Business Recorder
EDITORIAL: The recent ruling by the Peshawar High Court in a bail plea case of a man charged with double murder of his daughter and another person is a significant reaffirmation of the state’s responsibility to confront so-called “honour” killings with the seriousness they demand. By declaring that any compromise between the accused and the victims’ legal heirs is inconsequential in cases falling under fasad-fil-arz (mischief on earth), Justice Sabitullah Khan has reinforced a crucial legal and moral principle: crimes that shock the conscience of society cannot be reduced to private disputes. For decades, Pakistan’s legal system has grappled with the misuse of the Qisas and Diyat framework, which allows victims’ families to pardon perpetrators. While grounded in principles of forgiveness and reconciliation, this framework has too often been manipulated in cases of ‘honour killings’, where the perpetrator and the “forgiving” party belong to the same family. This structural flaw has enabled offenders to evade accountability, perpetuating a cycle of violence—particularly against women. Recognising this loophole, Parliament acted through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2004, and more decisively through the 2016 amendment addressing offences committed in the name or pretext of honour. By bringing such crimes within the ambit of fasad-fil-arz, the law sought to shift them from the private to the public domain, treating them not merely as personal grievances but as offences against society itself. Justice Khan’s ruling underscores the importance of this shift. By rejecting the defence counsel’s argument that the other victim’s relatives no longer wished to pursue the case, the court has sent a clear message: justice in honour killing cases is not negotiable. The state retains an independent obligation to prosecute such crimes, regardless of familial forgiveness. This interpretation strengthens the intent of the 2016 amendment and closes one of the most troubling avenues of impunity. Equally important is the court’s candid acknowledgment of the “unfortunate and ignominious practice” that has taken root in society, particularly following the promulgation of Qisas and Diyat Ordinance. Honour killings are not isolated incidents in this patriarchy; they are part of a broader pattern of gender-based violence often justified through distorted notions of family dignity. Legal reform, while essential, must be accompanied by sustained social change. However, strong judicial enforcement is a necessary starting point. It signals that the state will not tolerate cultural justifications for murder. The decision may also deter potential offenders who previously relied on the expectation of familial pardon. This ruling is a welcome and necessary step toward dismantling the culture of impunity surrounding so-called honour-based violence. By prioritising societal justice over private compromise, the court has upheld a fundamental principle that no individual has the right to take a life in the name of honour—and no agreement can erase that crime. Copyright Business Recorder, 2026
Go to News Site