Blasphemy

#23 by Mantolives on April 13, 2004 10:13am PT

Yasser Latif Hamdani you have a come a long way from someone who used to froth like a Mullah :) Congratulations and welcome to the civilized world. Do we mind if I send what you posted to the rest of our members ?

Thanks for the article.

See if you can join us in NYC - if you can`t join us start a secular pakistan movement whereever you are and be careful. Our members do things because they want to live free not because they want to die for some religion.

Here is a picture of Dr. Shaikh :




and a statement from Islamabad :


“We may draw some satisfaction and may even feel like celebrating that our efforts in pursuing this case led to the acquittal of Dr. Sheikh, but let`s not forget that as long as the Blasphemy law is on the statute book, it will continue to be misused. At this very moment there are several innocent people, victims of this black law, languishing in various jails and lock-ups of the country awaiting an uncertain future. And these victims may not be as fortunate as Dr. Sheikh was. Dr. Sheikh had a circle of committed friends inside and outside the country.

“It is also a sad reflection on the state and society of Pakistan that even when individuals are exonerated by law of any guilt, they are forced to flee the country for their safety. The state or society is unable or unwilling to provide them protection. Dr. Sheikh was not at all eager to leave the country. If he had a choice he would have stayed with his family and friends. I could see his reluctance to leave the country written large on his face when I accompanied him to the airport.”

“The bottom line is that we must continue our campaign until this draconian law, along with similar other medieval laws, is undone or at least modified to save the innocent people from its abuse.”

kaurasach at # 32:

Good observation. This works across the border too.

When Farzana Varsey writes an article, Indians of Hindu faith show the same level of shock, disbelief, and surprise at a Muslim writing protest articles.

Also, Indian Muslims, Sikhs and Christans settled in the USA tell us about many horror stories of their experince in India too.

Its about time both people took corrective measures. In Pakistan, progressive Muslims have begun to challenge regressive Muslims. I wonder what Hindutva supporters in majority and sitting in the Government will do when they attain more power?

ahmadzai #31: PPP had power twice, in the 90s. They did nothing about the blasphemy law. Infact Z. Bhutto is the person who declared Ahmedis to be non-Muslim. Nawaz Sharif is the person who, according to this article, introduced the death penalty for blasphemy.

Blasphemy laws are not a religious phenomenon. They are a social phenomenon. Just like the Shariah Bill is not a religious phenomenon. It is a political phenomenon. It was a political attempt by Nawaz Sharif to gain power in the garb of religion. Blasphemy laws and honor killings, and what not, are used to suppress people from other groups/religions, when the arguments are actually over land, and other such things.

Every now and then, someone from PPP and PML tries to propose a bill against this or that. It never gets anywhere, because even their own party members do not support it. Otherwise, these laws would have been dead long ago.

One of the worst things that can happen to Pakistan is if it gets split along religious and secular lines. This will result in a very polarized society, with each group completely out to get the other group. This is what has happened in India, and you have seen the political results. A better split would be along human rights lines. Groups supporting human rights and groups opposing it. The dividing line should be humanism. Not secularism and Islamism.

I have certain issues with people trying to wrap human rights violations in secularism or Islam. People should oppose the Blasphemy law, because it is against human rights; not because they are secular or Islamic. No need to throw in their own religion or secularism in there. Using the blasphemy law to push secularism is like a maulvi using a date rape to push Islam. Blasphemy laws are not due to Islam, just like date rapes are not due to a spread of secularism and lack of Islam.

I think Mr. Shaikh was a victim of the Pakistani social system. He became a victim of a law that was put in place by the British, strengthened by Zia, and strengthened even more by Nawaz Sharif, and accepted by PPP (and Musharraf), and encouraged by MMA. This covers the whole social spectrum of the Pakistani society, from most secular to most religious. There is thus no part of the Pakistani political structure that has opposed this law. If he had the correct connections, he would have been let of in a day, I assume. That is another social phenomenon.

I seriously doubt too many people in Pakistan buy secular arguments, any longer. Maybe they should, but they don`t. If anything, wrapping this in a secular argument will actually turn people away from it. This is the Pakistani audience. The only way people will rise up against this law is if people use a religious argument to discredit it.

This is where secularists and Islamists fail. They end up pushing their own agenda, rather than concentrating on removing the problem. I think the Blasphemy law should be removed. Not because I am secular or Islamic. But because I am a human being.

ijaz_gul #30: You are correct. Christians are the biggest victims of this law. And of many other forms of discriminations, in Pakistan, if you ask me.

I have always wondered how much discrimination Christians face in Pakistan. I have many Christian friends, but obviously it is hard for me to judge, what level of prejudice they face, since I am not a Christian myself. The only place I have seen very little discrimination against Christians, Ahmedis etc. is when I was in the military (except at high ranks), or when I moved abroad.

It would be interesting to get your point of view, on how much discrimination Christians face, in Pakistan. And whom you consider to be the best leader for minorities in Pakistan (Zia, Musharraf, Bhutto, Ayub, Altaf etc.).

Judging by your comments and Patrick`s comments, the discrimination faced by Christians is quite a bit less than I would have thought. However, I have a feeling both of you are letting your patriotism get the better of you, when commenting on this subject......

Romair, 35

“One of the worst things that can happen to Pakistan is if it gets split along religious and secular lines. This will result in a very polarized society, with each group completely out to get the other group. This is what has happened in India, and you have seen the political results.”

Actually, a better example is Algeria, another Muslim country...look what happened there...Pakistan needs to learn that lesson well...and quick.

Ahmadzai #34,

``When Farzana Varsey writes an article, Indians of Hindu faith show the same
level of shock, disbelief, and surprise at a Muslim writing protest articles.``

That is grossly incorrect - I think the objections to Farzana`s articles precede
the acknowledgement of her religion. Seasoned journalists like M.J. Akbar,
Saeed Naqvi, Mushirul Hassan and numerous others have written far more damning
articles about problems in India. By and large, their religion has never been
brought into the equation. I personally consider Akbar to have a more nuanced
understanding of Indian politics than most other people; many Indians would agree
with me.

Surely, people`s problems with Farzana lie elsewhere; however, the fact that her
detractors here feel the need to bring up her religion is completely distasteful.

Congrats to you Dr Sheikh to come out of jail alive. We read about your case few years ago and there was some discussion on you also on this web site but then you slipped out of our minds with time. Never heard about you again either. I was just wondering few days ago about what happened to your case. Glad to hear the way it turned out.

shiraz/solitude:

If you don`t like my personal opinions...

..that is water under the bridge...we can differ all we want in a responsible manner:)

check out petitions on line and set up your letter there...

rgds,

t

i dislike long cut n paste jobs -- the link here expires and TFT does not archive -- so am reluctantly posting the entire article -- hope am forgiven -- it is relevant

Ten reasons to repeal the Hudood laws

Sherry Rehman

---

For the first time in twenty-five years, the National Assembly has been heatedly debating the Hudood Ordinances for the last three weeks on every Private Member’s Day. The five criminal laws remain stubbornly on the statute books despite the much-repeated promises of General Pervez Musharraf that they should be done away with. But while the General ran a virtual ordinance factory during his three-year tenure as Chief Executive, and even promulgated ordinances after the NA was elected, he chose not to repeal these laws. Given that the government has the numbers to do away with the ordinance, which the two PPP governments did not have during their fragmented tenures, it has come as a shock to many that now when the Pakistan Peoples Party Parliamentarians has actually challenged these laws by tabling a bill that includes their repeal, the government has opposed it on entirely spurious grounds

The Advisor on Women’s Development, Ms Niloufer Bakhtiyar, opposed the bill on the floor of the House on March 24th saying that while she agreed in principle with the contents of the Women’s Empowerment Act 2004, she could not but oppose it on ‘technical ‘ grounds. She argued that the bill carried too many clauses for the ministry to deal with. Interesting, because if that were indeed the case, the bill would have long ago been disallowed on technical grounds and returned by the Speaker’s chamber to the prime mover. So Ms Bakhtiyar was either moved by partisan pique that she has not been able to introduce her own bill, with all the resources of her ministry, or she was defending the government party’s commitment to the religious right to not support the repeal of the Hudood Ordinances.

The sad fact is that only a few weeks ago the leader of the PML-Q, Chaudhry Shujaat, gave such a commitment to the Amir of Jama’at-e Islami, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, on the floor of the House during the critical last round of voting on the 17th amendment. The amendment subsumes all the interventions made by General Musharraf in the Constitution and empowers him at the cost of the Parliament. Unsurprisingly, the Mutahidda Majlis-e-Amal members fired the heaviest salvos against the repeal of Hudood Ordinances. The Alliance is increasingly relying on a dangerous mix of propaganda and hagiography, often cast in chaste Arabic, to throw theological red herrings into the debate. It is important, therefore, in this growing atmosphere of acrimony and obfuscation, to understand the facts about the Hudood Ordinances and why they must be repealed.

Is it, as the religious right maintains, a conspiracy of the liberal classes? Or is it a case of an imperfect justice system needing less flawed laws that create social injustices? A dispassionate look at the laws throws up at least ten, if not more, reasons to repeal them. Let’s consider them.

1. The disrespected Constitution of Pakistan, even in its tattered state still prohibits any laws that discriminate against women and minorities.

2. It would be salutary to remember that General Ziaul Haq introduced these laws in 1979 without any public or parliamentary debate. There is consensus now that he misused Islam to legitimise his blatant and unconstitutional usurpation of power. Therefore, they are entirely man-made and have no sacral link to the spirit, and in many cases, even the letter of Islam.

3. More than one National Commission on the Status of Women has recommended their repeal. Justice Majida Rizvi has condemned these laws as repugnant to Islam. Justice Nasir Aslam Zahid has said that they were drafted in a hurry and were not in conjunction with the principles of Quran and Sunnah.

4. The crux of the matter is that the HOs have transformed the landscape of tazir punishments as well; most Hudood laws are now applied as tazir punishments for zina, for qazf, for prohibition etc. A compelling application in point is the fact that prior to the HOs, children under the age of seven, for instance, bore no criminal liability. Now they do.

5. Despite the fact that Islam forbids discrimination on the basis of sex, colour, caste, or creed, this law makes minorities victims of double jeopardy, because while their testimony is second rated, punishments opposed to their own Shariah [creed] are still applicable to them in an arbitrary manner.

6. Findings reveal that the HOs are the most misused laws to keep poor, dispossessed women in police lock-ups without access to defense counsel or speedy justice. A sample survey of Lahore’s Central Jail shows that from 1980-87, 47 percent of the women imprisoned were booked under the offence of zina. Data from Karachi Police Station (South) shows that 80 percent of the cases registered are under this law. Specifically, the application of the zina or adultery laws has legally blurred the distinction between rape and extra-marital sex. This has resulted in the absurd situation of rape victims being treated as accomplice since they are unable to produce witnesses, which in turn has invariably led to their imprisonment and physical punishment. The notion that the Zina Ordinance is not an issue since 90 percent of women get acquitted under it ignores completely the social realities in any country, particularly the semi-feudal Pakistan. Clearly, something is drastically wrong with a law under which 90 percent of the women are kept behind bars unjustifiably. (One woman was known to be under trial for seven years before she was released on acquittal).

7. These laws encourage honour killings and injuries because they allow these crimes to be compoundable offences. Statistics reveal that most honour crimes are perpetrated by close kin or family members, who are then conveniently forgiven by the heirs of the victim. As it stands, only Pakistan and Saudi Arabia accept these laws in their totality. All other Muslim countries have rejected or amended them in the interests of justice and equality.

8. These laws discriminate against women as they de-link puberty from adulthood. In contemporary society a girl can reach puberty at the age of ten. But at age ten, no girl can tell the difference between paedophilia and rape, nor should she be allowed or forced to enter into contracts such as the marriage contract. The HOs also reject the definition of adulthood as defined under the 1973 Constitution which puts it at a minimum of eighteen years of age.

9. They reduce the testimony of women to half, despite the fact that most of the recorded Islamic Hadith are based on the sole testimony of Hazrat Ayesha. If one woman’s testimony is acceptable for the basis of much sacral law, then why is one woman’s testimony not acceptable in a case of rape in a women’s hostel, for instance?

10. So far hadd has never been executed but it has been awarded. That means that these laws have little use except to keep our superior courts busy in overturning their sentences. Most jurists and experts on law have concluded that the defects in these ordinances are so basic that amending these would serve no useful purpose and will cause more miscarriages of justice. If the delivery of justice is the objective of law, the only option is the total repeal of the Hudood Ordinances 1979.

Sherry Rehman is the former Editor of the newsmagazine Herald, and currently a member of the National Assembly. She is also the prime mover of the Women’s Empowerment Bill by the PPPP.

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

Another blasphemy case...in the land of the pure
http://www.dawn.com/2004/04/13/top2.htm

#21 amit and #25 arjun..
you folks dont miss much do you..smartypants..

this was a sobering read. though i support the existence of blasphemy laws in principle--they are a part of shariah law--the form of them in pakistan is a travesty and not islamic at all and prone to misuse. either you have a full shariah system with its extremely strict levels of evidence required or you have a secular system; in pakistan we have a complete hotch-potch of a system based on the british system with bits of `islamic` law tacked on. no wonder it is a joke. in a real islamic system dr. shaikh would not never have been jailed on such flimsy evidence.

Naqshbandi (re #45):

Blasphemy laws are against Quranic commandments that deal specifically with this issue. FYI.

Quran commands believers to merely avoid company of those who blaspheme. That`s all. Apparently your revered sheikh forgot to tell you this ... as he continues to treat Quranic position as a minor technical detail ...

I can clearly visualize the world of that Brigadiar from ISI. That is the mindset of majority of the military and it was carefully cultivated during the Zia days.

But all this is a tip of the iceberg. The trouble lies with the political Islam in vogue in the country. No one clearly takes it head on. Everyone is scared and apologetic. Only PPP & MQM are somewhat clear headed about it.

Muslim League is worst and more dangerous than MMA. It is Muslim League that politised Islam in the first place.

Jay is absolutely right when he says that TNT should have been buried & forgotten after creation of Pakistan.

....... i am glad the good doctor managed to get out of adiala jail alive ........ i believe while he was there, another blasphemer was shot to death by a fellow prisoner armed with a gun supplied by the muslim police ............. but that is not really important ........ what is really important is the fact that the fundamental questions that the doctor had raised are still unanswered :

a)was the prophet of islam and his parents muslim before Islam was revealed to the prophet and b) did the prophet shave under his armpits since the custom was probably unknown to his tribe at the time..............

.......... they are fundamental questions that form the basis of islam ......... these - along with the eternal question about which is more impure: the pig, woman, the hindoo or the ahmedi - must be answered before the muslims can reconquer spain and new delhi ..........