Honor Killing: Saving Banaz Mahmod

Last updated on: June 14, 2007 at 10:00 pm by Rafia Zakaria

Honor Killing: Saving Banaz Mahmod 2007-06-14T22:00:00-04:00 Rafia Zakaria

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Banaz Mahmod

On April 28, 2006, 20 year-old Banaz Mahmod Bakabir Agha’s body was found hacked to pieces and packed in a suitcase in a suburb of London. Her crime was leaving an abusive arranged marriage and wishing to marry a man of her own choice. Finally, on June 12 of this year, her killers were brought to justice when a British court convicted her father Mahmod Mahmod and her uncle Ari Mahmod of her murder.

Banaz’s case illustrates how a host of factors can come together to allow such grotesque honour crimes to occur. Archaic and misogynistic cultural beliefs, on the one hand, reduce women to objects of ownership and control, whose family members have no qualms in obliterating them for imagined sins against tradition. On the other is a host foreign culture suspicious of a ghettoised and economically disenfranchised Muslim minority, and hence slow to provide protection. Banaz had repeatedly asked the police to provide her with protection and even given them a list of three people whom she believed would try to kill her, to no avail.

Finally, also blameworthy is the persistent silence of the Muslim Council of Britain, and other Muslim groups who jump to organise protests when Muslim women are denied the right to wear niqabs but choose to ignore their plight when they fall prey to the brutality of their own families.

The collusion of all of these factors, the low priority given to Muslim women’s freedom by their own cultural tradition, their host nation and ultimately their religious community are all to blame in the Banaz case.

The saga began in late July 2005 when twenty year old Banaz left the marriage that her Iraqi Kurdish family had arranged for her at age seventeen, and returned to her family home. According to police reports, Banaz complained of being repeatedly abused and raped by her husband. In one incident, he punched her in the face and knocked out one of her front teeth because she had dared to call him by his first name in public. Despite her family’s opposition to her divorce, Banaz chose to stay on in her family’s home. In late 2005, Banaz met and fell in love with Rahmat Suleimani, a Kurdish man from a different tribe.

The love affair ignited even more of her family’s ire. Already shamed at the fact that Banaz’s sister Bekhal had left the home at age 15 to escape family violence, Banaz’s uncle, Ari Mahmod, convened a family council in which the elders decided to kill Banaz to reclaim their family honour. Banaz was told of this plan by her mother and went to the police to report the death threat. Terrified at the course of events and still believing that her mother would protect her, Banaz refused to enter a shelter, but the threats against her life continued.

A chilling episode in the story took place on New Year’s Eve 2006. Banaz was lured into her grandmother’s house in nearby Wimbledon to meet with her father and uncle to sort out her divorce. While there, she became terrified when her father first made her drink brandy to sedate her (something she as a Muslim had never done before) and then proceeded to put on gloves. Hysterical and drugged, Banaz ran out of the house by smashing a window with her bare hands and found help in a nearby caf�. However, when she went to the local police they refused to believe her story.

In a video made at this time, one can see an obviously disorientated Banaz lying on a hospital bed and detailing her father’s suspicious actions. On January 21, 2006, Banaz’s family attempted to kidnap her boyfriend, Rahmat. In the days following the attempt Banaz again went to the local police station and filed a report saying she would co-operate fully in any investigation against her family. Four days later, while in her family home, Banaz was killed. Her body was found on April 28, 2006, with the bootlace used to strangle her still around her neck.

There is nothing that can mitigate the horror of an innocent life taken at the behest of the very people that were responsible for bringing it into the world. At the most primary level, a crime which involves a father killing his own daughter, whose only mistake was to choose her own mate, should evoke the deepest disgust in every human heart. But the Banaz case is also an indictment against the religio-cultural confusion becoming increasingly symbolic of West-European society in the twenty-first century.

Muslim immigrant communities like the Iraqi Kurds are geographically and economically ghettoized, with little incentive and few logistical reasons to assimilate into the mainstream. Segregated thus, these communities recast adherence to traditional customs as a form of resistance to a foreign culture they perceive as hostile and unwelcoming. Exerting draconian control over women becomes a convenient means of acting out the frustration of feeling helpless in a foreign land.

At the same time, host cultures use the issue to substantiate their own delusions regarding the ‘other’ people living in their homeland. The ‘xenophobic’ Britons treat the occurrence of such crimes as proof of the barbarism and backwardness of immigrants. The ‘cultural relativist’ Britons, used to exoticising the ‘other’, simply look elsewhere, unsure of how to judge such a saga of unabated cruelty.

In either case, girls like Banaz are denied the help they need.

Finally, religious groups such as the powerful Muslim Council of Britain find delving into such matters generally useless to their political and mobilisation aims. By disposing of the issue of honour killings in a convenient web disclaimer about the “pre-islamic” nature of the custom, they expose their own dubious commitment to Muslim women like Banaz, who are left to fend for themselves when it comes to fighting against repression in their own communities.

Rafia Zakaria is associate editor of altmuslim.com and an attorney and member of the Asian American Network Against Abuse of Women. She teaches courses on constitutional law and political philosophy. This article previously appeared in Daily Times (Pakistan).

Commentary

Rafia Zakaria

Previous Post

June 12, 2007

Video blogger Baba Ali: “I’m not a scholar, I just try to tell people simple things”

Next Post

June 15, 2007 Podcasts: altmuslim review 024

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2012 Elections 30 Dayd 30 Writers (2017) 30 Days 30 Writers 30 Days 30 Writers (2015) 30 Days 30 Writers (2016) 30 Days 30 Writers (2018) 30 Days 30 Writers 2017 Ali Asadullah Ali Eteraz Alper Bilgili Arthur Richards Asides Asma Uddin Black History Month Briefings Charles Turner Commentary Cyrus McGoldrick Eman H Aly Fatimah Popal Hajj Hajj and Dhul Hijjah Hesham Hassaballa Hisham Hellyer Ibrahim Abusharif Inas Younis Irfan Yusuf Jalal Baig Junaid Afeef Laila Alawa Laila Alwala Mas'ood Cajee Muqtedar Khan Nakia Jackson Newsmakers Parvez Ahmed Podcasts Rabia Chaudry Rafia Zakaria Ramadan Reviews Safiyyah Ally Saud Inam Shahed Amanullah Svend White The Opinionated Oncologist Visions Wajahat Ali Zahed Amanullah Zahir Janmohamed Zainab Khan

Select a Month November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Why did God command the Israelites to eat unleavened bread?

Select your answer to see how you score.

It was the only bread they knew how to make It was a symbol of humility They had to leave Egypt quickly Yeast was considered unclean