Illustration: Liu Rui/GT





The incident in which conservative Pakistani Islamists tried to stand in the way of legislation that protects women from being discriminated against and hurt by violence in the country's Punjab Province has reflected a critical issue: In a modern nation which is dominated by a single religion, there is conflict between the protections for disadvantaged groups provided by civil laws and the protections for those in the religious group provided by religious doctrines.



In a country like Pakistan, where religious communities account for a huge part of the population, religious elite groups possess advantageous social and even political status.



In light of this, religious extremists can obstruct temporal powers from involving in religious affairs in the name of religious laws and traditions, while having support from a considerable number of people.



The protection of women in Pakistan is an important issue that has attracted attention from the globe over the years. The international community often criticizes the Pakistani government for its inefficiency over this matter, given the regular tragedies that happen to women in the country.



In the Punjab's case, those who believe that the bill to protect women does not conform with Islamic doctrines seem to stand against the modernization of the legal system.



In the eyes of religious conservative forces and extremists, Islamic rules are enough to safeguard women's rights and interests. Such a view is not justified. Even in areas where Muslims are the majority, there are still a handful of non-Muslim residents. Although Islamic rules may include regulations on non-Muslims, it is somewhat unfair to non-Muslim groups.



Religious rules often contain congenital defects. There are quite a few ambiguous expressions in the rules given the complexity and mystique of religion. This cannot help when shaping judgments while following standard process in real cases. And given the affirmative action that has been going on for hundreds of years, reform in Islamic regulations is needed to boost gender equality.



Discrimination against women in Pakistan has also increased the economic costs of society.



Pakistan has to spend more on its medical services and social welfare system to help the victims, let alone the political as well as economic price it has to pay for the damage to its national image. Controlling and reducing potential harm before violence occurs with the binding power of law is a better option for a nation's development.



Nevertheless, in a Pakistani woman's life, they are still under the huge pressure from religious customs.



Compared with other religious content, the rules of Islam are relatively complete, which makes it possible to use these rules to replace secular law.



However, even in communities in which people's religion plays a powerful role, religious doctrines should not overrule laws in the secular world. Without protection from non-religious forces, disadvantaged groups can never have a safe environment, while perpetrators can exert violence in the guise of belief and religion, escaping punishment and acting like their violence is legal.



A basic factor of a modernized country is providing its citizens with the protection of secular laws. Protecting the rights and interests of women and minority groups by religious laws may not be enough given the big picture of international development.



From the perspective of national governance, the reasonable attitude toward religious groups is to respect their customs. But no religion can be above the law in a society ruled by law.



How to properly protect the customs of minority and religious groups is a challenge to many countries including China. The key point is the proposed measures shouldn't be against the constitution.



Just as the Punjab incident shows, despite nine months of objections and protests from religious conservatives and extremists, the elaborate and comprehensive bill that aims to protect women from being hurt from violence was eventually passed.



The author is an associate professor at the East China University of Political Science and Law. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn