Opinion

Keep on pushing against the blasphemy law

The Council of Islamic Ideology's response to Sherry Rehman's bill can also be seen as a major success for Rehman.

Naveen Naqvi December 22, 2010

On November 25, 2010, former minister Sherry Rehman submitted a bill to the National Assembly seeking amendments to the blasphemy law. Since then, the religious parties of Pakistan have been in a tizzy. Aside from the announcement of two major rallies — one on December 31 and the other on January 8 — we see that the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII), or the ‘top Islamic body’ of Pakistan as it is known, has a response to Rehman’s bill.

I admit that I am wary of the Council. My scepticism stems from their reaction to what could have been a great achievement, the Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Bill. Many claim that the legislature has not been implemented primarily because the Council labelled the bill as ‘discriminatory’ and argued that it would allow police to violate the ‘sanctity of the home,’ and lead to higher divorce rates. However, among other positive changes, it would have broadened the definition of abuse and created protection committees providing legal care and medical facilities to victims of abuse.

Interestingly, in October 2009 when the bill was moved in the Senate, it was a senior member of the Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Islam (F), who raised the most vociferous objection to the Domestic Violence Bill. In November 2009, the same senior member of the JUI-F, Maulana Mohammed Khan Sheerani, was given the valued and influential position of the chairman of the CII.

I bring up all this to return to the matter of the blasphemy law and point out that while the CII’s watered down changes can be viewed as a counterproposal, they can also be seen as a major success for Rehman. For it seems that those interested in maintaining the controversial laws sense a momentum for change that they cannot stop. To ensure a large turnout at the two rallies that I mentioned in the opening paragraph, the names of all their major players are being pushed. This includes all the leaders of ‘outlawed’ parties. Hafiz Saeed and his likes are ominously gathering in a show of strength under one banner. They could also find in this an opportunity to recover from the damage caused by the WikiLeaks cable that revealed Maulana Fazlur Rehman to have kowtowed to former US Ambassador Anne Patterson for power in government.

It may be true that most opponents of the blasphemy law, and I include myself in this, believe that the law should be repealed, scratched altogether. However, an amendment, specifically Sherry Rehman’s proposed amendments, can be a good start. At the very least, they will bring some change, some initiative, where there has been none for decades. As activist Beena Sarwar said to me, “politics is about compromise, dialogue and negotiation too.”

Rehman has also stated that she hopes this will be only the beginning. In this very newspaper, she wrote in moving words: “This is the time to push for repeal of the blasphemy law in the legislature. If that does not work, just like the Hudood repeal bills did not when we moved them, we need to build positions and craft laws that amend these laws so they become toothless...”

I say let us be roused by Rehman’s appeal to stand together to make things better in whatever way we each can. This could be that glimmer of hope for which we are constantly clamouring.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 23^rd, 2010.

COMMENTS (15)

Raja Arsalan Khan | 13 years ago | Reply @Muhammad Saleem Usmani "Yeah and these changes have nothing to do with ordinary conditions of people and again the same talk of taliban and mullahs. One day we will read in some leak that these people were paid by americans to change the law, just like what has been found about the NGOs in Bangladesh, that they were paid and given visas to try and “secularise” madressahs. How low we sell. " Please don't insult Bengalis. They were and are politically aware people and not insane. The Awami League govt has rightly banned Maududi's books at public libraries, which you do not have (and instead you are ready to expand the "seminary network"). Their Supreme Court is also not Wahabinised, as it has ruled that the state should be secular and has nothing to do with religion. That was very reason they had opted to make their own "Desh". If they were still in our subjugation, they would still have been shackled by the "Objective Resolution". Human rights and dignity, freedom and modernity are not a product of NGOs, and are the hallmark of human progress. Do not mix human ideals with the NGOs. If you are so politically and socially updated, try to criticise the RSPs-like programmes and suggest alternative. Why the rightwingers do not go all-out against these so-called development strategies, which are advocated by the NGOs? The answer is simple: They support and nurture the pseudo social structure which the "conservatives" cherish and want to impose on the whole world.

Muhammad Saleem Usmani | 13 years ago | Reply Yeah and these changes have nothing to do with ordinary conditions of people and again the same talk of taliban and mullahs. One day we will read in some leak that these people were paid by americans to change the law, just like what has been found about the NGOs in Bangladesh, that they were paid and given visas to try and "secularise" madressahs. How low we sell. No one has ever been convicted of this law ever, so why change? Some wrote 80% of minorities are victimised with this law and with more than 90% cases of registered cases against muslims, I cannot understand how 60% of around 5 million non muslims were threatened by the law. But that is the modus operandi of the liberal fascists in Pakistan. They will strike fear with no reason and no facts to back them up with the usual "are you with taliban or with west", not knowing that most of us are with neither. We want to go ahead and prosper but with education and our values and not by blindly following west. By the way in UK and EU, desecration of Jesus Christ and of course Holocaust is punishable by life in prison. So, let the west change its laws and let them prove that they actually believe in values that they champion.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS

parvez | 13 years ago | Reply Nice article, completely agree with you. There has to be sustained pressure in the media both print and broadcast where bold people must forcefully push for a change. From what little I have seen in the media, it appears that those law makers who are supporting the present law are relying more on rhetoric and playing to the gallery and less on logic and sound knowledge of the subject. This should be countered and its weakness exposed thereby strengthening the case for change.

Aamir+Ali | 13 years ago | Reply Just because mullahs and self-styled experts are in favor of anti-woman and anti-minority laws does not mean those laws cannot be challenged or repealed. The blasphemy law is used to target minorities with whom someone has a dispute and it is ridiculous for Pakistanis to pass laws to protect Islam, a religion that existed for thousand plus years before Pakistan was created.

Raja+Arsalan+Khan | 13 years ago | Reply @ Saleem "More than 80% of Pakistanis are not sypathisers of religious extermists nor are aligned with liberal fanatics." And "Pakistan has a long way to go. But not the way where religious or liberal fanatics want us to take." Total confusion. Accept it or not believe it or not we as a society are basically conservative and as there is no substantial change in the socio-economic change, we have adopted the wrong way, that is extremism out of the fear of losing our "identity". We were against modernity in 19th century and are also in the 21st. We are religio-extremists. One cannot call himself a "true momin" or "liberal" when he chooses one set of ethics for himself and another of others. We have dual standards and generate hypocrisy along with all the evils on the earth. We way only two choices: Either go forward (follow the West) or move back to the 8th century (Waziristan model). There is no in between. We have experimented for the last 63 years to remain as we are and what we have got mullah, mullah and mullah nothing but mullah. I may look like a "liberal fascist" but with 100 per cent clarity I suggest to fight a all-out war against the forces of the past. One would win and carry the agenda forward. Otherwise, we will keep targeting the Bhuttos and Zardaris and Sherrys even after another 40 42 years.

Jawad+Iqbal+Jawad | 13 years ago | Reply Problem is there with the implementation and not with the law itself. In most of the cases people who got victimized in the name of the blasphemy were brutalized by the people and not sentenced by the courts. Yes, it is fact those who committed such brutality were not punished by the courts. But why Ms Rehman and the writer herself insist on repealing the law?. As we cannot demand annulling the the capital punishment in case of murder, the demand for repealing the blasphemy law is also illogical.

User | 13 years ago | Reply Yeah repealing the blasphemy law would protect the minorities same as the Women's protection Bill has been *successfully* protecting the women and we see the rape victims getting justice... I would repeat : **No doubt strings are moved from USA** or some European NGOs has heavy investments in it like we had in repealing the Hudood laws. What improvement has it brought?

M+Ali | 13 years ago | Reply Yeah repealing the blasphemy law would protect the minorities same as the Women's protection Bill has been successfully protecting the women and we see the rape victims brought to justice... Crap! I would repeat : No doubt strings are moved from USA or some European NGOs has heavy investments in it like we had in repealing the Hudood laws. What improvement has it brought?

TKhan | 13 years ago | Reply "Imagine a govt which didnot move to provide electricity to this nation for 3 years …..and suddenly its active as if passing and amending this law would solve all problems…. No doubt strings are moved from USA….." .... How will the law or the amendment benefit USA? Who said that it will solve all the problems? What are your objections to the amendment? How about talking sense for a change?

Majid Maqsood | 13 years ago | Reply Rightly said, let us be roused on this ray of hope for repealing this blasphemy law. we came to know 60% minorities have been victimized on the name of blasphemy. we know well how our minorities are powerful or dare to talk in this wave of extremism. One Judge has also been killed who gave justice to one victim so there is no doubt is badly abused. i was so surprised when i was told, a doctor from Hyderabad working in pharmaceutical company who threw the business card of else doctor because they were not agreed to prescribe same medicine and he was blamed for blasphemy and it was told that Mohammad word was written on that business card. i absolutely agree what Ms. Noven says in her article.

SM | 13 years ago | Reply For those who would like repeal Blasphemy Law what would you suggest the punishment if someone disrespect Quran & Prophet (pbuh)

Saleem | 13 years ago | Reply Why target blasphemy law only? Why not the PPC 302, 303 for murder which results in more than 30,000 people being incarcerated, almost 70-80% on false charges. People abuse laws. What Sherry Rhaman has proposed in her article is such an example. Why make a law toothless. Either keep it or remove it. Our liberal extremists have an interesting mantra. When a police party raids a house of a person wining a womanising, they have breached the sanctity of a citizen's house, whereas when police raids a house to free an abused maid, they have done their job. Truth is that in both cases law was broken, so why target only one side. Just because they are affluent? More than 80% of Pakistanis are not sypathisers of religious extermists nor are aligned with liberal fanatics. Why not introduce penalties on the wrong complaint? These people dont trust the courts? Pakistan has a long way to go. But not the way where religious or liberal fanatics want us to take.

Arsalan J. Sheikh | 13 years ago | Reply It's funny how divorce rates and home sanctity are a priority for our Islamist parties, but not the protection of abused women. What's their plan for addressing that issue? NOTHING!

Salman | 13 years ago | Reply Imagine a govt which didnot move to provide electricity to this nation for 3 years .....and suddenly its active as if passing and amending this law would solve all problems.... No doubt strings are moved from USA.....

Waqas+Afridi | 13 years ago | Reply I think.. let it be in the same practice.. There is a feeling of huge disliking for the religious forums / entities found among masses on account of strict religious practices and thoughts. But one shouldn't forget that they have the best understanding and knowledge pertaining to the religious matters. Now if about 95% of religious experts are against this bill than there is no point of going in its favor. We should admit the facts.

Replying to X