Khanum Jeiranova v Georgia

Khanum Jeiranova v Georgia (2021) CEDAW Committee. CEDAW/C/80/D/140/2019

Georgia failed to investigate and prosecute gender and honour-based violence against a woman, Khanum Jeiranova, who was severely beaten by family and subsequently found dead. As a minority ethnic Azeri who could not communicate with the Georgian-speaking police, she experienced intersecting discrimination.

What happened?

Ms Jeiranova, a married woman of Azeri ethnicity, fell in love with another man, A.I. Three members of her husband’s family saw her with him in his car, assumed that she was unfaithful, and attacked them both. A.I. managed to escape, but the three people caught Ms Jeiranova and beat her, they also called other people to tell them about this alleged adultery, and eventually 15 people beat her, threw stones at her and insulted her, even though her children were present. Her father was contacted, when he arrived, he slapped Ms Jeiranova in the face and took her to his home. Police officers and the village governor were at her father’s house when she arrived. She told them that she was being put under pressure to commit suicide by drinking rat poison, but she wanted to live and asked the village governor to help her. As some of the officials did not speak Azeri, only Georgian, there were some apparent misunderstandings between Ms Jeiranova and the police. After signing a letter undertaking not to harm her, the police agreed that she could go home with her parents, and they agreed to check on her the following day. Her parents took her to their home and the following morning she was found hanging in the garden shed, with her left hand between the noose and her neck. The police opened an investigation, but her family refused to allow an autopsy examination for religious reasons. However, the mullahs who prepared her body for burial noted that she was covered in blood and bruising, and a deep wound and scratches around her neck.

Within a week, Ms Jeiranova’s parents asked for an investigation to be opened into her death. Investigations focused on Ms Jeiranova’s alleged adultery. Requests for new investigations and complaints about the failure to investigate continued. The case was brought to the CEDAW Committee by Ms Jeiranova’s husband and children. The authors submit that the authorities were aware that she was unsafe at her parents’ house and that she was subjected to psychological violence and coercion to commit suicide: also that the authorities too readily went along with the idea that Ms Jeiranova had committed suicide due to her own sense of shame, rather than “dishonour” being the reason for wider family members killed her. Subsequently, witnesses denied seeing Ms Jeiranova being beaten only her children described this.

What was the decision?

“ 7.6 The Committee notes the authors’ claim of a violation of articles 2 (f) and 5 (a), read in conjunction with article 1, of the Convention and in the light of general recommendations No. 19 and No. 35. It also notes the State party’s observation on measures taken to combat violence against women and gender inequality, including with regard to ethnic and national minority communities. The Committee further notes that the State party has not explained how the measures taken have benefited Ms. Jeiranova. It considers that the infliction of ill-treatment on Ms. Jeiranova, the basis of the denial of an autopsy on the objections of relatives known to have posed a threat to her, the Kakheti Prosecutor’s qualification of her behaviour as “dishonourable” and the decision to terminate the investigation based on the conclusion that she had committed suicide because of her “shameful” behaviour and faithlessness confirm that Ms. Jeiranova was the victim of intersecting discrimination related to her ethnicity and the stereotypical attitudes of the police and judicial authorities. Accordingly, the Committee finds violations of Ms. Jeiranova’s rights under articles 2 (f) and 5 (a) of the Convention, read in conjunction with articles 1 and 3 of the Convention and in the light of general recommendations No. 19 and No. 35.”

Recommendations

The CEDAW Committee recommended to Georgia that Ms Jeiranova’s case be investigated again, promptly, thoroughly and independently, and that perpetrators be prosecuted and sanctioned. The CEDAW Committee also made recommendations that Ms Jeiranova’s children receive comprehensive reparation, including compensation and an apology. Recommendations were also made for a safe custody and care arrangements for the children.

The CEDAW Committee also made general recommendations regarding effective investigation and prosecution of all forms of gender-based violence, including killings in the name of so-called “honour.” To achieve this, there should be mandatory trainings for police and justice officials.

The CEDAW Committee also (paragraph 9(b))

“(vi) Ensure that an assessment of the danger to the life of the victim, the seriousness of the situation and the risk of repeated violence is carried out by all relevant authorities at all stages of the investigation and the procedures under the Law on the Elimination of Domestic Violence and Protection and Support of Victims of Domestic Violence of 2006, in order to mitigate the risk and provide immediate protection and support to victims and their children, especially in communities with entrenched “honour”-based values, social norms and practices and direct them to appropriate services;

(vii) Strengthen appropriate, specialized services, including early warning systems, with trained personnel, for cases of domestic violence and human rights violations in communities that are isolated, closed and/or where “honour”-based norms apply, including by facilitating access to such services and ensuring the swift, competent and specialized handling of such cases.”

The CEDAW Committee also recommended that data on femicides, “honour killings” and forced or induced suicides be gathered.

Learning from other institutions

The CEDAW Committee also made recommendations based on the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (known as the “Istanbul Convention”) regarding appropriate criminalisation of crimes in the name of so-called “honour” which are appropriate for investigating and prosecuting members of extended family as well as immediate members of families.

Relevance

This is the first case of an honour killing that the CEDAW Committee has dealt with.