Section 10. Conclusion

Ultimately, the state is responsible for the regulation, restriction and punishment of domestic violence. Even if states commit themselves to the principle of women’s rights (e.g.

The problem of domestic violence and the difficulties in combating it are connected to the authoritarian and unrepresentative nature of many states in the Middle East, Africa and Asia. Authoritarian and/or unrepresentative rule bolsters patriarchal family relations, and fosters conditions in which social and religious conservatism can thrive (Sharabi 1988). According to Deniz Kandiyoti:

The failure of modern states to create and adequately redistribute resources intensified tensions and cleavages expressed in religious, ethnic and regional terms... As the state itself uses local patronage networks and sectional rivalries in its distributive system, citizens also turn to their primary solidarities both to protect themselves and to compensate for inefficient administration. This reinforces the stranglehold of communities over their women, whose roles as boundary markers become heightened. (Kandiyoti 1991: 13-14)

When the state is incapable or unwilling to represent the interests of members of society, the importance of family and kinship relations for social survival is inflated. Consequently, any challenges to patriarchal authority in the domestic sphere — including but not limited to challenges to the use of violence - can be construed as threats to the family as an institution. This, in turn, lends itself to the idea that empowering women would corrode and menace the family, and that efforts to do so are, therefore, both dangerous and ‘alien’.

Although shari'a is administered, interpreted and used in a variety of ways across Muslim societies, in certain contexts it may be used to justify failures and refusals on the part of states to provide women with the rights and protections that they are due as humans, as citizens, as women and as Muslims. And to the extent that popular notions about shari'a may conceive of certain forms of vio­lence against women as normative and/or legitimate, this undercuts the efforts of those who seek to press the state to assume and exercise its responsibility.

In conclusion, because of the importance of the state - and the failure of so many states to protect and ensure the rights of their citizens - struggles for women’s rights can be seen as part of a broader struggle against authoritarianism and unrepresentative rule, not a rejection of religion or culture. Many rights activists throughout the three regions are striving to cultivate and clarify this distinction, and it is to them that this study is dedicated with the hope that it can contribute to their cause.