Qandeel Baloch has been killed in the name of honour. Her only crime was that she was born in a society that refuses to allow women to live on their own terms. There never can be any honour in killing. Human life must be accepted as sacred and inviolable. Unless we do so, we will remain victims of a vicious cycle that gives misogyny a prime place in society. Our laws, especially those that are the product of General Zia-ul-Haq’s hypocrisy in the name of religion and which bring religion into disrepute, give sanction to this misogyny and protect it. These laws, including the so-called Qisas and Diyat laws, need to be revisited. Dignity to our people needs to be restored. Military coups are another form of “honour” killing. This is when the military of a country decides to take over and subvert the will of the people, often professing to act in the name of national honour or security. Sometimes, military dictators act in the name of religion or ideology. The “Islamising” General Zia-ul-Haq, who is responsible for the many hypocritical laws that plague our legal system, ironically was a close ally and friend of the secularist Turkish General Kenan Evren (he was demoted to the rank of Private by a Turkish court in 20114), who had taken over Turkey in a military coup in 1980. Here you had two generals, one a self-professed Islamist, and the other self-professed secularist, who had no qualms allying themselves with each other on a global stage. This was because ideology is always a façade for them. Both these generals were backed by Washington, and were part of the US cold war policy to contain Soviet Union’s influence in the region. Some of us supported another “honour” killing when General Pervez Musharraf took over. He introduced the ideology of enlightened moderation. As we would learn in time, Musharraf did not care about either enlightening or moderating Pakistan. He was more concerned about the institutional interests of the Pakistan army. In the end he retreated on every promise he made to the liberals, and left the country in a far worse shape than it had been before his rule. But have we learnt a lesson? Last week, banners began appearing in major cities around Pakistan calling on General Raheel Sharif to take over. These banners were put up by a hitherto unknown political party called Move on Pakistan. These banners were in a clear violation of Article 6 of the Constitution as well as Section 124-A of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860. It remains to be seen whether appropriate action will be taken against the said political party and its leaders. Then there was the attempted coup in Turkey on the night of 15 July. We watched agape in horror as fighter jets made low flying passes, and tanks moved in on Ankara and Istanbul. For a while it seemed that all was lost, and that a coup had been completed, until Erdogan fought back calling on his people to take to the streets. The coup was suppressed and democracy saved. There are many disagreements one can have with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, but he is the elected leader of Turkey. The attempt on his government was yet another attempt at honour killing. It was foiled by a people now alive to the idea of democracy. He was supported not just by those who had voted for his AKP. No opposition party supported the coup. The Kurds and their HDP, which have been at the receiving end of Erdogan’s increasingly autocratic tendencies, stood shoulder to shoulder with other citizens of Turkey against the coup. This is democracy. It does not mean a carte blanche for Erdogan but rather an assertion of the will of the people, in whom sovereignty rests unconditionally. One wishes the people of Pakistan can be so assertive and clearheaded in face of any future attempt at military adventurism. Speaking to the military officers Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah said: “Do not forget that the armed forces are the servants of the people. You do not make national policy; it is we, the civilians, who decide these issues and it is your duty to carry out these tasks with which you are entrusted.” It is this principle i.e. that elected civilian leaders, men and women, make policy that is the heart of any democracy. Military is a subservient branch of the government. We cannot remain wedded to the idea that a saviour in a uniform will come and fix problems of Pakistan. The impulse to look for martial saviours is derived from the same patriarchal root that justifies horrible acts like the so-called “honour” killings. Our inability to allow civilian democracy to take root is directly proportional to the misogyny prevalent in our society that does not allow women to live as human beings on their own terms. You tackle one and you will tackle the other, because a truly democratic society is incompatible with misogynistic patriarchy, which inevitably leads to fascism and militarism. The writer is a lawyer based in Lahore and the author of the book Mr Jinnah: Myth and Reality. He can be contacted via twitter @therealylh and through his email address yasser.hamdani@gmail.com