To: one_less who wrote (18145 ) 7/13/2001 2:57:17 PM From: Solon Respond to of 82486 "Women may not invoke these defenses for murdering a male relative under the same circumstances, nor may they use them for killing men who attempt to rape,sexually harass, or otherwise threaten their " honor." " Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor U.S. Department of State, February 25, 2000 (for Jordan) "The Criminal Code allows leniency for a person found guilty of committing a " crime of honor," a euphemism that refers to a violent assault with intent to murder against a female by a male relative for alleged sexual misconduct. Law enforcement treatment of men accused of " honor crimes" reflects widespread unwillingness to recognize the abuse involved or take action against the problem. Sixteen such murders were reported during the year in which the victims were shot, strangled, stabbed, bludgeoned, and run over with vehicles. Human rights monitors believe that many more such crimes were committed but not documented as honor crimes. Moreover, most crimes of honor are not reported by the press. The actual number of honor crimes is believed to be significantly higher. One forensic medical examiner estimated that 25 percent of all murders committed in the country are honor crimes. The police regularly imprison women who are potential victims of honor crimes for their own protection. There were up to 50 women involuntarily detained in this form of " protective custody" during the year. According to Article 340 of the Penal Code, a " crime of honor" defense may be invoked by a defendant accused of murder who " surprises his wife or any close female relative" in an act of adultery or fornication, in which case the perpetrator of the " honor crime" is judged not guilty of murder. Although few defendants can meet the stringent requirements for a crime of honor defense, that is, the defendant personally must have witnessed the female victim engaging in sexual relations, most avoid trial for the crime of murder, being tried instead on the charge of manslaughter, and even those convicted of murder rarely spend more than 2 years in prison. (In contrast to honor crimes, the maximum penalty for first-degree murder is death, and the maximum penalty for second-degree murder is 15 years.) Such defenses commonly also rely on the male relative having acted in the " heat of passion" upon hearing of a female relative's alleged sexual transgression, usually without any investigation on the part of the assailant to determine the veracity of the allegation before committing the assault. Defenses in these cases fall under Article 98 of the Penal Code. Women may not invoke these defenses for murdering a male relative under the same circumstances, nor may they use them for killing men who attempt to rape,sexually harass, or otherwise threaten their " honor." On February 6, Hussein Suleiman ran over his pregnant sister Malak Suleiman three times with his pickup truck. According to his own testimony, he wanted to make sure that his sister was dead so that he could " cleanse his family honor." On July 27, he was sentenced to 1 year in prison. On February 10, after providing bail for her release from prison, Maha Walid's father, brother, and uncle took her to the back yard of their home. They argued about her alleged " immoral behavior." Her uncle then shot her in the head and handed the gun to her father, who shot her twice, fired the gun into the air, and shouted that he had " cleansed his honor." On July 12, the three men were sentenced to 5 months each for the crime. In June one judge broke with tradition and refused to accept the " heat of passion" defense in an honor crime case. The court sentenced Khalil Mohammad to 15 years in prison for the murder of his wife, rejecting his plea that he had killed her in a fit of fury, " because he already knew about her behavior in the past and did not kill her." In December the National Committee to Eliminate " Crimes of Honor" presented leaders of the upper and lower houses of the Parliament with a petition signed by 15,000 citizens demanding an end both to crimes of honor and the legislation that protects perpetrators of such crimes. The lower house rejected in November a government-supported amendment that would have eliminated Article 340; however, the Senate approved the same measure in December. The amendment was returned to the lower house for reconsideration. If the lower house again rejects the measure, the two houses would meet in joint session to settle the issue."