Unlawful marriage or bitter ex?: Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi on trial in Pakistan
On February 3rd, 2024 a court in Pakistan sentenced former Prime Minister Imran Khan and his wife, Bushra Bibi, to seven years in jail in a case related to their marriage. The allegations implied that Imran and Bushra were in violation of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) after entering into an ‘un-Islamic marriage’. The complaint against the marriage was raised in November 2023 by Khawar Maneka, Bushra Bibi’s ex-husband. According to him, Bushra divorced him on 25th September 2017 and married Imran Khan on 1st January 2018 without completing her required iddat period, which caused him and his family humiliation and disgrace. In Islamic tradition, iddat represents a mandatory waiting period for a woman following her husband's demise or post-divorce, during which she is prohibited from marrying another man. This period primarily serves to clarify the lineage of any child born subsequent to the husband's death or divorce.
The complaint was filed under sections 34 (common intention), 496 (marriage ceremony fraudulently gone through without lawful marriage) and 496 B (fornication) of the Pakistan Penal Code. According to Islamic law, section 496 B falls under zina. Zina is defined by Islamic law as unlawful sexual intercourse, i.e. intercourse between a man and a woman who are not married to another. This encompasses extramarital as well as premarital sex. Zina does not differentiate between the concepts of “adultery” and “fornication”, and Islamic law prescribes punishments for both men and women for the act of zina. However, in principle, it is a problematic offence to prove. It requires four respectable witnesses to the actual act of intercourse.
In 2022, Justice Ali Zia Bajwa issued a ruling in a judgement that upheld an order, wherein an application for registration of a case under charges of zina was dismissed. It was decided that the union of husband and wife in an irregular marriage, without observing the period of iddat, may have consequences under Islamic law but it cannot be treated as unlawful. This leads us to question the intentions behind these allegations against the couple. Do they form a genuine case or are they just a way to further spread political propaganda by state-backed parties? That is an important conversation, but one to be had at another time. However, the blatant use of a woman's body, and autonomy to further that propaganda should raise concern - especially considering Pakistan's legal and political history with such laws.
In 1979, the Hudood Ordinances were introduced as a part of General Zia-ul-Haq’s Islamization campaign which aimed to bring Pakistani law into conformity with Islamic injunctions. The punishment of zina was one of the main ordinances, however, because zina is so difficult to prove, the ordinance was misused immensely. The ordinance has been widely criticised because it resulted in the persecution of rape survivors. When women were unable to provide evidence that they were raped, they were prosecuted because their rape report was considered an admission to pre/extra-marital sex. In the absence of four male witnesses to corroborate their stories, they had no way out.
Pakistan has had a rocky journey when it comes to recovering from regressive movements. This is reflected in the Bushra-Imran ruling as well as the motorway rape case, when a mother was gang raped in front of her children on the motorway while seeking help for a broken-down car. Ironically, Imran Khan, who was Prime Minister at the time blamed such events on increasing vulgarity in society and said “If a woman is wearing very few clothes it will have an impact on the man unless they are robots. It’s common sense.”
Statements like these have been counterproductive to the plight of women’s and gender rights movements in the countries that have been striving for basic human rights for decades. Regarding the Bushra Bibi - Imran Khan ruling, Aurat March and Sindh Moorat march, women and trans activist movements expressed in Instagram posts how this ruling violates Bushra Bibi’s basic human right to privacy and expressed their concern for the consequences the ruling will have for all Pakistani women.
The impact of the verdict on the iddat case can be devastating for all Pakistani women. Not only does this set a dangerous precedent for other women who can be victimised in courts the same way, but it is also an unjust ruling in every sense of the law. The verdict is a manifestation of unequal marriage laws that establish men's superiority and control in marital relationships and reinforce patriarchal control over women’s bodies. This is also part of a much bigger problem that contributes to the normalisation of conversations about women's and trans people's private lives, and bodies - on social media and in courts. This is a clear attempt to dehumanise and subjugate women and should be condemned in its entirety.