A panel of lawyers appointed by Afghanistan's president to review the murder of Farkhunda, a female Islamic scholar who was killed by a mob of men, plans to recommend those accused be retried, the group's leader said yesterday.
"Our main finding is that they should send the case back to the trial court and retry the entire case, including all those people who were pardoned, this time in the presence of defence lawyers for Farkhunda," said Najla Raheel, the chairwoman of the panel.
The brutal murder of Farkhunda (27) in Kabul on March 19th led to protests by women's groups. They intensified when word leaked out that the country's appellate court had secretly commuted the death sentences of four men, dropped charges against some and reduced sentences against many others.
Even in the initial trial, only 12 of the 49 men who were charged were convicted. Four were sentenced to death and eight others to 16 years in prison. In addition, the cases of 19 police officers, accused of failing to intervene to try to save Farkhunda, were postponed, and none has served jail time. The 18 other men had all charges dropped.
The five-lawyer panel has finished reviewing the 2,000-page file of testimony and documents in the original trial, and has seen the still-secret 120-page decision by the appellate court justifying the reduction of sentences. Ms Raheel said the panel agreed it would ask the supreme court to order a retrial of all the men originally accused.She said she expected the court to meet on the case soon, when the panel would present its findings.
No legal representation
Ms Raheel’s panel was appointed by president
Ashraf Ghani
to act as defence lawyers on behalf of Farkhunda and her family. Under Afghan criminal procedure, victims have the right to be represented at a trial, but that did not happen.
“Now that we’ve been through the case in detail, we’ve seen that there was no justice done in this case, and we’re going to demand of the supreme court that they make sure justice is done,” Ms Raheel said.“One of the men who was completely pardoned, Mohammad Omran, he’s not even in jail, but he instigated the whole episode and yet the appeals court completely pardoned him.” Ms Raheel referred to the caretaker of a shrine in downtown Kabul, who was one of two workers there accosted by Farkhunda, who criticised the selling of amulets and the telling of fortunes as unIslamic.
Witnesses accused Mr Omran, as well as an amulet seller named Zain-ul-Din, of responding by falsely accusing Farkhunda of burning the Koran, provoking the mob attack. Zain-ul-Din was sentenced to death and Mr Omran to 16 years by the trial court, but the appellate court commuted the death sentence to 20 years in prison and released Mr Omran.
That court apparently accepted Mr Omran’s claim in an appeal hearing, closed to the public and family, that he was in another province at the time of the attack, even though the police arrested him at the scene, according to testimony.
The appellate court also apparently accepted the claims of those sentenced to death that Farkhunda was dead when they assaulted her – one with a rock bigger than a watermelon he smashed into her head, another by setting her on fire.
One of the accused, Sharaf Baghlani, also known as Mohammad Shareef, boasted on Facebook he had struck the fatal blow. He said he was an agent for the National Directorate of Security, the Afghan intelligence agency, which later disavowed any connection. Mr Baghlani’s death sentence was reduced to 20 years.
One of those sentenced to death had his sentence reduced by the appellate court to 10 years, on grounds that he was under 18, rather than 19 or 20 as the trial court had been told. Many of the other eight who were sentenced to 16 years received reduced sentences from the appellate court, which has never explained its rationale.
“The president really wants to see justice done in the Farkhunda case,” said Shahla Farid, a law professor who led a fact-finding commission convened by Mr Ghani before the first trial. “The problem is there was no transparency in the appeals, it was not in public or open court, so family members and their lawyers want the supreme court to return it to the trial court.”
But she said death penalties might be too harsh, especially for young men who might have just been caught up in the mob hysteria: “I want to convince the family of Farkhunda that justice has to be fair.”
On the other hand, death sentences are handed down by Afghan courts for lesser crimes, such as robbery, and Farkhunda’s supporters complain the appellate court apparently considered evidence only from male witnesses and the accused themselves.
Falsified documents
Abdullah Mohin, an activist with the group Justice for Farkhunda, said he expected the supreme court would simply support the appellate court’s decision. He said he had reviewed the case file at the appellate court and found it riddled with falsified documents used to justify the reduced sentences.
“There are some high authorities who just want to cover up the whole case,” Mr Mohin said. “We are not satisfied at all.”
Repeated attempts to reach officials of the appellate court and supreme court for comment were unsuccessful. – (New York Times service)