion but it has to be kept in mind that honour killings existed long before Muslim extremism began to rise from 1979 onwards. Thankfully, this perverted line of thinking is not widespread in Toronto or the rest of Canada.
The orientalist ignited fascination with this Muslim garment does not seem to end as the centuries go by. Rather as humanity progresses further into modernity, the fascination with the hijab keeps increasing, especially in the West.
It is a symbol of respect, faith, and honour for some and a symbol of oppression, tradition, and patriarchy for others. Some Muslim girls and women choose to wear it or not, others are forced to wear it implicitly by the weight of tradition or explicitly by family members. Those who are more traditional seem to think it mandatory while others consider it a matter of choice. In such a situation, the position that Canada currently holds on the issue of hijab is the right one; to leave the choice to the individual. For any state to intervene and make it either mandatory to veil or unveil goes against fundamental rights of the individual. Those who propose banning the hijab seem to not notice that they are acting exactly in the way religious fundamentalists would act. Islamic fundamentalists want to force Muslim women to wear the hijab; “Freedom” fundamentalists (like Kay, the French government, or Fatah) want to force Muslim women to not wear the hijab. Both fundamentalists want to impose their choice upon Muslim women and are unwilling to give them any autonomy to exercise their free will. Both think that Muslim women obviously don’t know what is good for them and thus they have to be decided for.
I can almost hear your question reader; but what about those women who are forced to wear the hijab either implicitly or explicitly? Allowing a safe counselling environment where young Muslim girls can discuss such issues with their parents would be a good start. Even if that does not work, at least having programs where girls can discuss these issues individually with a counsellor or peer-group can help. To have school teachers better trained in providing help with such issues to students is also important. If someone is suffering silently from any issue at home, generally there are signs that he or she will display at school which teachers can notice if they look. Many will remain silent unless asked or until they know there is a person they can talk to who can guide them to make decisions on their own. It is the girls and women who should be given the freedom to make their choices. To force women to either veil or unveil is not the solution.
4. A Muslim Issue?
Aqsa Pervez was a Muslim Pakistani-Canadian girl. But her killing by her father is not a Muslim or Pakistani issue only. It is clearly a case of domestic violence intertwined with inter-generational conflict. Both of these social problems are not particular to Muslims or Pakistanis. Domestic violence against girls and women is an issue that inflicts all communities that make up Canada and there should be zero-tolerance for it. We all have responsibility in relation to this issue. The Muslim and South-Asian community however does need to acknowledge more that this issue actually exists within our own families. There is considerable denial that is mainly due to the brushing aside of any problem that will make “us” look bad in front of “them”. The first path to resolving any issue is accepting the fact that the issue exists and then finding solutions in a collective way. I do not mean to de-emphasize honour killings by considering them part of domestic violence. All domestic violence stems from the men trying to assert their authority over the girls and women and honour killing is an extreme expression of that authority. In many Muslim countries, the way honour killings happen cannot be confined to just domestic violence because at times, the tribe or the extended family is involved in the crime. The way honour killings have happened in the West, generally tend to be in the home and the larger community is not involved, which is why I consider them as part of domestic violence.
The inter-generational conflict is also one that affects all parents and teenagers the world over. From the details that are emerging, it seems that like any teenager, Ms. Pervez wanted more independence in her life, she had wanted to move out of the family house and the week before her murder, had been staying at a friend’s house. She was not non-religious but wanted less restrictions in her lifestyle. The urgings of rebellion that she felt are those that every teenager goes through. She wore clothing like those of her friends at school in a desire to fit in not because of her different cultural background but because all teenagers feel the need to fit in and be more like their friends. Being part of the group is an obsession that all of us have experienced to varying degrees in our youth. A big part of that rebellion is appearance. Teenagers want to dress in a way that is acceptably “cool” which translates as follows: wear the opposite of everything your parents like. Most girls of that age want to wear make-up, tighter clothes, etc., which most parents understandably disapprove of. In the case of immigrant children, the only difference is that such behaviour of teenagers is seen as loss of the culture of the mother country and that makes parents feel helpless and insecure. Though that is understandable, immigrant communities (and I speak here particularly of the Muslim Pakistani-Canadian community) need to acknowledge and understand that it is unrealistic to expect our children to not be influenced at all by the society they live in. Yes, they should be taught the ideas and traditions that make up our heritage but we have to understand that they will be different from the children growing up in our mother country. The word ‘different’ in the previous line does not necessarily mean that it is a bad thing. Living in any society is like sailing through the sea in a small boat. No matter how much you protect yourself, you will get a little wet from the water. Similarly, society will have its influence on you and it should In order to make us and our children productive member of society.
Other than that, only time, understanding, and culturally sensitive support groups for both adults and teens can resolve inter-generational conflict that affect all immigrants. Will both parties be happy with the resolution? Maybe or maybe not. But both the parent and the teenager can finally come to some understanding eventually. The extreme measures taken by Mohammad Pervez are clearly unacceptable for which he will be rightfully punished.
5. What is to be done?
Looking at photos of Aqsa Pervez that her friends have posted on Facebook groups in her memory, it seems she was a lively girl, loved by friends, and full of life. Sadly, a life cut short by the most dishonourable of acts. It is still being decided in court whether her father will be charged with first or second degree murder.
As Canadians, we have to accept this unfortunate incident as a reminder that domestic violence against girls and women takes many shapes. There should be no tolerance for it. More social and culturally sensitive youth programs that are well-funded need to be there and should be well publicized to help members of our communities whenever they need it.
As Muslims and Pakistani-Canadians, we have to openly accept that there is domestic violence in our community against girls and women and we cannot deny it. It obviously brings shame to the community as a whole when we lose a member like Aqsa Pervez so tragically to an honour killing. We should openly say first to our own community and then to others that the practice of honour killing is un-Islamic. Yes, it unfortunately exists in our mother country but we want it to end and should work towards educating our own communities about the horrors of this terrible practice.
As parents, we need to understand and acknowledge that though we face issues and problems in accommodating our values and beliefs in Canada, our children deserve even more understanding and support because they are caught between two distinct worlds; one inside the home and one outside neither of which is completely “perfect”. But we shouldn’t make things more difficult for say a young daughter or sister who is already trying to fit in with her friends and is also trying to keep up with her parents’ expectations. It is not a very comfortable or easy issue for her to deal with on a daily basis. If we imagine being in her place, we can better understand her point of view and thus know how to resolve problems when they arise.
One hopes for tragedies like that of Aqsa Pervez to never happen but when they do, they inevitably bring communities together and remind us of our weaknesses as a society. Let us reflect and learn so that such tragedies can be prevented in the future.
ENDNOTES
[1] All Qur’anic verses mentioned here are from Yusuf Ali, A. (trans.) The Meaning of the Holy Qur’an (Brentwood, Maryland: Amana Corporation, 1989)
[2] “Teen Dead after Alleged Attack by Father” CBC News [11 December 2007]
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2007/12/11/teen-attacked.html
[3] “Aqsa Pervez Mourned” The Edmonton Journal [16 December 2007]
http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/story.html?id=4b0875ae-dada-4e47-8cd7-10d8e62aa614&k=93596
[4] This distinction is made in Yotam Feldner, “’Honor’ Murders – Why the Perps Get off Easy” Middle East Quarterly Vol. VII, Number 4, December 2000 http://www.meforum.org/article/50
[5] Wadud, A. Qur’an and Women: Rereading the Sacred Text from a Woman’s Perspective (New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1999)
[6] I take this distinction between equity and equality from Dr. Jamal Badawi. He explicates it as follows. “The term "equity" is used instead of the more common expression "equality," which is sometimes misunderstood to mean absolute equality in each and every detailed item of comparison rather than overall equality. Equity is used here to mean justice and overall equality in the totality of rights and responsibilities of both genders and allows for the possibility of variations in specific items within the overall balance and equality. It is analogous to two persons possessing diverse currencies amounting for each person, to the equivalent of US $1000. While each of the two persons may possess more of one currency than the other, the total value still comes to US $1000 in each case. It should be added that from an Islamic perspective, the roles of men and women are complementary and cooperative rather than competitive.” [bold emphases in original] Footnote in Badawi, J. Gender Equity in Islam: Basic Principles (Plainfield, Indiana: American Trust Publications, 1995) p. 55.
[7] Yotam Feldner, “’Honor’ Murders – Why the Perps Get off Easy” Middle East Quarterly Vol. VII, Number 4, December 2000 http://www.meforum.org/article/50
[8] Margot Badran discusses this term and its implication in detail in the following article. Margot Badran, “Islamic Feminism: What’s in a name?” Al-Ahram Weekly Online [17-23 January 2002]
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2002/569/cu1.htm
[9] Barbara Kay, “How Canada Let Aqsa Down” National Post [12 December 2007]
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2007/12/12/barbara-kay-how-canada-let-aqsa-down.aspx
[10] Tarek Fatah & Farzana Hassan, “The Deadly Face of Muslim Extremism” National Post [12 December 2007] http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=162281
Labels: aqsa pervez, canada, feminism, fundamentalism, honour killings, mississauga, muslim women, muslims, toronto