|
In the case of
the bangle seller Chand Barkat (acquitted by a woman
sessions judge in Karachi), the accuser was a rival
shopkeeper. Jagdesh Kumar, the Hindu worker lynched at a
Karachi factory in 2008 after being accused of blasphemy had
lost his heart to a Muslim girl. Najeeb Ahmed, the young
factory owner in Sheikhupura murdered in 2009 by his own
workers had had a dispute with the employee who incited the
mob.
Behind the
razing of two Christian villages in Gojra last year, in
which nine Christians were killed after allegations that
some Christians had desecrated the Quran, was a premeditated
plan aimed at clearing out their land.
The Christian
woman, Aasia Noreen, was sentenced to death after being
accused of blasphemy a year-and-a-half ago when she defended
her faith before some Muslim women who refused to drink
water she offered them. (Their reasoning: she is Christian
and therefore ‘unclean’. Let’s be clear – this is a class
issue. They would not have refused water from a ‘gora’, a
white Christian). Even before the case could come up before
the High Court – which must confirm the sentence or acquit
her – the issue has been politicised to the extent that
Aasia’s life is in danger even if she is found innocent.
It is shameful
that no action has been taken against the Jamat-e-Islami
affiliated cleric in Peshawar who announced Rs5 lakhs as
reward for anyone who will kill Aasia if the Lahore High
Court acquits her. Is incitement to murder not a criminal
offence?
Even as the ‘religious
right’ was out on the street baying for Aasia Noreen’s
blood, protesting the president’s right to pardon her, an
even more absurd case came up: Dr Noshad Valyani, a family
physician in Hyderabad who discarded the visiting card of a
medical representative with the name Mohammed is accused of
‘blasphemy’ (People are now wondering if they should stop
using this name for their sons).
The alleged
incident took place on Dec 9, while the complaint was lodged
on Dec 11. In Aasia Noreen’s case too, the complaint was
lodged several days after the alleged incident. This pattern
is evident in most cases of alleged ‘blasphemy’. Charges are
typically filed days after the incident, after local clerics
and self-styled defenders of the faith hear about the
altercation and persuade someone to press charges. In other
words, the blasphemy law is being cynically used as a
political tool to arouse passions and keep certain persons
and parties in the limelight. It would be nice if we could
just ignore them but when they impose their views with
violence, they must be countered.
The injustices
perpetuated by the blatant exploitation of the blasphemy
laws have led even the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII),
Pakistan’s foremost constitutional advisery body regarding
Islamic injunctions, to propose procedural amendments to
guard against
misuse against any individual regardless of religion. Even
the most virulent of blasphemy law defenders, including a
certain cleric against whom women’s rights activists have
been up in arms, privately admit that the law is flawed and
that amendments are necessary. A few brave souls are ready
to say this publicly, like Dr Khalid Zaheer, who holds that
“there is no blasphemy law in Islam.”
At a talk he
gave last year organised by the civil society group People’s
Resistance in Karachi, Dr Zaheer noted that the Quran does
not even hint at a worldly punishment for blasphemy.
Instead, the holy book urges Muslims to ignore what the
blasphemers say, to not be a part of them when they
blaspheme, and to create circumstances that do not allow
blasphemy to take place. (Noman Quadri, a student member of
PR, has translated and posted the speech to his blog).
On the question
of why so many Muslims believe the reality to be otherwise,
Dr Zaheer explained that hadith and history mention several
incidents in which people were killed apparently for the
crime of blasphemy. However, “only those people lost their
lives according to the divine law who refused to accept
God’s message when it was clearly delivered to them by the
messenger.”
According to
the Quran, death was a punishment to be meted out to the
enemies of the messengers during their lifetime. “Such
incidents have nothing with the issue of blasphemy in our
times,” he added.
If Muslims want
to retain a blasphemy law, they must satisfy two conditions:
a) Capital
punishment cannot be given to a person who is found guilty
of committing blasphemy. According to the Quran, capital
punishment can only be given to murderers and those who take
the law into their hands. (Quran; 5:32)
b) The
punishment should be applicable to those found guilty of
blasphemy against revered personalities and deities of all
faiths and it should be equally applicable to both Muslims
and non-Muslims. The Quran says: “Don’t use abusive language
against their false gods lest they should use the same
language against yours in retaliation.” (Quran; 6:108)
Of course not
everyone will agree with Dr Zaheer. That is fine. Let the
discussion continue. Let there be debate on amendments to
the man-made blasphemy laws of Pakistan.
In the
meantime, here is a basic principle that all Pakistanis, no
matter what their political or religious beliefs, must
publicly agree to: no one has the right to murder anyone
regardless of their religious beliefs.
Courtesy News |
