Lawyer calls for judicial reform after Port Said judge grants leniency to ‘honor killing’ defendants

A Port Said court granted on Tuesday two defendants leniency despite finding them guilty after they killed a woman "to defend their honor."

The court determined this week that the woman's death was caused by serious injuries she suffered in October at the hands of the defendants: her mother and son. The presiding judge acquitted the son and handed the mother a suspended one-year prison sentence.

The outcome of the case is not a one-off. Reduced sentences are often granted to defendants in crimes against women on the grounds of leniency, according to criminal law professor and former Criminal Court President Shoukry al-Daqqaq as well as Center for Egyptian Women’s Legal Assistance (CEWLA) lawyer Nada Nashaat, who both argue that the practice is especially common in situations where the accused are deemed to have acted in defense of their “honor.”

According to a case report filed at the Manakh Police Station in Port Said and covered by the domestic press this week, the defendants in the case got into a fight with the woman on October 27 because of what they described as her “frequent absence from the family home.” 

The woman’s mother attacked her with a wooden stick and a hose, while the son punched her in the face, the woman's sister said, adding that she suffered serious injuries and was then transferred to Port Said’s Salam Hospital.

A forensic report of the incident confirmed that the woman died due to a serious head injury that led to brain hemorrhage and the failure of vital body functions, with the hospital report stating that she was already in a coma by the time she arrived. 

While the forensic report shows that the physical assault led to the woman’s death, the court acquitted the son of murder charges and handed the mother a suspended one-year sentence due to what it considered “the human aspect of the case” and the fact that they acted in response to the woman’s “frequent absences” in order to “defend their honor.”

The social values that define a woman’s behavior as unacceptable are at fault in the Port Said sentencing, Nashaat told Mada Masr. 

The lawyer said that these social restrictions about what is permissible for women ultimately play into the presiding judge’s own logic, so that their personal upbringing, societal norms, cultural values and traditions and many other factors play into their decision to grant defendants leniency. 

Judges have the power to deploy leniency under Article 17 of the Penal Code, which allows them to reduce sentences by two degrees depending on the circumstances in which the crime was committed.

According to Daqqaq, who authored a research paper on the use of Article 17, judges investigating crimes of violence against women often choose to grant leniency.

Daqqaq points to several cases over the late 1990s and early 2000s in which leniency was granted by judges prosecuting “honor” crimes against women or instances of sexual violence, specifically rape. Daqqaq notes that in these cases, the accused received reduced sentences, even when aggravating circumstances were present that would normally allow for harsher sentencing. 

Daqqaq explains in his research, however, that the definition of mitigating circumstances, either material or personal, that allow for the dispensation of leniency are left entirely to the judge’s discretion and cannot be clearly defined.

The circumstances of a crime, which consist of its nature, the perpetrator, the victim and their surrounding factors, allow judges to “draw from what they personally deem as grounds for leniency,” the research notes. 

Nashaat argues that the legal loophole creates a permissive attitude toward violence against women. 

“In cases where men — especially relatives — kill or attack women, the reasoning often given in court, particularly in cases that receive reduced sentences, is something along the lines of ‘he was defending his honor’, or ‘he was driven by jealousy,’” Nashaat said. “To what extent will we continue to allow such broad use of judicial discretion, based solely on the judge’s personal convictions?” 

In his paper, Daqqaq called for restrictions to be imposed on judges’ authority to grant leniency to defendants in sexual violence and “honor” crimes — cases in which, he notes, women are most frequently the victims.

Achieving justice and ensuring public deterrence are among the main objectives of criminal sanctions, the judge notes. 

But the arbitrary use of judicial leniency in cases of violence against women gives the impression to victims and their families that the “law is ineffective” in holding perpetrators to account and could demonstrate to others in society that they will not be held accountable if they commit similar crimes, Daqqaq continues.

“There is complicity in the rationale that we will accept any type of violence as long as it falls under the bigger realm of preserving our reputation, that of our families and our honor,” Nashaat said.

The result is a legal system that has itself become part of the violence enacted against women, Nashaat says. “The complicity becomes legal as well as societal.”