by Gerald Nkisu Katayi
Is wife battering a criminal act in Zambia? This one question can be answered by different opinions across the nation. The diverseness in answering this question can be justified by different sources that inform Zambians. As it has been said, “who educates you controls you”.
One of our own law makers is allegedly to have battered his wife. He is not the first nor is he going to be the last man to lay his hands on his spouse. Zambian women are battered in marriages and even during courtship by their boy friends. But who says these acts are criminal?
Zambia is a country of ethnic diversity; this means Zambians can have the same question, yet give different answers and none of the answers will be wrong. Tradition, Religion and English Law are the main sources of information where decisions are derived from. Both of these institutions are alive and well; they are both entertained by the society and politicians yet in some cases they antagonize each other.[pullquote]Zambian women are battered in marriages and even during courtship by their boy friends[/pullquote]
In some Zambian traditions wife battering is part of showing love, in fact some women complain when violence is absent in their marriage; meaning they don’t feel loved. English Law (State) will interpret the same scenario as criminal and punishable offence, while the Church will say love is not easily provoked, thinks no evil, love has patience, love is kind, (1 Corinthians 13:5-7), avoiding any form of violent.
In one society we give recognition to traditional and civil marriages, we have traditional healers and medical doctors; we have local courts to deal with cultural matters, chiefs to rule over their tribes, culture to interpret the norms of a tribe. On the other hand we have the police to enforce the Law, criminal courts to determine the State Law and politicians to rule. In case of wife battering, when tradition says yes, the State will say no! In this case who is right and who is wrong?
Tradition sees hunting as a way of survival, the State calls it poaching and is a punishable offence, tradition in some places supports early marriages, the State brings in girl child education, witch battering is acceptable in some chiefdoms, the State says that is an assault, tradition has it that a woman should endure pain, even when ill she should cook for her husband, the state has women’s rights.
Polygamous marriages are allowed by some traditions, the Church and the State say no. Should the State then arrest the traditional follower who is polygamous? If a chief who is a follower and the keeper of tradition and culture beats up his wife, are the society and the Law going to demonize him? Or is it that some animals are more equal than others?
If a man is empowered by his tradition to batter his wife as away of showing love or solving family disputes, why should the Law come in? Is this then a divided society?
It is tantamount to persecution to try a Christian by sharia law which is Islamic. Why is it in order to try an ardent traditional follower in the courts of law for wife battering? Can this be seen as persecuting the traditionalist?
Both the Church, tradition and the State are institution that influences people’s decisions. Are these three institutions on the same standing? If not; when does tradition becomes inferior to the Law in the case of wife battering? These institutions must be harmonized like in Kenya where chiefdoms are abolished in order to create a more “united conscience society”. If the Law and traditions are allowed to operate without clear distinction, how is the society that is so diverse going to know if wife battering is an offence or not?
