Thank you for the input — I really appreciate it.

Interesting to see the actual wording.

Wait, is this…Sam Zarifi, Amnesty’s Asia Director?

However, purely as a law, it has been caricatured as the ‘marital rape’ law. In fact, the Dari version shows it to be basically pretty middle of the road Shi’a jurisprudence, slightly to the right of Iran, but not egregiously so.

The particular provision that has been mistranslated and misinterpreted as ‘allowing’ marital rape doesn’t do so, legally speaking: article 132 includes the following relevant provisions:
(1) The spouses are obliged to socialize with one another and their parents and family.
(2) The spouses are obliged to cooperate and collaborate for welfare of their families and children.
(3) The spouses must abstain from any actions that would cause the hatred and displeasure of one another; whenever the husband wants his wife to attend to her appearance, the wife is obliged to do so.
(4) The husband is obliged, except during period of travel, to spend the night in one place with his wife at least one night out of four, except when it is harmful to one of the spouses or one of them suffers from a venereal disease. It is the duty of the wife to tend to the husband’s inclination for sexual liaison. The husband is obliged to not postpone intimacy with his wife for more than four months without his wife’s consent.
(5) Whenever a man has more than one wife, he is obliged to spend at least one night out of four in view of section (4). The right of the wife (to intimacy) may, upon her consent, be transferred to the husband and other spouses.
(6) The husband may increase the rights (of intimacy) to more than one night, on the condition that no harm or shame comes to the other spouses.
(7) The wife is obliged to manage and perform those areas of domestic chores that the husband has specified in the marriage contract; otherwise, the wife is not obliged to perform domestic chores.

As you can see, this is not an explicit endorsement of marital rape. From a purely legal point of view, the offending language in section (4) (“It is the duty of the wife to tend to the husband’s inclination for sexual liaison”) has to be read in light of section (3)’s injunction against actions that would cause “hatred or displeasure”. And under basic jurisprudential principles the article could be interpreted so as to prohibit rape, in fact.

No question that the language about the wife’s obligation to satisfy the husband’s sexual needs is highly problematic. But the point of article 132 is to govern the mutual responsibilities of spouses (including up to four wives) in the sexual sphere.

No question this is absolutely discriminatory toward women, and deeply troubling, given Afghanistan’s current political climate, as well as the absence of a functioning judiciary, and the absolute lack of state protection for women, in particular Shi’a women.

But it is not a ‘marital rape’ law, and by casting it thus, the Western media and policy makers have actually given a sop to Mohseni and others who make a living by positioning themselves as defenders of Islam against Western interlopers. The law should never have been rammed though, but the Wolesi and Mishrano Jirgas’ foolishness, and Karzai’s weakness, are other issues.

Now, Afghan civil society and their international supporters should focus on ameliorating some of the political damage, and not try to engage in a debate on Shi’a jurisprudence.

And yes, I will second Monk in asking since when does Mohsini represent Hazaras? Most Hazaras (as Shi’as) don’t follow him on religious and legal matters–which is ever the more reason for him to posture and pretend for the mantle. Certainly there is no unanimity on the matter between Shi’a Ayatollahs.

It is crucial to understand how the Shi’ite juridical system works: all Shi’ites must follow an Ayatollah (which is typically represented by an accomplished and recognized individual that heads a whole institution of dedicated researchers and tools that issue judgements after thorough research). The only demand is to stick with the Ayatollah for all matters juridical (there is variation in the interpretation of the finer points of the law so this does matter). Traditionally the Ayatollah’s may be based in Iraq, Iran or Lebanon simply because they will have more resources available to them in those countries rather than Afghanistan and Afghan Shi’as may follow any of them. There are Hazara Ayatollahs in both Iran and Iraq, so a Hazara in his right senses will have nothing to do with this Afghan equivalent of Cher.

Mohsini’s constituency is mostly non-Hazara Shi’ites from Kandahar. If Karzai wants to make a play for their loyalty so be it.

As for Mohsini’s definition of democracy, that’s as far as his knowledge of democracy goes. I wonder what he has to say about his multiple wives, jihadi crimes including the rape of a girl almost a tenth of his age, massacre, summary executions and more. What does he have to say for the fact the while Hazaras were being slaughtered in central Afghanistan, his Shiite madrassa prospered right inside Kandahar and since when does he represent the Hazaras, who I am sure have better alternatives to a dogmatic puppet from Pushtoon south.

It is a shame that religious and racist extremists like Mohsini have become power brokers while the Hazaras, despite their never ending persecution by Islamic and ethnocentrist extremists; are being increasingly marginalized. Let’s not even start discussing how the dedication of all aid and reconstruction funds to Taliban hit south and warlord hit north have let down the Hazaras right from the start of “democracy in Afghanistan”.

This law is yet another attempt to undermine the progress Hazaras have made during the last eight years. The facts speak for themselves. Hazara women still refuse to wear full hijab, they have had active participation in programs like Afghan Star. They hold posts such as Afghanistan’s only female governor, only female mayor, head of Afghanistan’s Independent Human Rights Commission and more in NGO’s and offices across the country. Hazarajat has the most promising female to male ratio in school and university enrollment.

These are facts, unmatched in any of the areas Mohsini or Karzai could ever actually represent. The rest is pure bullshit.