By Kamran Adil and Warda Kamran Adil
Honour killing is the most extreme form of Gender-Based Violence (GBV) that has gained the spotlight due to its prevalence in Pakistan. The issue has received significant international and national attention, which is periodically reignited whenever some odd event takes place. While society and the media have consistently condemned and highlighted these horrific incidents of honour killings, the response of the justice sector has been measured and time consuming. The present write-up will attempt to place the systemic response of the justice sector in a legal context.
JUSTICE SECTOR RESPONSE
The justice sector of Pakistan comprises of the legislature and the criminal justice system which together form the machinery for providing justice to victims. The justice sector’s response may be examined thematically by looking at the following areas:
- CRIMINALIZATION
The first challenge was to criminalize honour killings as a separate category of offence. This was not an easy task. Widespread societal condemnation coupled with amplification of the reports of honour killings by media resulted in very effective advocacy. Additionally, non-governmental organizations also took up the matter very forcefully. The first justice sector response in the form of a concrete judicial indictment came in 2001 when the Supreme Court of Pakistan declared that honour killing (as a custom of karo kari) was against article 8(1) of the Constitution of Pakistan[1]. Later, in 2004, the legislature defined and criminalized honour killing through a special law i.e. the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2004[2]. It defined the honour killing in the following words:
“offence committed in the name or on the pretext of honour” means an offence committed in the name or on the pretext of karo kari. siyah kari or similar other customs or practices;”[3]
The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2004 also excluded[4] the offence of honour killing from the list of standard murder categories. The 2004 Amendment added many other provisions to clarify the sentencing, waiver and compounding of the honour killings. The legal framework was further strengthened through the Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offences in the name or on the pretext of Honour) Act, 2016[5]. The 2016 law, attending to the doubts and practices of dealing with honour killing as a species of murder, changed the very nature of the offence by including it in the category of ‘fisaad-fil-arz’[6] (mischief on earth). The inclusion of honour killing in the category of ‘fisad-fil-arz’ resulted in considerable legal implications as it made the offence an offence against the state (instead of an offence against person). This criminalization of the honour killing was the first tangible and concrete response of the justice sector to this important issue.
- TYPOLOGY
There is no academically or legally recognizable typology of the offence of honour killings. However, based on the information available as per reported honour killings and for the sake of discussion and analysis, the offence may be categorized in the following types[7]:
- Honour Killings in the confines of a house/residential/building;
- Honour Killings in which the panchayat/local council of elders decide to kill the woman or man or both; and
- Honour Killings in which the woman is killed in court premises/offices.
For categories (b) and (c), usually some form of direct and testimonial evidence along with forensic evidence are available; it is category (a) that merits special attention because, more often than not, the crime scene is contaminated (washed, polluted or cleaned) by the perpetrators who happen to be in full control of the crime scene till the information is received by police for further legal action. Unfortunately, given the domestic nature of this offence, this type of honour killing is quite pervasive and leads to substantial challenges in terms of investigation, prosecution and adjudication of the crime.
- MEASUREMENT
Estimating the true statistics of honour killings in Pakistan is a difficult exercise due to inconsistent and sporadic reporting. For example, as per press reports, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) noted that 405 honour killings took place in Pakistan in 2024[8]. On the other hand, the data available on the website of the Punjab Police (that runs data from 2011 to 2023) shows a downward trend of honour killings[9]. The data collection process for measurement must be more accurate and be validated. Nevertheless, one point is clear: there has been a substantial impact on the number of honour killings since the introduction of the above-mentioned legislative changes.
- REGISTRATION OF CRIMINAL CASES AND STATE AS COMPLAINANT
Following social outrage and persistent media coverage, the police leadership has improvised the process of registration of criminal cases involving cases of honor killings. The police have started taking control of the initial information by denying the suspects the opportunity to become complainants of the cases. The police have also started registering cases as complainants on behalf of the state. This change of process is not based on law, but on the willingness of police officers/leaders to take action against this heinous form of killing.
- BURDEN OF PROOF
During a trial, after the police have collected the circumstantial evidence in cases of first type (i.e. honour killing within the confines of a house) and the prosecution supports it, the next big challenge is to deal with the onus of proof requirement that shapes the mindset of the judges in Pakistan. The accused- centric architecture of the criminal justice system, that is based on the presumption of innocence, is the most challenging part of the whole prosecution/trial. Under article 117 of the Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, (QSO) the onus squarely falls on the prosecution in such cases. However, the Supreme Court has steadily adopted a victim centric approach in dealing with cases involving vulnerable members of society such as women, children and the infirm. For instance, in the case of Saeed Ahmed[10] the Supreme Court clarified that while the burden on proof lies on the prosecution, in cases involving vulnerable members of society, the said burden is lightened by the silence of an accused in circumstances which incriminate him, e.g. when the victims were last seen alive in his company or were living with him. In such circumstances, the accused ought to offer some explanation as to what happened to the victims, and if he furnishes a false explanation or does not offer any explanation, he casts a shadow upon himself. The Supreme Court relied on Article 122 of the QSO to place this responsibility of furnishing an explanation on the accused person. The judgement laid the foundation for interpreting the law in victim-centric spirit. Since then, its ratio decidendi has been followed in many judgements[11]. Recently, Justice Amjad Rafiq of the Lahore High Court took up a case and sought to humanize the trials in honour killing cases in which women were killed within the confines of their houses.
- SENTENCING
The justice sector response was not limited to criminalization of honour killings; it also extended to establishing sentencing standards. The Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offences in the name or pretext of Honour) Act, 2016 amended section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (PPC) and stipulates that an offence of honour killing cannot be punished under section 302(c) (the lowest degree of murder)[12]. This provision was applied in the Abbas Case decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan[13]. In addition, section 311 was added to the PPC through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2004[14], which was further substituted by a more refined version of section 311 that brought in more clarity in the law by stating that even in the cases where compounding or waiver had taken place, the court was empowered to impose the punishment for life[15].
- COMPOUNDING AND WAIVER
The conduct of heirs of complainant is also an important aspect of honour killing cases. In many instances it was observed that heirs of the victim would become the complainant of the criminal case. This not only established their control over the criminal case but also enabled them to compromise with the accused or compound the offence. To curtail this reprehensible practice, the police leadership started registering criminal cases on behalf of the state, thereby foreclosing the chances of the accused/heirs to take control of the case and compound the offence or compromise with the accused. An added bulwark against the practice of compounding came in the form of amended section 345 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898[16] through 2004 and 2016 criminal law amendments which enables courts to impose life imprisonment even after compounding or waiving off the offence of Qatal.
While Pakistan’s justice sector response has been slow and far from ideal, it has shown some signs of improvement. Necessary legislative reforms and evolving jurisprudence of the Supreme Court in cases like Saeed Case (2015) and Assad Case (2020) signify a step in the right direction. With more victim-centric legislation, interpretations and judgements from courts, it is hoped that the criminal justice system will be humanized and justice will be served to women who die within the confines of their homes.
[1] PLD 2001 SC 96
[2] Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2004 (notified in official gazette on 10th January, 2005.
[3] Through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2004, the definition of honour killing was added in definitions of the Qisas and Diyat part of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860.
[4] A proviso was added to section 302 (c) of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2004.
[5] Notified on 21st October, 2016 through official gazette.
[6] Section 2 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offences in the name or on the pretext of Honour) Act, 2016.
[7] As a disclaimer, it may be noted that these types are only for academic purposes and no category is proposed to be less important than the other.
[8] https://tribune.com.pk/story/2558258/405-honour-killings-recorded-across-pakistan-in-2024-hrcp
[9] https://punjabpolice.punjab.gov.pk/honour-killings (as visited on 31st October, 2025). The number of cases in 2011 were 364, which came down to 150 in 2023.
[10] 2015 SCMR 710
[11] PLD 2017 SC 681, 2017 SCMR 724 and 2025 SCMR 1591
[12] Section 3 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offences in the name or pretext of Honour) Act, 2016.
[13] PLD 2020 SC 620
[14] Section 8 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2004.
[15] Section 6 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offences in the name or pretext of Honour) Act, 2016.
[16] Section 14 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2004 added a new provision sub-section 2(a) to section 345 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
