Religious scholars from various schools of thought on Saturday denounced the convictions of PTI founder Imran Khan and his spouse Bushra Bibi in the iddat case, terming the court’s verdict “controversial” and “against Shariah”.
They further demanded that all the persons involved in the case, including the petitioner, be brought to justice and offer an apology to the affected party.
They expressed their unanimous view that the iddat case lacked any basis in religious, Sharia, or legal jurisprudence. They collectively believed that the case was politically motivated.
Imran and his wife Bushra Bibi were convicted in a case concerning their marriage during the iddat period.
Addressing a news conference alongside Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) Chairman Hamid Raza and Majlis Wahdatal Muslimeen Pakistan (MWMP) President Allama Raja Nasir Abbas at the National Press Club Islamabad, former religious affairs minister Noorul Haq Qadri observed that the court verdict in the iddat case had violated the Shariah orders and subjected a “veiled woman” (Bushra Bibi) to character assassination.
He termed the court’s decision “controversial” and “against Shariat” and urged the superior judiciary to withdraw it.
Qadri demanded that that all the persons involved in the case, including the petitioner, be brought to justice and offer an apology to Imran and Bushra Bibi.
Speaking on the occasion, Raza lamented that the “honour” of a woman was targeted.
“In our society, women are kept away from such matters even during hostilities. No one has the authority to change the given Shariah orders but the moderate class gave an abominable decision,” he said.
The SIC chief maintained that an opinion could be sought from the Council of Islamic Ideology on such a “sensitive issue”.
Abbas noted that according to fiqah, only the woman’s testimony was deemed credible in matters of iddat.
He said Bushra Bibi observed purdah and “humiliating her” was a reprehensible act.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ