The Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) seems to be working in an overdrive to make its presence felt. The council has issued fatwas and given proposals, mainly targeting women on the issue of DNA testing in rape cases, child marriages and polygamy among others. Recent among these, though not binding on the government, is a proposed ‘model’ of the women protection bill passed by the Punjab government a few months ago, which CII and other Islamic parties had firmly rejected declaring it “un-Islamic.” The ‘highlight’ of amendments proposed by the body is it that it recommends allowing a husband to beat his wife ‘gently if she needs to be disciplined’, in addition to prohibition on mixing of genders in schools, hospitals and offices. Much of the CII’s opposition to existing domestic violence legislation has been the assertion that domestic violence does not exist in Pakistan, and therefore does not need to be legislated against. The CII claims that the bill it has proposed protects all rights given to them under Shariah. The proposed bill is to be deliberated in provincial assemblies. Salient points from the proposed bill address property, marriage, motherhood, crimes and violence against women, and apostasy; and it even ventures into instruments of state ‘acceptable’ for a woman to be involved in. Civil society, intelligensia, and human rights activists have rightly rejected the bill as being unconstitutional. The provisions of the proposed bill violate fundamental human rights and is against international laws and treaties signed by Pakistan. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) condemned these recommendations, calling for the council of “zealots’ to be disbanded. Furthermore, Punjab Law Minister Rana Sanaullah also said that the proposals of CII are not binding and can only be accepted after a debate in the house. Although some of the proposals regarding honour killings, forced conversions, right to own and bequeath property, criminalisation of contracting marriages for vani and with Quran, are a departure from the hardened stance of clerics, provisions regarding domestic violence and segregation of women in public places is a cause of concern. The word ‘gently’ has not been defined expressly either. Similarly, there is no punishment outlined if a husband beats his wife, exceeding ‘gentle limits’. The CII’s bill highlights woman as the culprit party in all issues stated in the draft as compared to the clauses in the Women Protection Bill, which focuses on victims of domestic violence. The CII bill only describes modes of punishments husbands are permitted to impose on their wives if they do not comply with their responsibilities under shariah. There is a need to evolve laws with changing times, as a law cannot be rigid, or etched in stone. Similarly, while quoting a verse from the Holy Quran, if the context and setting are not taken into account it isolates and distort the words in a way that distorts or falsifies the original meaning. The only time when a light violence is permitted is when a husband finds out that his spouse has committed adultery. Furthermore, since the CII rulings are not binding on the legislative assemblies, the constitutional status of the council is perplexing. Civil society has urged for abolishing the council as the purpose for which it had been created was achieved a long time ago. It is high time provincial as well as federal governments took responsibility to have proper laws and guidelines regarding these issues without succumbing to any pressure by forces that distort religion to keep their power on the malleable public. Domestic violence is a major problem, and government cannot stay in denial like members of CII who repudiate the existence of any kind of domestic violence in Pakistan.*