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 23rd, 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
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ