Last year, a girl named Amina El-Filali was raped in her town of Larache, Morocco, where her parents filed a criminal complaint. The case was taken to court where, in accordance with Article 475 of the Penal Code the judge ordered the rapist to marry his victim, thereby absolving him of his crime. Since Amina was a minor, the court was required to obtain the consent of her parents before authorizing this marriage; Amina’s father now says he was pressured into agreeing to the marriage. Under the Family Code, once a decision is passed by the judge, it cannot be reversed.
Amina committed suicide last week. She was 16.
A bill was first introduced into the Moroccan legislature in 2008 to amend this law, but has been shelved since. Legislation, much like rape, is a power game. Since those who have the authority and power to change this law are unaffected by it, they do not pursue it with urgency. Requiring a woman to marry her rapist is telling her that her being is restricted to the honor (or dishonor) it brings to the family. No longer a virgin, she would only bring shame, so transfer her legal status to the man that started this mess to begin with – she’s his problem now. A hand-me-down.
It is this chauvinistic mentality that led to the creation of a law in Pakistan that required a woman to produce four witnesses before she could accuse someone of rape. This was the law of the land for some 27 years before it was amended in 2006. There were numerous movements in Pakistan throughout the years to change those laws, but they were always debated out of Parliament and vetoed by female parliamentarians just as much as men. Why? These women were from affluent families that remained sheltered from such crimes and they were told by clerics that changing this law (that was introduced in the garb of a religious mandate) would be against Islam – and these women blindly agreed.
Various countries have a law similar to Morocco, where the rapist gets away by marrying his victim. The fact that most of these countries are predominantly Muslim is often cited to be the reason for such codification; it is becoming a fad to blame all ill on Islam. I find no such injunctions in the Qur’an, and even though rape is not specifically mentioned, the Bible does address sex outside of the marriage contract:
“And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.” (Exodus 22:16-17 – similarly, see Deuteronomy 22:25-30)
Whether based on religion or not, there is no argument for forcing a girl to marry her offender (or forcibly marrying anyone, for that matter – but that’s another debate all together) for shame of “losing her honor” for no fault of her own.
It wasn’t until 1991 that the English courts recognized marital rape as a crime; before such time, consent to sex was implied in a marriage. The House of Lords unanimously threw out this principle, calling it a “common law fiction” which was “absurd”. Many countries now recognize marital rape as a punishable criminal offense; many still, do not.
Moroccan women have taken to the streets to push the bill from 2008 into law. Let’s hope it doesn’t take the life of another Amina before we can discard these incongruous laws world over; because in the words of the House of Lords, they really have “no useful purpose to serve”.
