Do you remember Gulnaz?

Remember Gulnaz? She was the woman who was raped and imprisoned in Afghanistan and then ‘pardoned’ to marry her rapist. Below is a programme on her case and the film, ‘Injustice’, which had been commissioned and then censored by the EU.

The programme has Persian subtitles, and some important bits in English, including an interview with the documentary-maker who gives an update on Gulnaz’s case.

She says Gulnaz is being put into the care of a family that wants her dead. Her rapist’s family and his wife have said they will not forgive her for publicising the case.

Talk about injustice.

(Link via Afsaneh Vahdat).


  1. Mriana says

    To put a woman or girl, who is the victim of a horrendous crime, in the care of her rapist is inhumane. Not to mention, put her in the care of another woman who admitted that she will kill her is also inhumane. I do not understand how even a justice system can be so illogically and irrationally uncaring and uncompassionate to anyone. It would seem she is going from one hell hole to another, from bad to worse, all of which were created by humans.

    Of course, to many Abrahamic religious extremists, a woman and her body mean nothing, except maybe as chattel. However, I think, when it comes to some religious sects and cults, women are treated worse than pigs and cows. Farm animals seem to get better treatment, even among the extremely and delusionally religious.

  2. Martyn N Hughes says

    Well, the onus is on Clementine Malpas now.

    She herself suggests up to 80% of women in one prison alone are there for ‘moral crimes’ and even 80% of those are there for running away from abusive relationships.

    That is terrible. As is the situation of Gulnaz.

    When asked by the interviewer why the European Union is blocking her film, Clementine Malpas says she cannot talk about what the EU has decided because it is in her contract not to.

    Now this is ridiculous. If Miss Malpas had any sort of sense – and a want for justice for these women – she should release the film.

    Fuck the EU and their petty contract. Human welfare is more important than both of those.

    • says

      Yes she should speak out more. She said in the documentary that she is constrained by her contract. Well I would just say fuck the contract and speak on behalf of the women who the EU censored…

  3. Sadiq says

    What a stroke of luck. I was looking for some information on my great great grand father – M.A.Namazie in Singapore so I could share the same with a friend who has living in Singapore for the past few years.

    Your BLOG sort of hits the spot …. and defines so clearly the current issues confronting us. Our ‘Social ad Cultural Demons’ are larger than fear and larger than comprehension.

    Thank you and I shall take out time to read some of the interesting stuff here.

    Take care.

  4. Zuruspa says

    I am old enough to remember a time when the West was on a fierce war against an Afghanistan where women did not need to wear veils, and could even go to to University.

    Because, the West said, they “were not free”.

    Now 25 years after they are free from reading & writing, and to marry their rapists and live within a family that wants them dead. Sweet liberty!

  5. smrnda says

    Could someone clarify what the EU censorship of this film entails?

    The idea that a woman should marry her rapist is one of the most repulsive things I’ve ever come across, it’s clearly produced by a mindset where women are just property and damaged property can’t fetch a high enough price so the attitude is that ‘well you broke it you bought it.’ It’s as if a rape – a crime against a woman’s person, is conceived of instead as a property crime against the man who basically owns her.

    It’s disgusting that the EU, which ought to be doing everything it can as a government body to highlight human rights abuses isn’t backing this film 100%.

    • Aliasalpha says

      I seem to recall that the EU censorship boiled down to “we commissioned it, we paid for it, its in our vaults & you’re never going to see it, fuck you.”

      • says

        They basically said that they had to take into account their relations with the Afghan ‘justice’ institutions so they basically put aside women’s rights for Sharia (again!). It’s outrageous. We need to keep publicising the issue till they are forced to show the film. In a sense, their censoring it has meant that it has been talked about a lot more.

    • says

      The EU decided not to show the film that highlights Gulnaz’s case and that of others in prison for ‘moral crimes’. They said it was because they had to take care of their relations with ‘justice’ institutions in Afghanistan. They also said they wanted to safeguard the women who had spoken up but they spoke up on their own volition. Anyway their speaking up is no more dangerous than marrying them off to their rapists… Basically the EU sacrificed the women to maintain the status quo.

Leave a Reply