Ranking religious freedom
It is hard to deny that religious freedom remains an elusive goal for Pakistan
The writer is a development anthropologist. He can be reached at ali@policy.hu
Majoritarian, populist and authoritarian tendencies, alongside religious extremism, have made life increasingly difficult for religious minorities around the world. Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Jews and members of other faith communities are all under threat, depending on which part of the world they reside. The need to protect religious minorities is justifiably important. However, the very act of identifying which religious minorities are under threat around the world is not an objective process.
Instead, the seemingly noble goal of ensuring religious freedom often serves as a site for the articulation and the exercise of power and vested interests. Consider, for instance, controversies surrounding attempts by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIFR) to identify countries where religious minorities are under serious threat around the world.
This year, the USCIRF list of 16 countries designated as Tier 1 ‘countries of particular concern’ (CPC) features a random assortment including Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam and Russia. On the other hand, fragile states like Afghanistan, India and Iraq are in Tier 2. The above categorisation evokes evident consternation. Why is, for instance, India, despite its ongoing electoral vitriol against Muslims, not placed in Tier 1? Are Afghanistan and Iraq spared inclusion in Tier 1 due to the longstanding US involvement in these countries?
Being placed on Tier 1 of the USCIRF listing, essentially being dubbed the worst violators of religious freedom, does have serious implications. In November 2018, the US Department of State for the first time ever designated Pakistan a CPC. While the State Department had issued a waiver against any related sanctions on Pakistan at the time, the USCIRF assessment could influence the State Department to lift this waiver.
Skewed as this listing may be, it is hard to deny that religious freedom remains an elusive goal for Pakistan. We have long been struggling with sectarian conflict and persecution of religious minorities. While Pakistan’s overall security has improved since 2015, religious minorities, Hindus, Christians and Ahmadis, continue facing the threat of mob violence, target killings, and systematic forms of discrimination.
At the same time, there is need to understand the underlying reasons for the exasperation surrounding the USCIRF ranking, and other similar mechanisms. Saba Mahmood, a Pakistani anthropologist, who passed away last year pointed out in her work how the notion of giving religious freedom was projected as a ‘crowning achievement’ of secular-liberal democracies, seemingly marking an important distinction between them, and more authoritarian states such as China or the former USSR. Yet, in effect, Euro-American interventions on behalf of religious liberty have been used to legitimise interventionist imperial and colonial projects. While pressuring a select number of post-colonial countries to uphold the rights of minorities within their boundaries, secular-liberal democracies have failed to deal with the rise of populist xenophobia within its own societies.
The Pakistan government would certainly do well to heed calls to create a National Commission for Minorities Rights as mandated by the Supreme Court’s 2014 decision. Despite the Supreme Court’s laudable decision to acquit Asia Bibi, the weaponisation of the blasphemy law remains a major problem. Although repeal of the existing law remains a tall order, it is possible to enact reforms to require evidence by accusers, allow authorities to dismiss unfounded accusations, and to enforce existing Penal Code articles that criminalise perjury and false accusations. On the other hand, however, international entities need to ensure that they also address the criticism levied against them. This requires espousing a more holistic concept of protecting minority rights not only in a limited number of non-western countries, but also within their own societies.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 17th, 2019.
Instead, the seemingly noble goal of ensuring religious freedom often serves as a site for the articulation and the exercise of power and vested interests. Consider, for instance, controversies surrounding attempts by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIFR) to identify countries where religious minorities are under serious threat around the world.
This year, the USCIRF list of 16 countries designated as Tier 1 ‘countries of particular concern’ (CPC) features a random assortment including Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam and Russia. On the other hand, fragile states like Afghanistan, India and Iraq are in Tier 2. The above categorisation evokes evident consternation. Why is, for instance, India, despite its ongoing electoral vitriol against Muslims, not placed in Tier 1? Are Afghanistan and Iraq spared inclusion in Tier 1 due to the longstanding US involvement in these countries?
Being placed on Tier 1 of the USCIRF listing, essentially being dubbed the worst violators of religious freedom, does have serious implications. In November 2018, the US Department of State for the first time ever designated Pakistan a CPC. While the State Department had issued a waiver against any related sanctions on Pakistan at the time, the USCIRF assessment could influence the State Department to lift this waiver.
Skewed as this listing may be, it is hard to deny that religious freedom remains an elusive goal for Pakistan. We have long been struggling with sectarian conflict and persecution of religious minorities. While Pakistan’s overall security has improved since 2015, religious minorities, Hindus, Christians and Ahmadis, continue facing the threat of mob violence, target killings, and systematic forms of discrimination.
At the same time, there is need to understand the underlying reasons for the exasperation surrounding the USCIRF ranking, and other similar mechanisms. Saba Mahmood, a Pakistani anthropologist, who passed away last year pointed out in her work how the notion of giving religious freedom was projected as a ‘crowning achievement’ of secular-liberal democracies, seemingly marking an important distinction between them, and more authoritarian states such as China or the former USSR. Yet, in effect, Euro-American interventions on behalf of religious liberty have been used to legitimise interventionist imperial and colonial projects. While pressuring a select number of post-colonial countries to uphold the rights of minorities within their boundaries, secular-liberal democracies have failed to deal with the rise of populist xenophobia within its own societies.
The Pakistan government would certainly do well to heed calls to create a National Commission for Minorities Rights as mandated by the Supreme Court’s 2014 decision. Despite the Supreme Court’s laudable decision to acquit Asia Bibi, the weaponisation of the blasphemy law remains a major problem. Although repeal of the existing law remains a tall order, it is possible to enact reforms to require evidence by accusers, allow authorities to dismiss unfounded accusations, and to enforce existing Penal Code articles that criminalise perjury and false accusations. On the other hand, however, international entities need to ensure that they also address the criticism levied against them. This requires espousing a more holistic concept of protecting minority rights not only in a limited number of non-western countries, but also within their own societies.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 17th, 2019.