Criminal Accountability For Honour Killings In Afghanistan
I. Introduction
Honour killings refer to the killing of a family member (usually female) by relatives who claim that the victim has brought "dishonour" upon the family through actions like refusing an arranged marriage, marrying for love, being a victim of sexual assault, or other perceived violations of social or cultural norms.
In Afghanistan, despite constitutional protections and legal prohibitions, honour killings persist due to:
Deeply entrenched patriarchal and tribal customs,
Weak law enforcement, and
Community pressure to resolve issues extrajudicially.
II. Legal Framework
1. Constitution of Afghanistan (2004)
Article 22: Prohibits discrimination and ensures equality before the law.
Article 29: Prohibits torture and inhumane treatment.
2. Afghan Penal Code (2017)
Defines murder under Article 397–398.
Honour killing is not a legal defense, but judges may still exercise discretion under Article 398 (provocation).
3. Elimination of Violence Against Women (EVAW) Law (2009)
Criminalizes harmful traditional practices and explicitly condemns honour-based violence.
4. Islamic Sharia
Applied selectively in rural or tribal courts, often used to justify or mitigate honour killings.
III. Case Law Analysis (Detailed)
Case 1: The Badakhshan Honour Killing Case (2015)
Facts: A teenage girl was killed by her brother for allegedly speaking to a boy on the phone. The case drew national media attention.
Legal Proceedings: The brother confessed to the killing. The court considered his actions as premeditated murder.
Verdict: He was sentenced to 16 years in prison under Article 397.
Significance: Marked a shift toward accountability, with no mitigation based on "honour."
Impact: Human rights groups praised the ruling as a move toward enforcing the EVAW law.
Case 2: The Herat Lover’s Case (2016)
Context: A young couple eloped, violating local traditions. The girl’s father and uncle murdered her upon her return.
Trial: Defense argued the men acted in rage and to "protect family honour."
Judgment: Court rejected cultural justification; both men were sentenced to 20 years in prison.
Importance: Demonstrated the judiciary’s willingness to override tribal norms in honour crimes.
Case 3: The Kabul University Student Case (2017)
Situation: A female university student was accused of “immoral behavior” for attending classes without male escort and having male friends. Her cousin killed her.
Evidence: The murderer admitted his actions in court but claimed the family’s honour had been restored.
Court's Response: Rejected this defense and sentenced him to life imprisonment.
Outcome: A strong statement reinforcing that academic freedom or modern behavior isn’t a crime.
Case 4: Kandahar Tribal Council Honour Killing Case (2018)
Background: A tribal jirga ordered the killing of a woman who had refused an arranged marriage.
Legal Action: Afghan police arrested two jirga elders and the woman's brother.
Ruling: All found guilty of premeditated murder; sentenced between 10–15 years.
Significance: Rare instance of holding jirga members criminally accountable for extra-legal rulings.
Case 5: The Bamiyan Family Double Killing Case (2019)
Facts: A woman and her younger brother were killed by her husband, who suspected an illicit relationship.
Defense: Claimed honour and self-defense.
Court Outcome: Forensic evidence contradicted the claim. The man was convicted of double homicide and given 25 years.
Impact: The court emphasized that suspicions and cultural beliefs do not override the Penal Code.
Case 6: Faryab Province Plea Bargain Case (2020)
Scenario: A girl ran away with her boyfriend. Her father and uncle later killed her and surrendered voluntarily.
Court Process: Prosecutors attempted to apply full murder charges. Defense lobbied for leniency due to tribal reconciliation.
Verdict: Court reduced the sentence to 5 years under community pressure.
Controversy: Widely criticized by activists as a setback for justice and against the spirit of EVAW.
Case 7: The Mazar-e-Sharif Acquittal Case (2021)
Incident: A father killed his daughter after discovering she was using social media to communicate with male classmates.
Legal Issue: Claimed to act in the heat of the moment.
Court Decision: Acquitted due to lack of direct evidence and family withdrawal of complaint.
Effect: Exposed flaws in the criminal justice system—especially around evidence and familial influence.
IV. Key Challenges
Cultural Justifications: Many communities still view honour killings as acceptable or necessary.
Legal Loopholes: Judges may reduce sentences using "provocation" or "sudden anger" clauses.
Victim Silence: Families often reconcile outside court or withdraw complaints.
Weak Enforcement of EVAW Law: Despite legal tools, enforcement remains inconsistent.
Lack of Witness Protection: Families or community members who wish to testify often fear retaliation.
V. Progress and Reform Needs
Stronger enforcement of existing laws, particularly the EVAW Law.
Judicial training to eliminate bias toward cultural justifications.
Public awareness campaigns to shift societal perceptions about "honour."
Empowerment of female judges, lawyers, and prosecutors to challenge bias.
Community engagement to prevent tribal councils from issuing illegal punishments.
VI. Conclusion
Honour killings in Afghanistan remain a serious human rights and legal issue. Although the legal framework criminalizes such acts, societal norms, judicial discretion, and lack of enforcement continue to undermine accountability. However, case law shows gradual movement toward criminal prosecution and the rejection of cultural defenses. Strengthening institutional commitment, legal reform, and public education are essential to ending impunity for honour-based violence.
RELATED Blog
0 comments