Honor Killings
Has the number of honor killings targeting women increased in the years following the 1979 Islamic revolution? If so, what factors have contributed to this rise in numbers? No definite answers can be given to this question. The Iranian judiciary does not release definitive data documenting honor killings, leaving researchers with empty hands. Lacking access to definitive and reliable data, researches often have to rely on narratives published in newspapers and websites.
Honor killings are as old as paternalistic cultures. What makes honor killings interesting in majority Muslim societies is that, in these societies, the legislator defends the murderer who commits an honor killing against a woman, citing mandates set by the Sharia and Islamic law.
In the Islamic Republic of Iran, according to addendum 2 to article 295 and article 226 of the Islamic penal code, if someone murders another on the assumption that the victim was “vajeb al-ghatl” [literally, “necessary to be killed” ], he will not be tried for first-degree murder. Based on these laws, judges convict murderers who have committed honor killings on the assumption that the murdered woman has committed adultery not to death or life imprisonment, but rather to pay the “dia” [blood money ]. As such, legal incentives, protected by judges in the area of implementation, are given to men who are accused of killing women. This must be noted as the most important factor behind the rise in the number of honor killings in Iran.
When a government turns nomadic and tribal beliefs into law and itself enters the business of propagating such beliefs, how can one hope to prevent or control the occurrence of honor killings targeting women? If the murderer’s “assumptions” about the beliefs of the victim are enough to warrant the murder, then why do we need a judiciary with thousands on its payroll? If individual judgments are enough to identify those condemned to death, then what is the need for a criminal justice system?
The Islamic Republic’s Constitution recognizes only one source for laws, and that is the Sharia and Islamic law. Furthermore, those who are in charge of interpreting these laws subscribe to a very old and outdated interpretation of Islam and intend to legislate against women and human rights. In current conditions, there seems to be no window of hope for revising discriminatory gender laws. Hope for reform has completely vanished. When a monthly publication is shut down simply for discussing discriminatory laws, chances are events such as honor killings will increase, not decrease.
Currently, the law, the Sharia, interpreters of Islamic law, government’s cultural institutions, and in general, policies that enable the government to interfere in its citizens’ private lives and more often than not propagates an anti-women culture, are supporting and sponsoring men who murder women and know well that they will not be punished for killing a woman in Iran.