DATA gathered by the Sindh Mental Health Authority over the last five years reveals that the largest number of suicides in the province occur in Thar, followed by Mirpurkhas district. According to the SMHA, a total of 767 suicides were reported in the province over the last five years. Out of them, 79 were reported from Thar while 70 were reported from Mirpurkhas. These findings were shared at a seminar in Karachi on Thursday. Speakers agreed that though the SMHA figures may provide a vague idea of the prevailing trends, the actual number of suicides in the province is much higher than reported. There could be several reasons for this: first, SMHA officials gathered data only from the district health offices and the police department, and missed those reported at private hospitals and facilities. Besides, they did not even conduct a cursory survey of suicides reported in the media. Second, apart from being a taboo subject, suicide is also illegal in Pakistan. Most families are reluctant to report it for fear of social stigma. In fact, the DIG Administration, who represented the provincial police department at the event, called the findings “unrealistic”, stating that the actual rate of suicide was far higher, including in Mirpurkhas district where he had been posted for several years.
It is sad that neither the government nor the public acknowledges mental health issues in society, let alone discusses treatment. Even if steps are taken, they are ad hoc and ineffective, and fall short of producing any lasting change. The SMHA study, unfortunately, reflects the same structural problem. Though the suggestions that emerged in the discussion, including the training of health workers to spot mental illnesses, access to psychological counselling and psychiatric treatment and training police officials to track suicide cases, are sound, they can only be acted upon once the true extent of the problem is known. For that, SMHA officials will have to carry out a detailed district-wise study of the number of suicides and their apparent causes.
An enlightened verdict
“A WOMAN, whatever her sexual character or reputation may be, is entitled to equal protection of law. No one has the licence to invade her person or violate her privacy on the ground of her alleged immoral character.” In a patriarchal society where a woman’s worth, often her very life, is premised on her perceived reputation and chastity, these words by the Supreme Court are no less than revolutionary.
They remind the criminal justice system that dignity is inherent, it is inviolable, and a woman’s sexual history has no bearing whatsoever on her credibility as a witness/complainant. Indeed, the landmark ruling — in a review petition filed by three men convicted of rape — which was released on Thursday, goes further. It holds that “reporting sexual history of a rape survivor amounts to discrediting her independence, identity, autonomy and free choice thereby degrading her human worth and offending her right to dignity guaranteed under Article 14.”
In other words, the character assassination that rape survivors are often made to endure at the hands of the defence is in itself illegal and unconstitutional. Harrowing legal proceedings are a major reason why women either balk at reporting rape in the first place or give up pursuing justice halfway through the trial.
The verdict authored by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah also notes the gender bias in medico-legal reports that freely resort to expressions such as “habituated to sexual intercourse”, “woman of loose moral character”, “non-virgin”, etc to describe the alleged victim. Echoing a judgement by the Lahore High Court in January this year that banned the humiliating ‘two-finger test’ of alleged rape victims, the apex court ruling says that physical examination of a rape complainant should only be done to determine whether the crime of rape was committed against her, “not to determine her virginity or chastity”. Indeed, even a sex worker can be subjected to rape, and she too has a legitimate expectation that law enforcement will investigate her complaint properly, apprehend the culprit and put him on trial.
Of course, it will take time for attitudes to shift in this misogynistic society, where women’s agency and autonomy are seen as alien concepts, where women are considered repositories of male honour, and where many of them have paid with their lives for believing they have the right to spurn unwanted suitors. However, the Supreme Court’s words matter; its decisions have weight.
When the highest court in the land takes such an unequivocal stance on a woman’s inherent right to dignity, without pandering to regressive notions of ‘culture’ and ‘tradition’, it cannot but nudge society a little more towards a humane ideal. Consider this was once a country where women who could not bring four witnesses to the crime of rape against them could be charged with adultery and thrown into jail. And rejoice at how far we have come.
Weak prosecution
THE detailed verdict of the Supreme Court in the Daniel Pearl case has once again established the poor state of investigation and prosecution in Pakistan. The judgement, authored by Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, pointed out clearly the prosecution’s failure to prove the guilt of Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh who is the prime accused in the murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl.
The Sindh High Court had last year overturned Sheikh’s conviction and the family of Pearl had appealed to the Supreme Court. The detailed verdict of the Supreme Court is a direct indictment of the prosecution and should put the system to shame. The verdict says that regarding each and every piece of evidence, there was uncertainty on the part of the witnesses and it was a settled matter that the benefit of the doubt would apply to the accused. The verdict states that the evidence furnished during the trial was full of factual and legal defects.
There is little doubt that Sheikh is a dangerous terrorist. His track record of criminality ranges from kidnapping to blackmailing and murder. He has hoodwinked the authorities multiple times and committed horrendous terror crimes. The fact that Pakistan’s criminal justice system cannot prove the guilt of such a man even after keeping him in a death cell for two decades speaks volumes for the state of the system. The unfortunate reality is that despite this dismal situation, little or no headway has been made in reforming the system. Investigation and prosecution remain in a shambles, ravaged by corruption, incompetence and habitual manipulation.
Innocent men are sent to the gallows while the guilty often walk free. It is this grim reality that has benefited Omar Sheikh. The judiciary and the executive both share the blame for their inability and unwillingness to cleanse the criminal justice system of the rot that has now seeped deep. The setting aside of Sheikh’s conviction has elicited a strong reaction from the United States and other countries. It is a blot on our justice system. Yet few voices are heard demanding an overhaul of the system so that such travesties of justice do not become the norm. Such is the apathy, however, that this case is also being dealt with in a normal manner and shall soon be buried under heaps of similar failures. Nothing could be more unfortunate for Pakistan.
