Taliban Use Of Corporal Punishment And Global Human Rights Objections
Taliban Use of Corporal Punishment and Global Human Rights Objections
I. Overview
Since the Taliban’s return to power in August 2021, Afghanistan has seen a marked increase in the use of corporal punishment as part of its enforcement of a strict interpretation of Sharia law. These punishments, often carried out in public, include:
Flogging (lashes)
Amputation
Stoning
Beatings
Such punishments are typically ordered by Taliban-run courts or religious councils, outside of a standardized legal process, raising significant international legal and human rights concerns.
II. Legal and Religious Justifications by the Taliban
The Taliban claim they are implementing Hudud and Qisas punishments derived from Islamic jurisprudence.
These include flogging for adultery, theft, and alcohol consumption, among others.
Taliban courts operate under a non-codified, theocratic system, where judges (qazis) rule based on interpretations of Sharia.
III. International Human Rights Framework and Objections
Global human rights law prohibits torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.
| International Instrument | Relevance |
|---|---|
| Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) | Article 5 prohibits cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment. |
| Convention Against Torture (CAT) | Afghanistan ratified it in 1987. Corporal punishment violates its provisions. |
| International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) | Article 7 prohibits torture or cruel punishment. Afghanistan is a party. |
| UN Human Rights Council Reports | Repeatedly condemned corporal punishment under the Taliban as rights violations. |
IV. Detailed Case Studies
Case 1: Public Flogging of Women for “Moral Crimes” in Takhar (December 2022)
Facts: Three women were publicly flogged (20–39 lashes each) for allegedly meeting men not related to them (non-mahram).
Procedure: No formal trial; sentenced by a local Taliban court.
Execution: Flogging carried out in front of a crowd at a stadium.
Human Rights Objection:
UN and Amnesty International condemned it as degrading treatment violating international treaties.
No legal counsel or appeal process was provided.
Impact:
Sparked international outrage; symbolized the repressive treatment of women.
Case 2: Flogging of 14 People in Logar Province (November 2022)
Allegation: The group (including three women) was accused of theft, adultery, and “moral crimes.”
Punishment: Sentenced to 30–39 lashes each.
Court: Verdict issued by a Taliban provincial Sharia court.
Global Response:
UNAMA (UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan) reported the incident and denounced the punishment.
Highlighted lack of due process and arbitrary justice.
Significance:
Marked one of the first major documented mass corporal punishments after 2021.
Case 3: Amputation for Theft in Kandahar (January 2023)
Facts: A man accused of repeated theft was sentenced to amputation of the right hand.
Method: Punishment was carried out by Taliban medical personnel in a hospital setting.
Legal Process: No defense attorney or formal evidence review.
Human Rights Perspective:
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights condemned it as medieval and cruel.
Violation of Article 7 of the ICCPR.
Impact:
Raised fears of return to Taliban's 1990s-era brutal practices.
Case 4: Stoning Sentence in Badghis Province (February 2023)
Scenario: A woman accused of adultery was sentenced to death by stoning.
Outcome: The stoning was not confirmed to have been carried out, but the sentence drew global condemnation.
Legal Concerns:
Total absence of procedural safeguards.
Evidence based on forced confessions and community rumors.
Human Rights Reactions:
Considered a gross violation of women’s rights, reinforcing gender-based violence.
International Law:
Capital punishment without due process violates ICCPR and CAT.
Case 5: Beating of Journalists in Kabul for “Un-Islamic Coverage” (September 2022)
Victims: Two Afghan journalists were arrested and beaten after reporting on women’s protests.
Punishment: Publicly displayed signs of physical abuse (bruises, swelling).
Context:
Taliban accused them of spreading Western propaganda.
Legal Failure:
No legal charge, trial, or sentence—arbitrary punishment.
Human Rights Reaction:
Organizations like Human Rights Watch and Reporters Without Borders condemned the beatings.
Violation:
Abuse of press freedom and protection from torture.
Case 6: Mass Public Flogging in Ghazni (March 2023)
Situation: At least 11 men were publicly flogged for crimes such as drug use, gambling, and fighting.
Judicial Process:
Local Taliban courts handled cases without transparency.
Punishment:
Each man received 20 to 50 lashes.
Response:
Documented by witnesses and NGOs; reported to UN.
Legal Implications:
No proportionality or individual assessment; collective punishment criticized.
V. Key Legal and Ethical Issues
| Issue | Description |
|---|---|
| Lack of Due Process | Most punishments issued without defense rights, trials, or appeals. |
| Cruel and Degrading Treatment | Violates multiple international conventions. |
| Discrimination Against Women | Many punishments target women disproportionately for “moral” violations. |
| Public Spectacle | Public floggings used for intimidation, violating dignity and human rights. |
| Suppression of Freedom of Expression | Journalists and activists also face corporal punishment. |
VI. Global Human Rights Reactions
United Nations:
Repeatedly condemned Taliban punishments as inhuman and degrading.
Urged the Taliban to uphold Afghanistan’s treaty obligations.
Amnesty International:
Called for international pressure and sanctions on Taliban leaders responsible.
Human Rights Watch:
Stressed that corporal punishment constitutes torture under international law.
European Union:
Denounced Taliban actions as “a return to the darkest chapters of history.”
VII. Conclusion
The Taliban’s reimplementation of corporal punishment—particularly public floggings, amputations, and stonings—constitutes a grave violation of international human rights norms. While the group justifies these punishments based on its interpretation of Islamic law, they are carried out without due process, in violation of Afghanistan’s international legal obligations.
These practices have:
Undermined the rule of law.
Reinforced systemic gender-based violence.
Invited widespread global condemnation.
Left victims without recourse to justice or redress.
RELATED Blog
0 comments