Early on December 13, the first e-mail to come in contained a Reuters message reporting to the world that a judge of Pakistan, a man of sane body and mind, had ruled that one man who had thrown acid on to the faces of two women should be taken to a sports stadium - where games are played and enjoyed with delight - and acid thrown on his face in the same manner but under medical supervision. This charming bit of news was also widely reported in our national press. Let us take one report, dateline Multan December 13 :

"An eye for any eye, ATC orders. Staff Report. Multan. Bahawalpur Anti Terrorism Court Justice Syed Afzal Sharif Kazmi on Friday sentenced a suspect to be blinded by acid for doing the same to a woman.

"The judge rules that the convict, Sajjad Ahmed, be given a matching punishment under the Islamic law of 'Qisas'.

"Sajjad Ahmed and his four accomplices threw acid on two women, Pathani (25) and Rabia (27) when they admonished the men for harassing them. Ms Rabia lost her sight and Pathani was seriously burnt. The court ordered that Mr Ahmed would be administered acid in his eyes in the presence of a medical officer at the Bahwalpur Stadium.

"The court sentenced the convicts three times - Sajjad Ahmed, Ahmed Doda and Khuda Bakhsh to seven years imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,000 each and five years imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,000 to Khuda Bakhsh and Ahmed Doda each. The court acquitted another two suspects on the benefit of the doubt. The court also ordered the payment of fine to the victims."

Is this civil judge to be reprimanded by his seniors, or are such judgments now to be considered the norm in Pakistan? Does the law of the land prescribe such punishments? If so, under which section of the PPC?

On the morning of December 19, this newspaper editorialized on 'Another fiendish act'. Members of the Kalayar tribe of Sillanwali, a tehsil of Sarghoda, took it upon themselves to parade through the local bazaar Ms Faiz Batool, an elderly woman councillor, an elected representative of the people. She had annoyed the tribals by participating in a 'brawl involving the tribe'.

Her family lodged a complaint with the police and the tribe is now using pressure to get them to withdraw the complaint 'or else'. The police and the local MPA remain inactive. As said the editorial, "From the reporting of the Nawabpur incident in 1984 to the recent ones involving acts of terror and torture against women there seems to be a consistent pattern of oppression and vengeance." And many such incidents, which probably occur on a daily basis in the hinterland of this country, are not reported.

As of December 19 this was "the latest addition to our national hall of shame." Are these tribal sub-humans to be allowed to get away with their disgusting display of barbarism, and continue their practices with impunity?

Last September we read of the plight of a newly married couple of Pano Aquil, Shaista Almani and Balaksher Maher, whose marriage was not to the liking of the 'elders' of their tribes (amongst whom Sardar Ali Gohar Maher and Sardar Khalid Ahmad Lund), and who, under threat of death, were in hiding anticipating that a jirga would impose upon them the karo kiri death penalty.

Sassui Palijo, an MPA of the honourable Sindh Assembly, in an e-mail message sent to me rightly termed the practice, 'a cancer in our society', and sadly but truly wrote that 'just because there are women in the parliament does not mean that drastic changes will occur because there is no rule of law and even government ministers openly support anti-women laws such as honour killings and the jirga system.

Sindh's cabinet minister Manzoor Panwhar supported and justified honour killings and said that the perpetrators of honour killings should be given more relief. When I tried to condemn him and raised the point in the House, our speaker, Muzaffar Shah, warned me six times and would not let me speak.' What else should she expect from the spineless and the flip-flopppers? What hope can there be?

Fearing for their lives, the legally married couple fled up north where friends gave them shelter. However, tribal predators, at the bidding of the tribal elders, tracked them down, and physically dragged them back to their village in Sindh where they were subjected to a forced divorce, and then each delivered to his/her parents.

A distressed Shaista with her parents requested her police escort to take her to her sister's house at Jamshoro, only to arrive to find the house locked and deserted, her sister's family, frightened by the whole situation, had fled. So back they all went to their own village.

Shaista and her husband had been in touch with our various human rights organizations since they were forced to flee for their lives.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, the Women's Action Forum and the Aurat Foundation together filed a consitutional petitition before the Sukkur Bench of the High Court of Sindh (874/03) against the Federation of Pakistan and 15 others asking that Shaista be given protection and saved from being killed.

On December 19, presiding judge, Justice Zahid Qurban Alvi, sitting with Justice Maqbool Baqar, passed an order. The IG Police Sindh was directed to ensure that her life was not endangered, and that those to whom her protection was entrusted would be held personally liable if any harm were to befall her. She and her family were to be escorted to Karachi and kept in a safe place, under 'maximum secrecy and security'.

An exhausted and traumatized Shaista is now admitted in a Karachi hospital where she is being treated. Balakhsher has obviously accepted the divorce and is living in relative tranquility with his relatives in his village. He is of no further concern. But now what happens to Shaista? She cannot perpetually live out her life in a hospital under police protection.

Yesterday's press carried a news item informing us that the Supreme Court has finally decided a 1996 appeal and upheld a 1991 judgment of the Federal Shariat Court which held that a woman who married under her own free will be considered to have done so validly. "The consent of the wali is not required and an adult and sane Muslim female can enter into a valid nikah of her own free will." Now, we await the honourable judges of the Supreme Court to make haste slowly and define what constitutes sanity in an adult Muslim female. As it now stands, those opposing such a marriage can always plead that the woman in question is insane.

President General Pervez Musharraf has proven himself to be sufficiently powerful, in the supreme national interest, to amend and add to the Constitution of the country so as to ensure that he remains in full charge of this nation for as long as he deems it necessary. But does he not regret that he finds himself unable to repeal the inhumane and obscurantist laws, totally against the 'larger' and 'supreme national interest' that lead to even more inhumane and neanderthal-like practices, that were imposed by his military predecessor, President General Ziaul Haq.

As Dawn editorialized on December 19, acts perpetrated under these laws are 'fiendish'. So, unless the general acts and undoes what has been done, the fiendish people of Pakistan will continue on merrily and unchecked with their superhuman malignant acts.