The appointment of female as senior judge in the apex court based on competence and aversion of ruling relative to Farkhuda’s murderers giving them save passage are the twin developments –the former an audacious and appreciable move upholding the supremacy of merit, the later intimates the murder of justice by a justice. Earlier, President Ashraf Ghani nominated a leading lawyer, Anisa Rasooli a former juvenile court judge to become the country’s first ever female Supreme Court judge. Afghanistan reserves the worst image in the international community pertaining to maintenance of basic human rights in general and women rights in particular. This decision will be deemed legitimate and levelheaded to reserve the ill perception Afghan have had concerning women rights. Otherwise the condition of functioning judiciary at present is nothing good of customary courts; downtrodden and plagued. The aversion of judgment to murderers and facilitators of Farkhunda’s is a self evident account to aforesaid sorry tale.

A couple of months ago, a woman got slaughtered mercilessly by throng of angry mob; some of whom earned virtue by giving a free hit with iron rod, stick, twig and vehicle; others relied to triggering off the mob to do their part while using trash language; and some resorted to be a silent onlooker. A woman yelled, sobbed amidst stream of blood flowing down her face and body, begged forgiveness but everyone relied to witness the account of brutality but turned a deaf ear and a blind eye instead. Only rare sane voices were heard barring the mob of wreaking malice that went unheard. How could the rude mob, overwhelmed by mislead emotions control their infatuation? This sorry but a brutal tale is dead account of an unfortunate woman later recognized as Farkhunda –was ruthlessly killed and dishonored.

The brutal incident took place on the avenues of Kabul raised serious questions on the competence of state apparatus law enforcement agencies aiding judiciary to tackle a situation before that grows worse. The lady certainly had not committed a blasphemy; nonetheless the enraged mob did it by desecrating a dead body of a lady followed by putting her on an ablaze. This incidence certainly brought us infamy and tempted tarnishing our image as tolerant and civilized nation. Nonetheless, the culprits involved the killing of women must be brought to justice and should face fair trial and put to punishment that would hold off such butchery in the future.

Subsequent to the incidence the reports, of the Ministry of Hajj and Religious Affairs (MoHRA) surface that declared woman guiltless, had not burnt the holy Quran. The officials confirmed that their investigations have revealed the books had Persian transcripts and there was evidence to prove the accusations against the victim. News eventually came out that Farkhunda had not burnt the holy book and instead it was an amulet (taawiz) given to her by a religious leader of the mosque itself to ‘ward of evil’ and help with her illness, Farkhunda had reached out to the mosque for help where she was once for ever helped.

Responding at the mounted pressure over dozen of people allegedly involved in that heinous crime were apprehended –amidst the height of demand, justice was anticipated to be served. The four of main culprits playing central role in the murder were issued death sentence the other eight convicts were levied 16 years of imprisonment for their active role in the murder by Primary Court. The court’s ruling was deemed sane given the culprits were liable of that punishment, earned wide appreciation from cross-section of the society. It was believed to be an act of justice that would play a role in discouraging such incidents to occur again. Expecting dispense of justice at this high value case would set examples streamlining the forthcoming decisions –will be deemed an exemplary shift.

Anticipating the justice will be served uninfluenced should not be considered recklessness –it indeed is. Undoubtedly, Afghanistan’s judicial sector is suffering male administration and inapt officials that undertake biased ruling in frequent hearings. Identically, a deliberated twist and turn was witnessed in the judgment issued subsequent to hearing of Farkhunda’s case in the court of justice. Later the Appeals Court reversed the verdict of the Kabul Primary Court sentencing three out of four men to 20 years of imprisonment and another to 10 years. Moreover, eight other convicts, who were each sentenced to 16 years of imprisonment, were also acquitted by the Court last week. Moreover, as the news reports disclose, the Court has entirely acquitted the custodian of the Shrine – Omran, who was found guilty of instigating the mob to attack on Farkhunda based on false accusations. He was initially sentenced to 16 years of imprisonment. This is a premeditated aversion of the former ruling, shocking but damaging the cause for maintenance of rule of law. This seems to be an intentional drive where a great deal of favoritism seemed to have been emplaced.

The biased ruling earned condemnation amongst humanitarian organizations and ordinary masses. The decision of Appeals Court has stirred loud outrage by civil society and Farkhunda’s family and relative who expressed indignation over the ruling of Appeals Court. Farkhunda’s parents have said that they do not accept the decision and see no justice in it. They have also said that they seek justice from the President and the Chief Executive. Following the widespread outrage over a recent Appeals Court decision to reverse sentences for key defendants convicted of murdering Farkhunda, the president has promised to reassess the case with the help of the Attorney General’s Office.

Defiant to death penalty I advocate the maintenance of order even if that demands infliction of severe punishment to the culprits. The courts acquitting the culprits by letting them go unpunished –is an injustice with the justice. Making mockery of justice will further encourage the culprits and they will continue their evil deeds.