Why should Abbasi apologise for standing up for minorities?

PEMRA has established that attempting to have any discussion on the persecution of minorities is next to impossible.

Zuha Siddiqui June 22, 2016
The Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority’s (PEMRA) latest directive – asking Aaj News to apologise for airing ‘controversial’ and ‘sectarian’ views during a Ramazan transmission reeks of nothing but double standards. Many have argued that Hamza Ali Abbasi’s bold step towards stirring, much needed, dialogue regarding the plight of Ahmadis and the demagogic blasphemy laws was bound to have serious repercussions.

And they weren’t wrong.

Mere hours later, Shabbir Abu Talib and Kokab Noorani openly declared Abbasi’s discussion an act of ‘treason’. On national television. Consequently, PEMRA, believing itself to be the sacrosanct upholder of morals banned both shows for indulging in provocative, non-serious and irresponsible conversations on television during the month of Ramazan.

It isn’t the fact that Abbasi’s decorous show – compared to the other preposterousness featured on our television channels – and his attempt to shed light on issues of contention being nipped in the bud that is worrying. It’s the haste, the promptness, the urgency with which PEMRA, an organ of the state itself, has reached out to ban Abbasi’s show, silence his voice on national television and effectively giving in to hate speech against minorities that is terrifying me.

Moreover, PEMRA has also effectively equated Abbasi’s attempt towards stirring dialogue and Kokab Noorani’s hate filled indictment against Abbasi by not only banning both shows, but calling for an apology from Aaj News, which featured Abbasi, as well as TV One, which featured Kokab Noorani on Shabbir Abu Talib’s show.


Of course, any attempt (however small the attempt may be) towards initiating surrounding contentious issues is immediately picked up by the state’s sniff dogs. Unsurprisingly, Pakistan ranks amongst the 10 worst countries on the Internet Freedom Index. The fact that we are on the brink of turning into codified law, one of the worst cybercrime laws in the region, only makes matters worse. Salient features of the draconian bill include:

1. An imprisonment up to three years and a fine of up to Rs0.5 million for creating a website for ‘negative purposes.’

2. An imprisonment up to three years and a fine of up to Rs5 million for obtaining information about an individual’s identification, selling the information or retaining it with self

3. A three month imprisonment or a fine of Rs50,000 or both for accessing unauthorised data.

4. Interestingly, the bill also contains a provision for the dissemination of hate speech. It calls for a five year imprisonment, Rs10 million fine, or both, for hate speech or trying to create disputes and spread hatred on the basis of religion or sectarianism.

The proposed cybercrime bill’s clause calling for criminalisation of hate speech held in conjunction with Hamza Ali Abbasi versus PEMRA blowout brings several pressing questions to mind.

The first, of course, is the fact that PEMRA very conveniently equated Abbasi’s discussion (I’d like to lay extra emphasis on the word ‘discussion’) with Kokab Noorani’s hate-filled rant about treacherous soldiers who must be killed for their disloyalty – subjecting both to the same punishment, banning them from appearing on television and asking their respective television channels for apologies.

Does PEMRA believe that incitement of violence and hate speech is equal to an attempted discussion regarding a repressive and demagogic amendment to the constitution of Pakistan?

As citizens, are we not entitled to discuss and debate matters concerning civil liberties?

Simultaneously, would it be fair to equate a debate regarding civil liberties with venomous calls for violence?

Which brings me to another question.

Will the clause calling for criminalisation of hate-speech in the cybercrime bill ever by used to prevent demagogues from inciting violence? Will it ever be used to protect minorities and oppressed communities? Or will it merely be used as a crutch for wielding oppressive censorship of views the state believes should not be brought onto the table for discussion and deliberation?

With this act, PEMRA has established (more visibly than ever) that, in Pakistan, attempting to have any kind of open discussion on the persecution of minority groups is next to impossible. But it has also, via its demagogic attempts at carrying out censorship, clearly defined a national narrative – one that turns a blind eye to subjugation and oppression and terms any resistance as non-serious and irresponsible.

By claiming that Abbasi’s show was the cause of much anger and sadness, PEMRA has effectively established itself as a body that succumbs to attempts of hate speech and intolerance and carelessly brushes grisly episodes of violence, persecution and oppression towards the backburner.

As I laud Hamza Ali Abbasi for going against the grain and bringing issues of deep significance to national television and consequently bearing the brunt of his bravery, I also mourn. I mourn because this episode has proven that we, as a nation, have been condemned to silence. Stifling, suffocating silence.

[poll id="623"]
WRITTEN BY:
Zuha Siddiqui The author is an undergraduate student at the Lahore University of Management Sciences with a major in Political Science. She tweets as @SiddiquiZuha (https://twitter.com/SiddiquiZuha)
The views expressed by the writer and the reader comments do not necassarily reflect the views and policies of the Express Tribune.

Facebook Conversations

COMMENTS (20)

Fahim | 4 years ago | Reply | Recommend You are confused. It is your personal view that he implied. I disagree, Scholars never got absolute power in Pakistan. I want to add that Pakistan never got independence completely. It was politicians who got independence in 1947. Now also they can't vote against their party leadership, thanks to Nawaz/bibi. Then to discuss issues who should go to NA ?
siesmann | 4 years ago Shows your state of mind.For you Taseer's killing was right. Blasphemy law is a blasphemy itself.A law that is abused in over 90% of cases can not be a law,but a travesty.Questioning an abused and an inhuman and immoral law is not making one's own laws.But paranoia of people like you,thanks to "scholars"(with IQ not above animals) is used to delusions.The same way this mullah and you will do with Abbasi. Pakistan squandered its independence when it let mullah loose on every aspect of life.
Xyz | 4 years ago | Reply | Recommend A society where complete freedom of expression is possible will actually be much more controllable and peaceful. EU stance on holocaust is not hurting anyone... While this issue is hurting people on a daily basis. How can u even compare. Infact it is not hurting just any people but people from your own country. " "At times inciting violence is justified" .... And this is exactly the reason radicalization and extremism is so much more among people who believe in this philosophy. Please remember just like you can justify inciting violence against others, others can justify the same against you. So when your loved ones get hurt, then accept that as a justified act.
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ