Non-State Torture of Widows: Harmful Cultural Traditions and the Law

Human-Rights — Image source: Pixabay.com – geralt.

By Ally Laverty and Zoe Prokopiou. – Student Researchers for Widows for Peace through Democracy. August 2026.

What is torture and what is Non-State Torture?

Torture is defined in Article 1 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture as “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.”

There are four cumulative elements in the definition:

1. intentional infliction;
2. severe mental or physical suffering;
3. by a public official, who is directly or indirectly involved;
4. for a specific purpose listed.

(Association for the Prevention of Torture).

Point three is where the dividing line lies between the UN’s recognition of state torture and the wider phenomenon of Non-State Torture (NST).

Non-State Torture is committed by non-state actors, such as relatives, partners, friends, traffickers, and pimps. It is typically inflicted in private and domestic spaces, though perpetrators can operate at an organised level within a community (Persons Against Non-State Torture).

How do widows face Non-State Torture?

Many widows globally face traditional, socio-cultural and religious rituals and acts which amount to Non-State Torture.

Much research surrounding the torture faced by widows references widow burning (sati), a historical Hindu practice where widows were forced to throw themselves on their late husband’s funeral pyre. However it is a largely outdated practice (Corbacho and Barrera, 2012). This reinforces the need for further research into the specific kinds of torture widows globally are subjected to.

From looking at a number of resources, it becomes clear that the research into the Non-State Torture of widows has been targeted towards certain regions.

In India, mortality rates are 85% higher among widows compared to married women (Corbacho and Barrera, 2012 – research by the Guild for Service), showing their acute vulnerability. Widows must live a spiritual life of restriction (Corbacho and Barrera, 2012); they are expected to follow restrictive and codes of conduct pertaining to diet and dress. Many widows move to Vrindavan, known as the ‘city of widows’. It is estimated that more than 15,000 widows live there in order to worship in the hopes of achieving salvation. It is noted that prostitution is a primary form of survival, with many younger widows being forced into the trade by pimps (Corbacho and Barrera, 2012). Though the research is sparse in terms of torture faced by widows forced into prostitution, it seems self-evident that these widows would be at significant risk of violence, especially sexualised tortures, as a result of their vulnerable position. Meera Khanna points out that the widows who become pregnant after being raped may be forced to undergo unsafe abortions (Corbacho and Barrera, 2012).
Widows in Punjab are referred to as randi, meaning ‘prostitute’. They can be accused of being responsible for their late husband’s death and many widows suffer physical and psychological harassment and abuse (Watson, 2018). According to Persons Against Non-State Torture, calling names, shaming, blaming and humiliation can all amount to Non-State Torture.

In Sub-Saharan Africa, widow rituals can include drinking the water used to wash the husband’s corpse. This is a method of “self-exculpation”; it is believed the widow will die if she is to blame for the death of her husband (Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, 2000). This harmful practice risks the spread of disease (Watson, 2018). The UN itself acknowledges that widows in this region are “coerced into participating in harmful, degrading and even life-threatening traditional practices” (United Nations). They may be subject to ‘ritual cleansing’ practices involving forced sex and scarification, endangering their health (UN Women). Furthermore, many practices involve physical deprivation and exposure, which can be categorised as Non-State Torture (Persons Against Non-State Torture). Examples include widows having to sleep on the ground without a blanket for extended periods, fasting, prohibitions on bathing and forced nakedness.

The United Nations have also recognised the prevalence of Non-State Torture against widows in areas of conflict, such as Afghanistan which has over half a million widows. Women here largely rely on their husbands to provide money for their family so if their husband was killed in combat they would be left with few resources to support their children. Some receive $150 per year from the government if their husband was killed in combat, but they rely on making money by washing clothes or begging in the bazaar to make ends meet (Chaon, 2017). Further to this, widows face violence, forced marriage, and ostracisation. Around 500 widows have become ostracised to the point that, in the 1990s, they built their own settlement 15 kilometres outside of Kabul named the City of Women (House of Lords, 2019).

Levirate marriage is a custom existing in India, Pakistan, some Middle Eastern countries and in parts of Africa which dictates that a widow should, or must, marry their brother-in-law (marriage.com, 2025). The tradition is notably observed in countries where it is frowned upon to remarry outside of the family or where there are strong cultural practices surrounding inheritance. While levirate marriage is sometimes seen as ‘protecting’ the widow by ensuring she is supported financially and emotionally, widows often do not have a choice. They are either forced, coerced, or have no option but to marry their brother-in-law as many widows are left unemployed and uneducated due to the societal expectation on girls to stay at home and marry young. Forced marriage has been recognised by the UN Special Rapporteur on torture as a form of “gender-based violence that constitute[s] ill-treatment and torture” (Mendez, 2016). Furthermore, other forms of Non-State Torture can be committed when forcing a widow to remarry, such as assault, kidnap and false imprisonment (Action4Justice), and ultimately levirate marriages push women into a serious relationship which can create an environment for other Non-State Torture such as physical and emotional abuse. Though the forced marriage of widows is criminalised by some countries, such as The Prohibition of Infringement of a Widow’s and Widower’s Fundamental Rights Law, 2001 enacted by the Enugu State in Nigeria (Action4Justice), the efficacy of such laws remains uncertain (Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, 2006), and the CEDAW Committee recognises that many countries’ legal systems still discriminate against widows (CEDAW, 2013), making them more vulnerable to forced levirate marriages.

What is the law?

International Human Rights Law

The United Nations Convention against Torture imposes upon States Parties the positive obligation to prevent, prohibit, investigate, prosecute, and punish torture among other more specific duties (Wendland, 2002).

Some authors have interpreted the obligation to protect as extending to protection from Non-State Torture, and States have expanded their laws to varying degrees in an effort to incorporate torture by non-state perpetrators (International Association of Democratic Lawyers, 2023).

Regional Human Rights Law

Regional treaties such as the European Convention on Human Rights (Article 3) can also expressly prohibit torture. The UK has enshrined ECHR in statute by way of the Human Rights Act 1998 although it is also ruled out by common law (Freedom From Torture).

International Criminal Law and a ‘legal loophole’

Article 7(2)(e) of the Statute of the International Criminal Court defines torture as “the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused”. Crucially, this extends to individuals and non-state actors. But such acts are only crimes against humanity when committed as part of a widespread attack against a civilian population (Nowak, 2021). This leaves out acts of Non-State Torture against individuals, such as widows who would be subject to torture by non-state perpetrators on an individual scale.
Manfred Nowak [UN Special Rapporteur on Torture 2004-2010] points out that this creates a “legal loophole” when it comes to states that have implemented both the UN convention and the ICC Statute (Nowak, 2021).

International Humanitarian Law

The Geneva Conventions, which apply specifically in armed conflict, also prohibits torture making it a war crime in certain scenarios (Center for Global Law and Justice).

Why there should be a UN Convention on Non-State Torture

Many associations are pushing for improved legal frameworks for the prevention and prosecution of Non-State Torture. Persons Against Non-State Torture is a self-funded group of scholars, educators and activists who are calling on States to address legal gaps regarding Non-State Torture. The Alliance of NGOs on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice has its own ‘working group on gender-based violence as torture inflicted by non-state actors’, which analyses existing international regulations and domestic laws and reviews best practices for criminalising Non-State Torture.

The United Nations already recognises the human right to be free from torture. It seems like a logical step to specifically condone all forms of torture, not only state-inflicted. By creating a Convention on Non-State torture, States Parties will be compelled to legislate against it on a national level. As long as Non-State Torture specifically is not criminalised, there is no criminal data pertaining to its occurrence, prevention and punishment to be collected. The only statistics available about its prevalence are those researched by NGOs. As a result, victims of Non-State Torture are made invisible.

The aforementioned organisations argue that “specific and distinct” laws on Non-State Torture are imperative in ensuring that victims are legally protected and perpetrators are adequately punished (Persons Against Non-State Torture). Legal recognition will spread awareness of the existence of Non-State Torture and create a legal framework upon which better research can be carried out and more informed investigations can be conducted.

We must also consider the patriarchal divide that governs the distinction between State Torture and Non-State Torture when only the former is criminalised.
The co-founders of Persons Against Non-State Torture recognise a “patriarchal ‘Non-State Torture war’ against women and girls” (Sarson and MacDonald, 2021); as it stands, torture being experienced by women in private spheres is not as legally significant as State torture. This imbalance undermines the purpose of Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which asserts that no one shall be subjected to torture. To properly achieve this goal, a Convention against Non-State Torture should be established to name and criminalise the human rights violations which are legally sidelined.

Why widows should be included in a UN Convention on Non-State Torture

There is a famous quote that “insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results”. We must bear this in mind as we fight to create meaningful change. It no longer works to word conventions generally and the Non-State Torture of widows is proof of that. If we don’t focus on helping those that need it most, they will only continue to fall through the cracks, further from equality and the social development that these conventions are enacted to promote.

But if we have a convention prohibiting Non-State Torture against everybody, why do we need to specify widows? Because sometimes focusing on the big picture means that we can lose sight of the individuals who need this protection the most. A helpful way to think about this is the ‘Burning House’ analogy which asks the following: ‘if one house was burning, would you hose down all the houses on the street, or would you hose down the house on fire because it is the one which needs the most attention at that moment?’. If we look at the Non-State Torture of widows as one of these ‘burning houses’, we need to focus the Convention on specific victims of Non-State Torture and not simply hope that by casting a wide net, widow victims will be properly protected.

Considering this, it is vital that widows are explicitly mentioned to identify the issue at hand and to better assign resources to ‘extinguish the fire’.

Widows are a highly vulnerable and globally significant subsection of the female population. For the same reasons that Non-State Torture should be legally recognised as a crime, widows should be explicitly identified as victims to it, namely, for data collection purposes, increased visibility and effective and universal prevention.

Other reasons include the following:

Responsibility to protect
Article 2(1) of the Convention against Torture refers to each States responsibility to take ‘effective’ measures to prevent torture under their jurisdiction. This shows that States have a duty to protect their citizens from this violation and by ignoring the evident human rights abuses of widows, they are violating this responsibility. Mentioning widows specifically, however, is a reasonable expectation as the impact could be significantly benefit millions of people within their jurisdiction by recognising their issues and reaping the benefits that can come with this, such as safeguarding and prevention measures at state level.
To break the cycle
In many cases, the violence against widows is justified by the violators as widows are deemed as ‘carrying disease’ or being ‘cursed’. These ideas are deeply rooted in certain cultures and widows themselves are not treated as human. In that way, it is clear to see that the perpetrators don’t think that the laws preventing torture apply to widows, and without explicitly mentioning widows, they will continue to think this way and the impact we are trying to achieve through a convention against Non-State Torture will not benefit the people who need it the most.
By mentioning that Non-State Torture against widows is a crime, it will clearly identify that widows are human beings with rights that apply to everyone else. This can start to tear down the negative beliefs towards them and remove the cultural justifications for this treatment of women.
To improve monitoring and data collection on widows
A prominent issue for widows facing Non-State Torture is that very few people know that there is an issue, and those who do don’t know the full extent of it. So far, we can only estimate that 85 million widows have faced physical abuse (Widows for Peace through Democracy, 2018) because, as we have seen, there is a lot of shame and fear felt by these women and we therefore can’t gain accurate information about their experiences.
The current lack of information represents the “low value placed on issues relating to widows and their children” (House of Lords, 2019) and by specifically recognising crimes committed against them we can start to gather information to make them feel seen and empowered.
With knowledge comes power. So, with the information gathered we can educate legislators, enabling impactful policy processes because the data can show specific areas for development, minimising the risk of creating “policies that are not fit for purpose and do not result in equitable outcomes” (Nasimi, 2023). We can also track the impact the Convention is having to pressure leaders to resolve the prevalence of torture on these communities.
Provide certainty for widows experiencing Non-State Torture
It is hard to be more certain in your intentions than by putting it in black and white. These few letters, whilst small on paper, will make great changes in the culture and communities regulated by it. They are proof that, despite what their abusers may threaten, they are deserving of freedom from torture and for the torturers to be punished for their crimes.
Article 13 of the Convention against Torture enables all individuals subject to torture to a right to complain and have their case examined, with protection from ill-treatment because of this. If widows are tortured because of social norms which discriminate, then potentially they will not feel able to bring themselves to raise a complaint, therefore explicitly mentioning them can be a reasonable step to protect them with the knowledge they are included.

References

Ally Laverty
I am a Legal Solicitor Apprentice at TLT LLP who grew up in Northern Ireland but now lives in Manchester. I started a career in law to make a positive impact and support people who are facing injustices across the world. Researching and writing articles with BPP University has given me a wider knowledge of social justice and provides experience that will help me reach my goal of working in international human rights law.

Zoe Prokopiou
I am a current law conversion student at BPP Law School with an undergraduate degree in French and Philosophy. I switched to law with a view to becoming a barrister and my interests lie in public international law, human rights law and environmental law.

Please help Widows for Peace to empower widows of all ages

Give Now

Support us on Facebook

NEWS & BLOGS FROM WPD, PARTNERS & NETWORK MEMBERS

Non-State Torture of widows: Harmful Cultural Traditions, Rituals and Practices – and the law