Saman Zahra

The issue of rape in Pakistan remains one of the most disturbing and persistent challenges within the domain of public safety, criminal justice and gender relations. Understanding the legal, social and structural dimensions of the problem is necessary for an honest discussion on why sexual violence continues at alarming levels and why so many survivors remain without justice.

In Pakistan, rape is defined under Section 375 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) 1860. According to this provision, rape occurs when a man has sexual intercourse with a woman without her consent. Several specific conditions clarify this definition. Consent obtained through threats of death or serious harm is not considered valid. A woman below sixteen years of age is legally unable to consent, making intercourse with her rape regardless of circumstances. Furthermore, consent given under the mistaken belief that the man is her husband also falls under the definition of rape. These provisions show that the law recognizes both physical force and coercion as central elements of the crime, while also acknowledging deception and age-related vulnerability.Legal definitions alone, however, provide only part of the picture. Rape in Pakistan is situated within a complex social structure shaped by gender norms, cultural expectations and deep-rooted inequalities. Attitudes toward sexual violence are affected by several factors: restrictive views on sexuality, limited knowledge about bodily autonomy, increasing exposure to global cultural trends, weak social protection systems and the exploitation of vulnerable individuals by those in positions of influence. Psychological aspects further complicate the situation. Survivors often experience long-term trauma, anxiety, fear and mistrust. Childhood abuse, adverse family environments and the normalization of gender-based violence contribute to a cycle in which harm continues across generations.

The importance of openly addressing rape in Pakistan cannot be overstated. Silence and denial only deepen the suffering of victims and strengthen the social obstacles they face. Large segments of the population have limited understanding of how widespread the problem is or what legal protections exist for victims. The number of reported cases is far smaller than the actual number of incidents. Fear of blame, pressure from family or community and widespread distrust in the justice process stop survivors from coming forward. Many who do report are subjected to harsh questioning, stigma and isolation. According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, more than eleven cases of rape are reported every day, while countless others remain hidden due to fear and lack of support. Awareness, education and preventive measures are therefore essential for reducing violence and encouraging victims to seek help.

Historical and contemporary data highlight both long-term patterns and recent fluctuations. A study conducted in 1988 revealed that 72 percent of women who were held in custody had experienced some form of abuse, while 20 to 30 percent of women across the country faced domestic violence. Between 2002 and 2004, Karachi recorded between 61 and 78 rape cases annually based on local FIRs, already a troubling figure given how many incidents go unreported. A 2004 report documented 728 rape cases, including gang rapes, along with other acts of violence such as assault, acid attacks and murder.From 2006 to 2016, Punjab saw reported cases double—from around 1,500 per year to nearly 3,000. More recent national data from 2017 to 2024 shows sharp ups and downs: 3,300 cases in 2017, rising to over 4,300 in 2019, decreasing in 2020, then jumping to more than 5,100 in 2021. Reports dropped again in 2022, rose to around 6,600 in 2023 and saw a modest decline in 2024. These numbers, although alarming, still fail to reflect the full magnitude of the problem because underreporting remains widespread.

Several high-profile cases have brought national and international attention to the issue. The 2002 case of Mukhtaran Mai exposed grave failures in protecting women in rural areas. The tragic murder of Zainab Ansari in 2018 mobilized public outrage and resulted in legal reforms focused on child protection. The Lahore Motorway case in 2020 revealed gaps in policing and public safety. The killings of Noor Mukadam (2021) and other similar cases highlighted the dangers women face even in supposedly secure environments. Mass harassment incidents, such as the Minar-e-Pakistan case in 2021, demonstrated that collective violence against women is not limited to isolated criminals but can occur in public spaces. Cases like DuaZehra (2022) and Fatima (2023) continued to raise concerns about child protection and legal loopholes. By 2024, Lahore remained the city with the highest number of documented rape cases, although conviction rates stayed low across the country.

Child abuse is another deeply troubling aspect. Early 2023 data from Punjab showed 1,390 incidents of child abuse, many involving boys and typically committed by people known to the victims. Such cases highlight the need for stronger safeguards for children at home, in schools and in workplaces.Section 376 of the PPC addresses punishments for rape. Sentences range from ten to twenty-five years imprisonment, or the death penalty in certain cases. Aggravated forms of rape—such as crimes involving children, persons with disabilities, severe physical harm, or the misuse of official authority—carry harsher penalties, including life imprisonment.Over the years, legal reforms have attempted to strengthen the system. The Criminal Law Amendment of 2016 expanded the scope of Section 376, introduced greater protections for vulnerable victims and required the use of scientific evidence such as DNA. The 2006 amendments earlier separated rape from the Hudood Ordinance, which had long created legal complications for victims seeking justice. More recently, the 2020 Anti-Rape Ordinance introduced special courts for swift trials, crisis cells for victim support, improved forensic procedures and chemical castration for repeat offenders. Reports from 2018 to 2021 documented high levels of sexual violence, workplace harassment and custodial abuse, with Punjab again reporting the most incidents. Government and civil society responses included awareness campaigns, helplines, legal amendments and school-based safety initiatives.

Survivors of rape face numerous obstacles not only in the legal process but also in their daily lives. Cultural norms frequently blame victims rather than perpetrators. Many fear retaliation from the offender or from community members who want to suppress the incident. Weak investigative procedures, delayed trials and gaps in forensic capabilities further discourage reporting. Psychological effects such as depression, fear, post-traumatic stress and social withdrawal often last for years. International estimates from the United Nations suggest that less than ten percent of rape cases are reported and Pakistan’s rate is likely even lower.Addressing sexual violence requires multiple, consistent efforts. Legal reforms must be matched with effective implementation, faster trials, trained investigators and reliable forensic processes. Consent education in schools and communities is important for reducing harmful attitudes. Public awareness campaigns can help counter victim-blaming and encourage families to support survivors. NGOs and community groups play an important role in providing safe spaces, counseling and legal guidance. Young people can contribute by volunteering in awareness programs, using social media responsibly to highlight safety issues and promoting respectful behavior in their surroundings.

Reducing rape in Pakistan is not only a legal challenge but also a social one. It requires a collective willingness to confront uncomfortable realities, protect those who come forward and build systems that prioritize safety, dignity and justice for all.

Saman Zahra

[email protected]

Dr, Muahammad Akram Zaheer

In 2021, before her death,Madeleine Albright expressed the expectations about democracy and contrasts with the sobering reality that has unfolded over the past four years. She explained why the anticipated resurgence has not occurred, how authoritarian states have adapted; how the United States has shifted away from its long-standing support for democratic causes and why democratic, ideals nonetheless remain alive in many societies despite mounting pressures.Madeleine Albright argued that authoritarianism was inherently weak because it relied on coercion rather than genuine public legitimacy. She believed that democratic idealsrooted in dignity, accountability, and autonomy remained powerful forces around the world. For her, the growing political activism of youth, the durability of civil society, and the universal desire for fairness pointed toward a coming democratic renewal. Her essay predicted that dissatisfaction with aging dictatorships would lead to openings for democratic change, particularly if the United States continued to support pro-democracy movements.

However, four years later, events have not supported this optimistic vision. Instead of an international revival, democracy has retreated in many regions. Protest movements that once seemed promising have been crushed. Governments with authoritarian tendencies have strengthened their grip, often using legal frameworks and digital tools to justify repressive measures. A particularly significant change has occurred in the United States itself. The second Trump administration has withdrawn funding from programs that traditionally supported democratic causes abroad and reduced the government’s readiness to defend democratic norms at home. According to Albright’s earlier warnings, this shift in U.S. policy encourages authoritarian governments, weakens global democratic networks, and reduces America’s influence as a moral and political leader.Examples from Iran and Cuba illustrate how authoritarian fragility does not necessarily lead to democratic change. In Iran, widespread protests following the death of MahsaAmini in 2022 briefly suggested that long-standing grievances could erupt into real political transformation. Yet the government suppressed the movement through mass arrests, executions, and strict control of communication. In Cuba, historic protests in 2021 raised hopes that economic hardship and political frustration might force change. Once again, the state responded with intimidation, surveillance, and imprisonment, successfully silencing dissent. These cases demonstrate that even unpopular authoritarian regimes can survive by adapting their methods of control, especially in the absence of strong external pressure.

The text also argues that the United States once played a critical role in supporting democratic activists in such situations. Through diplomatic pressure, targeted sanctions, civil society funding, and international broadcasting, Washington helped dissidents raise their voices and protected them from isolation. However, current U.S. policy has dismantled many of these tools. Institutions such as USAID, Radio Free Europe, and numerous democracy-related programs have lost funding. Thousands of initiatives that previously trained journalists, supported election monitoring, or strengthened civil society organizations have been reduced or shut down. As a result, protest movements facing repression now have fewer resources and less visibility.Meanwhile, China and Russia, the world’s leading authoritarian powers, have not offered appealing alternative models. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine discredited any notion that strongman governance brings stability or responsible leadership. China, once admired for rapid economic growth and efficient administration, now faces slowing economic performance, stricter political controls, and growing skepticism about its intentions in developing countries. In many regions, China is increasingly seen as a creditor that encourages dependency rather than a partner that supports long-term development. Yet because the United States is retreating from the democratic sphere, China has found more space to present itself as a reliable, non-interfering provider of investment and political support for governments that do not wish to face democratic accountability.

Although authoritarian models appear unattractive, democracy has not advanced because its institutional foundations have weakened in many places. Yet public support for democracy remains strikingly strong. Surveys from multiple regions show that majorities continue to prefer accountable government over authoritarian rule. Even in countries experiencing political setbacks or military coups, citizens consistently express support for fair elections, independent courts, and term limits. This demonstrates that democratic ideals continue to resonate, even when democratic institutions are failing.Across the world, civic resistance movements reveal this continuing commitment. In Georgia, large crowds have challenged flawed elections and a controversial law targeting nongovernmental organizations. In Israel, massive demonstrations in 2023 defended judicial independence. In Myanmar, despite extreme repression, activists continue to resist military rule at enormous personal cost. In Tunisia, where democracy flourished for a decade after the Arab Spring but has since been dismantled by President Kais Saied, citizens continue to challenge the erosion of rights. In Belarus, opposition leaders remain imprisoned or exiled, but protests and international campaigns persist.

Albright believed strongly in the potential of youth movements. Young people, she argued, were more globally connected, more educated, and more determined to demand accountability than previous generations. Their willingness to challenge long-standing hierarchies appeared to offer a new force for democratic change. Yet in practice, youthful idealism has often collided with entrenched power structures. In many authoritarian or semi-authoritarian states, young activists face digital surveillance, online harassment, and imprisonment. In some countries with declining democratic institutions, such as Tunisia and Turkey, many young people have responded not by organizing politically but by emigrating. This trend reflects a crisis of confidence: young citizens expect more from their governments, yet see fewer opportunities to shape political outcomes.The text emphasizes that democracy requires more than public support it needs strong institutions capable of enforcing accountability. Independent courts, legislatures, media organizations, and election commissions form the infrastructure that sustains democratic systems. These institutions, together with global networks of assistance, have historically helped democracies build resilience. Organizations such as the National Endowment for Democracy, the European Union, and others have long contributed to training election observers, supporting journalism, and encouraging reform. Their efforts have helped secure important victories, such as Poland’s 2023 opposition win and Tunisia’s decade of democratic experimentation.Nonetheless, successes are increasingly rare. Freedom House reports that nearly 60 countries experienced democratic decline in 2024 alone. Examples include the dissolution of opposition parties, the removal of term limits, and the passage of laws designed to silence civil society organizations. Meanwhile, the reduction in U.S. support for democratic initiatives has strained the international system that once helped movements survive repression.

Albright’s central insight: that the human desire for freedom, dignity, and accountability continues to exist even when democracy is under strain. The challenge lies not in the disappearance of these ideals but in the weakening of the structures and alliances needed to help them flourish. Albright argued that democracies must work together to support one another, counter authoritarian influence, and preserve the institutions that uphold democratic life. The future of democracy depends not only on public aspiration but also on coordinated leadership and sustained investment in democratic infrastructure.