Taliban’s new criminal code sparks outrage for legitimising slavery, social bias

An Afghan human rights body has condemned the new “Criminal Procedure Code” issued by Taliban-ruled Afghanistan, saying it legitimises discrimination and abuse. The code categorises citizens into four classes, explicitly recognises slavery (termed “ghulami” or “ghulam”) as a legal status, and grants mullahs and clerics immunity from criminal prosecution.

Punishments for the same offence in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan will now vary based on the offender's class, Rawadari, the human rights body said.

According to Article 9 of the new code, the top spot among the four classes will be occupied by the religious scholars or mullahs. If the mullahs commit any crime, they would just be advised, while those at the bottom of the social class would be subjected to imprisonment and corporal punishment, it pointed out.

Four classes

On January 4, Taliban supreme leader Hibatullah Akhundzada approved and circulated the new 119-article document titled the “Criminal Procedure Code for Courts,” which is intended to regulate judicial proceedings in Taliban-run Afghanistan.

Also read: Taliban says overturning restrictions against women not a priority

Under the code, religious scholars are subject only to “advice” or admonition for offences, while the elite class that includes tribal elders and military commanders may be summoned but generally escape imprisonment. The middle class can face jail terms, and those placed in the lower class are subjected to the harshest punishments, including public flogging and imprisonment.

Rawadari pointed out that the Code runs contrary to international human rights standards, such as equality before the law, presumption of innocence, prohibition of torture, and fair trial rights. The code relies heavily on confessions and testimony for proof, lacks provisions for defence lawyers or the right to remain silent, and allows broad discretionary punishments (ta'zir), it added.

Backlash

Following the release of the code, the Taliban received backlash from several human rights bodies across the spectrum.

What is striking is that the code bans only specific forms of physical violence that result in "bone fractures" or the "tearing of the skin", reported the Afghan International, a London-based Afghani news outlet.

Also read: Executions and amputations will resume, says veteran Taliban boss

These provisions contradict principles of equality, human dignity, and international prohibitions on slavery, and are "far worse than the Middle Ages", said The Supreme Council of National Resistance for the Salvation of Afghanistan, a coalition of political leaders and factions opposed to Taliban rule.

Former Attorney General of Afghanistan, Mohammad Farid Hamidi, posted on X, “it is a document proclaiming the conviction of all citizens," adding that branding people as inferior is a clear insult, a direct assault on human dignity, and a grave violation of human worth.

Legitimises slavery

The code repeatedly uses the term "ghulam" (slave) to distinguish legal statuses, acknowledging slavery.

Article 15 of the Code says that "In the case of any crime for which a 'hadd' (prescribed punishment) has not been specified, ta'zir (discretionary punishment) is ruled, whether the criminal is free or a slave."

Paragraph 5 of Article 4 specifies that hudud punishments are executed by the "Imam", while ta'zir punishments can be carried out by the "husband" or the "master" (badaar). Hudud refers to fixed punishments under Islamic law for specific crimes considered violations of God's rights.

Also read: India has to cement Taliban ties as China advances, Pak reels back in Afghanistan

The provision has raised concerns, by rights body, about institutionalised domestic violence and slave-like conditions, particularly for women and children as it enables masters and husbands to enforce punishments.

Notably, Taliban last year banned 140 books written by women and imposed gender restrictions.

UN intervention

Former National Directorate of Security chief Rahmatullah Nabil said it proves "politicised religion and rigid interpretations offer no future for Afghanistan". The Afghanistan Women's Justice Movement condemned it as "the legalisation of brutality" that entrenches gender apartheid.

The UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in Afghanistan, Richard Bennett, noted the code's "deeply troubling" implications and said he was reviewing it from human rights and Sharia perspectives. Rawadari urged the United Nations, International Criminal Court, and global human rights bodies to intervene.