Sacrifice at the altar of pragmatism
From the Blog PkColumnist.com: Sacrifice at the altar of pragmatism - Recently, a debate has started on the issue of repealing the notorious blasphemy law which is used to terrorise the minority. Every case of injustice against a member of one of the minority groups in the country provokes a debate but with no forward movement on this score. Such a draconian law as the blasphemy law is mainly used by the powerful to their advantage to oppress and control the powerless members of society. The fact of the matter is that today there is no neutral arbiter, in the state and society, who could fairly adjudicate between the religious minority and majority. Poor Aasia Bibi and her family can at best hope to generate enough interest domestically and internationally in the case as a human rights issue for some superior court to come to her rescue. There is also a possibility that she might eventually get rescued and may have to leave the country. However, can she hope to get relief inside the country? There is little hope for that. The government's reaction to the situation, though indirectly, is to appoint Maulana Sherani of the JUI-F as the chairman of the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII). About a year ago, a delegation of civil society had met the president and requested him to not let the CII fall victim to ideologically rabid mullahs. It seems that the request fell on deaf ears. Not only will the blasphemy law remain, such laws, in fact, will gain greater value and strength. At this juncture when the country needs greater sanity, Maulana Sherani's appointment is bound to lead the state in an opposite direction. Unfortunately, this is being done in the name of pragmatism — for the government to retain support from the JUI-F. Technically, the case against Aasia may have been proven on the basis of evidence produced against her by the community. No one seems to have evaluated the personal bias, interests and bigotry of those that gave evidence in the case. Isn't it comical that it is the same society which does not find enough evidence to allow the courts to prosecute murderers and terrorist such as the leader of Lashkar-e-Jhangavi, Malik Ishaq, who was accused of committing over a 100 murders — none of which were eventually proven in a court of law, thus resulting in Ishaq's release? Such cases are never proven because there is no one who is willing to testify against these terrorists. Not to mention the fact that the legal system of this country is full of bigots. The superior courts do not have a great track record of making laws on critical matters. Historically, their tendency is conservative which is not only apparent in their reaction to blasphemy cases but also other laws such as those relating to qisas and diyat. This particular law, which came out of Zia's era was another case of a law supporting the powerful at the cost of the weak. Many superior court judges brutally applied the law because it was the easiest thing to do. It didn't take a lot of effort to exonerate someone on the basis of a compromise reached between two parties. If any one has doubts about the legal conservatism of our judiciary they can consult Tahir Wasti's seminal work on the application of Sharia law in Pakistan with a focus on the Qisas and Diyat Ordinance. There are many big names in the judiciary and the legal community who never challenged the premise of an unfair law and instead blindly applied it. Thus, there is little chance that any one will take action to save Aasia Bibi except for some 'under-the-table' or indirect intervention by the state to appease the international community. The fact of the matter is that bigotry and intolerance has sunk into our society and state institutions. At the end of the day, this is not about religion but about using religion to gain greater power to molest the powerless. We have long forgotten the tradition of the Prophet of Islam (pbuh) who showed tolerance and mercy towards a non-Muslim woman known for throwing garbage at him. The story is that he went to inquire after her health when she didn't show up to do her usual act. Sadly, we are incapable of applying such tolerance because our scholars, leaders, thinkers and judges are blinded by political pragmatism and lust for power. . Read Full Post
Who will give Aasia Bibi justice?
From the Blog PkColumnist.com: Who will give Aasia Bibi justice? - Our honourable chief justice has enough time to visit the Supreme Court to conduct meetings pertaining to hearsay reports on the government's attempts to take down the judiciary, but he has not had the time to take notice of the death sentence awarded to Aasia Bibi for blasphemy. The issue has been highlighted in sections of the local media and in much of the international press as well. Amnesty International has lambasted us for sentencing the woman to death and even the Pope has joined in, asking the government to set her free. On November 20, it has been reported that the president has taken note of it and asked for a report on the matter. However, why are the superior courts silent on this pressing issue? Some are trying to explain the lack of action on what, they say, is a dilemma that the honourable judiciary is facing. They say that the case has been decided by a lower court and an appeal will be heard by the Lahore High Court. In such an eventuality, it would not be wise for the Supreme Court to intervene, rather let the law take its course — let the Lahore High Court first decide on the appeal. In a sense, since the case is already being heard, at least an appeal against the verdict given by a lower court judge, it would be best if there was no suo motu action. However, this is only side of the issue. According to news reports, a government body, the National Commission on the Status of Women, has criticised the lower court's verdict, saying that the woman is not guilty of blasphemy but rather that she is being made to pay because of a dispute. This view also says that the case happened in Punjab and that if the superior judiciary were to step in and intervene, it could well open a veritable can of worms. The reason for that is that there is said to be a landlord involved in the Aasia Bibi case and that her punishment may have something to do with his influence in the area. And, that he is linked to the party in power in his province. Hence, this view goes, it is probably best for this case to take its legal course and not have any senior judicial authority intervene and make life difficult for the ruling party. What can be said in fairly reliable terms is that this case, nay, the blasphemy laws themselves are a tool that have been used time and again to settle personal vendettas and to maintain a deadly hegemony over values, that is: if you don't agree with me, I will kill you. This is unjust and, in this case in particular, it is cruel. The honourable chief justice's speedy response is awaited. . Read Full Post
This one's for the fans of Katrina Kaif
From the Blog Speak Your Mind!!!: This one's for the fans of Katrina Kaif - . Read Full Post
0 comments :
Post a Comment