Donate Now
I spent the morning with Joshua Dau, who heads the Special Commission on the Rights of Non Muslims in the National Capital. The Special Commission was established under the CPA for the interim period between the agreement's signing in January 2005 and the referendum on southern independence in 2010. The need for a body to protect non-Muslims in Khartoum arose because throughout the interim period Sudan was to be one country with two systems, determined by geography; sharia law would be applied throughout the geographic north, regardless of whether or not an individual residing there was Muslim or not. But given the number of displaced southerners living in the capital (no one knows the exact number, but 1.5-2 million is often referenced), and the ideal that the national capital should accommodate the diversity of the country, the drafters of the CPA determined that southerners in the capital should not be "adversely affected" by Sharia, and the Special Commission was set up to ensure this ideal was put into practice.
In truth, the Special Commission has been largely powerless – more on that later. But for now I thought I'd share an interesting case that has just been brought to them:
The parents of a young Dinka woman, let's call her B, came to the Special Commission after B was sentenced to 100 lashes. B is pregnant and so the sentence has been deferred until after she delivers. Her parents hope the Special Commission can get the sentence commuted before that happens. The unborn baby's father, a young Nubian man that we'll call C, and who is Muslim, was given the same sentence. C's lashes were administered immediately. B and C were both sentenced under Sharia for having conceived a child out of wedlock (note – this was not a case of rape).
B's parents came to the Special Commission not only to complain that their daughter was sentenced to be lashed, but also to complain that C got off lightly. Under traditional law for the Dinka, C should pay B's family a minimum of four cows (a cow is worth around 1000 Sudanese pounds, about USD 400, making upwards of four cows a significant price to pay). The reasoning for the payment is that conception out of wedlock is seen by the Dinka as an offence against the woman who "will not be married as she should have been." (I'm unable to refrain from highlighting here the daughter-as-property concept under the dowry system. When I am told "not married as she should have been" I hear, "not worth as many cows to the family as she otherwise would have been.") The theory is not only that the cows provide wealth to the family to help them raise the new child, but also that the hefty price will deter young men from "following their lust" in the future.
According to Lau, if this case was in the south, the traditional Dinka law would apply, despite C being Muslim, because B is the one who has been harmed.