ARTICLE: MISUSE OF BLASPHEMY LAWS, PAKISTAN

[Pdesousa3@cs.com]

From:    rfturf@yahoo.com (Robin Fernandez)
    

(Friends:I request you all to read this piece and
lobby in whatever little way you can for the scrapping
of controversial amendments in the blasphemy laws of
Pakistan--Robin Fernandez)
______________
State silence on abuse of blasphemy laws
By Robin Fernandez
Marginalised communities are often disappointed by the
inadequate legislative protection given to them by
governments. Their lobbying attempts to enlarge the
legal umbrella that barely covers their heads are
doomed from the start. The state is willing but the
political flesh is weak. Perhaps in no place is that
more apparent than in Pakistan where the majority of
Muslims do recognise the need to protect Christians
and other religious minorities from discriminatory
laws. But the government is paralysed by fear of what
it has identified as far-right extremists. A small
illustration of their grip on the power levers came in
May 2000 when no less a person than General Pervez
Musharraf announced the withdrawal of a proposed
amendment to the blasphemy law. Musharraf had earlier
offered to revise clause 295-C of the penal code. 
The Christians, as a matter of principle, are not
opposed to the original 1860 penal code clauses of 295
and 298, both of which are intended to prevent
religiously motivated violence and hate crimes. Nor do
they dispute the efficacy of the 1927 amendment to
clause 295 incorporated as 295-A which reads:
"Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of
outraging the religious feelings of any class of
citizens...by words, either spoken or written, or by
visible representations insults the religion or the
religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished
with imprisonment...for a term which may extend to two
years, or with fine, or with both."
Their grouse lies mainly with the legal insertions
made by the late military ruler Ziaul Haq in the
1980s. These amendments,introduced as 298-A, 295-B and
295-C, for one, do not mention malicious intent to
rake up religious sensitivities as a condition for an
action amounting to criminal offence. They also
prescribe stiffer penalties for blasphemy and focus
almost exclusively on the religious sentiments of
Muslims, instead of "any classs of people". In 1990
the Federal Shariat Court upheld the punishment
recommended for blasphemy under clause 295-C. It ruled
that the only punishment available for anyone
convicted of blasphemy was death.
Christians have argued, in vain, on two counts. They
say that no member of their community would ever
wilfully insult or defile the name of Prophet Muhammad
or any of his companions. Nor would they ever malign
Islam or rebuke adherents of the Muslim faith. Their
community leaders say they merely want the government
to prevent people from lodging false blasphemy cases
against non-Muslims.
Lawyers say the country's blasphemy laws have all too
often been invoked for the purpose of grabbing prized
land, settling personal scores and eliminating
competition for lucrative posts. The human rights
watchdog, Amnesty International, lists yet another
cause: "Charges against Ahmadis and Christians appear
to have been brought solely because of their
membership in these minority groups." While this is
undeniable in several cases, one must differentiate
between the obscruantists and the moderates and the
literate and the uneducated--a distinction that was
first made by senior administration officials
following last September's terror attacks on the
United States.The intolerance for which the Muslims of
Pakistan have been blamed for, stems from a fringe
fundamentalist element.So the state or government,
instead of its powerless masses, is obliged to tame
the obscurantists and take concrete measures to
protect religious minorities.
Apart from throwing into prison dozens of people, the
controversial amendments in the penal code have
claimed an important life. Bishop John Joseph, the
first native Punjabi bishop, committed suicide in May
1998 to protest against the death penalty awarded to a
Christian youth for blasphemy. 
One of the noticeable trends emerging from the misuse
of blasphemy laws is the fact that the average
victim--in the case of Christians especially--is
disadvantaged, barely literate and resident of a rural
town in Punjab or Sindh. This is again proof that
discriminatory laws are far more menacing to the poor.
Thus it falls upon the government to create legal
structures to protect the poor and the defenceless.
Human-rights activists believe the charge of blasphemy
ought to be thoroughly examined before criminal
prosecution can get underway. In most of the cases
documented by human rights organisations the
complainant himself is the sole witness to the act of
blasphemy that could include desecration of the
Qur'aan and insulting or defiling the name of the
prophet. The verbal testimony thererof is rarely
corroborated by other sources. By the time court
proceedings are instituted, however, more witnesses
mysteriously step forward.
It is not uncommon for the judge hearing the case or
the defence lawyer to receive death threats. Often
angry mobs of people are seen assembled outsides
courthouses hearing blasphemy cases, as if to
reinforce the message that they would not accept
anything less than a conviction.Other intimidatory
tactis usually follow. Against this background,
30-year-old Ayub Masih was sentenced to death by a
court in Sahiwal two years ago.The deceased bishop of
Faisalabad, Bishop John Joseph, fought off the
blasphemy allegation against Ayub. The charge was in
fact motivated by a dispute over land allotment for
Christian families. Once the blasphemy charges were
filed against Ayub several Christian families that
hoped to win land under a government programme for
landless peasants were beaten and forcibly evicted.
Ayub is still in prison since the appeals filed
against his sentencing are pending.
Beyond mere appeasement of religious minorities is the
possible measure of widening the scope of the
blasphemy law, making it a punishable offence to
malign religious personages of all other faiths. That
is likely to heal many of the long festering wounds of
the minorities, and ensure that their religious
sentiments are accorded the respect they deserve.