Kasus pertama
: Ayah menyetubuhi anaknya selama 3 tahun. Alasan si ayah melakukan hubungan
seksual tersebut adalah sebagai tanda kasih sayangnya terhadap anak (di
Jakarta)
Kasus Kedua
: Ayah, kakek dan paman menyetubuhi seorang
anak perempuan (berarti anak tersebut disetubuhi oleh ayah, kakek dan pamannya)
selama tiga tahun. Anak perempuan tersebut bekerja sebagai PRT di Jakarta, dan
ketika diketahui hamil ia dipulangkan ke daerah asalnya di Kebumen.
Kasus Ketiga
: Ayah menyetubuhi anak perempuannya sehingga anak tersebut melahirkan
seorang anak (cucu dari ayahnya) dan sekarang ia sedang mengandung anak kedua
hasil dari hubungan seksual dengan ayahnya. (Purbalingga)
Rata2 kasus Incest di Indonesia -jika dilaporkan- diproses dengan
hukuman terhadap pelaku selama-lamanya 9 tahun untuk korban satu orang
dan 11 - 15 tahun jika korbannya dibawah umur dan lebih dari satu
orang. itu menurut Kitab undang-undang hukum pidana.
Sayangnya dengan ganjaran yang sangat ringan seperti itu sampai saat
ini pelaku incest rata2 mendapat ganjaran 4-5 tahun penjara.
ini yang terjadi dinegri kita, yang katanya sangat mengedepankan
kehormatan keluarga. Haah...! bagaimana bisa perusak tatanan suci
keluarga dan penggelap masa depan darah daging sendiri hanya diganjar
dengan hukuman yang paling ringan ?
sebagai perbandingan,
di thailand, negara penjual sex terbesar di Asia, pelaku incest dikenai hukuman mati
di philipine, negara seribu-satu tawaran sex, pelaku incest disuntik mati
dalam hukum Islam ?
pernah suatu kali shahabat Rasulullah bertemu dengan seseorang yang
membawa bendera berwarna merah berjalan dengan langkah terburu-buru.
Setelah ditanya, shahabat tersebut menjawab, ia sedang dalam perjalanan
menunaikan tugas menghukum mati seorang anak yang meniduri ibunya.
Riwayat.
Kasus Incest yang dilaporkan sebenarnya hanya sebagian kecil kasus yang
sama yang terjadi dilingkungan masyarakat kita. Ada beberapa penyebab
adanya incest.
Kurangnya pemahaman agama. Pemahaman agama adalah benteng
utama yang menjaga pola interaksi antar manusia. baik hubungan sedarah
maupun tidak. Jika keluarga tidak mendapatkan informasi tentang
bagaimana agama mengatur pola2 interaksi yang dibolehkan maka
kemungkinan adanya penyimpangan dalam pola interaksi sedarah sangat
tinggi. Banyak keluarga beranggapan karena satu keluarga -ayah,ibu,
anak, paman, bibi, sepupu- maka boleh buka-bukaan seenaknya. Dalam
Islam, sejak kecil anak telah dipisah dari ranjang orangtua. Anak
laki-laki dan perempuan dipisah. Masuk kamar orangtua diatur pada saat2
tertentu dengan ijin, dan banyak hal lain.
Ekonomi miskin. isteri
yang ikut membantingtulang membuat dapur terus mengepul cenderung
mengalami keletihan yang luarbiasa sehingga menurunkan pelayanan
terhadap suami. dengan kondisi perekonomian keluarga yang seret,
bapak menggarap anak menjadi alternatif jalan keluar bagi mereka
(suami-kadang2 disetujui oleh sang isteri) untuk terus melanggengkan
keluarga. Karena untuk cari diluar harusss keluar duit lagi, kan ?
Rendahnya pendidikan.
Pendidikan yang jauh dari standar mengakibatkan korban dan keluarga
menganggap perilaku incest adalah aib keluarga yang sangat pribadi.
Sehingga banyak yang tidak mau melaporkan ke pihak yang berwajib atau
orang lain. Rendahnya pendidikan ini menimbulkan potensi perilaku
incest semakin marak.
Kasus Incest bukan kasus perkosaan biasa. Hal ini menyangkut
kepercayaan, kelangsungan sebuah keluarga, masa depan anak dan kondisi
psikologi yang terbentuk.
Olehnya sangat disayangkan jika undang-undang kita memperlakukan pelaku incest sama dengan korban perkosaan biasa
.
sudah saatnya hadir hukuman mati bagi pelaku incest !!!
 | wah bagus itu saya setuju
soalnya dalam syariah kan itu namanya zina
bagi yang udah nikah hukumnya rajam
bagi yang belum nikah cambuk seratus kali |
 | Setuju, perkosaan dalam keluarga seharusnya dihukum lebih berat. Saya tidak tahu apakah hal ini juga diatur dalam UU perlindungan anak, tetapi seharusnya negara juga melindungi anak dari kekerasan dalam rumah tangga seperti ini. |
Comment deleted at the request of the author.
 | UU perlindungan anak dan KDRT (kekerasan dalam rumah tangga) masih mengacu pada KUHP untuk masalah perkosaan dan penganiayaan.
hukum penjara 9 tahun (yang bisa dinego jadi 1-4 tahun)
pasal berlapis 9-15 tahun ---masih bisa dinego juga sampe 4,5 tahun :( |
 | Pernah baca berita pemerkosaan bayi 6 bulan oleh ayahnya di Medan - di majalah wanita terkenal di Indonesia. Details mengerikan. Liputan itu bikin saya mual dan mimpi buruk bertahun-tahun dan saking takutnya sampai majalah itu saya black list... |
| ugh... :_( ...hikss...
saya kalo dapet postingan ttg incest atau penganiayaan anak dengan crita yang terlalu detail seringnya malah nggak dibaca...nyeri hate..(padahal sedang riset ttg seputar incest dan penganiayaan) ...
|
 | riaa wrote on May 14, '06 ....pada dasarnya ada juga keterlibatan kurang meratanya pendidikan, dan banyaknya tayangan syurr beredar di masyarakat...
Dulu di Oprah Winfrey juga pernah dibahas hal seperti itu, bayangkan efeknya pada anak2 tersebut ketika beranjak dewasa... bahkan ketika umur mereka 40 dan sudah menikah, mereka masih takut tidur sendiri...
Lalu bagaimana tindakan negara pada anak2 tersebut ? Bolehlah orang tuanya dihukum seberat2nya... lalu diberikan kemana tanggung jawab terhadap anak itu ? seharusnya memang ada peraturan perundang2an yang jelas...
|
| Saya mah kalau disuruh bikin riset begitu (seputar incest dan penganiayaan) mending kabur.... itu juga kalu kaki bisa digerakin...hehehe... soalnya dengernya aja kaki udah lemeeees....tulang rontok semua rasanya. Saya mah riset *Reply Pertama* aja, biar bisa hahahihi... |
 | Miris klo dengar berita ttg incest, tidak bisa membayangkan bagaimana traumatik korban hiks...semoga pendidikan kita khususnya moral semakin membaik, abis sekarang masih banyak lembaga pendidikan, bukan menghasilkan produk yang menjadikan manusia lebih baik tapi cenderung menjadi sekedar mesin kehidupan |
| riaa wrote on May 17, '06  2. kasus incest memang berdampak psikologis yang panjang (ditayangan oprah bahkan ada kasus incest yang dilakukan seorang bapak (yang memiliki pekerjaan'suci') terhadap 3 orang anaknya, mereka baru melaporkan setelah mereka berusia diatas 20 tahun, padahal peristiwa terjadi saat mereka masih anak-anak2...lihat tayangan yang itu nggak mbak ?
emang harus komplit penanganannya.
3. Secara hukum, tanggungjawab anak yang orangtuanya tidak cakap hukum (karena melakukan pelanggaran hukum) akan dialihkan ke wali dengan keputusan pengadilan. tanpa memutuskan hubungan darah mereka. dan anak berhak atas waris dan semua yang menjadi haknya...  Untuk no.2 iya, yg itu saya liat... dan dia bilang 'Itu semua untuk mengusir setan yg ada dalam diri kalian'
Duh, kasian bgt sih anak2nya.
Yg No.3 maksud saya adalah lebih ke tanggung jawab pada sisi psikologi anak, apakah ada penanganan khusus untuk korban2 incest yg diberikan oleh negara ataupun badan hukum lain, atau apalah...
yah gitu aja deh... ngomongin hal ini bikin sebel juga yah... gemesss :D |
 | masarcon wrote on Jun 9, '06, edited on Jun 9, '06 ttg incest, saya kurang setuju dengan 3 alasan di atas.
- Kurangnya pemahaman agama.
- Ekonomi miskin.
- Rendahnya pendidikan
menurut saya :
1. kurang dekatnya hubungan orang tua dengan anak, sehingga meski tinggal serumah, tapi masih bisa tega melakukan hal semacam itu. di timur tengah incest ini juga tejadi soale. kurang dekat dalam artian, pihak lelaki tidak ikut mengasuh, dan memiliki keterikatan batin dengan si anak.
2. kenapa hukuman di indonsia sering masih ringan dan bisa di nego? karena ujungnya, si pihak lelaki masih jadi pusat ekonomi keluarga. keluarga jadi bangkrut kalo si lelaki ini di delete untuk selamanya dari keluarga.
3. konsep keluarga yang patriarkis dan kurangnya kemandirian wanita juga menjadi sebab kenapa mereka jadi korban. dari pada jajan, gitu kan yang sering menjadi kilah :(
4. kurang yakin kalau syariah dan para ulama kita berpihak pada korban. contoh, UU KDRT dan perlindungan anak justru di Indonesia yang menetang adalah partai islam. contoh kasus Imrana adalah dibawah ini, bisa dilihat bagaimana para ulma Deoband bersikap.
|
| Salah satu kasus yg merupakan contoh bagus tentang kesemena-menaan suatu lembaga peradilan syariah. Salam, Anita I will never marry my father-in-law: Imrana http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/7242_1402629,00180007.htmHTTabloid.com Muzaffarnagar, UP, June 17, 2005 Horrified at the panchayat's decision asking her to marry her father- in-law who allegedly raped her on the night of June 6, Imrana Bibi says she would prefer to remain single rather than comply. However Allah Razi, head of the Nurwaan Masjid in the village Charthawal where the shocking incident took place, is quite unmindful of the crossroads at which the 26-year-old mother of five now finds herself. "After sex with her father-in-law, the girl has become haram for her husband. According to me, she must accept her father-in-law as her husband and her husband, Nur Illahi as a son. She has no other option but to agree if she wants to continue to live in this village. Else she will have to leave," he says. Tensions have certainly mounted after Imrana decided to move out of her husband's village and live with her parents in Kukada, some 15 kms from Muzaffarnagar. Unable to swallow the insult, Imrana's brother came to Charthawal and thrashed her father-in-law Ali Mohammad. The police had to make its presence felt in the area to prevent the law and order situation from deteriorating further. Imrana's brother then lodged an FIR and had Ali Mohammad arrested. He was produced in the Muzaffarnagar sessions court and sent to 14 days judicial custody on Thursday. On the other hand in Charthawal the matter has now passed from the panchayat to the Muslim Shari'ah court of Muzaffarnagar that is expected to give its verdict on the first Friday of July. But opinion seems divided even among Muslim clerics and religious leaders. While some feel that Imrana's case is best left to the law of the land, others want the Shari'ah court to have the final jurisdiction. "Imrana has only two choices - she can either accept her father-in- law as her husband or divorce her present husband and marry elsewhere. Her five children should be handed over to her in-laws. After sex with her father-in-law, her husband has become her son. So if she stays with him, it's an insult to Islam," insists Sheikh Ul Hadis Maulana Anjarshah Kashmiri, a local Muslim leader. Another prominent member of the community however disagrees. "Shari'ah ke aaine main hame us mahila ka dard samajhna chahiye. Gunahgaar ko kadi se kadi saza dilaye janne ki zarurat hai aur Imrana ke saath insaf ki zarurat hai (We must understand that woman's pain in the context of the Shari'ah. The guilty should be punished as severely as possible and Imrana must get justice)," he says. |
| Kasus Imrana ini masih carut-marut. Berita lainnya misalnya http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_4-7-2005_pg3_5CONTROVERSY: Imrana rape case and fatwa controversy By Yawar Baig Berikut ini saya kutipkan "laporan" lebih lengkap lagi, sebuah posting di milis kmnu2000, dari yang tinggal di India. salam, DWS -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [kmnu2000] Re: Kasus Imrana Bibi Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 10:52:30 -0000 From: Rizqon Khamami
Kasus Imrana ini sekarang lagi menjadi isu paling panas di India.
Kasusnya semakin komplek dan ruwet ketika kelompok politisi Hindu
ikut-ikutan ngomong, meminta pembubaran Muslim Personal Law,
seperti 'Nikahnama', undang-undang perkawinan Muslim, yang baru saja
kemaren diluncurkan oleh All India Muslim Personal Law Board
(AIMPLB), organisasi mirip-mirip MUI di Indonesia, tapi lebih kuat
dan lebih besar.
Gara-gara soal penetapan 'Nikahnama' tersebut, kelompok Syiah, yang
awalnya bergabung dalam AIMPLB, membentuk AIMPLB sendiri. Tidak mau
ketinggalan, kelompok aktivis perempuan membentuk AIMPLB sendiri,
semacam dewan fatwa untuk kalangan perempuan dan untuk menyuarakan
kepentingan mereka. Persoalan menjadi tampak complicated, ketika
ulama-ulama di ulama-ulama Deoband masih menjadi tempat rujukan
masyarakat, meskipun informal. Deoband adalah pesantren pengkhusus
pelajaran Hadist. Pesantren ini memiliki jaringan yang sangat luas di
anak benua India, dari Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, dan Afghanistan.
Sementara itu, ulama-ulama non-deobandi banyak berkumpul di AIMPLB,
seperti ulama-ulama Nadwah, nisbat ke pesantren Nadwatul Ulama milik
almarhum Abul Hasan Ali Annadwi. Ini peta ulama-ulama India untuk
membaca fatwa tentang Imrana itu.
Kasus Imrana, awalnya karena dipicu oleh keputusan Panchayat,
kelompok adat, mendesak Imrana untuk menceraikan suaminya. Imrana
ngotot, tidak mau. Lalu Panchayat meminta fatwa ulama Deoband. Ulama
Deoband, yang menganut madzhab Hanafi secara kolot, mengatakan:
perkawinan Imrana otomatis batal, karena pemerkosanya adalah
mertuanya sendiri. Alasannya? Karena hubungan bapak-anak
adalah "suci", Imrana terhitung menjadi ibu bagi suaminya. Imrana
mengalah. Cerai. Tapi saya tidak melihat fatwa Deobandi, Imrana harus
menikahi mantan mertuanya itu, bahkan ulama Deoband menolak
kemungkinan Imrana menikahi mertuanya, karena si mertua harus dihukum
mati dengan lempar batu. Wacana tentang Imrana harus menikahi si
mertua menggelinding ketika semua orang sudah mulai ngomong, dari
para aktivis perempuan, ulama Wahabi, ulama Syiah, dan bahkan pendeta
dan politisi Hindu. Koran rame-rame cari sensasi. Ruwet.
Ulama-ulama Syafii juga berkeberatan dengan fatwa Deobandi itu.
Menurut ulama Syaifi, Imrana tidak boleh mendapat hukuman lebih
lanjut. Apa hukuman itu? Harus bercerai dari suami yang telah
memberinya 5 anak. (Bukan menikahi si mertua bejad itu). Imrana
sendiri berumur 26 tahun. Masih kinclong. (saya belum
mengecek pendapat madzhab Hanafi dan Syafii ini.)
Kasus Imrana ini makin ramai ketika dua anggota AIMPLB mendukung
fatwa Deoband itu, meskipun sebagian besar menolak. Sampe-sampe
Maulana Rabey, ketua AIMPLB dan pengasuh pesantren Nadwatul Ulama,
Lucknow, sibuk kesana-kemari memadamkan kontrovesial itu. Saya masih
terus mengamati perkembangan soal Imrana ini. Dalam tahun-tahun ke
depan, saya lihat, kasus ini akan menjadi titik menentukan soal Fatwa
dan Posisi Ulama di India, bahkan mungkin merembet ke dunia-dunia
Islam lainnya. Kenapa? Karena wacana ini sudah menyerap perhatian
ulama-ulama di Amerika dan negara-negara lain, yang sebagian besar
masih keturunan India.
Yoginder Sikand menulis soal fatwa itu. Teman-teman di Leiden, saya
yakin, tahu siapa Yoginder Sikand. Karena dia pernah post-doc di
Leiden. Saya sertakan di bawah.
***
From: yogi sikand
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 08:26:16 -0700 (PDT)
Fury Over A Fatwa: Muslims Contest Deobandi Mufti's Opinion on Imrana
Rape Case
Yoginder Sikand
The rape of a Muslim woman, Imrana, by her father-in-law some weeks
ago has now snowballed into a major controversy following a
controversial fatwa issued by a mufti of the Deoband madrasa
announcing that the marriage between Imrana and her husband now
stands dissolved. Further complicating the controversy, the Hindutva
lobby is using the fatwa as an excuse to step up its campaign for the
abolition of Muslim personal law, presenting itself as saviour of
Muslim women, its complicity in the mass rape and murder of Muslim
women notwithstanding. And making matters even more messy, sections
of the `mainstream' media, ever on the prowl for stories
of `oppressed' Muslim women as a stick to beat Muslims with, have
sought to sensationalise the issue all out of proportion, presenting
the fatwa as further `evidence' of the unrepentant `obscurantism' of
the mullahs, as if Hindu priests were any better when it comes to the
violation of women's rights.
For all the heat that it has generated, the Imrana case has, in a
sense, proved to be a blessing in disguise, for it has generated
considerable soul-searching within the Muslim community about the
institution and authority of the `ulama or Muslim clerics, who see
themselves as authoritative spokesmen of the faith. It has also led
to heated discussion as to precisely what the shariah or Islamic law
is or lays down and as to whether or not traditional Islamic
jurisprudence or fiqh can or cannot be modified or reformed .
Increasingly, as these discussions suggest, alternate voices seek to
speak for Islam, challenging the authority that the `ulama of the
madrasas claim for themselves. The responses to the Imrana
controversy are also bringing out into the open the considerable
diversity of views among the `ulama of different schools of thought
on matters of Islamic jurisprudence, as some non-Deobandi `ulama have
joined the fray in critiquing the Deobandi fatwa. These voices
indicate the fluidity and contested nature of precisely what the shariah is
seen as constituting, and at the same time point to the possibility
of developing new, more gender-just perspectives on jurisprudence
from within a broadly defined `Islamic' paradigm.
The `ulama, predictably, are divided on the fatwa, this reflecting
the ambiguous nature of the shariah and the different sectarian
understandings of it that, on several points, are mutually
contradictory. Most Hanafi `ulama, both Deobandis and Barelvis, who
represent the majority of the Indian Muslims, appear to concur with
the fatwa, as the fatwa is said to be in accordance with the Hanafi
interpretation of the shariah as laid down in the classical Hanafi
fiqh texts. For their part, the Ahl-i Hadith, the Indian counterpart
of the Saudi `Wahhabis', have consciously distanced themselves from
the fatwa. Unlike the Hanafis, they are not bound by the corpus of
traditional fiqh, following the guidance only of the Qur'an and the
Hadith, statements attributed to the Prophet Muhammad. In a recent
statement, a leading Ahl-i Hadith scholar, Abdul Wahhab Khilji, has
declared that neither of these primary sources of Islam law calls for
dissolution of marriage on account of rape by a woman's
father-in-law, unlike what the Deobandis claim. Hence, he argues,
the fatwa is not `Islamically' valid. A similar statement critiquing
the fatwa has been issued by the newly-constituted All-India Shia
Muslim Personal Law Board. Incidentally, one of the reasons for the
setting up of this Board was that several Shia `ulama felt that the
All-India Muslim Personal Law Board was heavily over-represented by
the Deobandis and hence unwilling to listen to alternate perspectives
from the other Islamic schools of thought. Likewise, another recently-
established Muslim organisation, the All-India Muslim Women's
Personal Law Board, has condemned the fatwa as unjust, claiming that
it had `misinterpreted' the tenets of Islam. No doubt this
organisation of spirited Muslim women will see Deoband's latest fatwa
as added justification for the setting up of a separate Muslim
Women's Personal Law Board and as further proof of the fact that
Muslim women need to interpret Islam for themselves, rather than
rely on conservative patriarchs to explain their faith to them.
It is not likely, however, that the `ulama of Deoband will be moved
by the arguments of these critics. The Deobandis, by and large, see
the Ahl-i Hadith and the Shias as heretics and not `true' Muslims at
all, and hence lacking the authority to speak for or about Islam. And
as for the women behind the All-India Muslim Women's Personal Law
Board, they are probably seen by many Deobandis
as `ignorant' `upstarts', at best, or as `agents', unwitting or
otherwise, of the `enemies' of Islam, at worst.
Not all Deobandi `ulama would necessarily concur with the fatwa,
however. I am given to understand by a friend of mine, who describes
himself as a `dissident Deobandi', that a small, yet significant,
number of younger Deobandi scholars, particularly those who have also
studied at universities, are resentful of the fatwa. My friend, who
pleads to remain anonymous for fear of being attacked by his fellow
Deobandi `ulama, says that the fatwa goes against the basic Islamic
tenet of `adl or justice. `Why should a woman be punished for a crime
committed by someone else? This is totally against what the Qur'an
teaches', he explains. He tells me that the fatwa is simply the
personal opinion of a particular mufti and that it is not binding or
the ultimate word on the subject, unlike what the media presents it
as or as the authorities at Deoband might like Muslims to believe. He
argues that although the fatwa is in accordance with the traditional
Hanafi view, which the Deobandis staunchly
defend, there is actually no compelling religious argument for
Muslims to blindly follow Hanafi jurisprudential precedent. The
Shafi, Hanbali and Maliki schools of Islamic law, regarded by Sunni
Muslims as equally `orthodox' as the Hanafi school, do not lay down
dissolution of marriage if a woman is raped by her father-in-law, he
tells me. Hence, he says, there is no reason why Hanafi Muslims
cannot `benefit from' these other schools of Sunni jurisprudence on
this or any other matter. Yet, he complains, it is unlikely that the
majority of his fellow Deobandi `ulama would agree to this
proposal. `They insist on blindly following Hanafi fiqh, although
they also claim that the other three schools are also valid', he
says, adding that their `lack of familiarity with the real-world
problems of Muslims' makes for their dogged resistance to any reform
in traditional Hanafi jurisprudence. He insists, however, that such
reforms are urgent. `Islam and the Islamic shariah cannot be reduced
to Hanafi jurisprudence and the Deoband school', he stresses.
Numerous Muslim intellectuals have also spoken the fatwa, arguing
that it is not in accordance Islam as they understand it. In this
way, they have sought to question the authority of the
conservative `ulama as ultimate religious authorities, arguing for
the right to interpret their faith for themselves. One of the most
outspoken critics of the fatwa is Dr. Mustafa Kamal Sherwani,
president of the All-India Muslim Forum and presently Dean of the
Faculty of Law and Shariah at the University of Zanzibar, Tanzania.
In a recent statement he has condemned the fatwa as `most retrograde'
and as being `in total violation of the shariah'. He claims that the
Qur'an testifies that `nobody can be punished or subjected to adverse
consequences for any deed which he or she was compelled to commit,
and the commission of which could not be resisted despite all human
efforts'. `According to Qur'nic injunctions', he adds, `even if a
woman is forced into prostitution by those under whose custody she is,
she is free from any guilt, sin or whatever might be associated
with it'. Hence, he says, punishing Imrana for being subjected to
rape by having her divorced `is a gross injustice which can never be
authenticated by the shariah' He condemns the fatwa as
unambiguously `un-Islamic' and fears that it is `bound to project
Islam as a cruel and unjust religion'. `I am sure', he says, `that
by acting in this most heinous and negative manner, these
obscurantist clergy are ruthlessly damaging the image of Islam'. He
argues that the fatwa and `similar developments' `amply manifest' the
fact that the traditional madrasas and mullahs have `lost their
utility' and that `the more free hand they are given in tampering
with the shariah, the more disastrous they will prove for the social
and religious fabric of the community'. `Now is the time', he
concludes in what will obviously been seen by the traditional `ulama
as a major assault, `when a sustained movement must be launched to
keep the illiterate Muslim masses away from the nefarious ideology of these
madarsas and maulvis if Islam is to survive as a modern religion in
the twenty-first century'.
Another bitter critic of the fatwa is Juzar Bandukwala, professor at
the M.S. University, Vadodara. He argues that while Islam obviously
condemns consensual sexual relations between a father-in-law and his
daughter-in-law, for which it lays down strict punishment for both
parties, the Imrana case is clearly different since it involves rape.
Hence, rather than being punished, as the fatwa in effect advises,
Imrana `demands compassion and
kindness' in accordance with the teachings of the Qur'an,
particularly because she is the mother of five young children and
comes from a poor family. `I am surprised', he says, that `the
Deoband ulama failed to apply these Qur'anic commands', and laments
that they have `erred badly'. At the same time as he critiques the
fatwa, Bandukwala expresses the fear that the Imrana case might be
used by Hindutva forces to promote its anti-Muslim agenda
by `stereotyping Muslims' and by `shedding crocodile tears for the
plight of Muslim women'. While welcoming the concern for Imrana
expressed by human rights and women activists, he warns of the risk
of playing into the hands of the Hindutva lobby. `We may be on the
verge of another Shah Bano disaster', he cautions, `and the last
thing the country needs at this stage is another issue to widen the
gulf between Hindus and Muslims'.
Yet another vocal critic of the fatwa is the Washington D.C.-based
Kaleem Kawaja, president of the Association of Indian Muslims of
America. He believes that the case should have been handled by the
state courts, in accordance with secular laws, instead of having been
taken to the mullahs for their decision. He berates some
Deobandi `ulama and certain members of the All-India Muslim Personal
Law Board for `compounding the problem' by `making highly irrational
statements regarding the marital status of Imrana', thereby
subjecting the victim to `further misery'. Rather than seeing the
problem as rooted essentially in patriarchal fiqh formulations, he
claims that the fatwa is based on `obscurantist tribal customs'. In
any case, he stresses the need for both the Deoband madrasa and the
All-India Muslim Personal Law Board to `make structural changes in
their set-up' in order to `stop such obscurantism and injustice to
women in the name of Islam'. He suggests that at least a third of the
40-member Working Committee of the Board should consist of women,
in place of the sole woman that it has today, and argues that there
are indeed several learned Muslim women who are qualified to fill
such a role.
Other Muslim intellectuals, while criticising the fatwa, have argued
that it points to the urgent need for ijtihad or contextually
sensitive re-readings of Islamic jurisprudence to meet contemporary
demands. One of the foremost proponents of ijtihad today, the Islamic
law expert Professor Tahir Mahmood insists that Imrana's fate cannot
be decided by `ancient juristic wisdom' laid down `by some religious
jurists of Arabia over a thousand years ago'. That rule, he added,
may have been a pro-women provision for its times, in a society when
remarriage for divorced women was easy, but in India today, he says,
the rule `need not be strictly imposed on an innocent and unwilling
couple desirous of continuing in marriage'. In a similar vein, Ghulam
Faruki, an Indian Muslim commentator based in the United States,
opines that the fatwa indicates that the Indian `ulama `are way
behind their counterparts in other countries', and urges then to
interpret shariah laws, through a process of ijtihad,
in a more gender-equitable manner. In case the `ulama refuse to
consider any such reforms, he suggests, Muslims must struggle for the
right for individuals to `opt for a uniform code' in order to ensure
gender justice.
Several Muslim critics of the fatwa appear to be incensed with what
they see as its `un-Islamic' conflation of patriarchy and shariah.
They have also berated some senior leaders of the All-India Muslim
Personal Law Board for apparently approving of the fatwa, arguing
that this indicates that the Board is unwilling to give women their
due. Thus, a certain Zafar Iqbal, a frequent contributor to several
Muslim internet discussion groups, accuses the author of the fatwa
and members of the Board that have approved of it of double standards
for men and women. `If the rapist is being dealt with under civil
law', he asks, why should the victim be `subjugated to Islamic
law?' `If is difficult to justify why Islamic laws of punishment
should apply to female victims, not to male perpetrators', he
asserts. Echoing the same view, Arshad Alam, an Indian Islamic
scholar based in Germany, argues that the fatwa clearly indicates
that traditional understandings of Islamic jurisprudence `do not give
> adequate protection to women', and hence are in need of reform. He
stresses what he sees as the deep-rooted patriarchy underlying the
Deobandi version of Islam, arguing that this is clearly evident from
the fact that while the author of the fatwa `categorically wants the
separation of the women in question from her husband, he suggests
that the rapist father in law should be tried under the Indian penal
code'. In other words, `while women are to be covered under Personal
Law, the men are free to enjoy the reformed secular law'.
Supporting Alam's argument, another Muslim writer, Parveen Khan,
writes that the fatwa `exposes the fact that Muslim women cannot
expect justice from patriarchal mullahs', and predicts that the chain
of shariah courts all over the country that both the all-India Muslim
Personal Law Board and the largely Deobandi Jami`at ul-`Ulama-i Hind
have recently started demanding `will lead to a hundred thousand
Imranas, Gudiyas and Shah Banos, on an unimaginable scale'. At the
same time, she warns that the Imrana case should not be
sensationalised out of proportion in order to portray Islam
as `irredeemably misogynist'. She rightly critiques a marked tendency
in the `mainstream' media to highlight instances of `oppressed'
Muslim women, while downplaying or even ignoring similar or even
worse cases of oppression of Hindu women, including of such heinous
crimes as sati and girl-child sacrifice that are not practised among
any non-Hindu communities, including the Muslims.
For their part, and not surprisingly, various `secular' political
parties, with their eyes on Muslim votes, have refused to condemn the
fatwa, except for the CPI(M), which has called for a review of gender
unjust laws. Since the conservative mullahs exercise a powerful
political influence among significant sections of Muslim voters,
these parties are consistently wary of antagonising them. Instead,
they go out of their way to court them in order to stress
their `secular' credentials. This symbiotic relationship brings the
politicians Muslim votes while it at the same time reinforces the
mullahs' claims to being the authoritative spokesmen of the Muslim
community. The fear of antagonising the mullahs, even if at the cost
of legitimising the oppression of women, thus explains `secular' hero
Mulayam Singh Yadav's claim that the fatwa must have been the effort
of considerable `thought', because, so he alleges, the mullahs `are
all very learned and they understand the community and its
sentiments'. The Congress has adopted a similar stance, and its
leader in Uttar Pradesh Salman Khurshid has announced that the issue
is an `individual one' which should be dealt in accordance with the
shariah. The Congress' position is, of course, entirely predictable,
given the historically close ties between the party and the Deobandi
mullahs, reinforced lately by the participation of its President in
the recently-held meeting of the Deobandi Jamiat ul-`Ulama-i Hind.
Between obdurate mullahs, anti-Muslim Hindutva ideologues,
unscrupulous politicians, newspapers hungry for sensational stories
and unrepentant patriarchs the fate of Imrana and countless other
women like her precariously hangs in the balance. Yet, as the
spirited critique of the fatwa mounted by sections of the `ulama as
well as Muslim intellectuals indicates, a new Muslim leadership is
today in the making, one that is sensitive to the real-world concerns
of hitherto silent voices like Imrana and her brothers and sisters
who now refuse to remain mute.
|
| elbintang wrote on Jun 10, '06, edited on Jun 10, '06 salam.
setahu saya sampai saat ini yg menggunakan peradilan syari`ah secara formal terang-terangan hanya su`ud -walaupun juga belum ideal- dan beberapa negara timteng (yg sangat sedikit sekali) sedangkan negara lainnya hanya perkasuistik (dan hal tersebut dalam hukum islam tidak disebut peradilan syari`ah) kerna ada beberapa tanggungan yg harus dilaksanakan negara sebelum hukum peradilan syari`ah dilaksanakan makanya diaceh disebut menggunakan beberapa hukum Islam bukan peradilan syari`ah.
dalam hukum Islam yg saya pahami
1. korban hukum incest tidak dibebani apa-apa bahkan diperlakukan sebagai korban (tidak diekspose jati diri, dipenuhi kebutuhan hidupnya oleh negara, diberikan hak untuk menegakkan keadilan)
2. pelaku incest dihukum mati (tidak ada satupun nash hadith yg saya temukan untuk membolehkan pelaku incest tidak dihukum mati)
memahami hukum Islam memang sering rancu dengan praktikal yg seolah2 mengatasnamakan agama...
Insya Allah jika ada sempat saya postikan beberapa ketentuan hukum jarimah (pidana Islam) ttg incest dan peradilan syari'ah
wallahu`alam
terima kasih telah banyak memberikan pencerahan, semoga bisa terus memberikan masukannya :-)
|
| ditungu mbakyu .... btw, pembuktian terjadinya incest di saudi pakai cara apa ? test dna dan sekedar laporan korban - tanpa bukti kan gak bisa dipakai ... :( |
| ada satu kasus incest di saudi yg disebut-sebut teman saya sempat menjadi ramai disana. menurut saya itu mungkin karena,
1. tidak pernah terdengar ada kasus seperti ini yg diketahui oleh publik atau jangan2 tdk pernah dilaporkan
2. sentimen patriarkis juga sangat tinggi di saudi -ini mah semua juga tahu yaks ?-
kasus incest di saudi ini dilaporkan ibu dan 2 orang kakak perempuan. korbannya tidak sampai melahirkan anak karena keguguran...
*sambil mencari2 ditumpukan file...saya simpan dimana yagh... *ribet mode on |
| |
