Fight Hudood, Protect Women

`` Until now rape cases were dealt with in Sharia courts. Victims had to have four male witnesses to the crime – if not, they faced prosecution for adultery.``

This is a blatant and groundless lie. As a journalist, do you think that, you have some responsibility towards yourself?

Sharia -- Sharia -- Sharia -- Islam`s undoing is its ``tusma pa`` sharia.

Islam is a brilliantly plumed peacock but with utterly deformed ugly feet afflicted with a primitive, barbaric, decadent and debilitating disease sharia -- unless this disfiguring cancer is dissected out of body and feet of Islam we Muslims will remain politically chaotic, socially retarded, intellectually infantile and spiritually bankrupt.

Re: # 2

If you are so cultured, enlightened, and modern then why doesn`t it show in your communication. You always seem to be angry with everyone all the time. Do you want all of us to become like you? Is this what you preach?

my dear brother Urs -- you accuse Beena or BBC of ``blatant and groundless lie`` -- and then you accuse me of being ``angry with everyone``.....:)

Beena, welcome “back” and thanks for this detailed chronology.

Sometimes, we get so preoccupied with the present that we forget the past. It is difficult to believe, but it is true that most of the damage to what used to be a relatively secular population was done over the last generation – although it is also crystal clear that the preparatory groundwork – developing the mindset which made it possible for such devastation to take place without the slightest murmur from those affected, occurred during the previous generation – starting with the partition. In my personal opinion, one of the greatest hypocrisies that many contemporary Pakistani politicians indulge in is to give lip-service to denouncing such things as the Hudood ordinance, while simultaneously praising the partition of the land which facilitated conditions that make such ordinances possible.

I wish organizations like the WAF the best of luck. Sometimes, I worry that they are fighting a losing battle – trying to help people who have decided to refuse all help and are comfortable in their misery – in fact sometimes making a virtue of such misery! Too many political and non-political actors seem to have developed a stake in keeping the status-quo and even exacerbating it.

#2 Nasah

Nasah sahib, your peacock analogy reminds me of the following stanza from my piece “Of the Saints and the Wicked” published on another web-site.

“…They lie, and lie - they thrive in lies
Have lies for snacks - main course is lies
Sweet words, like peacock - can they say
Note kin - that bird`s peculiar way

The peacock - heart of stone, partakes
For lunch - the most venomous snakes!...”

I mention this piece because of the ``peacock`` part - no sinister inferences are to be drawn from it! :)

``Cheney Converts to Islam
Posted by Eric Kenning on March 02, 2007

Keith Ellison, a Democrat from Minnesota, was sworn in as the nation’s first Muslim member of Congress in early January, but he is not the highest-ranking Muslim official in the United States. That honor belongs to Vice President Dick Cheney, who during one of his many trips to Saudi Arabia in the 1990s on behalf of Halliburton secretly converted to Wahabbi Islam, a rigorous fundamentalist version of the faith.``

This may explain the brotherly bond between the House of Wahab and the Cheney`s House of Iraqi Shish Kebob.

Women alone can bring about the change they would like to see, because all Muslim Pakistani men are impotent. 6th century tribal Arabic barbaric code has no place in today’s world, be it in Pakistan, Arabia, Nigeria, or Jordan. Gender specific laws are the worst form of institutionalized discrimination. If a woman has to produce 4 ‘male’ witnesses to prove a rape (considering that 4 pious Muslim men will be watching the poor girl being raped – quite possible), then a man victim of rape should be asked to produce 4 women to prove his case.

Bina:

Good read. My wish is that if you can moderate it so that women speak out more on this, than fundamentalists males.

``Women alone can bring about the change they would like to see, because all Muslim Pakistani men are impotent.``(kulharee)

The amazing thing about Pakistani men in power is that they are such under achievers -- they get so happy with so little -- Musharraf feels he created a `milestone` just by amending the goddam Hudood `laws` -- had no guts to abolish it -- if he would have -- ``khoda nu khaastay`` -- abolished it -- I don`t know, he might have died of heart attack!

One day the gutsy women of Pakistan will indeed empty this Hudood trashcan over the heads of the Pakistani male chauvinist pigs -- Inshallah soon.

#10 nasah

[One day the gutsy women of Pakistan will indeed empty this Hudood trashcan over the heads of the Pakistani male chauvinist pigs -- Inshallah soon.]

Ham intzaar karengey, tera Qayaamat tak
Khuda karey ki, Qayaaamat ho, aur tuuu...aye!

Dear Writer:

Thanks for bringing up a very much needed and sensitive issue for Pakistani women.

Your initiative and stand on this controversial Hudood ordinance is very well taken, understood and appreciated.

My understanding for hudood ordinance is that it is propagated by some screwed minded, ignorant, illiterate, inhumane and chauvinistic mullahs exclusively based on their own idiotic and disrupted thought process with extremely biased approach to suppress and oppress the weak female gender, to take control of her life for their own pleasures. I searched Quran and some other unbiased text books, I did not find anything as much cruel as this Hudood Ordinance is. And the claim by these perverted mullahs that Hudood Ordinance is according to Islamic teachings is totally WRONG, it is actually a skewed and misinterpretations of Quran and other Islamic books.

Mullahs treat women as half humans in every aspect of life and this is exactly another try from their screwed minds to prove that women are just half humans nothing else.

I read a case of a 13 years old BLIND girl who got raped by two men (father and son) in Pakistan and only due to this Hudood ordinance they got VINDICATION and the poor girl got punishment for committing adultery.

I believe hudood ordinance should be stopped immediately without even wasting more time in discussions and forums. Only a cruel human will favor such skewed mullah made laws who are not even humans in my pov.

In Pakistan there is an emergency situation as for as Women rights are concerned, they are being violated openly in the name of Hudood ordinance and nobody can question Mullahs as they are afraid of Mullahs barbaric wrath. In Pakistani society there is very well established violence and discrimination against women in every aspect of life, women folks are more than half of the citizens of Pakistan and that`s the main reason Pakistan is regressing more and more even in today`s modern day and age.

I strongly believe there should be an accountability for all the crimes against women in Pakistan @ a wider level. How can Pakistani society thrive , if, half of it`s population is being deprived of basic human right, if half of it`s population is being oppressed, if half of it`s population is being suppressed, if half of it`s population is being truly violated for it`s rights,

I strongly believe that Pakistan cannot prosper until it won`t recognize women as equal humans to men in every aspect, until it won`t give an equal opportunity and equal respect for all Pakistani women according to the true values of Islam without skewing them for Mullahs own ill wishes.
Thanks

We moderates have to recognize that we are the first casuality of pandering with mullahs. The moment we start scoffing at their stupid claims and laugh them off, they become impotent and useless to do any harm. The problem happened because some of us USED these mullahs to control other moderates. This started with Pakistan turing into an ``Islamic Republic``, and ulemas became important in such a setup. The only solution is to roll back Pakistan as a ``Secular Republic`` and throwing a few pieces of bones at the mullahs to keep them busy.

#13
ballukhan

Very well said. You read my mind. Can`t agree more.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

PS: I would have really wanted to get out of this tit for tat cycle and I had practised utmost restraint for many weeks now, but freaks like BJkumar leave me no choice but to respond with facts. In coming hours and days, I shall denude once again, the true cancer of society and humanity, subcontinent`s original fascist terrorist who goes by the name of ``Mahatma`` Gandhi.

For this I apologise to my Indian friends in advance.

Ballu Khan,

``The problem happened because some of us USED these mullahs to control other moderates. This started with Pakistan turing into an ``Islamic Republic``, and ulemas became important in such a setup. The only solution is to roll back Pakistan as a ``Secular Republic`` and throwing a few pieces of bones at the mullahs to keep them busy``

My responses to Cancer clot below notwithstanding: Well said and completely agreed. The rot started when we passed the Objectives Resolution in March 194 completely while ignoring the concerns of minorities ... Islamist Freaks who opposed the creation of Pakistan but supported this resolution claimed that this was ``democracy``.

However... we got Pakistan on the principle that the concerns of any permanent minority should never be ignored... and yet our ``constitution-making`` starting from March 1949... and culminating into the current ``constitution`` of 1973 was merely an exercise in how to screw over the minorities best.

PS to 17:

Constitution of 1973

As a lawyer working with this document on a daily basis, I have come to the conclusion that while in most countries, Constitutions exist to protect minorities and fundamental rights of citizens from the tyranny of the majority... in Pakistan the constitution of 1973, as it stands, serves to protect the tyranny of the majority from the infringement of fundamental rights and minorities....

This is most ironic because our entire rationale for the Pakistan movement was to save Muslims and other minorities from the tyranny of the Majority ...

#18 by Mantolives

... err .. but Manto, the 1973 constitution was passed by consensus of all provinces and political parties ... so where exactly do you lay blame?

Re: # 18

Mantolives, as zeemax said on another thread this constitution was passed by a majority in all provinces (all provinces had a majority). How does this tie up with your assertions (this as well as others)?

On another note: The constitution is just a piece of paper. It is worth only as much as the respect it is accorded, and the agreement people have that it is sacrosanct (upto a point). From what I gather, this respect for the constitution is just a game of intellectual point scoring in Pakistan. For the reality is somewhat different, Sarwar`s article on FP attests to this. Also the fact that democratic governemtns in Pakistan themselves didnot respect the constitution and in many cases just modified the martial law dictats. Every coup in Pakistan, had the backing of the educated, the economic elite and the religious elite (okay after sometime there was opposition but that is another issue). This does indicate, an essential lack of agreement on the main points of governance in Pakistan. Apart from the 1973 document!

Dotty,


There are two separate points here:

1. I was talking of 1973 constitution as it stands after the insertion of 2 A which is an altered form of OR.

2. Read my post again. Majority is exactly the issue. The essential purpose of constitution in any society is to protect the minorities and fundamental rights from the tyranny of the majority... and in Pakistan`s particular case, it was this idea that Muslims as a permanent minority would be crushed under the weight of the tyranny of the majority that made Pakistan.... How does the passing of Objectives resolution or the passing of 1973 by a ``majority`` gel in with the essential idea of Pakistan as well as the fact the resultant constitution is merely giving majoritarian fascism legitimacy?

Beena, this was a very thoughtful article on a face of Pakistani society that is veiled away from the mainstream societal awareness. The damge of the last three decades cannot be undone so easily and as a nation, in many ways, we were uprooted and confused by the economic antics of Z. A. Bhutto and faux piety of General Zia-ul-Haq. I agree with you that the road ahead is long and difficult and what makes this even more difficult is that there are no easy answers to the query of how we can once more regain our national sanity. It is very easy and quite human to place the blame and absolve ourselves from our failures to stand up and defend those ideas, we claimed to have cherised.

Our failure as a nation is, and was, that we never understood what we hoped to acheive as a nation and instead of creating a nation based on the promises of our sacrifices, we opted to create a nation girded on the principles of exclusivity. Pakistan is a very young nation, as far as the chronological records of nations go and it is still an immature nation caught up in its insecurities and its national-historic complexes. In the past, we have gained much and we have lost much, but the end of the struggle is not near and we are destined to suffer more as we trudge and stumble, forward groping our way, towards a distant future. We will suffer as a nation till that point in our national evolution when we realize that our national salvation lies in the compromises of moderation and in tolerance and not in the zeals of extremism.

The question is not about constitutions and it not about justice but it is certainly about the cruelity in our national character as much as it is to ask why are we so cruel and intolerant as a nation. It is the psyche of this nation; of extolling intolerance; of practicing intolerance; of justifying intolerance and seeking a sadistic satisifaction in intolerance that should concern us. As long as we seek to build chasms in our national life on the basis of divisions and perpetuate divisons in our realities and as long as we seek to deny; to repress; to suppress and to ignore the plight of the less fortunate amongst ourselves, we will remain an insecure nation incapable of all those characteristics that define the context and the defination of what constitues an understanding of the word ``humanity``.

Reforms and justice in Pakistan and for its people are rhetorical mirages, which are meaningless and they will remain meaningless until we find the inner courage within ourselves to actually believe in them not as legalistic concepts but as the reaffirmament of our own humanity. We as a nation have to discover our lost humanity and we have to learn the art of tolerance; the patience to hear those who have a complaint and the confidence to face our own incompetence as a people. We have to believe, above all else, ourselves first before we can believe in the slogans of our own choice and preference and unless we do not believe in ourselves as a nation, we will not be able to believe in those things which give us the cloak of a nationhood and confer upon us the mantle of a civilzed people.

The sufferings and the misfortunes of this nation is but a mere symptom of our own wishes for expedient power, fame and glory, and passage of all reformist laws will not cure us from the malady that strickens and that malady is not religion or corruption, but our national inability ask ourselves why we place so much importance upon the propersity of individualistic avarice in Pakistan and not enough upon the building of a national conscience. It is the sacrifice a collective national utility at the alter of personal ego that should horrify us and till that point, injustice and intolerance will roam this land as hungry wolves.

Pakistan and its people need to heal themselves before they can seek to remedy the ills of their society and as long as we continue to pass laws, without reforming ourselves, we must remember that laws are transient and can be altered with the consent of the pliable. We, as nation, have twisted and turned to so many directions at the call of so many false promises, that we have lost our sense of balance and we have believed so many of our own lies, because the truth was a bitter relization that we had only ourselves to blame for our misery that we are uncertain about which lies we are supposed to believe and which we are not supposed to believe. We must remember that laws and justice in a society are the reflection of the people, who compose the society and just laws and fair justice does not necessarily gurantees kind, tolerant and humane societies.

Ciao

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#22 FerozK

[we opted to create a nation girded on the principles of exclusivity.]

Exclusivity has been the bane of the Pakistani society, no matter how much individual Pakistanis deny it - only the liars and the cheats find any redeeming value in it.

And no matter how much such people do so, it is plain as daylight to the rest of the world that but for that feeling of exclusivity - of being ``deiiferent`` because of religion and of expecting ``exclusive`` treatment based on religion, there would have been no push for a separate country.

Denying the underlying thought of exclusivity - the very founding principle of that country, does not make it go away. The disease gets covered up but its poisonous effect corrodes the body from inside.

It takes one full generation (1948-1973) to take complete hold and another (1973-present) to start killing its ``own``!

The Hudood ordinance is only a ``flower`` that blooms atop the toxic waste of a LOT of poison buried underneath! Plucking this flower will not stop other flowers from springing up.

The following is a news item from Yahoo!News (March 6, 2007). I thought it might be of interest to the Chowk readers at this board.

Moahammad Gill

---

``Violent debate on women`s rights in Pakistan

By David Montero, Correspondent of The Christian Science MonitorTue Mar 6, 3:00 AM ET

Working for the public was a gift from God for Zille Huma Usman, Punjab`s provincial minister for social welfare.

But two weeks ago, Muhammed Sarwar violently disagreed, killing her before a crowd because, he said, God does not allow women to work. He later told police that he felt no remorse for his crime.

Ms. Usman`s death, which shocked the country, comes at a moment of violent flux over the role of women in Pakistan. As the Pakistani government clamps down on Islamist extremists, the conflict over competing visions of Islam has enveloped the issue of women`s rights, turning it into a battleground issue between moderates and Islamist extremists.

``There is a growing sense of menace among women. I`ve heard working women express anxiety about driving on the streets alone. They work not only because they have to, but as a statement,`` says Jugnu Mohsin, the publisher and managing editor of The Friday Times, a progressive weekly newspaper. She adds that the threat emanates from a minority segment of society, but has grown worse over the years, incited in part by legislative victories favoring women`s rights over fundamentalist interpretations of Islamic law.

In December, Pakistan`s Parliament passed the Women`s Protection Bill, which amended the Hudood Ordinances, a set of religious laws long considered discriminatory toward women. But by shifting the laws from religious codes to secular ones, the bill unleashed widespread political discontent.

``The Women`s Protection Bill has focused attention on the issue. Women have become the target because it`s a victory for women, even a partial victory,`` says Kamila Hyat, joint director of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan in Lahore.

Although not directly related, recent events suggest a growing arc of violence against women and girls. In the North West Frontier province, at least three girls` schools have been bombed, and threats circulated by pamphlets have directed female health workers to leave the area.

Despite what appears to be escalating violence, government officials say the situation is under control. ``We are cognizant of the matter, and we are taking all possible measures to make sure the area does not get Talibanized,`` says Brigadier Javed Iqbal Cheema. the director of the National Crisis Management Cell, which deals with matters of internal security.

A troubling parable of Pakistani society, observers say, rests at the intersection where Usman and her killer collided on the afternoon of Feb. 20 in Gujranwala, a northeastern city of more than 3 million.

Usman, the first female politician in her family, was a proud symbol of change. Thanks to national laws which allotted one-third of all local legislative seats for women, some 30,000 women entered local politics after 2001, according to a 2004 World Bank study.Usman herself began working up the ladder four years ago.

``She was very interested in giving charity to the poor. Her belief was that if you want to work, it is no matter if you are a man or a woman,`` her husband, Muhammed Usman Haider, says at the family home in Gujranwala. ``I`m proud to say she`s the most pious woman. She knows more about Islam than anyone.``

Meanwhile, religious leaders universally condemn Mr. Sarwar`s stated motives, and while few clerics would support his extreme actions, the rising violence indicates that there may be segments of society who do. A debate rages over what Islam says about a woman`s right to work and hold office.

``Whoever did this was wrong. She was not un-Islamic. There is nowhere in the Koran that women cannot hold office, as long as they act with modesty,`` says Aqeel Ahmed, who works at a computer shop in Gujranwala.

More than religion, what most disturbs observers is that Usman was not Sarwar`s first victim. In 2003, he confessed to police that he had killed at least four women and wounded four others, mostly prostitutes and dancers.

His gruesome acts made national headlines, but when Sarwar appeared in court, he changed his story and the cases fell apart. There were also allegations, according to the local press, that religious leaders paid compensation money to the victims` families, who eventually dropped the cases.

While police deny any wrongdoing or neglect in Sarwar`s previous cases, his frequent run-ins with the law, observers say, expose the institutional discrimination at work within the Pakistani justice system.

``[Women] are not getting real justice. They`re not going through the police and the judiciary ... It will take so much time and insults of that lady,`` says Humaira Hashmi, the regional general manager of the Punjab Rural Support Program in Multan, which addresses issues of women`s rights.

Such lapses are part of the larger fabric of abuse toward women that goes unchecked in Pakistani society, according to observers. An October 2006 United Nations report highlighted that honor killings claimed the lives of 4,000 men and women between 1998 and 2003 in Pakistan.

``Police almost invariably take the man`s side in honor killings or domestic murders, and rarely prosecute the killers,`` said a 1999 Amnesty International report. ``Even when the men are convicted, the judiciary ensures that they usually receive a light sentence, reinforcing the view that men can kill their female relatives with virtual `impunity.` ````

Dear BJkumar,

No point selectively quoting Ferozk ... he is far too educated in these matters than you.

He wrote and I quote: Our failure as a nation is, and was, that we never understood what we hoped to acheive as a nation and instead of creating a nation based on the promises of our sacrifices, we opted to create a nation girded on the principles of exclusivity

He is saying the same thing I am. The founding principle of Pakistan is NOT exclusivity. It is Equality Fraternity and Justice. The people who GIRDED Pakistan on a path of exclusivity are the very PEOPLE who OPPOSED the PRINCIPLE OF PAKISTAN and who were brought into POLITICS by none other than the racist casteist hindu fascist bigot Gandhi.

Despite this I do not the racist casteist Hindu fascist Bigot Gandhi for our ills... we allowed Gandhi`s erstwhile allies... the Islamo-fascists ... to hijack the idea of Pakistan... hence it is entirely our fault.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: # 27

Your obsession with Mahatma Gandhi is very unhealthy.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: mantolives # 28

You have made a very good point and within that observation, you have identified a very important issue on the issue of the Objectives Resolution of 1949. The Objectives Resolution was the fountainhead of all Pakistani constitutional thought and its preamble and the intentions espoused therein, despite the existence of three constitutions, has not changed. Pakistani constitutional law needs to ask a basic question of what is the purpose of constitutionalism in Pakistan. Constitutions are made to create a framework of political representation that enhences and not diminishes political rights; be that of the constituent power or the sums of the constituent power.

In Pakistan, the debate has been aglore about the restitution of the 1973 constitution, but the debate does not focus on the issue of how the constitutional intent will be revived. The arguments on the restoration of 1973 constitution have been in the context of the military-civilian power struggles, but the silence is quite deafening on the matter of how the constitution will be abided. The past truth of our national constitutional experience has been that there is no political respect for constitution in Pakistani politics either from the military or the civilians and to them, the importance of the document does not lie in its intent, but in its utility to carve an exclusive niche of political power for themselves.

The constitutional failures in Pakistan, though they can be easily pegged to a particular cause, needs to be reconsidered in the light of the question of what we, as a nation, hope to express of ourselves constitutionally. Unfortunately in Pakistan, we created a constitution but we never asked to what purpose we were creating a constitution for in the first place. The Objectives Resolution of 1949, with its preamblic emphasis on religion, was passed by the very men who sat; agreed, appluaded and listened to Jinnah`s August 11, 1947 speech but within two years, the ideas of Jinnah about Pakistan were superimposed by ideas that Jinnah would have not condoned. The Objectives Resolution basically mooted the expressions of Jinnah and in doing so, changed the contours of political debate in Pakistan, but in a larger sense, the Objectives Resolution did not change the nature of consitutional debate as much as it subdued the nature of constitutionalism in Pakistan.

Objectives Resolution was a constitutional coup d` état, nearly nine years before the advent of the first martial law in Pakistan, and it was a coup in the sense that it over threw the basic tenets of Pakistan`s creation and replaced them with the very antitheis of Pakistan: a theocracy. The argument, suggesting that the Objectives Resolution was a coup d` état, can be summerized if the constitution of a nation is supposed to idealize the political believes of the nation and how to attain them, then the Objectives Resolution did not reflect the aspirations for the reasons, which underlined the creation of Pakistan; namely the protection of economic and constitutional rights of the Muslims of India and if this premise is extrapolated a bit more, the overarching need to protect the fundlemental rights of the minority from the despotism of the majority.

The creation of Pakistan and its historic reasons refutes the rationale of the Objectives Resolution, but as the Objectives Resolution has influenced all subsequent constitutions, the question needs to be asked challenging the veracity of Objectives Resolution. This question needs to be asked and answered, because if the reason for the existence of Pakistan was different from the reason for its existence as articulated by the Objectives Resolution, it did not fullfil the wishes of the majority of the Pakistanis and we can verify this historically from the electoral and constitutional disagreements, which originated between East Pakistani political majorities and West Pakistani political minorities immediately after the passage of the Objectives Resolution. If this line of thought is further elongated, it implies that Pakistani political and constitutional problems arise from the fact that since 1949, Pakistan has been governed and administrated and influenced by an illegal constitution and constitutional guidelines, which do not find resonance with the popular opinion of political thought.

The question and the task at hand, then becomes one of finding a solution to undo the mess created constitutionally by the Objectives Resolution and not merely reviving the 1973 constitution in its fullest sense. The constitutional problem in Pakistan has been that all its consitutional ideas were based on the premise of an illegal constitution that did not enjoy a majority consensus and though the 1973 document is a majority document, its basic premise is flawed and in that sense, it does not really represent the wishes of the people of Pakistan as much as it represents the interests of a political minority to excerise its political sway over a majority; either in a political sense or within the rubric of provincial autonomy/consitutional rights versus the federal constitutional rights. Hence, the question is what is the constititution in Pakistan supposed to represent; the interests of a political minority or the interests of the nation and if it is the latter, then the Objectives Resolution does not represent that political idea.

Consequently, we as a nation must answer this question because the answer to this question delves into the very crux of the constitutional problems in Pakistan. If we persist with the Objectives Resolution, as the wellspring of our constitutional thought, then all laws and legislative bills we may pass to moderate the excesses of religion, for example, in Pakistan and revert Pakistan to its original intentions, will fail because the Objectives Resolution will provide a very credible constitutional argument to perpetuate an illegality of a consitutional tryanny based on theocracy that flys in the face of the real historic reasons for Pakistan. Huddood Laws and reforms to them are meaningless unless we as a nation decide what we want constitutionally and if the idea is to reform the Huddood Laws and even repeal them, then repeal cannot happen till we deny the raison d`etre for such laws themselves and the raison d`etre for the constitutional rights in Pakistan, and the present constitutional rot, stems from the Objectives Resolution and its denial of basic consitutional rights not only to the majority of the population, but to the majority of the provinces that make up the Pakistani political federation and by its creation of a political-religious culture of exclusivism that only benefits the political and social interests of a minority.

Huddood Laws and reforms to them are self-defeating until and till we decide what sort of a nation we want as Pakistanis - liberal or theocratic - and on this basis, frame a constitution that suits our views and not try to circle a square by constitutionally tinkering with a document that does not represent our views. It is our national failure to precisely achieve this understanding and our misplaced hope to continue constitutionally as half liberal and half Islamic that has created the constitutional problems we face and cannot solve because of our inability, as a polity, to decide what we want our constitution to represent about ourselves and what we are and what we want to become. This is the very predictment that percolates our constitututional problems and why its ripples affect all our political, legal and legislative thoughts and makes them into flawed and self-defeating propositions.

Ciao

Dear Ferozk,

That has to be the most succinct articulation of what I have been harping about most crudely for all these years. I am glad that I am joined in this view with someone of your calibre, whose impartiality is unquestionable.

This in particular:

The creation of Pakistan and its historic reasons refutes the rationale of the Objectives Resolution, but as the Objectives Resolution has influenced all subsequent constitutions, the question needs to be asked challenging the veracity of Objectives Resolution. This question needs to be asked and answered, because if the reason for the existence of Pakistan was different from the reason for its existence as articulated by the Objectives Resolution, it did not fullfil the wishes of the majority of the Pakistanis and we can verify this historically from the electoral and constitutional disagreements, which originated between East Pakistani political majorities and West Pakistani political minorities immediately after the passage of the Objectives Resolution. If this line of thought is further elongated, it implies that Pakistani political and constitutional problems arise from the fact that since 1949, Pakistan has been governed and administrated and influenced by an illegal constitution and constitutional guidelines, which do not find resonance with the popular opinion of political thought.The question and the task at hand, then becomes one of finding a solution to undo the mess created constitutionally by the Objectives Resolution and not merely reviving the 1973 constitution in its fullest sense. The constitutional problem in Pakistan has been that all its consitutional ideas were based on the premise of an illegal constitution that did not enjoy a majority consensus and though the 1973 document is a majority document, its basic premise is flawed and in that sense, it does not really represent the wishes of the people of Pakistan as much as it represents the interests of a political minority to excerise its political sway over a majority; either in a political sense or within the rubric of provincial autonomy/consitutional rights versus the federal constitutional rights. Hence, the question is what is the constititution in Pakistan supposed to represent; the interests of a political minority or the interests of the nation and if it is the latter, then the Objectives Resolution does not represent that political idea.


An aside: If I may be allowed to add: A false notion has crept in which suggests that somehow unbridled majority rule equals democracy... Democracy is basicaly derived from two constituent parts which roughly translate in modern parlance Demo = people ... cracy = rule.... it should be the rule not of some people or most people ... but all the people. This is the beginning an end of all debates... whether about rationale of having Pakistan or why the state in Pakistan should be secular and constitutional.

1973`s constitution is not a constitution in my opinion. This fraud document is merely rules of business of a theocratic state. A theocratic state by virtue of its theocratic nature cannot be constitutional. The sooner we do away with this 1973 constitution... or alter it to suit the fundamental principle of Pakistan... a liberal and secular polity for all its citizens ... the better.

I don`t know much about Hudood law or anything about how Pakistani women are raped and then subjected to all types of agonizing experiences on their way to extract justice of some kind from judges picked out from the same bunch of rapists (of laws). But on lighter vein, this law should, indeed have something to do with Pandavas and Dropadi of Hindu mythology. When Pandavas wanted to rape Dropadi they made a pact between themselves that when one engages in the act of rape four others would watch it not only to stand witness but to extract full pleasure of this maddeningly beautiful aspect of life involving the two varieties of sexes, believed of course ignorantly, to be given to them by their pagan God Lord Krishna. This law, if at all requires amendment, should be amended in such a way as to facilitate this Pandavas and Dropadi episode being performed amicably and with the consent of the victim (?), the accused (?) and also the law (?) of the land. So, whenever a woman stumbles across the rapist she would highlight the benefits of observing the act and induce him to bring four others for the show so they can take turns in enjoying not only the rape but the enchantment of its thorough, three dimensional viewing. Then accused would charge the victim with indulging in Jina in the mock court room. After coming across such cases in large numbers the court would take a view that this being endorsed and liked by so many people, should be given legitimacy. As the myth goes, the relation of Pandavas and Dropadi was indeed approved by all wise men including Lord Krishna. If this old wisdom is applied to modern day Pakistan, in a few years this gruesome act of rape would be transformed into something quite blissful experience for the entire society. As a byproduct it will serve as a rapprochement bid to engage Hindu India in the peace process.

Good idea! No?

Samar

Re: # 37

> When Pandavas wanted to rape Dropadi they made a pact ....
When Abu Bakr wanted to rape his daughter ... he sent her over to mo`s house ....


Yeah yeah, I get what you are saying ....

The Justice of Pakistan Supreme Court, Mohammad Taqi Usmani testifies that during the 2 decades of his service on the bench not a single rape victim was ever required to bring 4 witnesses to prove her case; in addition no woman has ever been convicted convicted because she failed to do so. It is vicious lie and propaganda.





Please educate yourself for your own good. Defying Allah and His commands because it makes you look modern is not a bargain you`d want to carry to hereinafter.


http://www.hudoodordinance.com/taqiusmani-article-p1.htm