Insights

Share this page

Summary

Data Explorer

Focus Group Discussion

This section presents a cross-province synthesis of focus group discussions held across 24 provinces of Afghanistan. The discussions explored women’s access to legal mechanisms, the challenges they face, and the type of justice available under the Taliban De Facto. The findings are organized around five guiding questions, highlighting common themes, uncommon nuances, and voices from participants themselves.

Issues women face requiring legal help

Across Afghanistan, women’s testimonies reveal a convergence of systemic rights violations and structural barriers that deny them access to justice. The most recurrent concerns include deprivation of education and employment, domestic violence, forced and underage marriage, and denial of inheritance rights. These are not isolated incidents but reflect a nationwide pattern of discrimination reinforced by both state policy and patriarchal norms. Restrictions on freedom of movement, the imposition of hijab, and exclusion from public life compound these violations, producing widespread psychological harm, with several participants linking their despair to rising rates of depression and suicide. As one woman from Badakhshan noted, “If we were to prioritize our problems, the first and foremost would be women’s right to education. But if we raise our voices, we are suppressed.” Another from Bamyan highlighted the collapse of protective institutions, observing that “in the past, we had women’s support networks, but now, none of that exists anymore.” The dismantling of state and civil society mechanisms such as the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, human rights organizations, and safe houses has created a legal vacuum where women’s rights are neither protected nor enforceable.

Within this vacuum, women are forced to rely on customary mechanisms such as jirgas and shuras, which they acknowledge as accessible and cost-effective but also biased and male-dominated. Courts, once perceived as imperfect but more formal avenues of redress, are now described as hostile spaces where women are silenced, humiliated, or coerced into returning to abusive marriages. One participant from Samangan province recalled being told by court staff, “If you were a good woman, you wouldn’t have come [to court].” Others reported inheritance and custody disputes almost invariably resolved in men’s favor, even where evidence supported women’s claims.

These accounts point to a fundamental denial of due process and equal protection, leaving Afghan women with no meaningful remedies under either state or customary law. Poverty and unemployment exacerbate these conditions, driving families to force daughters into early marriage and reinforcing economic dependence. From a legal perspective, the testimonies underscore the collapse of independent justice mechanisms and the systemic exclusion of women from legal recourse. Policy responses must therefore focus not only on restoring credible legal support structures within Afghanistan but also on mobilizing international accountability frameworks to challenge these entrenched violations and provide Afghan women with avenues to reclaim their rights.

Mechanisms women turn to and why?

Women overwhelmingly reported turning first to family elders, then to jirgas or shuras, and only rarely to courts. Jirgas and shuras were described as accessible, low-cost, and culturally familiar, but also deeply biased against women. Family pressure and norms of shame often prevented women from approaching courts, which were viewed as corrupt, slow, and humiliating. Urban women in Kabul, Kunduz, and Samangan were more likely to attempt courts, whereas rural women had little option but to rely on elders or jirgas. Helmand and Badakhshan participants recalled positive experiences with civil society legal aid in the past, while in Kunduz, women noted rare online counseling support. Yet, in many provinces, silence or even suicide emerged as the only recourse, particularly in Badghis and Faryab. As one participant in Herat explained, “Even with a video of rape, the court demanded witnesses from the woman.” From Paktia came an even starker account: “Women cannot turn anywhere… they must endure in silence.”

Why Jirgas and Shuras are used?

Jirgas and shuras have long been embedded in Afghan society, but reliance on them has grown since the Taliban’s takeover and the closure of women’s institutions and courts.

Justice in Taliban controlled courts

They are valued for speed and low cost, and for the trust accorded to community elders, even when decisions are unjust. Urban women historically relied more on courts, but with these avenues eroded, they too are forced into jirgas. Some provinces, such as Badakhshan, Baghlan, and Parwan, criticized jirgas as ineffective and recycling problems, while others, like Nuristan and Nangarhar, described them as more just than corrupt courts.

A woman in Balkh summarized the dilemma: “We are forced to choose between two bad options—and we choose the less harmful one.” In Parwan, participants stressed that jirgas exist not out of trust but out of necessity and lack of alternatives.

Women described Taliban-controlled courts as biased toward men, humiliating, and exclusionary. Women are often silenced, required to appear with a male guardian, and confronted with harassment. The absence of female lawyers, judges, and police further prevents women from securing fair outcomes. Although inheritance and some divorce cases were occasionally resolved in provinces like Samangan and Sar-e-Pol, these were exceptions. Corruption was a recurring theme, with judges reportedly demanding bribes or even sexual favors in Herat and Jawzjan. In Parwan, women reported fear of flogging for small infractions, while in Takhar, women were told by court officials that they “should have been killed instead of coming here.” As one participant in Kunar put it, “Courts and jirgas are the same now—both humiliate women.”

Civil society legal aid networks

Civil society legal aid networks, once vital lifelines for women, have all but disappeared under the Taliban. Women recalled with nostalgia the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, safe houses, and NGOs that previously defended their rights, covered legal expenses, and provided awareness. Today, such institutions operate only clandestinely, if at all, and mainly in health or humanitarian fields. Parwan and Samangan noted secret or health-focused groups, while Kunduz reported rare online support. In Takhar, some NGOs still exist in other sectors, but not in legal rights. The loss of civil society has left women with virtually no supportive institutions. As one participant from Herat said: “Only NGOs stood for us—now they are gone, we are voiceless.”

Women overwhelmingly reported turning first to family elders, then to jirgas or shuras, and only rarely to courts. Jirgas and shuras were described as accessible, low-cost, and culturally familiar, but also deeply biased against women. Family pressure and norms of shame often prevented women from approaching courts, which were viewed as corrupt, slow, and humiliating. Urban women in Kabul, Kunduz, and Samangan were more likely to attempt courts, whereas rural women had little option but to rely on elders or jirgas. Helmand and Badakhshan participants recalled positive experiences with civil society legal aid in the past, while in Kunduz, women noted rare online counseling support. Yet, in many provinces, silence or even suicide emerged as the only recourse, particularly in Badghis and Faryab. As one participant in Herat explained, “Even with a video of rape, the court demanded witnesses from the woman.” From Paktia came an even starker account: “Women cannot turn anywhere… they must endure in silence.”

News Feed

Read More Surveys

Contact Us