tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052900244791771766.post3375181674543120038..comments2023-06-18T17:09:57.327+03:00Comments on Observations of a Jordanian: The Legal Side of Honor KillingsFarahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05178447716946708839noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052900244791771766.post-33959707510847793652008-07-04T07:49:00.000+03:002008-07-04T07:49:00.000+03:00Ms. Sheeley, I'm very glad my post grabbed your at...Ms. Sheeley, I'm very glad my post grabbed your attention. You have done amazing work in shedding light on the subject and I applaud your courage for that. We're still a long way ahead, but I remain hopeful.Farahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05178447716946708839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052900244791771766.post-91270668984836815422008-07-04T04:04:00.000+03:002008-07-04T04:04:00.000+03:00Thanks for blogging about this, Farah.I've done qu...Thanks for blogging about this, Farah.<BR/><BR/>I've done quite a bit of work on this, and when I visited the Speaker of the Lower House of Parliament a couple years ago, he told me Article 340 has never, to his knowledge, been employed in a dishonor killings case. Article 98 is the one that is used. He also said one of the problems with Article 98 is the lack of a minimum sentence (allowing judges too much latitude, as you note), and he suggested five years for starters.<BR/><BR/>It's true that other countries have on their books something similar to Article 98, laws that deal with crimes of passion. But, even when those laws are successfully employed in a defense, you don't see people getting off with a six-month sentence, as you do with dishonor killings in Jordan. More typical is that, instead of getting a life sentence, the perpetrator will get 20 years or 30 years or something along those lines. And the crimes of passion laws usually codify the specific circumstances under which they can be used as a defense, which isn't the case with Article 98 (as you note).<BR/><BR/>Also, there is already a lot of support within Jordan for tougher penalties for these crimes. I conducted a nationwide attitude and opinion survey on this very topic in Jordan a couple years ago. Among other findings, the survey (using a representative sample of the entire population of Jordan) revealed that 89% of the respondents support tougher penalties (I've since seen this figure corroborated in a later study). Another 3.5% don't care one way or another; the remainder like the status quo. Even the remainder, though, told me there needs to be a higher burden of proof that an actual impropriety occurred and that "impropriety" should be legally defined so everyone is clear about what constitutes a breach.<BR/><BR/>Such overwhelming support for reform should remove any excuses relating to popularity for maintaining the status quo. Clearly, something else is at work.<BR/><BR/>Ellen R. Sheeley, Author<BR/>"Reclaiming Honor in Jordan"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052900244791771766.post-90797149393876434642008-07-03T19:03:00.000+03:002008-07-03T19:03:00.000+03:00hamzah, it's not article 98 that I have a problem ...hamzah, it's not article 98 that I have a problem with, it's how article 98 is applied by judges in cases that were obviously thought out and premeditated and like I said that's what needs to be changed. You're right, it's not specifically for honor crimes, but I would think it's mostly used in honor crimes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052900244791771766.post-41692461344814069312008-07-03T12:49:00.000+03:002008-07-03T12:49:00.000+03:00Farah, the government web site where the laws are ...Farah, the government web site where the laws are available is currently inaccessible for some reason, but I want to point out that there is what is called a مبدأ جزائي regarding article 98 which states:<BR/><BR/>- تشترط المادة 98 عقوبات لاعتبار الفاعل مستفيدا من العذر المخفف المنصوص عليه فيها أن يكون قد أقدم على فعله تحت<BR/>تأثير سورة غضب شديد ناتج عن عمل غير محق وعلى جانب من الخطورة أتاه المجني عليه . <BR/><BR/>So it's not for any reason that a person can get a reduced sentence.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052900244791771766.post-52655389968636636632008-06-25T11:52:00.000+03:002008-06-25T11:52:00.000+03:00Hareega, and that's what needs to be changed. Not ...Hareega, and that's what needs to be changed. Not allowing judges to use this article in cases of honor crimes, or at least not in cases that were clearly premeditated and based on nothing but rumors and hearsay.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052900244791771766.post-79673024730134412112008-06-25T10:46:00.000+03:002008-06-25T10:46:00.000+03:00Nothing wrong with article 98. It's present in alm...Nothing wrong with article 98. It's present in almost all Western countries. Notice that it mentions "persons" in a state of extreme anger and not necessarily men and doesn't in any way refer to men killing women for sexual acts. It's probably the interpretation of the law that's a problem because we realize that a most men who commit honor crimes do not commit them when they're in an extreme state of anger (like catching their wife in bed with someone) but acting based on suspicion and after having a plan to kill her.Hareegahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03506185925815988104noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052900244791771766.post-37042760775543471252008-06-25T10:33:00.000+03:002008-06-25T10:33:00.000+03:00Tololy, I think the reason they don't is because t...Tololy, I think the reason they don't is because they're afraid to lose popularity. With subjects like these the government (and the royal family) doesn't wish to start up a controversy, but I think they have a greater number of people on their side now than when they participated in the campaign in 2000. It's bad for their reputation mind you, Jordan has become more notorious for honor killings than anything else.<BR/><BR/>Observer, of course they did. Women's worst enemy is women, sadly.Farahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05178447716946708839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052900244791771766.post-79646501352944878222008-06-25T09:49:00.000+03:002008-06-25T09:49:00.000+03:00I guess that women had a good chance to stand for ...I guess that women had a good chance to stand for themselves when we had the parliament elections. Unfortunatly most did vote for the tribal candidate without giving a damn about their rights as women.The Observerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01601842419039013133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052900244791771766.post-50608194529650086122008-06-24T23:24:00.000+03:002008-06-24T23:24:00.000+03:00I agree with you that there needs to be more aware...I agree with you that there needs to be more awareness among women themselves if honor killings are to stop. Women in power, such as the queen, ministers, and members of the senate and house of representatives are expected to do something about this. They don't, because they are not bothered with anything beyond their immediate job descriptions. That's part of the criteria that qualifies many of them to hold their positions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com