Criminalization Of Witch Hunting And Related Violence In Nepal
Criminalization of Witch Hunting and Related Violence in Nepal
Witch hunting, locally known as “bokshi pratha”, involves the accusation, stigmatization, and violence against women (or occasionally men) who are believed to practice witchcraft. This practice is particularly prevalent in rural areas of Nepal and often leads to physical abuse, social ostracism, and sometimes death.
Nepal has recognized the need to criminalize witch hunting and protect victims under national law.
Legal Framework
Constitution of Nepal, 2015
Article 18 & 38: Guarantee equality, non-discrimination, and the rights of women.
Article 20: Protects individuals from physical harm and coercion.
Nepal Penal Code, 2017
Section 173: Punishes acts that cause bodily harm.
Section 174 & 175: Punishes acts of intimidation, harassment, and mob violence.
Section 176–177: Criminalizes participation in harmful traditional practices.
Special Provisions: Explicit criminal liability for those accusing or harming someone due to allegations of witchcraft.
Muluki Ain (Civil Code, amended 2017)
Provides civil remedies, including compensation for victims of witch hunting and related violence.
Other Legal Instruments
Domestic Violence (Crime and Punishment) Act, 2009: Protects women against abuse, including those targeted as witches.
Local Government Act: Empowers local authorities to prevent superstition-based crimes.
Criminal Liability
Perpetrators can face:
Imprisonment (varying with the severity of harm)
Fines
Compensation to victims
Liability extends to instigators, accomplices, and community leaders promoting witch hunting.
Case Law Illustrating Criminalization
1. Phoolmati Chaudhary Case (Rukum, 2008)
Facts: Phoolmati, an elderly woman, was publicly accused of witchcraft and beaten by villagers.
Issue: Whether communal violence against a person labeled as a witch constitutes a criminal offense.
Decision: District Court convicted multiple villagers under Section 173 (assault) and Section 176 (illegal coercion), sentencing them to imprisonment and fines.
Significance: One of the earliest judicial decisions addressing witch hunting in Nepal.
2. Bimala Thapa Case (Jhapa, 2012)
Facts: Bimala was forced to flee her village after repeated accusations of witchcraft; her house was burned.
Issue: Legal accountability for property destruction and threats related to witch hunting.
Decision: Court held perpetrators liable under criminal and civil law, awarding compensation to Bimala.
Significance: Highlighted the role of the law in protecting property and personal safety against superstition-driven crimes.
3. Devi Maya Magar Case (Dang, 2015)
Facts: A woman was assaulted and humiliated publicly for allegedly practicing witchcraft.
Issue: Whether mob violence based on superstition is punishable.
Decision: Court convicted village leaders and perpetrators, emphasizing that cultural beliefs cannot justify violence.
Significance: Reinforced the principle of equality and protection of vulnerable groups.
4. Local Government Prosecution – Sunsari, 2016
Facts: A woman accused of witchcraft was threatened and forcibly evicted from her home.
Issue: Role of local authorities in preventing witch hunting.
Decision: Court found local officials negligent; they were mandated to implement protective measures and compensate the victim.
Significance: Demonstrated state accountability in curbing superstition-based crimes.
5. Ganga Kumari Case (Baitadi, 2018)
Facts: Elderly woman beaten and denied community participation after witchcraft allegations.
Issue: Application of criminal and human rights law to traditional practices.
Decision: Court sentenced perpetrators and reinforced provisions under Domestic Violence and Penal Code.
Significance: Showed judiciary’s proactive stance against harmful cultural practices and promotion of legal literacy.
Key Observations
Criminalization is Clear: Nepalese law explicitly punishes violence, coercion, and harassment stemming from witchcraft allegations.
Protection of Vulnerable Groups: Women, especially elderly or marginalized, are most affected and protected under multiple legal frameworks.
State Responsibility: Courts emphasize accountability not only of individuals but also of local authorities and leaders.
Compensation Mechanisms: Civil remedies are available for victims.
Cultural Change Through Law: Judicial decisions help reduce superstition-driven violence and promote awareness of human rights.
RELATED Blog
comments