As 2026 dawns, women in Pakistan are left grappling with a stark reality: rape and marital rape continue to be misinterpreted by judges in the country’s highest courts.
Published January 10, 2026
DAWN
Earlier this month, Pakistan’s Supreme Court (SC) set aside a rape conviction, changing it to fornication (consensual sex out of marriage), reducing a 20-year sentence to five years and slashing the fine from Rs500,000 to Rs10,000, sparking fresh calls for better protections for Pakistani women.
“Such judgments do not give confidence to women to come out and report sexual violence perpetrated on them,” said Ayesha Farooq, chairperson of the government-notified Committee of the Anti-Rape Investigation and Trial Act, formed in 2021.
Despite protective legislation, 70 per cent of gender-based violence (GBV) incidents go unreported. Of those reported, the national conviction rate stands at just 5pc, with some categories as low as 0.5pc and domestic violence convictions at 1.3pc.
Senator Sherry Rehman highlighted the stark figures: in 2024, Islamabad recorded just seven convictions out of 176 reported rape cases. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa reported one conviction from 258 cases, Sindh reported no convictions despite 243 cases, and Balochistan recorded 21 rape cases with no convictions.
Legal precedent or social regression?
Nida Aly, Executive Director AGHS Legal Aid Cell, said, “I have never felt so disappointed in our judiciary. Judges have failed as a gender-competent forum and lost credibility.”
The SC case involved a survivor who, in 2015, was raped at gunpoint while relieving herself in the woods. She reported the incident seven months later; DNA tests confirmed the accused as the father of her child. The trial court convicted him, and the Lahore High Court (LHC) upheld the verdict. Yet at the SC, two of three judges reclassified the act as fornication, citing the complainant’s silence, lack of resistance, and absence of physical marks. Section 496-B of the Penal Code prescribes five years of imprisonment and a Rs10,000 fine for fornication.
This reasoning drew sharp criticism from the National Commission on the Status of Women, which said consent cannot be inferred from silence, delayed reporting, or lack of resistance, and urged courts to recognise the realities of trauma, fear, coercion, and power imbalances in sexual violence cases.
Ironically, after the recasting of the case, the woman was exempted from punishment.
She was reminded of another case of rape in 2024, where a woman accused her brother’s friend of rape.
“The same judge converted the conviction of rape into fornication along with arguments like “the woman showed no resistance; there were no marks of violence” and there was a two-day delay in reporting to the police.
Justice Ayesha Malik’s dissenting note arguing there was no “standardised” rulebook response by the victim emphasised consent.
Jamshed M. Kazi, UN women country representative, said such cases resonate far beyond the courtroom. “The language used and the conclusions reached shape not only legal precedent but also social attitudes, survivor confidence, and public trust in justice.”
He added, “For survivors of sexual violence, judgements can leave lasting marks on the lives of women and girls, affecting how their experiences are believed and remembered, and may discourage reporting, reinforcing silence, fear, or self-doubt among survivors.”
Another case saw the LHC dismiss rape complaints against a husband because he was still legally married, even though he raped the woman at gunpoint. The judge, while maintaining the conduct of the man to be “immoral” and “inappropriate under religious or social norms”, said it was not a crime since the marriage continued to exist legally at the time of the incident.
“The judge focused on the validity of the marriage and completely disregarded the woman’s claim of non-consent and being subjected to forced sex at gunpoint,” pointed out Aly.
Marriage, consent and the law — A dangerous grey area
While there is no explicit provision criminalising marital rape, the Protection of Women (Criminal Law Amendment) Act, 2006 removed marriage as a defence to rape. When the definition of rape was substantially revised under the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2021, no marital exemption was reintroduced.
Between 1979 and 2006, Maliha Zia, Director, Gender, Inclusion & Development at the Karachi-based Legal Aid Society, explained, marriage operated as a defence to rape because the law defined rape as sexual intercourse by a man with a woman “who is not his wife” under specified circumstances. The deliberate removal of the words “not his wife” in 2006 therefore eliminated marriage as a defence, a position that has remained unchanged since.
“The 2006 Protection of Women Act was an important step; it corrected major injustices by separating rape from zina (unlawful sexual intercourse – including adultery and fornication),” said Dr Sharmila Faruqui, a member of the National Assembly. “But it stopped short of clearly saying that lack of consent within marriage is also rape and that silence has allowed old assumptions to survive.”
Faruqui stressed the need for judicial sensitisation, particularly at senior levels, but noted that judges are ultimately bound by the law. “When the law is unclear, even well-intentioned interpretations can go wrong,” she said. She called for legislative clarity — through a penal code amendment or another carefully considered route — emphasising that consent, grounded in dignity and equality, must remain central regardless of marital status. “Marriage was never meant to be a license for violence.”
This was endorsed by Zia, who has been among the trainers of judges who hear GBV cases. “Much work needs to be done to constantly sensitise the justice sector on women’s experiences and the trauma they go through due to sexual violence. “Many work on the assumption that the woman is most likely lying, especially if she didn’t fight or run or report straight away,” she added.
To its credit, Pakistan, under the anti-rape act of 2021 special courts were notified to look into GBV cases. To date there are 174 such courts. Unfortunately, these courts are not exclusively handling GBV cases, said Zia.
But even with this limitation, rape case convictions in Sindh rose to 17pc in 2025, from 5pc in 2020, when such courts did not exist. “Imagine how much better it could be!” According to her, in districts where there is a high caseload of GBV, courts should be exclusive, not necessarily more.
Header image: A woman carries a sign and chants slogans during a rally to mark International Women’s Day in Lahore, Pakistan March 8, 2019. Reuters/Mohsin Raza/File Photo
Note: This article was originally published in Inter Press Service and has been reproduced here with permission.
Zofeen T. Ebrahim is an independent journalist based in Karachi.
She tweets at @zofeen28.
Earlier this month, Pakistan’s Supreme Court (SC) set aside a rape conviction, changing it to fornication (consensual sex out of marriage), reducing a 20-year sentence to five years and slashing the fine from Rs500,000 to Rs10,000, sparking fresh calls for better protections for Pakistani women.
“Such judgments do not give confidence to women to come out and report sexual violence perpetrated on them,” said Ayesha Farooq, chairperson of the government-notified Committee of the Anti-Rape Investigation and Trial Act, formed in 2021.
Despite protective legislation, 70 per cent of gender-based violence (GBV) incidents go unreported. Of those reported, the national conviction rate stands at just 5pc, with some categories as low as 0.5pc and domestic violence convictions at 1.3pc.
Senator Sherry Rehman highlighted the stark figures: in 2024, Islamabad recorded just seven convictions out of 176 reported rape cases. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa reported one conviction from 258 cases, Sindh reported no convictions despite 243 cases, and Balochistan recorded 21 rape cases with no convictions.
Legal precedent or social regression?
Nida Aly, Executive Director AGHS Legal Aid Cell, said, “I have never felt so disappointed in our judiciary. Judges have failed as a gender-competent forum and lost credibility.”
The SC case involved a survivor who, in 2015, was raped at gunpoint while relieving herself in the woods. She reported the incident seven months later; DNA tests confirmed the accused as the father of her child. The trial court convicted him, and the Lahore High Court (LHC) upheld the verdict. Yet at the SC, two of three judges reclassified the act as fornication, citing the complainant’s silence, lack of resistance, and absence of physical marks. Section 496-B of the Penal Code prescribes five years of imprisonment and a Rs10,000 fine for fornication.
This reasoning drew sharp criticism from the National Commission on the Status of Women, which said consent cannot be inferred from silence, delayed reporting, or lack of resistance, and urged courts to recognise the realities of trauma, fear, coercion, and power imbalances in sexual violence cases.
Ironically, after the recasting of the case, the woman was exempted from punishment.
She was reminded of another case of rape in 2024, where a woman accused her brother’s friend of rape.
“The same judge converted the conviction of rape into fornication along with arguments like “the woman showed no resistance; there were no marks of violence” and there was a two-day delay in reporting to the police.
Justice Ayesha Malik’s dissenting note arguing there was no “standardised” rulebook response by the victim emphasised consent.
Jamshed M. Kazi, UN women country representative, said such cases resonate far beyond the courtroom. “The language used and the conclusions reached shape not only legal precedent but also social attitudes, survivor confidence, and public trust in justice.”
He added, “For survivors of sexual violence, judgements can leave lasting marks on the lives of women and girls, affecting how their experiences are believed and remembered, and may discourage reporting, reinforcing silence, fear, or self-doubt among survivors.”
Another case saw the LHC dismiss rape complaints against a husband because he was still legally married, even though he raped the woman at gunpoint. The judge, while maintaining the conduct of the man to be “immoral” and “inappropriate under religious or social norms”, said it was not a crime since the marriage continued to exist legally at the time of the incident.
“The judge focused on the validity of the marriage and completely disregarded the woman’s claim of non-consent and being subjected to forced sex at gunpoint,” pointed out Aly.
Marriage, consent and the law — A dangerous grey area
While there is no explicit provision criminalising marital rape, the Protection of Women (Criminal Law Amendment) Act, 2006 removed marriage as a defence to rape. When the definition of rape was substantially revised under the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2021, no marital exemption was reintroduced.
Between 1979 and 2006, Maliha Zia, Director, Gender, Inclusion & Development at the Karachi-based Legal Aid Society, explained, marriage operated as a defence to rape because the law defined rape as sexual intercourse by a man with a woman “who is not his wife” under specified circumstances. The deliberate removal of the words “not his wife” in 2006 therefore eliminated marriage as a defence, a position that has remained unchanged since.
“The 2006 Protection of Women Act was an important step; it corrected major injustices by separating rape from zina (unlawful sexual intercourse – including adultery and fornication),” said Dr Sharmila Faruqui, a member of the National Assembly. “But it stopped short of clearly saying that lack of consent within marriage is also rape and that silence has allowed old assumptions to survive.”
Faruqui stressed the need for judicial sensitisation, particularly at senior levels, but noted that judges are ultimately bound by the law. “When the law is unclear, even well-intentioned interpretations can go wrong,” she said. She called for legislative clarity — through a penal code amendment or another carefully considered route — emphasising that consent, grounded in dignity and equality, must remain central regardless of marital status. “Marriage was never meant to be a license for violence.”
This was endorsed by Zia, who has been among the trainers of judges who hear GBV cases. “Much work needs to be done to constantly sensitise the justice sector on women’s experiences and the trauma they go through due to sexual violence. “Many work on the assumption that the woman is most likely lying, especially if she didn’t fight or run or report straight away,” she added.
To its credit, Pakistan, under the anti-rape act of 2021 special courts were notified to look into GBV cases. To date there are 174 such courts. Unfortunately, these courts are not exclusively handling GBV cases, said Zia.
But even with this limitation, rape case convictions in Sindh rose to 17pc in 2025, from 5pc in 2020, when such courts did not exist. “Imagine how much better it could be!” According to her, in districts where there is a high caseload of GBV, courts should be exclusive, not necessarily more.
Header image: A woman carries a sign and chants slogans during a rally to mark International Women’s Day in Lahore, Pakistan March 8, 2019. Reuters/Mohsin Raza/File Photo
Note: This article was originally published in Inter Press Service and has been reproduced here with permission.
Zofeen T. Ebrahim is an independent journalist based in Karachi.
She tweets at @zofeen28.
