Amina Lawal Free?

This morning, Rose woke me with the good news of Amina Lawal. She is set to be freed.

Some of you may recall the story of Amina Lawal, the Nigerian woman sentenced to death by stoning for adultery. A child resulted of the affair, so they gave her two years to wean the child before they were set to kill her. Pretty nice of them, really. Most would just be killed outright.

Amnesty International, and every women's rights organization under the sun got involved, as did plenty of men as well. (I fucking hope that both the National Action Committee of the Status of Women and the National Organization of Women stuck their noses deep in this one, if not then they will never get my support for anything!). There was pressure from all over the world, and lots of it. But still, they were set to kill this woman. Rose told me last night that the decision of whether or not to free Lawal was to be made today. I was absolutely convinced that they were going to kill her. Why? Because they wanted her killed. She's a worthless woman, no great loss, and she deserves to die. They wanted her dead, and it didn't matter to them what anyone thought of that. Death, death, death. I still can't believe that she is going to be free barring an appeal by the state. Listen to this:

1. She never had a lawyer during her first trial.
2. She was never made to fully understand what a conviction of this case would bring.
3. Pregnancy outside of marriage is all that is required to prove that a woman committed adultery. (i.e. a husband could deny having had sex with his wife for months, and the courts would believe him unless they brought in a learned scholar that they chose to listen to, see below)
4. All a man has to do is deny having raped someone, and any case brought against him is dropped for lack of evidence.

But wait, there's more. This excellent article by Sanusi L. Sanusi discusses how Islamic law and sharia have been misinterpreted and abused by the ignorant and powerful. This causes the whole religion to be called into question and exposes it to ridicule. I believe that some aspects of it are ridiculous. For example, gestsation periodsa are defined as anywhere from six months (minimum) to anywhere between four and twelve years to determine paternity. A twelve-year pregnancy? A sleeping fetus? I suppose that these laws were invented centuries before anyone really knew better, but twelve years? This is based on the assumption that Aisha, wife of the Holy Prophet, had three pregnancies in twelve years, and that each of the pregnancies lasted four years. Extending the maximum gestation period protects those who have odd medical circumstances (long pregnancies). If a birth happens after the maximum gestation period (which begins after the last date relations between husband and wife could reasonably and reliably occur), then the child is not the husband's, and the woman is probably an adulteress. The only way that I can imagine this to really make sense is in the case of an extrauterine pregnancy that is never detected, and eventually results in a calcified fetus. (This is a disgusting and spooky thing; I've seen pictures.) Here is some interesting text:

In the case of Amina Lawal (and the earlier case of Safiya) the babies were delivered well within the gestation period (emphasis mine). They could only be tried based on one of the following three possible events:

1. That the woman, being of sound mental health and fully aware of the consequences, voluntarily brings herself to the court and confesses to being pregnant from adultery. She is then convicted based on her confession, which she is free to withdraw at any point before or during the punishment. The partner is not convicted unless he confesses when asked or volunteers a confession as well. (This is based on sound traditions).
2. That four male, reliable eye-witnesses testify to having caught her in the same act of sexual intercourse with a man other than her husband. (emphasis mine) (This is based on Qur’anic text). Or
3. That the husband repudiates the child and takes an oath of Li-an to the effect that the woman is an adulteress and she fails or declines the counter oath affirming her innocence. (This is based on Qur’anic text).

We already know that the first condition didn't happen. Neither did the second or third, as far as I know. I would have to find more information on these men. But if what this scholar says is true, then Muslim Nigerians (and, to a lesser extent, the world) is being taken for a ride. This is yet another disgusting male power grab, I think. The fact that Sanusi Lamido is being harrassed by many fellow Muslims is proof that they would rather torture and kill women than listen to logic, reason, compassion, science or their own Holy Book. At least the ones in that part of Nigeria. This is why you should necessarily think ill of sharia or Islamic law, but the people who practice this law and would impose it on others.

Who am I kidding? Any law that says that men are better than women and advocates killing women (and men, to a lesser degree) should be scrapped and ridiculed.

I have just said that they hate women over there. Minutes after Lawal was freed, a man was sentenced to death by stoning for sodomy (and child molestation, I assume). I wonder if there will be any international appeal for this man. I'd say his chances are on the far side of zero, but we'll see.