Lubna Hussein Pants Trial Adjourns Until Tuesday

Lubna Hussein, who was arrested July 3 for wearing pants and is now standing trial, openly defied the court by wearing the very same outfit to trial that she was arrested for, AFP reports.

From the Associated Press:

A Sudanese female journalist facing 40 lashes for wearing trousers in public in violation of the country's strict Islamic laws told a packed Khartoum courtroom Wednesday she is resigning from a U.N. job that grants her immunity so she can challenge the law on women's public dress code.

Lubna Hussein was among 13 women arrested July 3 in a raid by members of the public order police force on a popular Khartoum cafe for wearing trousers, considered indecent by the strict interpretation of Islamic law adopted by Sudan's Islamic regime. All but three of the women were flogged at a police station two days later.

But Hussein and two other women decided they wanted to go to trial and Hussein invited human rights workers, western diplomats and fellow journalists to Wednesday's hearing.

Some of her women friends showed up in court Wednesday wearing trousers in a show of support.

"This is not a case about me wearing pants," said Hussein, who works in the media department of the U.N. Mission in Sudan and contributes opinion pieces to a left-leaning Khartoum newspaper.

"This is a case about annulling the article that addresses women's dress code, under the title of indecent acts. This is my battle. This article is against the constitution and even against Islamic law itself," she said after the hearing.

Story continues below

advertisement

Judge Mudathir Rashid adjourned the hearing until Aug. 4 to give Hussein time to quit her job.

Hussein said she would immediately quit and thanked the U.N. for intervening to spare her possible punishment.

She said the U.N. mission was trying to stand by her, invoking a clause in an agreement between the Sudanese government and the world body's representatives in Sudan that obliges authorities to ask permission before starting legal proceedings against a member of its staff.

Hussein's defense lawyer, Nabil Adeeb, said the U.N. wanted to protect its staff, but Hussein wanted her trial to proceed.

"We have contradicting interests," he said. Hussein can face at least 40 lashes, according to Adeeb.

Islamic Sharia law has been strictly implemented in Sudan since an army coup led by President Omar al-Bashir seized power in 1989, toppling an elected but ineffective government. Activists and lawyers say the implementation of the law is arbitrary.

Public order cases usually involve quick summary trials with sentences carried out shortly afterward, as was the case with the 10 of the 13 women arrested earlier this month. They were flogged and fined 250 Sudanese pounds, or about $120.

Women in the mostly Arabized and Muslim northern Sudan, particularly in the capital Khartoum, dress in traditional outfits that include a shawl over their head and shoulder. Western dress is uncommon.

Still, the raid on a Khartoum cafe popular with journalists and foreigners was unusual.

>___

Associated Press reporter Sarah El Deeb conributed to this report from Cairo, Egypt.

Comments

[manshands]

With the Emmy Awards being broadcast all over the world next month, all female celebs, especially female journalists, should join in a non-vocal but visual protest of and solidarity for Hussein, by wearing trousers to all Emmy Award presentations. Just a reminder for so many of we Americans who go about our work days without thinking about the fact that we live in a country where we have the civil right of freedom of choice. I remember just a few short decades ago when woman in America were not allowed to wear slacks at the workplace.

[BarryChamplain]

As someone on this weekend's Bill Maher program put it so succintly, if you're a woman living in one of these fundamentalist Islamic countries, you're just screwed.

Meaning I guess that there is just no glimmer of hope that you'll ever have anything close to human rights, if you're a female living in one of these advanced nations.

I'd like to think it can't happen here, but if, for some hypothetical reason, the US were taken over tomorrow by a government which imposed corporal punishment on The Ladies, for morality violations... I believe you'd see a lot of formerly-g­utsy-talki­n' American women, bowing their heads and doing what they were told.

Why do I think that? Well, we just got through about two weeks of the Gates affair, in which every double-high authoritarian in America railed about respecting "authority" no matter what. Rudy Giuliani (textbook fascist former mayor of NYC, and 9.11 profiteer) told the President "Two words: SHUT UP!"

(I can just imagine Giuliani, if someone had told George W. Bush "SHUT UP!" He would have had the NYPD break his door down and arrest the commentator... had the commentator been Black, he'd be as dead as Patrick Dorismond or Amadou Diallo!).

There are an awful lot of Americans who really, really like being told what to do, or else. They've never progressed emotionally beyond Child.

[Iccarus]

They did arrest a Vegas bartender for making a joke about Bush. He said if someone set him on fire he'd be a burning bush...

[dannydog]

Oh the joys of a psychotic religion with a dress code! Makes me wanna go back to the 7th century when girls knew how to dress right, camels gave solace in the night, shaving was a chore and God Was Great. Allah help this poor woman (or at least loan her airfare so she can leave your God Forsaken land).

[mariegachelin]

There's nothing wrong with reformation and unless people stand up and speak up, oppression will not go away. She's a grown woman and she alone should decide how to dress. Most peodple don't see anything wrong with wearing a pair of slacks and no woman should be abused if she chooses to wear slacks. These issues are nothing but a way for some to control and force others into submission. Religions makes sense, they instill morality and ethics but abuse is unethical.
By now, most people can conclude that the Islamic religion has a lot of room to introduce reformation and hopefully, this would be a beginning.

[Ametista]

How does religion "make sense"???? Name ONE that does not subjugate women!

[isocraticinfidel]

This case isn't about the right for women to wear pants, per se, rather, it is, in the words of Lubna: "... a case about annulling the article that addresses women's dress code, under the title of indecent acts."

She just doesn't want the wearing of pants to be considered indecent and is hoping the court will agree with her and say that the article itself is unconstitutional and that it also goes against islamic law. She isn't "challenging" islamic law as JoyceGioia of twitters inc. suggests. I wish she was, but she isn't.

Ms. Hussein is brave indeed and it is sad that the women in Sudan have to take such small baby steps toward being treated as human beings. The progress toward human rights is painfully slow and will continue to be so unless the U.N. steps up and provides the same protection they offered Hussein as a
"staffer" to all the women of Sudan.

Anyone else wondering how the other, already lashed women paid the $120 fine?

(Just an idealistic thought here, but what if men and women banded together and put forward a case calling for universal laws that would make it unconstitutional for any government to inflict "quick summary trials" with swift sentences on any of its people?)

I hope everyone signs the petition and that Lubna wins her case and makes this article in their constitution null and void.

[clueless JD]

We need to improve how we execute our immigration laws so that it would be easier for victims of violent human rights violation could emigrate to the USA. USA needs to stand for something, and this it both it and how.

[VDHL]

I think a group of us, large as possibble, should go there and wear pants. Seriously.

[elan4444]

I lived in Sudan, and I am amazed at the courage of this woman. What is the most enduring memory of the recent Iranian protests? To me, the photo of the simple act of one Iranian woman, walking along traffic, in a sleeveless black dress, her head uncovered. I was so touched by this image - to think women in these Fundamentalist Islamic countries are living in conditions that existed in Spain before 1492! That wearing a modest garment such as a high-neck sleeveless dress is a revolutionary gesture!

Amelia Bloomer made a similar gesture in the U.S. when she rode a bike astride dressed in loose-fitting ankle-length pants (called Bloomers). She did it for all of us! We owe her an amazing debt of gratitude. Hopefully, Lubna can embarrass the Sudanese government into change, but I don't bet on it.

In view of this woman's courage, I have to reflect on our President's statement from his trip to the middle east, that we should not interfere with Islamic women's dress. This is the only thing I have strenuously disagreed with in regard to his policy statements. Sarkozy recently went as far as to ban the burka in France. Vive le Sarkozy! Jack Straw in the UK has indicated he will not see women in his office who wear the scarf. About time! It is imperative that we stand with Lubna, and make it widely known.

[tigerlyly]

Fantastic insight!

[Iccarus]

I agree with everything except the we should help part. It seems that it's better if we let the people decide for themselves. We can be supportive but if we make too much noise we will be accused of "meddling" and the hardliners will come out in droves. No?

[joannenj]

It is sad that the other women just went ahead and underwent the flogging. I wonder who does the flogging? Is it women or men? If it was men, isn't that indecent for a man to see a woman's skin? There are so many contradictions in Shaira law that the term Law should not be used at all. It's barbarism plain and simply. Treat women and children as property. Ignore all the sins of men.

[RACVC]

It has to be men. They probably find this quite stimulating.

[riff4u]

As a Muslim who has traveled around the Islamic world, I never thought pants on a woman was forbidden anywhere. In Pakistan it is part of the national attire on women. I don't know who came up with a ban on pants, especially when it is pants that cover a womans legs. There are a lot of crazies that come up with some strange interpretations of the Quran that I will never understand.

[Mikeeee]

Name me one person currently alive in the US with as much courage as is being displayed by this woman? She is a true hero and it's sadly stunning how quiet the fake hero worshipers on the right are being. Where's Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Palin, Dobson, et al

[Name Not In Use]

Rosa Parks - If she were still alive.

[nylibgrrl]

She was very courageous, but that just proves Mikeeee's point -- no one CURRENTLY alive...

[Omnibus]

Mikeee, obviously you have not kept up with the Incredibly Brave Pepin Tuma, who was arrested in DC for yelling "I hate the police" at police officers who were involved in a traffic stop at midnight. Mr. Tuma is surely as brave as Ms. Lubna Hussein.
Incidently, I do wholeheartedly agree that Ms. Hussein is exceptionally brave to take her case to court, and where is Pelosi, Reid, Clinton and NOW on this matter?

[Mikeeee]

It's an insult to Lubna Hussein to compare somebody mouthing off to a self absorbed cop and "might" get a fine to a woman who faces 40 lashes.
Ridiculous.

[whiskeytangofoxtrot451]

The article says she contributes to a left-leaning newspaper in Kartoum. I'm willing to bet if she were a contributing to a rightwing newspaper, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Limbaugh would be all over her story.

[tigerlyly]

Why praise courage by condemning the non-courageous? It is a poor excuse for a compliment.

[Destin]

Pretty sad that in 2009, men still repress women. I'm a man and I'm sick of it. When I get married, I'm going to have an agnostic ceremony because I want my wife to also be my partner in life, equally, as well as my soulmate. Mutual respect goes a long way in the world, if it's allowed.

I wish I knew how to fix this mentality, this problem. You'd think that because women are the bearers of life, that they might be held in high esteem. In many older civilizations, this was exactly the case in which women were held in high regard. What went wrong?

[Darling Daintyfoot]

well stated Destin. I was so impressed with Jimmy Carter's remarks to the southern fasci... err basptist convention. the disposition of religion is a sad excuse and poorly disguised one too, to keep women enslaved subject to absurdity and horrors.

[nylibgrrl]

"What went wrong?"

Well, a lot of factors are involved, I'm sure, but it I think it's significant that many of those cultures who held women in regard also worshipped goddesses. Then those who believed in the "one true god" came along and couldn't live and let live, they had to wipe out belief in goddesses as evil, even to the point of slaughtering people who wouldn't convert. Sad that some men became so afraid of women that they had to use their greater physical strength to suppress them and that so many of their descendants still do the same thing.

[JerryLevy]

Let's see, here is a society that wants to beat a woman for wearing slacks. So she is on trial for committing this "crime." Where are the NGOs, Human Rights organizations, and the UN? Does anyone know the difference between right and wrong anymore or is this just an example of everyone no wanting to "judge" another country for observing traditions that are different from ours?

[KDog76A]

Jerry didnt read the article... smooth one, the UN is all over this.

[Gwiwer]

She had a job with the UN that would have made her immune to prosecution, but she purposefully quit that job so that she could fight the charges in court. You may want to reread the article.

[ramsha]

I don’t buy the argument that woman are equal to men. In my opinion they are several notches better than most men.
Overall women seem to have a greater sense nurturing, justice and common sense. The bible and Koran have without any basis, placed a woman’s role to be subservient to man. The fanatic Christian is not very different from the Muslims, of these theocratic countries. His concept about the role of women is often very similar. Fortunately the fanatic Christian is in the fringes of our society.
These religious texts are not to be thrown lightly aside; they have to be thrown with great force, in to the nearest garbage dump. As a corollary imagine being guided by a 2000 year old scientific text for a modern research project.

[nimblehuman]

I just fanned you for this post, BRAVO!!!

Unless the 2000 year old text in question is a document recovered from Atlantis, you're spot on about that, too :)

[bismillah001]

Many would disagree with your characterization of the Qur'an as being anti-female. Islam was actually quite revolutionary in its approach to women's rights; so much so that Muhammad's contemporaries often ridiculed him for it. Some examples: people who practiced the pre-Islamic custom of female infanticide were emphatically rebuked, and daughters were described as a "glad tiding" (Q 16:58).

Also, unlike Christian doctrine, the Qur'an holds that Adam and Eve were created equally; Eve was not from his rib (7:189). Furthermore, in the Qur'anic version of their story, it is both of them together - not just Eve - who are tempted by Satan and disobey God (Q 2:36).

The Qur'an also emphasized equal rights and responsibilities among married couples, describing each spouse as a "garment" (2:187) and "protector" of the other. Women may also initiate a divorce (2:229, 58:1), in which case their wedding gift shall not be rescinded.

The Qur'an also established inheritance for women. Among one's children, the daughter's share is half of the son's, and this is because in Islam, men are required to financially support their wives (there is a Prophetic saying that "the wife says: 'Feed me or divorce me.'" The wife may also work, but she has the right to expect full backing from her husband.

Spiritually and legally, men and women are given equal rights and responsibilities. This was not so in 'the west' until the 20th century.

[alexhoward]

Oh, come off it. Since when to religious extremists pay the slightest to their actual holy books? A religion must be judged by its believers, not by its books.

[jamiso]

What you are calling "equal rights" is what is known as "separate but equal"

Jumpin Jebus (oh sorry, Isa) Religion poisons everything

[CorporatePork]

you're imposing your own higher sense of morality on the qur'an

the qur'an continuously mentions that the mens rights trumps the females. Women inherit significantly less than males.

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all),"

Its ok to beat women if you suspect them of being disloyal? Where is the passage that says women can beat men, if they are disloyal?

"If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice,"

oh wait, thats not justifying women beating disloyal husbands, thats justifying a double standard on loyalty.

[VDHL]

Yay for you. Yet your interpretations are not the same as the majority and this leads to honor killings, these beatings for the strangest of things. What is your opinion on women being beaten as punishment for wearing pants. You haven't said.

Yes women get to keep their inheritance. But that is because your religion uses archaic practices. It is no longer necessary for men to be the only one to work, unless the woman chooses not to. Men can beat their wives, they can have them killed. Even though you may have a milder Islam which you practice, just like here in the USA, religious freedoms allow fundamentalists to get away with all kinds of horrible things, mostly they are done to women and children, these are the people abused.

I don't agree with complete religious freedom. I think all children should be allowed to choose their religion and the law should see to it that they are, actually, not indoctrinated. Fear and Hell should NEVER be mentioned to a child until they are a complete adult. Nor should religious punishments. This is why atheism makes sense to me.

I've heard your arguments before about how much more modern Islam is to Chrisianity. The truth is neither are. They are both inclined to be abomonations to real, living human beings. Not ban the burka, ban fundamentalism of any type.

[bergerkos]

Also, unlike Christian doctrine, the Qur'an holds that Adam and Eve were created equally; Eve was not from his rib (7:189). Furthermore, in the Qur'anic version of their story, it is both of them together - not just Eve - who are tempted by Satan and disobey God (Q 2:36).

"unlike Christian doctrine" above means to say "unlike the Bible".
Muslims share the belief, that the present Bible is not the same one as it used to be.

You must know it, that the authenticity of the modern Bible can be easily verified with the help of some 6000 ancient manuscripts of different times and in different languages known to scientists today. If changes were made, they can be tracked back to its source...
And such task HAS been made, and the Bible found to be virtually THE SAME TEXT as was known at least 200 BC. The same as it was known to Muhammad.
You see what that means?

Just simple: one of the two is lying. Either the Bible is lying about Adam and Eve , or the Qu'ran is. The former was written much earlier, than the latter, and the latter often refers to the former. Real dilemma! The decision is yours.

[LCLA]

You don't have to go to Sudan to find dress codes. We have many communities here in the USA with ordinances against fashion trends such as the low rider pants that a lot of young men were wearing to emulate their gangsta friends in prison. Intolerance of different customs and fashions is part of the human condition.
It is great to see someone with the courage and energy to challenge such bigotry at great personal risk. But we should not be so smug as to pretend that this injustice only happens somewhere else.

[alexhoward]

So you're saying that not being allowed to wear "low rider" pants (and perhaps ski masks in banks? Just a thought) is an injustice comparable to receiving 40 lashes for wearing pants? This sort of persistent immaturity will doom our country, mark my words.

[riff4u]

Wearing low rider pants does not require 40 lashes.......it just shows that your IQ is 40.

[JerryLevy]

Lets see, you are equating the trial and possible beating of a woman for simply wearing slacks with dress codes here in the USA. OK, I am "pretending" this would never happen here in the USA or in Europe or in non-Islamic Asia. And you need to rethink your "smug" moral equivalence.

[LCLA]

I didn't say anything about it being equivalent. I pointed out that intolerance is the human condition and is very present in the USA.
No, we don't give people 40 lashes for offensive fashion. But women have been jailed for contempt of court for wearing pants in a courtroom, and young people in many communities do face jail and a criminal record for following fashion trends.