memri
August 11, 2010 Special Dispatch No. 3159

Human Rights Campaigner I. A. Rehman Examines Pakistan's Controversial Blasphemy Law and Its Misuse Against Christians, Other Minorities

August 11, 2010
Pakistan | Special Dispatch No. 3159

On July 19, 2010, two Christians, pastor Rashid Emmanuel and his brother Sajjad, were shot dead on the premises of a court in Pakistan's Faisalabad city.[1] The two had been accused of distributing blasphemous materials; a case had been filed against them under Section 295-C of the Pakistani Penal Code (PPP) for distributing handwritten pamphlets that contained blasphemous materials.

According to the report, the pamphlets carried two cellphone numbers which led to the brothers' arrest, following a complaint lodged by one Khurram, who is believed to be member of the little known Tehreek-e-Hurmat-e-Rasool (Movement for the Prophet's Dignity).[2]

In another case, a 60-year-old woman, Zaibun Nisa or Zainab Bibi, spent 14 years in a Pakistani prison for an alleged act of blasphemy against the Holy Koran, though no court trial took place and no police case was filed against her.[3] The Lahore High Court, which ordered her release after no evidence was found against her, expressed dismay over her long detention "without any trial."[4] The woman was also found to be mentally unstable.

The cases cited above have caused fresh concerns over Pakistan's controversial blasphemy laws. One of them, Section 295-C, carries the death penalty.

In most blasphemy cases, Pakistan's trial courts in Pakistan cannot deliver impartial judgments because of threats from armed religious groups, and sometimes even from vigilante policemen, who take it upon themselves to implement their own form of instant justice against the accused. The blasphemy laws have also attracted international attention, especially for their misuse against minority communities in Pakistan such as Christians, Hindus and Ahmadi Muslims.

Several human rights campaigners and members of minority communities have demanded changes in these laws. However, no Pakistani minister wants to risk his life by introducing such legislation. In a recent article, "Blasphemy Law Revisited," I. A. Rehman, the internationally renowned Pakistani human rights campaigner, examined the damage the blasphemy laws are doing to Pakistani society.

Following are excerpts from Rehman's article, in the original English:[5]

"[Has Pakistan's Blasphemy Law] Achieved the Declared Objective of Preventing Vigilante Justice?"

"The first question is: Has Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) achieved the declared objective of preventing vigilante justice? This is because one of the main arguments in support of the blasphemy law was that it would prevent private citizens from killing blasphemy suspects.

"In a preface to Namoos-i-Risalat [Prophet's Honor], an account of the making of 295-C by Advocate Ismail Qureshi (Al-Faisal Publishers, Lahore, 1994), former Supreme Court judge and former [Pakistan] president Rafiq Tarar declared: 'If this law is not there, the doors to courts will be closed to the culprits and to the petitioners provoked by them, and then everyone will take the law in his own hands and exact revenge from the criminals. As a result, anarchy will prevail in the country.'

"In 1994, the Lahore High Court declared that if Section 295-C of the PPC were struck down, the old system of killing a culprit on the spot could be revived.

"Can the claim that Section 295-C prevents non-state violence against blasphemers and suspects survive an empirical study? No one has ever been executed for blasphemy under court orders. On the other hand, there is a long list of suspects/defendants/convicts who have been killed precisely in the manner that 295-C was supposed to prevent.

"Naemat Ahmar of Faisalabad was killed by a student. Tahir Iqbal died in mysterious circumstances in prison. Manzur Masih was gunned down outside the Lahore High Court. Buntu Masih was fatally wounded while in police custody. Sajjad Farooq, a hafiz-i-Quran [one who has learned the Koran by heart], was killed by a mob in Gujranwala. Mohammad Yusuf, a former member of Zia's Majlis-i-Shura [the advisory council of former President General Zia-ul-Haq], was killed in prison.

"Zahid, accused of desecrating the Koran, was killed by a police constable. Mushtaq Zafar and Sanaullah, two blasphemy accused on bail, were shot dead. Samuel Masih, charged under 295-A, was attacked and fatally wounded in a TB clinic. Ashiq Nabi was shot dead in Nowshera because his wife alleged that he had desecrated the Holy Koran. Jagdish was lynched in a Karachi factory and a computer operator of Gujrat was killed by a policeman. And Anees Mallah was killed in a Sindh prison because he rammed his motorbike into the gate of a pandal set up for a quasi-religious meeting."

Should "An Unintended Offense Under 295-C [the Blasphemy Law]... Be Liable for the Death Penalty[?]"

"Is it not time for the learned Ulema [religious scholars] to re-examine their thesis that the blasphemy law can stop private citizens from killing suspects? Surely, they do not wish their faith to be defamed.

"Another question pending resolution is whether an unintended offense under 295-C should be liable for the death penalty. Advocate Ismail Qureshi, the main architect of Section 295-C, himself pleaded for an amendment to the provision so as to bring it 'in accordance with the Koran and Sunnah.' 'If the provision is maintained in the present form,' he wrote, 'there is a danger of 'ambiguity' and legal complications.'

"Here he was affirming the view expressed by the Council of Islamic Ideology [a constitutional advisory body] in 1984 that only a deliberate act of blasphemy could be punishable with death. However, the burden of proving that an offense was unintended was to be on the accused.

"The same opinion was expressed by Maulana Riazul Hasan Nuri, adviser to the Federal Shariat Court [which functions parallel to the Supreme Court]. The Lahore High Court also said so in 2007. Does this not call for an amendment to Section 295-C?"

Another Issue Is "The Application of the Blasphemy Law to Non-Muslims [and Blasphemy Against Prophets of Other Religions]"

"A third issue in debate is the controversy over the application of the blasphemy law to non-Muslims and the non-implementation of the direction in the Shariat Court's 1990 verdict to the effect that blasphemy against any prophet other than the Holy Prophet of Islam (PBUH) should also be liable for the death penalty. Off and on, some members of the minority communities have raised this issue.

"In 1994 the Lahore High Court had also dealt with this question and declined relief on the ground that the Federal Shariat Court had already given a clear directive. The blasphemy law has also created serious problems for the judiciary, especially the subordinate courts. In almost each case brought before them they come under such heavy pressure from agitators that they are afraid of applying their minds to the papers before them. This has again been confirmed by the case of Zainab Bibi (released after 14 years of unwarranted confinement).

"Some years ago the Lahore High Court acquitted a mentally unsound man who had been awarded the death sentence by the trial court. Justice Tasadduq Husain Jilani passed strictures on the trial court for ignoring a certificate from a hospital describing the accused person's condition, which was on record. Unless those who make a living or gain social status by initiating prosecution on blasphemy charges stop gheraoing the courts, many more sick persons may have to share Zainab's fate.

"Among the other problems faced by courts are questions related to the accused person's conduct after the alleged crime or his belief. For instance, while acquitting a man who had been awarded the death sentence for blasphemy, a division bench of the Lahore High Court in 2002 observed: 'If a Muslim, through an affidavit, admits that he has not committed any contempt, then there is no reason to doubt his sincerity and submission.' The court also expressed concern over the rise in blasphemy cases and suspected an element of mischief.

"The same court, while allowing bail to a person accused of desecration of the Koran under Section 295-A in 2006, ruled that in case of disrespect to the Holy Koran a complaint could only be filed by a government or an authorized officer, a ruling that is rarely respected. In 2007, while acquitting a man who had been awarded the death penalty by the trial court, the Lahore High Court ruled that if a person's remarks fell within a sect's definition of blasphemy but other sects thought differently, he could not be convicted of blasphemy. The courts could not intervene in such sectarian controversies.

"At the same time, the courts face dilemmas when evidence against an accused is not strong enough to justify capital punishment while he is not completely innocent either. This difficulty is often faced in cases where death penalty is the only punishment prescribed for an offense."

"Section 295-C Has Become a Weapon In Sectarian Wars, and Is Bringing a Bad Name to Pakistan, Its People, Its Parliament, and Its Judicial System"

"It is clear that after two decades of painful experimentation, a review of the PPC chapter on offenses against religion can be deferred only at the risk of causing miscarriage of justice in many more cases – especially now that Section 295-C has become a weapon in sectarian wars, and is bringing a bad name to Pakistan, its people, its parliament and its judicial system…"
Endnotes:

[1] Dawn, Pakistan, July 20, 2010.

[2] Dawn, Pakistan, July 20, 2010.

[3] www.dawn.com, Pakistan, July 22, 2010.

[4] www.dawn.com, Pakistan, July 22, 2010.

[5] Dawn (www.dawn.com), Pakistan, July 29, 2010. The text of the article has been lightly edited for clarity. Subheads added by MEMRI.

Share this Report: