Lubna Hussein Sent To Jail For Wearing Pants, Avoids Flogging

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Lubna Hussein Sent To Jail For Wearing Pants, Avoids Flogging stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

MOHAMED OSMAN and SARAH EL DEEB | 09/ 7/09 01:01 PM | AP

What's Your Reaction?

KHARTOUM, Sudan — A woman journalist was convicted Monday of public indecency for wearing trousers, but was spared a sentence of flogging. A defiant Lubna Hussein said she would not pay a $200 fine and would take a month in prison instead to protest Sudan's draconian morality laws.

The 43-year old journalist has set out to challenge the police and courts since her arrest in July by insisting the case go to trial, aiming to embarrass the Khartoum government with the publicity. Her prosecution – and the prospect that she could get the full sentence of 40 lashes – drew an international outcry.

The judge's decision to impose a fine equivalent to $200 appeared to be an attempt to curb the criticism.

"I will not pay a penny," Hussein, who during the court session wore the same trousers that sparked her arrest, told The Associated Press after the ruling.

During the session, police rounded up about 40 women protesting outside the courthouse in support of Hussein, some of them wearing trousers as well in a sign of solidarity.

Sudan's government implements a conservative version of Islamic law in the north. Under public indecency laws, anyone committing an act or wearing clothing deemed indecent can be punished with a flogging or a fine, but lawyers and human rights groups say the law is too vague and arbitrary. In the capital the "public order" police enforce the laws, breaking up parties and scolding men and women who mingle in public.

In mostly Muslim northern Sudan, many women wear traditional flowing robes that also cover their hair, but it is also not uncommon for women to wear trousers, even though conservatives consider it immodest.

Public order police arrested Hussein along with around a dozen other women in a Khartoum public cafe. Ten of the women received a quick, closed-door trial and were flogged soon afterward, avoiding the social stigma associated with a public trial on morality charges.

Story continues below
advertisement

Hussein, however, insisted on a public court and even resigned from her job in the U.N.'s public information office because it gave her immunity.

After a three-hour session Monday, the judge ruled Hussein's outfit indecent and imposed the fine. He said her clothes violated traditions that a woman should only "adorn themselves" for their husbands and not in public, Hussein's lawyer said.

Lawyers said Hussein would be taken to a jail in Omdurman, on the outskirts of Khartoum, after she refused the fine.

Galal al-Sayed, Hussein's lawyer, called the ruling "incorrect" because the judge ignored his request to present defense witnesses and based his decision on contradictory statements from the prosecution witnesses. Al-Sayed said he would appeal the conviction.

He said the judge had apparently opted for a fine, not flogging, to avoid international criticism. "There is a general sentiment in the world that flogging is humiliating."

Even before the ruling, Hussein said she would refuse any fine. "I won't pay, as a matter of principle," she said. "I would spend a month in jail. It is a chance to explore the conditions in jail."

It is not the first time Sudanese courts have raised an outcry. In 2007, a British teacher was charged with insulting Islam after she allowed her students to name a teddy bear Muhammad in a class project, which some radical clerics called an insult to Islam's prophet. She was convicted and sentenced to 15 days in prison, though not the possible sentence of 40 lashes – again, an apparent move to avoid worsening international criticism. She then received a presidential pardon and returned to Britain.

Hussein's case has raised a string of condemnations by international human rights groups, and Hussein has sought to draw attention to Sudan's morality laws.

Amnesty International called on the Sudanese government to withdraw the charges against Hussein and repeal the law which justifies such "abhorrent" penalties. The London-based group said Friday that the law allowing flogging is state-sanctioned torture.

It pointed to an incident in 2003 when eight women were flogged in public with plastic and wire whips, reportedly leaving permanent scars on the women. The women had been picnicking with male friends.

Human rights and political groups in Sudan say the law is in violation of the 2005 constitution drafted after a peace deal ended two decades of war between the predominantly Muslim north and the Christian and animist south Sudan.

In a column Friday in the British daily Guardian, Hussein said her case is not an isolated one but is emblematic of repressive laws in a country with a long history of civil conflicts.

"When I think of my trial, I pray that my daughters will never live in fear of these police," she wrote.

Hussein said she would take the issue all the way to Sudan's Constitutional Court necessary, but that if the court rules against her and orders the flogging, she's ready "to receive (even) 40,000 lashes" if that what it takes to abolish the law. "We will only be secure once the police protect us and these laws are repealed," she wrote.

Government spokesman Rabie Abdel Attie said Monday that "this is not a way to change the law."

"Changing the laws goes through officials, and it is a continuous matter looked into by the parliament," he said.

Abdel Attie said many women in Sudan wear trousers in government offices and institutions. He said there may be other issues surrounding Hussein's case that led to her arrest, but he refused to elaborate on what they might be.

"These courts are not convened without a crime. Lubna was convicted and she should respect the law," he said.

KHARTOUM, Sudan — A woman journalist was convicted Monday of public indecency for wearing trousers, but was spared a sentence of flogging. A defiant Lubna Hussein said she would not pay a $200 f...
KHARTOUM, Sudan — A woman journalist was convicted Monday of public indecency for wearing trousers, but was spared a sentence of flogging. A defiant Lubna Hussein said she would not pay a $200 f...
Loading...
 
Report Corrections
 
Comments
51
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
- jennylynn I'm a Fan of jennylynn 49 fans permalink

Where is the NOW's anger about this?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:04 AM on 09/09/2009
- dac253 I'm a Fan of dac253 23 fans permalink
photo

I suppose they're on the phone with the International Organization for Women

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:04 PM on 09/09/2009
- Sean 6399 I'm a Fan of Sean 6399 31 fans permalink

We better invade there quickly and drop bombs on them until they start dressing like us.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:51 PM on 09/08/2009
- hidenout I'm a Fan of hidenout 8 fans permalink

I get your sarcasm, but if that was your gut reaction to the article, your priorities are completely misplaced.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:06 AM on 09/09/2009
- edensaunt I'm a Fan of edensaunt 3 fans permalink

how is flogging a grown woman not "indecent"? how could this possibly really be about propriety if the punishment is so much more indecent than the supposed crime?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:05 PM on 09/08/2009
- Obenauer I'm a Fan of Obenauer 6 fans permalink
photo

How are trousers deemed indecent? They would be more modest than even a long flowing robe because it is harder for flesh to be exposed? And if it is because they are "men's clothes," a view held by some Christian fundamentalists, this is not necessarily the case. May times the stitching in woman's pants ("trousers") is different than those worn by men. The Sudanese Salabi strictures on women's clothing seem very legalistic and may be more cultural than religious?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:15 AM on 09/08/2009
- sense11 I'm a Fan of sense11 32 fans permalink
photo

And I thought our culture was bad.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:51 AM on 09/08/2009
- dac253 I'm a Fan of dac253 23 fans permalink
photo

Long pants in July? in Sudan? That girl needs a pair of shorts or a skirt!

You go girl!~ Lovin ya!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:06 AM on 09/08/2009
- JerryLevy I'm a Fan of JerryLevy 54 fans permalink
photo

What do you think the penalty for that would be? Stoning to death?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:01 AM on 09/08/2009
- nofog I'm a Fan of nofog 4 fans permalink
photo


Interresting how the west selectevly shooses stories to cover or distract
You never gave a damn about Sudan as a whole, you're ready to kill her son or husband for fighting you, yet you out of your way to make a fuss about some women wearing pants and geting punished

women are geting punished far more for loosing their bread winners, by your bombings and supplies of weapons to the highest bidder, you make me sick for talking about womanrights when you did not even give a damn about the whole country, Propaganda time is anytime to you, it never seases,
What is happening in America and Europe's womens is far degrading, from Le moulin Rouge
to the fithty sex trade in the streets of any American city I guess is axceptable to your taste . YAK .

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:28 AM on 09/08/2009

Couple of things stood out for me at the tail of this piece:

"Government spokesman Rabie Abdel Attie said Monday that "this is not a way to change the law."

"Changing the laws goes through officials, and it is a continuous matter looked into by the parliament," he said."

-- except in some situations the courts are forced to look at the law and the public becomes aware of the laws need to adapt leading to discussion.... see Susan B Anthony and her fight for women's right to vote in the US.

Also: ""These courts are not convened without a crime. Lubna was convicted and she should respect the law," he said."

-- So you are saying that there is no possibility of going to court and being found innocent? I thought that was the point of the court, to determine any wrongdoing and then assign punishment if any. :

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:05 PM on 09/07/2009
- JerryLevy I'm a Fan of JerryLevy 54 fans permalink
photo

This is what is so nonsensical about your post----you actually believe that there is rule of law when the penalty for not wearing a Burqua is being tortured. Yes, there is a so called court manned by clerics and mullahs but who would get a fair trial there. Do you think the Jews could get a fair trail in the 1933 Nuremburg court? Your blather shows nothing but an acceptance to enslaving women.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:04 AM on 09/08/2009
- MarcusT I'm a Fan of MarcusT 62 fans permalink
photo

"the penalty for not wearing a Burqua is being tortured" Poor Jerry, and his parents had such high hopes for him.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:01 PM on 09/08/2009

I suspect you misread my post. I quoted several items from the end of the article from the Government spokesman where I thought his opinions were rather off on how laws can change and what constitutes a court.

I'm not sure where you got from me using Susan B Anthony as a good example of the laws eventually changing by standing up for what you believe in court to me accepting slavery of women.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:45 AM on 09/19/2009
- KriTiKiT I'm a Fan of KriTiKiT 39 fans permalink
photo

she live on the beach...
do if you finds a woddie arrest her...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:52 PM on 09/07/2009
photo

Just wait, if Sarah Palin becomes President, this sort of thing will come to America.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:47 PM on 09/07/2009
- HockeyMom I'm a Fan of HockeyMom 3 fans permalink


I hope she live through 30 days. Why do men need so much power?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:42 PM on 09/07/2009

kid5rivers2, why should we have respect for the institution of slavery, which is basically what Islamic Fundamentalism means for women. Yes, it's their culture, but so what? Slavery was a part of the American culture too.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:39 PM on 09/07/2009
photo

Ma'am! I'm a Muslim and Islam says/does no such thing of women. Therefore, any who does any such thing to women are NOT Muslims, okay? The Western world, of which, from birth, I've been a part, is so full of wrong notions of what Islam is and what it represents, not doubt because in the Western world, most people do NOT think for themselves, rather, blindly follow the mainstream media offerings. And the MSM, we know, is owned and controlled by vested interests not people-oriented interests. If you doubt me of the latter, then you've not been following the healthcare reform "debate".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:48 PM on 09/07/2009
photo

You along with many Americans need to be deprogrammed on this religous garbage.

No one should have live under 12Th century moral code of stupidity. Yet muslin women are treated as third class citizens. Your family code of honour is despicable..

I believe in nothing unless there's proof for it, especially not liars in the American media.
If you really want to save your spiritual life, get deprogrammed from religous nonsense.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:44 PM on 09/07/2009
photo

don't think we've heard the last from beautiful Lubna. 10 of the women with her in the cafe got l flogged!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:25 PM on 09/07/2009

It's ramydam, what do you expect? We Must be Holy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:50 PM on 09/07/2009
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect