|
The Imrana rape case is the case of the sexual assault of a 28-year-old Indian Muslim woman by her father-in-law on 6 June 2005 in Charthawal village in the Muzaffarnagar district Uttar Pradesh, India (located 70 km from Delhi). The village elders and subsequently, several levels of Islamic legal opinion regarded Imrana's marriage with her husband null, as the Sharia regards sexual relations with both the father and son as incestuous. This sparked nationwide controversy as critics argued the case was treated as adultery and not rape.〔(【引用サイトリンク】title= Let's be fair to Imrana )〕〔(【引用サイトリンク】publisher=http://www.tehelka.com/story_main13.asp?filename=Ne071605The_legal_fiction.asp ) 〕 ==Rape and Islamic rulings== On 6 June 2005, Imrana, 28 years old at the time, and the mother of five children, was raped by her 69-year-old father-in-law Ali Mohammad. Soon after she was raped, a local Muslim ''panchayat'' (council of elders) asked her to treat her husband Nur Ilahi as her son and declared their marriage null and void.〔 〕 Imrana defied the panchayat's ruling and continued living with her husband. The leading Islamic seminary Darul Uloom Deoband also issued a ''fatwa''〔 〕 or opinion, which quotes from Quran 4:23: ''wa la tankihoo ma nakaha aaba-o-kum'', “And marry not women whom your fathers married”, and not distinguishing between rape and adultery, said that as a result of her father-in-law's act, she should now be treated as the mother of her husband and she could no longer live with him even though Imrana had not married her father-in-law. She was still married to her husband when she was raped by her father in law therefore the fatwa provided by the panchayat's disregard the Islamic rulings against rape and the punishment for the rapists. Due to such fatwa Imrana is in a way being prosecuted instead of her rapist father in law as she is being ordered to leave her husband and start a life with her rapist. The fatwa is a clarification of the ruling by the village leaders who disregarded the Islamic teachings for such cases for the sake of shunning Imrana who is thought to have brought shame to the community by having sexual intercourse with her father in law.〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Fighting for Imrana )〕 This ''fatwa'' was based on the Abu Hanifa school of Islamic Jurisprudence (Hanafi fiqh), which rules that on having sex with a man she marries, a woman has the status of mother to all his children. The other three schools, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali, reject this position〔 〕〔 〕 The All India Muslim Personal Law Board also endorsed the fatwa,〔 〕 but opinions were divided between the Hanafi and Shafi'i,〔 the two sunni fiqh's mostly represented in India. Later, the Deoband seminary denied that it has issued such a ''fatwa''. Nur Ilahi continued to stay with Imrana and said that "() neither sought advice nor counsel from Deoband. () have not raised the issue before clerics." At one point, Uttar Pradesh chief minister Mulayam Singh Yadav also endorsed the view of the Darul Uloom that she can no longer live with her husband. After Imrana's case was highlighted by the national media, the National Commission for Women directed authorities in Muzaffarnagar to take action.〔()〕 The body's chairperson Girija Vyas asked the Uttar Pradesh government to punish the guilty and sought a report on the incident. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Imrana rape case」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|