The voice in the cage: The Taliban regime, criminal law, and the silenced scream of women in Afghanistan

From Poetry to a Scream

Afghan poet Nadia Anjuman once wrote in a poem:

“I am caged in this corner

full of melancholy and sorrow

my wings are closed and I cannot fly

since I am an Afghan woman

I must cry out”

Then, in another poem, Anjuman calls out to the world:

“I have no desire to open my mouth. What is there to say?

Whether I tell it or not, I will be despised by this age

How can I speak of honey? It has turned to poison on my tongue–

Alas! Despots have bridled my mouth

Whether I weep or laugh, whether I live or die

Blessed be this world where there is no one to share my grief.”

THE OWNERS OF THE CAGE

So, who are these despots, why did the poet feel as if she were trapped in a cage, and what lived experiences lay behind her cry? Born in 1980, Nadia Anjuman knew the Taliban mentality, which had descended upon Afghanistan like dark clouds since the mid-nineties, and she witnessed firsthand the oppression inflicted upon women and girls. Therefore, the sorrow behind her words and her heart pointed to a specific mentality: the Taliban.

NEW PENAL CODE, OLD MENTALITY

The new penal code recently announced to be implemented in Afghanistan has once again turned eyes toward the country. What is it telling the people of Afghanistan, and what kind of penal system does the Taliban want to use to govern the country? To get the answers to these questions, I spoke with Dr. Zakira Hekmat, Founding President of the Afghan Refugee Solidarity and Assistance Association. What Hekmat had to say regarding both her own experiences and the Taliban regime was quite striking. After all, Hekmat lived in Afghanistan for many years, and her family and relatives are still there.

PENAL PROCEDURE AND THE CASTE SYSTEM

Before moving on to our interview with Hekmat, I would like to mention a report she shared with us titled “The Taliban’s Penal Procedure: Introduction and Basic Principles.” This report reveals the content of some of the laws included in the new penal code. First of all, the report states that the “Islamic Emirate Courts” are responsible for the implementation of the relevant legal provisions. On the other hand, it is stated that a kind of caste system will be observed in the application of punishments. Specifically, the Taliban administration has divided Afghan society into four categories: scholars and dignitaries; the gentry (tribal sheikhs and merchants); the middle class; and at the very bottom, the poor. According to the procedure, while scholars are punished only with a judge's warning, the gentry are punished with warnings and summons to court; the middle class with summons to court and imprisonment; and the lower class with threats and beatings (flogging) (Article 9).

THE SOCIALIZATION OF VIOLENCE

Another controversial issue is that it allows for ta'zir (punishment determined by a judge) to be carried out by all people; accordingly, any Muslim who witnesses the commission of a sin related to the rights of Allah has the right to apply ta'zir (Article 4).

Let us continue with the section titled “Ta'zir Provisions Regarding Religion and Sect.” Here, it is clearly stated how crimes committed against religion will be punished. For example, the ta'zir punishment for a person who insults the Prophet or other prophets is determined as death; however, it is stated that if the person repents, they will still be sentenced to 6 years in prison.

So, what happens if a person says that the views of the jurists are not followed or are unacceptable? The penal code has the answer to this question as well: 2 years in prison. A similar prison term applies to those who declare they have left the Hanafi school of thought. Accordingly, those who announce they have left the aforementioned school will be punished with 2 years in prison. In addition, it is clearly stated that those who spread heresy or propagate a belief contrary to the Ahl al-Sunnah and thereby harm the state or the public can be sentenced to up to 10 years in prison.

A REGIME BUILT ON THE FEMALE BODY

The penal provisions regarding the social sphere contain similarly unacceptable regulations. For example, it is stated that if a woman leaves her religion and later returns, she will be sentenced to life imprisonment and flogged (10 lashes) every three days.

It is also stated in this regulation that if a woman is beaten by her husband in a way that leaves bruises or signs of fractures on her body, the man will be given only 15 days in prison. According to experts, this provision clearly “encourages domestic violence.”

Another article (34) that appears regarding women concerns women who return to their father's house due to domestic violence: Accordingly, the law considers the woman who takes refuge in her father's house as guilty and deems both the woman herself and her family worthy of a three-month prison sentence. Finally, it is stated that insulting Taliban officials will be punished with 20 lashes and 6 months in prison, and providing shelter to dissidents will be punished with 39 lashes and 5 years in prison.

Let us come to our interview.

''THIS IS NOT LAW, IT IS SLAVERY''

When I asked Dr. Zakira Hekmat, Founding President of the Afghan Refugee Solidarity and Assistance Association, for her thoughts on the regulation, she said:

“The penal procedure announced by the Taliban cannot be treated merely as a technical or civil legal text. The real issue is how such regulations affect the sense of justice, human dignity, and social balance in Afghanistan.

Subjecting people to different punishments based on their social status, criminalizing women fleeing violence, or excluding women from education and public life poses serious problems not only in terms of universal human rights but also in terms of the moral and conscientious foundations of Islamic law.

The silence of weapons does not mean true social peace. Lasting peace and stability are not possible in a system where half of society is deprived of basic rights. The legitimacy of law should not stem from oppression, but from its capacity to produce justice, protect the weak, and limit arbitrariness.

Hekmat continued: “As can be clearly seen from the latest penal code, this regulation approves domestic violence and therefore punishes even women who take refuge in their father's house; it creates a caste system among people and eliminates freedom of belief.”

A SILENCED SOCIETY

Zakira Hekmat also said the following regarding the situation of women: “Women cannot participate in working life, they cannot leave the house alone, they can only go to the doctor with their husbands or mahram (close male relatives), and girls can only be educated up to the 6th grade. We know that there are early and forced child marriages.” Expressing that she experienced similar situations while in Afghanistan, Hekmat says the situation is heartbreaking.

At this point in our conversation, I brought up the Afghan people. I asked, “Is the public satisfied with this order, do they not object, what is the state of the opposition in Afghanistan?” Hekmat said that the people are not satisfied with this order, but are silenced by force and oppression. She then continued: “There is no democracy in Afghanistan, there are no elections. A seven-member Taliban delegation runs the whole country. When they came to power, they said, ‘We will change.’ Nothing has changed.”

THE DISCOURSE OF ''PEACE'' AND REALITY

Our conversation continued with an article by Yasin Aktay, a former Deputy Chairman of the AK Party. In his article in the newspaper Yeni Şafak titled ‘What is the Taliban Doing? Are They Re-banning What They Banned Yesterday?’, Aktay criticizes the news reflected in the press about Afghanistan and denies the laws mentioned in the penal regulation, citing Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid. These statements belong to Aktay: “

“When it comes to the Taliban, everyone feels entitled to fabricate everything; there is no other explanation. In fact, if the most standard ethical rules regarding journalism and research were applied here, it would not be that difficult to verify these. But again, when it comes to Afghanistan, even this much journalistic ethics is not deemed necessary. You hear something, you say it is true, and you spread the news.”

I reminded Zakira Hekmat of these words and objections of Aktay. Hekmat:

Some Turkish media outlets interpret the penal regulation recently announced by the Taliban differently, reporting as if it also covers the field of education. However, the announced text is only a penal regulation and does not contain any new provisions regarding education.

However, this does not mean that the existing bans on the education of girls in Afghanistan have been lifted. Currently, it is forbidden for girls to continue their education after the 6th grade; women and girls cannot attend middle schools, high schools, and universities. These bans are effectively enforced.

The legal structure under the Taliban administration is also noteworthy. As Taliban Spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid has clearly stated, every order given by the Taliban leader is a law in itself. In this context, the new penal regulation signed and announced by the Taliban leader also carries the character of a “law” that has entered into force directly in Afghanistan.

Furthermore, the Taliban's restrictions on women, girls, and ethnic and religious minorities continue within Afghanistan. In fact, observations on the ground indicate that these restrictions will increase even more over time. Today, women, who make up about half of the population in Afghanistan, are effectively excluded from the right to work, education, social life, and political participation.

In his article, Aktay says that “peace” prevails in Afghanistan, stating, “What we see ourselves is that for the first time in its 70-year history, peace and security have been ensured throughout the country.” I asked about these statements as well. Hekmat said, “During the state period before the Taliban, it was they who created unrest in the country; who organized bombings and suicide attacks, destroyed schools and bridges, targeted civil servants, bombed girls' schools and hospitals, and waged armed struggle against NATO soldiers trying to ensure security in Afghanistan. These actions dragged Afghanistan into chaos and instability for many years.

Today, since the same structure that created insecurity is in power, bombs are no longer exploding; bridges, schools, and hospitals are not being targeted. This situation stems not from the provision of security, but from the fact that the source of violence is the very people who hold the administration.’’

Towards the end of our conversation, Hekmat said:

Women, who make up about half of the population in Afghanistan, are systematically excluded from productive life. Women are being locked in their homes; they are effectively deprived of their rights to work, employment, education, political participation, and social activities.

At the same time, serious restrictions are being applied to ethnic and sectarian minorities; the participation of these groups in public life and their access to basic rights are narrowing day by day. For these reasons, a large segment of Afghan society is thinking of leaving the country and trying to take advantage of every opportunity that comes their way. Families are forced to migrate to other countries through legal or irregular means so that their daughters can receive an education, women can participate in working life, their children can have a safer and more hopeful future, and especially so that minority groups can access basic rights.’’

I left the final word to Hekmat again. I asked, do you have a call regarding Afghanistan? “If these restrictions continue in the same way and the Taliban does not feel any meaningful diplomatic pressure or deterrent power against them, it is inevitable that the administration will gradually evolve into an absolute power structure. In such a case, for a large segment of Afghan society, staying in the country will cease to be a livable option, which will lead to the reactivation of escape routes on a mass scale. As a result, Afghanistan will become the source of a new and large refugee wave for neighboring countries, the region, and more distant geographies. On the other hand, the complete closure of political and social channels may cause the tension accumulated in the oppressed segments to be released in different forms; this has the potential to trigger new opposition movements, internal conflicts, and security risks. Therefore, the current passive stance of the international community not only deepens human rights violations in Afghanistan but also carries the risk of paving the way for new instabilities on a regional and global scale,” she concluded.

Zakira Hekmat is a civil society organization leader and an important figure who lives with a sense of responsibility toward her people, who still lives in Afghanistan with her heart and soul even if not physically, and who tries to be the voice and breath of the girls and women in her country. In this sense, what she says is striking and meaningful. In this respect, one must listen to the words of the interlocutor and listen to what Hekmat says to reach the truth. When the subject comes to this, it should also be reminded to Yasin Aktay. To verify the news reflected in the press, we spoke directly with Zakira Hekmat, the interlocutor of the subject, based on journalistic principles. She stated that they have seen the law and that what is written is true. Moreover, she stated that they will release a separate report on this in the coming days.

WHOSE WORD IS THE TRUTH?

Now let us ask him: While there were democratic mass organizations from Afghanistan or the interlocutors of the subject to talk to, why did he take the words of Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid as a reference? How ethical and correct is this attitude in terms of the struggle for freedom, democracy, and rights? While Afghanistan is governed by an open despot regime, how appropriate is it to seek the truth through the spokesperson of the regime? Let these questions remain here. Let us leave the final word to Ali Shariati. Because his words stand beside us like a torch that will shed light on our questions.

Shariati says: “Do not believe any word in a country where only the state has the right to speak.”