In many regions of the world, particularly the Middle East, honour crimes, i.e. violence committed under an excuse of maintaining or rebuilding family honour, represent a serious and difficult human rights problem. Honour crimes are a severe concern in Jordan and Lebanon. These crimes, which primarily target women and girls, are ingrained in societal norms and cultural traditions that place a high value on family reputation which is frequently associated with the behaviour of women and the idea of her purity. Honour crimes continue despite widespread criticism and demands for change, a reality which raises serious concerns about the efficiency of legal systems and the vital role that society plays in encouraging these violent crimes. This article analyzes how legal responses and cultural attitudes against honour crimes have changed over time. It starts with the 1998 case of Kifaya Hussein, which made headlines, and then it attempts to determine whether and to what extent public and legal attitudes have evolved over the course of more than 20 years by looking at events leading up to the more recent case of Zeinab Zaiter in Lebanon in 2021. This time frame provides a thorough examination of the effects of societal shifts and legislative reforms on the prevalence and attitudes toward honour crimes. Constructivism is the theoretical approach for examining how honour crimes are socially produced and it contributes to a better understanding of how society views on gender roles and honour, as well as cultural norms, influences the persistence of honour crimes.
Keywords: human rights, honour crimes, legal systems, Middle East, Kifaya Hussein, Zeinab Zaiter, constructivism