Letter to my mother

Dear Amma Jee: I am dismayed by our society’s propensity for violence. From domestic violence within homes and corporal punishment for children within our private domains, and vigilantism in the name of morality and religion in public sphere, to demands for savagery as justice by a state that fails to protect its citizens, why do we see mindless anger as a solution to everything? Were we always like this as a society or has exposure to violence in both private and public spheres convinced us that the very problem could be the solution?

After the announcement that Kasur’s rapist-killer had been arrested, you wrote on Facebook: “Sorry Zainab you could not be protected. To preclude repetition of such horrific incidents not only Zainab’s abuser but all perpetrators of such beastly crimes should be hanged publicly. A mass execution of child abusers will set an example. If you agree please stand up and be counted. It is now or never.” I have to respectfully disagree. You raised us in a home where we were allowed to think independently, argue and disagree – and so I wish to present my viewpoint.

As a father of two handsome boys and one beautiful girl, I share the anger and have sleepless nights worrying about how best to protect them from the world we have brought them in. But I am convinced that, while hanging Zainab’s killer might be cathartic for a while, it won’t make society safer for children – including my own. I don’t believe a public hanging will cure all paedophiles in our midst. If I thought a mass hanging could render our society safe for children permanently, I might agree in self-interest.

What conversation will I have with my six-year old when he asks why people are being hanged by their neck in public, when I am uncomfortable speaking to him even about child abuse and sexual molestation? I worry he might grow up thinking it is okay to inflict cruelty on others. Doesn’t violence create a vicious cycle where many on the receiving end in one cycle become perpetrators in the next? I wonder if those who inflict abuse on others were born rotten or if they were nurtured in an environment where they internalised the abuse they received.

As a student of law with an interest in theories of punishment, I have yet to come across a convincing empirical study that establishes that the death penalty is an effective deterrent. I suspect civilised societies that have developed an aversion for capital punishment didn’t do so because their practice of public hangings and shootings eradicated violent crime, but because they realised over time that the vices of brutal punishment override its perceived benefits. That certainty of punishment is a more effective deterrent makes logical sense.

Can’t punishment be severe without being inhuman? We often hear that those who indulge in beastly crimes don’t deserve human treatment as their actions denude them of human rights. Should a civilised society stoop to the level of the deviant in meting out justice to him? Javed Iqbal the serial killer, who sexually assaulted over 100 boys, strangled them and drowned their bodies in acid, was condemned by the judge hearing his case to be chopped up into 100 pieces and drowned in acid. Did such a sentence reflect the judge’s state of mind or Iqbal’s?

Let’s assume such a brutal sentence was carried out as ordered. Would making such an ‘example’ have afforded protection to Zainab? We learnt in law school that the main theories of punishment include deterrence/reprisal, restitution and reform. In our polity, we allude to ‘root causes’ every once in a while, but focus on reform is almost non-existent. What if paedophilia is a disease that can’t be cured or deterred by threat of violence? Will making an example of Zainab’s killer still make children safer?

Whether proclivity for child molestation is caused by nature or nurture, can’t we build a system to identify paedophiles and ensure they don’t mingle with society freely, instead of calling for mass executions? Will there be a point to hangings if they can’t deter the criminal behaviour in question, or if it is likely that we may end up hanging the wrong folks? We know criminal justice systems are a human contrivance. They are peppered with human biases. And they make mistakes. Who is responsible if we hang a few innocents in our fit of rage?

While clearing the backlog of criminal cases, our Supreme Court reversed convictions of some who spent decades in prison. In 2016, it acquitted two brothers who had already been executed. What kind of deterrence does a state create by hanging an innocent? Striking the right balance between safety and efficiency of a penal system is a big challenge. Can anger have a role in driving such balancing exercise? Very often those we hang are poor. If deterrence rests on hanging the indigent and never those with means, is it justice or witch-hunt?

Can death threats deter someone motivated by ideology or nature? Can capital punishment dissuade suicide bombers? Did the butchers who descended on APS plan to leave alive? Did hanging Mumtaz Qadri deter vigilantism? Did the Qadri example deter the mob from lynching Mashal Khan? This week a student killed his principal in Charsadda, accusing him of being a blasphemer. Punishment can be severe even when it doesn’t take a life. And a system that ensures certainty of punishment is a more effective deterrent that one that is arbitrarily violent.

Coming back to the protection of children, we will need to begin speaking candidly about issues that we are embarrassed about. We are seeped in a culture where perceived notions of honour, respect and politeness override our wellbeing. I have looked back at how we were raised, loved and protected to draw lessons as a parent. I have vague memory of an inappropriate embrace or two by a domestic helper and a Quran teacher. But we never spoke about molestation in our house and grew up with a sense that boys aren’t vulnerable to abuse.

I believe it was part luck but mostly strict oversight of our daily routines, no sleepovers, parental interest in our friends and their families and focus on safety (bordering on paranoia) that kept us safe as kids. I don’t think society was much different a generation back. It just didn’t talk about issues. Anyone who has gone to boarding school, for example, has experienced or witnessed or been aware of sexual molestation. Some who were bullied when young became bullies when they grew older. Some were scarred for life. But we feel shame broaching these subjects.

Growing up we received no sex education. No one spoke to us about hormonal changes during puberty and how to deal with them. A teacher who once tried was reported to the principal for inappropriate conversation with teenagers. We are a society that pretends that sex doesn’t exist. Consequently, we don’t speak intelligently about how it affects the safety of children, or adult relationships, or how it leads to harassment, violence and crime. Talking about sexual molestation will not eradicate it. But it will enable us to protect our children better.

Behavioural change is hard. Dragging out skeletons from closets is even more painful. But without this we can’t think logically about how to make our homes and schools safer for children. Without identifying flaws in each component of our criminal justice system – watch and ward, investigation, prosecution, court and prisons – and finding 21st century solutions to fix them (while learning from the examples of others), the system will remain dysfunctional, arbitrary and violent. And demand for hangings will remain our collective response to trauma.

As you always told us, there are no shortcuts in life. I hope you will reconsider your Facebook status.

Your loving son.

The writer is a lawyer based in Islamabad.

Email: sattar@post.harvard.edu