Senate panel rekindles forgotten report on blasphemy law

Senate committee decides to make 1991 report starting point for fresh debate

ISLAMABAD: A Senate committee has decided to start a fresh debate on the blasphemy law in light of a 1991 report of the upper house in which critical recommendations were made to the contentious legislation but remained ‘untraceable’ for a long time.

PPP Senator Farhatullah Babar revealed details of the forgotten report to the Senate Functional Committee on Human Rights during its meeting on Friday. He suggested that the report be made the ‘starting reference point’ for proposing ways and means to prevent misuse of the law.



MQM Senator Nasreen Jalil presided over the committee meeting which was attended by Sitara Ayaz, Nisar Muhammad, Dr Jamaldini, Mohsin Leghari, Mufti Abdul Sattar, Samina Abid and Farhatullah Babar.

The PPP senator disclosed that almost quarter of a century ago, the Criminal Law (Third Amendment) Bill 1991 seeking mandatory death penalty for blasphemy was introduced in the Senate on November 4, 1991. “The bill was promptly referred to the standing committee on law and justice the same day.”

Senator Babr said the law and justice committee was then headed by Raja Zafarul Haq, the current leader of the house in the Senate, and included late Yahya Bakhtiar among others.

In its report, the committee had observed that there was a need for a more specific definition of the offence under Section 295 PPC (blasphemy) because in the words of the committee “in its present form it was very generalised”, he said.

According to the report, the committee also asked what punishment had been given to convicts of blasphemy during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) or during the times of caliphs or afterwards and in other Muslim countries, he said.

“While raising these questions the report; however, is silent on whether it approves or disapproves of the proposed amendment in the law.”



Talking to the media, Senator Babar said that according to the official report of the 36th session of the Senate held on February 20, 1992, the then committee chairman, Raja Zafarul Haq, had moved a motion that a delay in the presentation of the report be condoned which was granted and the motion was adopted the same day.



“According to the records, it only annexed the bill with its report, raising questions, and did not endorse the amendment bill,” he said.

He said it was a mystery how and why the Criminal Law (Third Amendment) Bill 1991 was passed despite the fact that the relevant committee had sought some clarification and not approved it (the bill).

The PPP senator said the committee report remained untraceable for a long time. “I was alerted to it by IA Rehman of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and was finally able to locate it.”

Senator Babar said a critical re-examination of Section 295-C was needed, particularly because this provision also did not enjoy the unanimous support of Muslim scholars.

Giving historical background, he said that in October 1990, the Federal Shariat Court (FSC) had ruled on a petition filed by one Ismail Qureshi that an alternate punishment of life imprisonment for blasphemy was repugnant to Islam and should be deleted.



The FSC had also directed the federation to add a provision to the effect that any act of blasphemy upon other prophets should also be punishable with death and that Section 295-C be amended by April 30, 1991, he added. “However, this was never done.”

Senator Babar said even Ismail Qureshi had expressed apprehensions, saying that in its present form it [the section] could create ambiguity and legal complications, and stressed that ‘proof of intent’ was necessary to secure conviction.

“Recently, the Supreme Court also ruled that discussing the blasphemy law and pointing out how to prevent its misuse is not blasphemy,” he added. “This verdict together with the disclosure about the Senate committee’s report provides a good starting point for a robust and informed debate.”

Meanwhile, the National Assembly Standing Committee on Human Rights on Friday rejected a private member’s bill of a MQM minority member.

“After examining ‘the Protection of Minorities Bill-2016’ (moved by Sanjay Perwani, MNA) the committee unanimously decided to disapprove it,” said a handout issued after the meeting.

“The committee acknowledges that forced conversion at any age is illegal. It also decides to take suo motu notice by itself, if any case of such type will be pointed out in the future.”

Published in The Express Tribune, December 3^rd, 2016.