The blasphemy law

The blasphemy law

I.A Rehman
November 25, 2010

THE worldwide outrage caused by the awarding of the death sentence to Aasia Bibi on a blasphemy charge was bound to happen sooner or later, in view of Pakistan’s inability to scrutinise a law that satisfies neither human rights advocates nor many authentic authorities on Islam. It is time this shortcoming was seriously addressed.

The matter has been complicated by two factors. First, the conservative opinion has not taken the reaction in the West, especially the Pope’s plea for mercy, in a proper spirit. Just as the people of Pakistan have a right to protest at violations of the Palestinian people’s human rights, western observers have a right to express concern at what they think amounts to human rights abuse in Pakistan.

Secondly, the idea of presidential intervention is counter-productive. Reprieve for a convict or two will not solve the problem. Future victims of the controversial legislation may have no defender at home or abroad. A critical appraisal of Section 295-C has become imperative, particularly because the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) provision does not even enjoy the unanimous support of Islamic scholars.

This will become abundantly clear from the history of the addition of Section 295-C to the Penal Code. As the Penal Code did not have any specific provision for blasphemy against the Holy Prophet (PBUH), advocate Ismail Qureshi moved the Federal Shariat Court (FSC) in 1984 that to prescribe the death penalty for blasphemy. The petition did not go unchallenged. One objection raised by the counsel for the federation (under Gen Zia) was that the petition was not maintainable. Another issue was that since legislation fell under the jurisdiction of parliament, could the FSC issue a direction to the federation? The court reserved judgment.

Meanwhile, a bill was moved in the National Assembly seeking the insertion of Section 295-C in the PPC. It provided for the death penalty for blasphemy against the Prophet (PBUH).

According to Mr Ismail Qureshi, the law minister did not support the bill on the ground that the Quran did not prescribe a penalty for this offence. “Besides, an unexpected situation arose,” says Mr Ismail Qureshi, “when many Islamic-minded members of the Assembly did not wholly agree with the bill because they thought imprisonment for life was sufficient punishment for blasphemy.” Anyhow the bill was passed though the law ministry added life imprisonment as an alternative punishment. Discussion on the bill was cut short because its supporters insisted that the issue was not debatable.

Mr Qureshi again moved the FSC, this time for deletion of the alternative punishment from Section 295-C. He admits that “some ulema argued that blasphemy was a forgivable offence and some even said that the ruler could award a lesser punishment than death”.

The FSC ruled in October 1990 that the alternative punishment should be deleted as it was repugnant to Islam. The court further directed the federation to add a provision to the effect that any act of blasphemy upon other prophets should also be punishable with death. The government was told to amend Section 295-C by April 30, 1991. The federation filed an appeal against the FSC verdict but it was withdrawn.

Fears that Section 295-C could be abused were expressed from the very outset, by Mr Ismail Qureshi himself. He wrote: “In my opinion, this Section 295-C needs to be further amended because it is necessary to bring it in accord with Quran and Sunnah (emphasis added). In the present form it could create ambiguity and legal complications.” He then emphasised that proof of intent was necessary to secure conviction (a point also made by the FSC) and that the sentence of death should be based on ‘tazkiat-ul-shahood’ (unimpeachable evidence).

To give effect to a part of the FSC verdict (relating to the deletion of the alternative punishment) the Nawaz Sharif government moved the Criminal Law (Third Amendment) Bill 1991. In its report on the bill the Senate Standing Committee, headed by PML-N leader Senator Zafarul Haq, expressed reservations about the definition of the offence. It said:

“The Standing Committee on Law and Justice after detailed deliberations decided to recommend the proposed deletion of ‘or imprisonment of life’ from Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code. The members, however, observed that there was a need for a more specific definition of the offence under Section 295 PPC which the members were of the considered opinion was in the present form very generalised. The committee suggests that the matter may be referred to the Council of Islamic Ideology for suggesting a more specific definition of the offence falling under Section 295 PPC As well as for its opinion as to whether during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) or during the period of Khulafa-i-Rashideen or afterwards in any of the Muslim countries, what was the punishment awarded to the offenders for committing offence falling under Section 295 PPC” (Gazette Extraordinary, Feb 22, 1992).

It was only during the early days of Benazir Bhutto’s second government that the amendment bill was finally adopted. Again the government was in a hurry to push the bill because the house was about to be prorogued.

The fears of abuse of Section 295-C started coming true soon afterwards. A surge in blasphemy accusations, mostly against Christians and Ahmadis in the beginning, invited the comment that this law had generated offences that previously were rare.

Three unsavoury facts were established: a) in many cases the law was invoked to deal with a business rival, to grab property or to settle a personal score; b) that filing FIRs against vulnerable persons had been adopted as a lucrative business by quite a few clerics; and c) that the conservative elements subjected courts to unbearable strains by laying siege to them. Subsequently it was found that trial courts were generally afraid of acquitting even an illiterate child accused of writing blasphemous notes or a man about whom a certificate of his mental disorder was on record.

Further, it was found that a blasphemy accused was safe neither in prison nor at a police station, nor even outside the Lahore High Court. Those acquitted by high courts could not live in Pakistan and a judge who had acquitted a child was killed after retirement.

Over the last few years the use of Section 295-C has become a weapon in the hands of sectarian warlords. While cases against non-Muslim citizens are still filed, in a good number of cases the accused are Muslims, including prayer leaders. It is not that governments have not been uncomfortable with 295-C. The governments of Benazir Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif and Pervez Musharraf all toyed with the idea of making some procedural changes but to no effect. Any further dilly-dallying will only compound the government’s difficulties.

While the argument for a repeal of the admittedly flawed text of the law is unexceptionable, this may take a long time. What is urgently needed is a serious effort to ensure that only those who deliberately commit an offence are punished and courts are protected against mob threats.

©2010 DAWN Media Group. All rights reserved

URL: www.dawn.com/2010/11/25/the-blasphemy-law-by-i-a-rehman.html

Time to repeal the blasphemy law

OPINION

Time to repeal the blasphemy law

Nasim Zehra
November 16, 2010

The writer is director current affairs, Dunya TV and a former fellow at Asia Center, Harvard University nasim.zehra@tribune.com.pk

In June 2008, Asiya Bibi, a Pakistani farm worker and mother of five, fetched water for others working on the farm. Many refused the water because Asiya was Christian. The situation got ugly. Reports indicate Asiya was harassed because of her religion and the matter turned violent. Asiya, alone in a hostile environment, naturally would have attempted to defend herself but was put in police custody for her protection against a crowd that was harming her.

However, that protection move turned into one that was to earn Asiya a death sentence. A case was filed against her under sections 295-B and C of the Pakistan Penal Code, claiming that Asiya was a blasphemer. Her family will appeal against the judgment in the Lahore High Court.

The Asiya case raises the fundamental question of how Pakistan’s minorities have been left unprotected since the passage of the blasphemy law. There may have been no hangings on account of the law but it has facilitated the spread of intolerance and populist rage against minorities, often leading to deaths. There is also a direct link between the Zia-ist state’s intolerance against minorities and the rise of criminal treatment of Ahmadis.

Cases have ranged from the Kasur case to the more recent Gojra case, from the mind-boggling row of cases between 1988-1992 against 80-year-old development guru Dr Akhtar Hameed Khan, to the case of the son of an alleged blasphemer, an illiterate brick kiln worker who was beaten to death by a frenzied mob.

Although doctor sahib faced prolonged mental torture, he was saved from the maddening rage that has sent to prison, and in some cases devoured, many innocent, poor and hence unprotected Pakistanis.

There is a long list, prepared by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, of unjust punishments handed down to Pakistani citizens whose fundamental rights the state is obliged to protect. Beyond punishments, minorities live in constant fear of being lethally blackmailed by those who want to settle other scores.

Yet most political parties have refrained from calling for the law’s repeal or improvement in its implementation mechanism. When, in the early 90s, I asked Nawaz Sharif sahib to criticise the hounding of Dr Khan, his response was a detailed recall of the story in which Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) went to ask after the health of a non-Muslim woman who repeatedly threw garbage over him. He condemned what was happening but said politics prevented him from doing so publicly. Later, General Musharraf, advised by other generals, reversed his announcement of changing the law’s implementation mechanism. Small crowds protested against it. Among politicians, very few exceptions include the PPP parliamentarian Sherry Rehman and, more recently, the ANP’s Bushra Gohar, who asked for its amendment and repeal.

Already sections of the judiciary have been critical of flawed judgements passed by lower courts in alleged blasphemy cases. Recently in July, Lahore High Court Chief Justice Khawaja Sharif quashed a blasphemy case against 60-year-old Zaibunnisa and ordered her release after almost 14 years in custody. According to the judgment, the “treatment meted out to the woman was an insult to humanity and the government and the civil organisations should be vigilant enough to help such people.” Surely the Bench should know the plethora of abuses that Pakistan’s minorities have suffered because of an evidently flawed law.

A message more appropriate, perhaps, would be to repeal the black law that grossly undermines the Constitution of Pakistan and indeed the teachings of Prophet Muhammad, one of the most tolerant and humane law-givers humankind has known. This environment of populist rage, fed by the distorted yet self-serving interpretation of religion principally by Zia and a populist mixing of religion and politics by a politically besieged Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, must be emphatically challenged. A collective effort to roll back these laws must come from parliament, the lawyers’ forums, the judiciary, civil society groups and the media.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 17th, 2010.

URL: http://tribune.com.pk/story/78368/time-to-repeal-the-blasphemy-law/

Statement about Ahmadis misinterpreted, says Nawaz

	Monday, June 14, 2010, Rajab 1 ,1431 A.H.
Statement about Ahmadis misinterpreted, says Nawaz

Monday, June 14, 2010

By our correspondent

PML-N Quaid Mian Nawaz Sharif has said that the constitution guarantees the rights of minorities and it is their obligation to show respect to the sentiments of the majority.

Talking to a delegation of Ulema, Mashaikh, and party members on Sunday, the former prime minister said that his statement regarding Ahmadis had been misinterpreted and rather than wasting time while issuing statements over it, efforts should be made to create unity among people. He said Namoos-e-Risalat and Khatam-e-Nabuwat were the basis of our faith and no compromise could ever be made on these matters. The delegation called on the former PM under the leadership of MPA Dr Saeed Elahi.

URL: http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=244866

Culture of bigotry

Columnist

.

Culture of bigotry

   By Huma Yusuf

   Sunday, 13 Jun, 2010

The day someone like Sharif is awaiting an ulema board’s verdict on whether or not he committed blasphemy is the day that the government should brainstorm and implement non-military means to curb bigotry. The calls for a thorough reform of the education system and curriculum and the repeal of Article 2 are endless, but they continue to fall on deaf ears. — File Photo.

What kind of sick democracy do we live in, where the declaration of equality of all citizens of the state can be deemed unconstitutional? This twisted logic was deployed by the JUI-F in its criticism of Nawaz Sharif’s comments describing Ahmadis as ‘brothers and sisters’ who are an ‘asset to the country’.

Among several other absurd reactions to Sharif’s statement, the JUI-F’s reasoning should serve as yet another wake-up call to the government that urgent social, political and legal measures must be put in place to fight the culture of bigotry and discrimination that is flourishing in Pakistan.

The JUI-F argued that Sharif was violating the constitution, which identifies Ahmadis as a minority community (never mind the fact that in a democracy, minorities enjoy an equal citizenship status and can be equal assets to the state).

This, however, was not the worst critique Sharif had to endure: the Wafaqul Madaris al Arabia accused Nawaz Sharif of defying religion and siding with ‘traitors’; ulema gathered at a seminar accused Nawaz Sharif of kowtowing to the US with his conciliatory remarks about Ahmadis; the ulema board of the Jamia Naeemia Madressah was convened to deliberate whether or not Sharif committed blasphemy by referring to non-Muslims as our ‘brethren’; and across the Pakistani blogosphere, which is supposedly populated by the nation’s educated elite and middle-class progressives, the question of whether Sharif is a kafir continues to be debated.

The irony of the backlash against Sharif cannot be lost on anyone. Since the Taliban launched an onslaught against the Pakistani state, the PML-N has refrained from condemning terrorism and extremist ideology in a forthright manner. Rather than explicitly blame the Taliban for the suicide bombings that have rocked the country, PML-N stalwarts have consistently pinned responsibility on a ‘foreign hand’.

Infamously, in February, the PML-N’s Rana Sanaullah consorted with leaders of the banned Sipah-i-Sahaba during the Jhang by-elections. And in March, Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif caused a firestorm by suggesting that the Taliban ought to have spared Punjab on the premise that the provincial government and the militants enjoyed an ideological affinity.

In other words, the PML-N has made every effort not to enter into a confrontation with the forces of extremism. In fact, in the wake of the May 28 attacks on the Ahmadis in Lahore, Shahbaz Sharif’s adviser, Zaeem Qadri, conceded that the provincial government had not made an effort to clamp down on bigoted and anti-Ahmadi posturing for fear of an ‘adverse reaction’.

Qadri’s defensive position is a throwback to Mian Muhammad Khan Daultana, the chief minister of the Punjab in 1953 who refused to take on the religious parties as they waged an anti-Ahmadi campaign, fearing a ‘head-on clash’. Daultana’s inaction became the subject of the now iconic judicial inquiry headed by Justices Muhammad Munir and M.R. Kiyani.

As Sharif makes every effort to clarify and retract his statements, he should probably re-read the Munir Report, the most eloquent defence of secularism which cautioned against trying to define what a Muslim is — thereby bringing a religious matter into the realm of the state — over 50 years ago.

After asking a gathering of ulema to offer their definitions of a Muslim, and finding that consensus was impossible, the justices wrote, “If we attempt our own definition as each learned divine has done and that definition differs from that given by all others, we unanimously go out of the fold of Islam. And if we adopt the definition given by any one of the ulema, we remain Muslims according to the view of that alim but kafirs according to the definition of everyone else.”

This is exactly the lesson that Sharif learned in the past few days. Despite all his party’s attempts to curry favour with rightwing and extremist forces, he ‘went out of the fold’ by making even the most insipid remarks in support of the Ahmadi community. By refusing to learn from history, the PML-N has repeated it. The tigers of Punjab are now cowering in a corner, licking their wounds, while talk of a military operation in their home province circulates on the international stage. It seems the monster of militancy and bigotry has grown so wild that it has come to threaten its benefactors.

But those who have been critical of the PML-N’s apathy towards extremism should not feel smug. The backlash against Sharif — a powerful politician with Saudi backing and rightwing credentials — underscores just how cheaply accusations of blasphemy (and, by extension, incitements to violence) can be come by in Pakistan.

In our newly established culture of 24/7 news reporting, people accuse and abuse with impunity — a fact that is increasingly exploited by the religious right. And any society in which an accusation that is not backed by evidence can carry so much weight if dressed in the trimmings of religious purity is doomed to endless cycles of violence, hate and regression.

The day someone like Sharif is awaiting an ulema board’s verdict on whether or not he committed blasphemy is the day that the government should brainstorm and implement non-military means to curb bigotry. The calls for a thorough reform of the education system and curriculum and the repeal of Article 2 are endless, but they continue to fall on deaf ears.

Perhaps, then, as a stop-gap measure, the government should try a different tack, one that is less daunting than education and constitutional reform.

Last year, after dismissing the human rights implications of the legislation, the government passed the Anti-Terrorism Amendment Ordinance (2009), which significantly shifted the burden of proof onto those accused of being involved in terrorist activities. In a similar vein, the government should consider legislation that shifts the burden of proof of blasphemy onto the accuser, and doles out strict penalties against those who make false accusations.

huma.yusuf@gmail. com

©2010 DAWN Media Group. All rights reserved

URL: www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-...lture-of-bigotry-360-hh-11

First Right Step Forward

First Right Step Forward

Date Submitted: Thu Jun 10, 2010

By: Mansoor Ishfaq (California USA)

When the departure of the dictatorship was in the planning stages, the million dollar question was who will lead the “Most Dangerous Country in the World”? From the short list, Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan People Party (PPP), was considered a moderate politician and champion of women rights. On the other hand, Nawaz Sharif, Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N) was a well respected figure in the religious circle. When Ordinance XX passed in 1984 against Ahmadi Muslims (Ahmadis), Sharif was then Zia Ul Haq’s right hand and was a close friend of religious parties serving in the cold war.

Due to her moderate approach, Bhutto was always considered more effective in the war on terror than Sharif. Bhutto would strike a deal with Gen. Pervez Musharraf which made it possible for both candidates to return to the country and to run in the upcoming general elections. In the same general elections, to get the political edge, Nawaz Sharif loudly spoke against war in terror and made allies with religious parties.

After the restoration of democracy, once again religious fundamentalists flourished under PML-N’s led government in the Punjab and terrorists established a base in southern Punjab. Under Shehbaz Sharif, younger brother of Nawaz and the current sitting Punjab chief minister, the worst attacks have been launched against religious minorities in Pakistan’s history.

The May 28th slaughtering of peace loving citizens of Pakistan demonstrated that under the Punjab government, sporadic attacks against Ahmadis have mushroomed into an epidemic. Initial investigation of the May 28th attacks suggests that during the terrorist’s weeklong preparations, the men stayed in Raiwind, the headquarters of Tablighi Jamaat, and official place of residence of Sharif brothers. The men had also taken shelter at the Ibrahim Mosque, a center of the Tablighi Jamaat in central Lahore.

Neither of the Sharif brothers visited a hospital where wounded Ahmadis were receiving treatment. The recent alliance between PML-N and Sipah-Sahaba (SSP), a banned anti-Shia outfit, during Jhang bi-elections confirmed continuation of PML-N policy. To ensure the PML-N-led Punjab government could preserve and nurture the party’s vote bank, it allowed the display of, and in some cases even sponsored, banners and billboards inciting hatred against Ahmadis. One such banner was recently placed on Mall Road outside the Lahore High Court and translated, read: “Jews, Christians, Ahmadis are enemies of Islam.” The other was a billboard put up last year, reportedly, for the Aalmi Majlis Tahaffuz-i-Khatm-i-Nabuwat, reading “Friendship with Ahmadis is rebellion against the Prophet, peace be upon him.” Even after all the violence on May 28th, the banners were not removed. But, while speaking to a private television channel, the advisor to Punjab Chief Minister Zaeem Qadri defended that the banners could not be removed for fear of “adverse reaction against the government”.

Soon after the May 28th massacre, two Khatme Nabuwat conferences were held in the Punjab. The first conference took place in Sargodha in which PML-N’s Senator Sajid Mir made a fresh call for removing all Ahmadis from key positions. The second conference was held on June 8, 2010 in Muslim Town Lahore, in which thirteen ulema attended including government officials such as Secretary Shariat Court’s Mulana Zahid Rashdi, a banned Jamat ud Dawa’s Amir Hamza, PML-N’s provincial minister Molana Ilyas Chanyouti and Jama’at E Islami’s Dr Fareed Piracha. In a press conference following the meeting, it was declared that the May 28th massacre was the work of forces who would like to repeal anti-Ahmadi laws. May 28th was linked to the Face book controversy and the government plan of clearing south Punjab from terrorists. Nawaz Sharrif was asked to retract his use of “brothers and sisters” for Ahmadis. A warning was issued to Ahmadis to leave the country and to the government to not to change the anti-Ahmadi Laws. Otherwise it was said, “the result will be worst than 1974 massacre”.

Nawaz Sharif took the first right step forward by calling Ahmadis “brothers and sisters”. The next step is to protect these “brothers and sisters”. PML-N shall understand that it is not an old Pakistan. The international stage is evolving faster than ever and support of fundamentalists is political suicide. A lesson can be learned from the fundamental religious parties who lost in the general election. Pakistan can progress only with a moderate philosophical approach where all its citizens, regardless of their faith, have equal protections and opportunities. By shedding the notion of “fundamentalist supporter”, PML-N can play a vital role in the future Pakistan.

URL: http://www.indiajournal.com/pages/event.php?id=11445

Changed music

Pakistan Punjab

Changed music

By Editorial
June 09, 2010

In the face of a barrage of criticism from many quarters, PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif has suddenly discovered that Ahmadis are equal citizens of Pakistan. Speaking recently in Lahore, he termed the community as ‘our brothers and sisters’ and asserted they should not be victimised.

Till now, the PML-N had taken a rather ambiguous position on the whole matter. It was under the government of Shahbaz Sharif that the town of Rabwah near Chiniot, with its population of around 70,000 consisting mainly of Ahmadis, was re-named Chenab Nagar against the wishes of the community. No attempt was made under the PML-N government to prevent speakers at religious gatherings – some of them held in the immediate vicinity of Rabwah – attacking the Ahmadis.

On the wider issue of extremism, while the PML-N has condemned terrorist attacks, it has been far more cautious in speaking out against the Taliban. Shahbaz Sharif’s curious labelling of the assertion that many such groups operated in the Punjab as an attack on Punjabis is another example of this ambiguity.

The evidence that the PML-N may be changing its tone is good news. There have been meetings on a possible operation in the southern Punjab. This is badly needed. We must hope the matter is taken beyond rhetoric and leads to change. While Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa ranks as the province worst affected by militancy, the Punjab harbours a huge number of madrassas and has traditionally been all too hospitable to the sectarian groups that have sprung up in its towns. There is also another key difference. While the ANP, the party now in government in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, has openly spoken against the militants, the two factions of the PML that have held power in the Punjab over the past decade have been reluctant to do so.

We must hope that the PML-N is willing to change its stance and this is followed through with consistency and does not change once the wave of pressure dissipates.

Published in the Express Tribune, June 9th, 2010.

URL: http://tribune.com.pk/story/19762/changed-music/

Sharif’s statement on Ahmadis angers clerics

Pakistan Punjab

Sharif’s statement on Ahmadis angers clerics

June 07, 2010

Wafaqul Madaris al Arabia asks PML-N chief to retract his statement

ISLAMABAD: Top leaders of an organisation representing Deobandi madrassas across the country have reprimanded PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif for calling members of the Ahmadiyya community as “brothers” of Muslims.

“Sharif should be ashamed of calling them brothers of Muslims,” said a statement issued by the Wafaqul Madaris al Arabia (WMA).

Sharif said in Lahore on Saturday that Ahmadis were as important citizens of Pakistan as people from other religions and called them an asset.

He made the statement to express solidarity with the Ahmadiyya community following last month’s two synchronised attacks on their places of worship in Lahore which claimed more than 80 lives with many more injured.

In a statement issued here on Sunday, leaders of the Wafaqul Madaris al Arabia – an umbrella organisation of more than 12,000 Deobandi madrassas – called Ahmadis “traitors”.

WMA leaders Maulana Salimullah Khan and Qari Hafeez Jahalindri urged Sharif to retract his statement and advised him not to “defy religion for petty political gains.”

The statement termed the Ahmadis as “infidels” and said that they could not be brothers of Muslims until they convert to Islam again.

Ahmadis were declared a minority under the 1973 constitution – a move that some people believe intensified hatred against Ahmadis.

Published in the Express Tribune, June 7th, 2010.

URL: http://tribune.com.pk/story/19379/shari...n-ahmadis-angers-clerics/

Counter-terrorism flaws need to be removed: Sharif

Pakistan Punjab

Counter-terrorism flaws need to be removed: Sharif

By Agencies

June 06, 2010

PML-N chief’s views on attack come a day after Punjab govt’s apathetic attitude

LAHORE: Emphasising that terrorists have neither religion nor state, chief of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Nawaz Sharif said that flaws in the counter-terrorism strategy need to be removed in order for it to be effective.

Giving his views over a week after terrorists killed over 80 people in an attack on two Ahmadi places of worship in the city, Sharif said “Terrorists have neither religion nor state. The nation and its institutions are united in the war against terrorism. Wars against terrorism are fought by the people, not governments.”

He further said that the Ahmadis were also citizens of Pakistan. “Ahmadis are our brothers and sisters,” he said.

Sharif’s views on the attack came a day after Ahmadis expressed dismay over the Punjab government’s apathetic attitude towards protecting marginalised sections of society.

According to reports, one of the injured terrorists was allowed to use his cell phone in hospital and authorities even arranged a meeting between him and his family members.

The Ahmadis have severely criticised the provincial government for failing to get tough with the arrested militants.

The government and the people have to join hands to fight against terrorism, Sharif added. He urged the chief minister of Punjab to eliminate terrorism from the province as a matter of priority.

Published in the Express Tribune, June 6th, 2010.

URL: http://tribune.com.pk/story/19177/counter-terroris...e-removed-sharif/

Pakistan’s Punjab region on knife-edge as extremists take hold, says governor

---Guardian, UK

News > World > Pakistan

Pakistan’s Punjab region on knife-edge as extremists take hold, says governor
Politicians accused of backing banned groups as minorities suffer violence and intimidation
Saeed Shah Faisalabad
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 29 April 2010 19.31 BST

Pakistan’s heartland Punjab province is an extremist “bomb” ready to explode, the region’s highest official has warned, with the recent targeting of minority groups seen by some as evidence of jihadists’ grip on the area.

The provincial governor accused the regional government, led by former prime minister Nawaz Sharif’s party, of tolerating or even supporting extremists, who are said to operate openly in Punjab free from the military operations waged against Taliban guerrillas in the area bordering Afghanistan.

“The Sharifs are creating a potential bomb here in Punjab,” said Salman Taseer, the governor of Punjab, who was appointed by the national government. “These [militant] groups are armed and dangerous. There is no way you can accommodate these people. There has to be zero tolerance.”

In recent weeks, a spate of armed robberies and kidnappings of the Ahmedi sect in the city of Faisalabad was traced to members of Jamaat-ud-Dawa, the group previously known as Lashkar-e-Taiba that was blamed for the devastating 2008 terrorist attack on Mumbai. Three Ahmedis were also shot dead, thought to be the work of the same group.

Sharif’s opponents accuse his party, the opposition Pakistan Muslim League-N – whose support comes partly from the religious right – of accommodating extremists such as Sipah-e-Sahaba, a banned sectarian group blamed for the deaths of hundreds of Shias.

In Jhang town, a byelection last month saw Sharif’s party openly court Sipah-e-Sahaba supporters. Punjab’s law minister, Rana Sanaullah, was pictured on the campaign trail with the alleged head of the group, Ahmed Ludhianvi.

Experts believe that the Pakistani Taliban is deeply influenced by Sipah-e-Sahaba, with the Taliban’s leader, Hakimullah Mehsud, a former member.

Sheikh Waqas Akram, an opposition member of parliament from Jhang, which is the headquarters of Sipah-e-Sahaba, likened the situation in Punjab to the Swat valley, where official inaction allowed the Taliban to take over in 2008. “There can be 10 Swats in Punjab, if you don’t check them [extremists],“ said Akram.

But Sanaullah denied the claims, saying that while banned groups operated in the province there was no “Talibanisation” in Punjab. “Not a single street where you can say there is a no-go area,” he said.

Sanaullah said that groups based in the north-west were behind the terrorist attacks in Punjab, not local organisations, adding that “95% of the people of Sipah-e-Sahaba are not terrorists”. He said: “We must persuade these persons to put aside their guns, to participate in elections. They have the right to vote, so why can’t I ask them [Sipah-e-Sahaba] for votes?“

Over the last year the affluent Ahmedi community in Faisalabad has been rocked by a campaign of violence and intimidation, which intensified in recent weeks. Ahmedi are classified as non-Muslims under Pakistani law, for believing that Muhammad was not the final prophet.

Police arrested four suspects last month. Three days later, on 1 April, three members of an Ahmedi family were shot dead as they returned from work. Their car was sprayed with bullets, in what police believe was a “very professional” hit and possible revenge for the arrests.

“The four people in jail are in Jamaat-ud-Dawa,” said senior Faisalabad police officer Abid Hussain. “They told us that they got a decree from a maulvi (priest) in their group that says that robbing, kidnapping and killing Ahmedis is allowed and would be rewarded in heaven.”

The city’s Ahmedi community have restricted their movements and some have hired bodyguards.

“We are now scared to leave the house, when the door bell rings, we are frightened about who might be there. Outside, we feel always like someone is following us,” said Mohammad Iqbal Ahmed, whose son and nephew were kidnapped in March and returned after the payment of a £20,000 ransom.

© Guardian News and Media Limited 2010
URL : www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/29/pakistan-punjab-taliban