Regarding Qadri's execution and Women Protection Law, religious parties can simply appeal against the verdict
JUBAIL, SAUDI ARABIA: Healthy debate is always welcome in a civilised society but what if the purpose of a debate is to demonise others and incite the public’s religious sentiments? That’s exactly what is happening after the hanging of murderer Mumtaz Qadri and the approval of the Women’s Protection Bill by the Punjab Assembly. Both events have provided a lifeline to religious parties to start attacking anyone opposing their views. Qadri was hanged as per the verdict passed by the Anti-Terrorism Court, the Lahore High Court and the Supreme Court (SC) wherein the SC clearly maintained that the prevailing blasphemy law is a man-made law and can be discussed and amended. If religious parties have any issue with the SC verdict, they can appeal against it. Instead, they feel more comfortable by making it a religious issue to incite violence.
The same is applicable for the Women’s Protection Bill. However, I wonder what religious parties have to do with a human rights issue. After insulting the assembly members, they are now threatening the government to either toe the line or be ready for bitter opposition. Sadly, they are not putting forward any argument but relying on rhetoric that the bill is against the norms of the Sharia. How can the Sharia stand for the abuse, torture and beating of women? These parties are defaming religion to achieve their goals. They need to understand that the world is moving forward; not long ago, slavery and polygamy were also acceptable in many countries and societies. But today, slavery is officially banned across the globe, and polygamy is discouraged and frowned upon. In the US, women only recently won the right to vote — in 1920. These examples mean that there is always a struggle to move forward in all societies and Pakistan is no exception.
In Pakistan, unfortunately, it’s always one step forward and two steps backward. The Punjab government is under pressure to amend the Bill to appease religious parties. What’s the point in debating an issue wherein decisions are made based on shouting capabilities and the nuisance value of the debater?
Masood Khan
Published in The Express Tribune, March 17th, 2016.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
