skip to main |
skip to sidebar
---daily Dawn, Pakistan
The Newspaper - National
NCJP’s signature drive against blasphemy laws
By Our Staff Correspondent
Friday, 28 Aug, 2009 | 02:13 AM PST
FAISALABAD, Aug 27: The National Commission for Justice and Peace (NCJP) has launched a signature campaign for the repeal of blasphemy laws, including sections 295-B, C, 298 A, B and C of the Pakistan Penal Code.
NCJP director Nisar Barkat said in 2000, the commission had launched a signature campaign for the restoration of joint electorate in Pakistan and collected around 200,000 signatures from people belonging to different segments of society.
He said the commission had started distribution of the forms designed for the campaign which would be collected till Sep 15 for their onward submission to the quarters concerned.
Quoting from the data collected by the commission, he said from 1986 to August 2009, 964 people were booked under these laws and of them 479 were Muslims, 119 Christians, 340 Ahmadis, 14 Hindus and 10 others. As many as 32 people, he said, had been killed by the mob or individuals after facing blasphemy allegations.
Deploring inaction of successive governments regarding misuse of theses laws, Mr Barkat said their repeal was the only solution to the issue.
He urged the parliament to repeal blasphemy laws since they were a source of promoting religious intolerance and disharmony in society.
Citing recent violent incidents in Gojra as an example, he said they were prompted by abuse of blasphemy laws which justified violence against the accused.
©2009 DAWN Media Group. All rights reserved
--- daily DAWN, Pakistan
COLUMNISTS
Not the business of the state — 2
By Ardeshir Cowasjee
Sunday, 23 Aug, 2009 | 09:51 AM PST
On Aug 18, a letter from Citizen of Pakistan Naeem Sadiq of Karachi (naeemsadiq @ gmail.com) was printed in this newspaper of record. The subject was a ‘Request for suo moto notice’ and it was an appeal to the chief justice of the Sindh High Court.
Karachi’s Defence Housing Authority in its application form for the allotment of plots in its DHA City scheme has asked those applying to declare their religion and sect. This, states Naeem, is discriminatory and a violation of our fundamental rights. He contends that the intention of the DHA is to make segregated living zones for those of different religions and to further add to this division on sectarian grounds. The demand is at odds with Islam, the Quran and Sunnah making no mention of any ‘sects.’
As he writes: ‘Unless checked, this practice may soon extend to a declaration of religion and sect for other routing commercial transactions, such as buying a PIA ticket or obtaining a mobile telephone SIM.’ So, he has requested the chief justice of Sindh to ‘take suo moto notice and order the DHA to remove the requirement of religion and sect from its application forms and other related documents’.
Absolutely correct — it is not the business of the DHA to delve into the religion and sect of people wishing to purchase plots which it has advertised for sale.
In similar vein, Citizen Sadiq on July 25, 2009 addressed a letter to Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Chaudhry at Islamabad on the matter of compulsory zakat deductions by the banks of Pakistan, appealing to the Supreme Court in the public interest to take suo moto notice. His letter reads: ‘The Supreme Court of Pakistan in a landmark judgment on March 9, 1999 gave a ruling that members of all ‘fiqhs’ were entitled to exemption from compulsory deduction of zakat, and the federal government had no authority to reject the declaration of any Muslim seeking exemption from zakat, if it was made on a prescribed form. This judgment enables any Muslim to declare his/her ‘fiqh’ and thus seek exemption from compulsory deduction of zakat. De facto, it also recognises the right of individuals to practise their faith according to their own ‘fiqhs,’ and not be dictated by the government’s interpretation.
‘The historic judgment, while so well recognising the right of individuals in matters of their faith, made an irritating mess of how this right was to be practised. Firstly, it requires Muslims to declare their ‘fiqh.’ The great Prophet of Islam (PBUH) did not subscribe to any ‘sect’ or ‘fiqh.’ For his followers to be forced to invent, be branded and be divided by sects and ‘fiqhs’ is therefore an absolutely unethical and undesirable demand on the part of the government.
‘The second irritant relates to the requirement of making this declaration on a prescribed format, thus creating a serious bureaucratic and procedural difficulty for the ordinary citizens. They are required to fill a judicial stamped paper of Rs20 (available for Rs120), have it signed by a notary public and two witnesses before making a completely unnecessary declaration of their ‘fiqh.’ The form is also called CZ-50 affidavit.
‘This anomaly could be easily rectified if the Supreme Court, through a public interest suo moto notice, clarified its original judgment by requiring only those Muslims to give in writing (on a plain piece of paper) who do wish their zakat to be deducted by a bank. This would truly be in keeping with the Supreme Court verdict that all Muslims are entitled to exemption from compulsory deduction of zakat.’
By July 31, Naeem received a letter from the Supreme Court registrar advising him that the chief justice had been pleased to accept the application and ordered that the matter (Suo Moto Case No.12 of 2009) be heard on Aug 10 at Islamabad, and he was required to appear in person.
Two issues were raised at the hearing: (a) that the procedure for exemption from compulsory deduction of zakat was tedious, time-wasting, and cumbersome; and (b) that the state cannot compel its citizens to declare a specific ‘fiqh’ and thus be divided and boxed into one or the other schools of interpretation.
Chief Justice Chaudhry sitting with Justices Jawwad Khawaja and Ijaz Ahmad heard the submission, agreed that it was a pro bono case, and ordered the State Bank and the federation of Pakistan to appear before the court at the next hearing (which is fixed for Oct 5) and explain as to why this procedure cannot be simplified and improved in the light of issues raised by the appellant.
The state of Pakistan is intrusive when it comes to matters of religion. Why? Are we not supposed to all be equal citizens with equal rights as decreed by Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the man who founded and made the country? According to the original constitution as promulgated at noon on Aug 14, 1973 by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, we were equal citizens of the state, with equal rights. But this equality was done away with in 1974 by Bhutto’s second amendment to his constitution, bending to the obscurantists and bigots, and an entire community was shorn of its rights and declared a minority.
Prior to this, in 1979 the same community was targeted by Ziaul Haq, general of the army and president of the republic, pious and God-fearing. He had decreed that all citizens, regardless of their religion, wishing to obtain a passport must sign a declaration that it is his/her belief that the Prophet of Islam is the final prophet and that any pretender that follows him is false.
Such is the business of the state.
arfc@cyber.net.pk
©2009 DAWN Media Group. All rights reserved
---daily Dawn, Pakistan
Columnists
Not the business of the state
By Ardeshir Cowasjee
Sunday, 16 Aug, 2009 | 12:53 AM PST
It has taken a mere 62 years — a blip in the life of many a nation, many an empire — for those who pass for politicians, both civil and military, to nearly dismantle Pakistan. Those of little genius have managed to do so to the best of their ability.
In the large it has been brick by brick, though at times large chunks have been done away with in one fell swoop, and on one occasion, back in 1971, an entire wall was demolished to serve the purposes of power-hungry megalomaniacs.
Given all to which it has been subjected, given the warping and distortions of the national mindset, Pakistan is to be congratulated for not only having survived the machinations of its ruling cliques, but to actually still be standing, albeit in a highly wobbly mode, on its mortgaged feet. For all the wrong reasons, it is now a high-profile country in the comity of nations, renowned all over the world for being what it should not be.
Each Aug 14 the nation is expected to honour the memory of the man who made it, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, and to celebrate the being of Pakistan. This year, that was denied in our capital city. From what we have read and seen on our television channels, Islamabad was festooned, not with the national flag, but with the flag of the party in power. Our kings of straw celebrate themselves, not their country and its maker, and they rule over a Pakistan that now has nothing to do with the ideals that gave it birth. However, let us remember the words spoken by Jinnah on Aug 7, 1947 when he landed in Karachi: ‘I never expected to see Pakistan in my lifetime. We must be very grateful to God for what we have achieved.’ One must suppose that we who have survived the 62 years of downgrading must be grateful for what is left to us. But what can one make of a nation many of whose citizens are still debating whether there should ever have been a Pakistan?
Those who quibble over partition should remember that by 1947 Jinnah’s firm and committed conviction was that there was no other possible solution in the face of the end of the empire. For better or for worse, the minority Muslims had to have their own land. A united India could never have worked out.
Days prior to the country’s founding, he urged his people to forget the past, to bury the hatchet, to work together no matter to which community or religious faith they belonged. He told them clearly that a state can progress and thrive only when each man is an equal citizen of the state, with equal obligations, rights and privileges.
He told them that the first duty of any government was the imposition of law and order, he warned against the pernicious subcontinental affliction of bribery and corruption, of nepotism and jobbery, and clearly and emphatically stated that the citizens of his country ‘may belong to any religion, caste or creed — that has nothing to do with the business of the state’.
Once he was dead, those who followed swiftly broke faith with him and it took them but six months to betray both Jinnah and the people of his country. They managed to do everything he had warned them not to do, and those that have followed the followers have succeeded beyond Jinnah’s wildest dreams in converting his country to quite the opposite of what he intended and in polluting the minds of its people. It was not to be for better, but unequivocally for worse.
To say that the leadership the country has suffered over its 62 years has been disastrous is but to overstate the obvious. Sadly, it must be admitted, Jinnah had an inkling that he was bequeathing his country to those who would prove unworthy inheritors of his labours (never did he utter the word ‘sacrifice’).
This newspaper of record which informs us on its masthead each day that it was founded by Mohammad Ali Jinnah, has allowed me to reiterate time and time again words spoken by that great man to his friend, my father Rustom Fakirjee Cowasjee, when one day he remarked, in dismal tone: ‘Mark my words, each successive government of Pakistan will be worse than its predecessor.’ And so it has been — such is our fate.
Though, today, it is difficult to believe that any successor can be much worse than what we now have sitting. But, then, with what we have on the ground which is likely to follow, Jinnah’s prescience might continue to prove to be accurate.
The lethal mixture of state and religion, imposed upon us by the Objectives Resolution of 1949 has ensured that bigotry and intolerance would flourish, that discriminatory laws would be imposed and would be immoveable, that sectarian killings would be a daily occurrence and that the threat of Talibanisation would be a reality with which we must live, though our mighty army has now taken up the fight. The question is, with the deterioration that has set in, can the fight be won?
To end, a quote from an editorial in this newspaper written 20 years ago on the occasion of Jinnah’s birth anniversary: ‘… we have paid ritualistic tribute and homage to the ideals and principles of Mohammad Ali Jinnah without grasping the essence and practical implications of his message and carrying out his behest. All his life he remained a true exponent of liberty and political pluralism and an ardent advocate of the rule of law and a democratic polity….’
arfc @ cyber.net.pk
©2009 DAWN Media Group. All rights reserved
Posts
