The conjunction of these two words: Christian and minority bears witness to the fact that Pakistan has become a society religiously divided rather than a nation united. I, and all of us who are deemed ‘religious minorities’, whether Christians, Hindus, Ahmadis or Parsis, are a living testament of State sanctioned religious discrimination. Minorities are discriminated against both constitutionally and legislatively.
Pakistan gained independence from Britain in 1947 but has been unstable ever since. Its people have suffered through three wars and endured military regimes and corrupt governments. Today militant Islamic forces in Pakistan have initiated much violence against Christians, who makeup 2.5 percent of the country’s people. Pakistan is a fundamental Islamic state. Article 20 of the constitution of 1973 states that every citizen has the right to profess, practice and speak about his own religion, while article 36 declares that the state safeguards the interests and the rights of the minorities. The reality is different, however, for the Christians are forced into a ghetto-like existence. Article 41 of the constitution states that the President of Pakistan, and other important posts like police/armed force and administration must be Muslims.
Since Pakistan is an Islamic country. Therefore, the constitution itself is discriminatory. As according to the article 2, of the constitution Islam is the State religion of Pakistan. And article 41 of the constitution of Pakistan no member of the minority could be the President thus this is also used for the post of the Prime Minister, Chief Minister of any Province, Head of the Judiciary or head of any government run office. Although article 20 does say that, all the minorities have every right to profess their faith freely and have every right as the citizens of Pakistan but there is no implementation as such.
Pakistan has dual system of justice; one is, Pakistan Penal Code, formally called Indian Penal Code, which was compiled by the British in the subcontinent according to its culture and values. After Partition of India and Pakistan it was retained in Pakistan as the basis of order and justice.
The other system is called Sharia Law. During General Zia’s reign Sharia Law was introduced as one of his many amendments to the constitution. He constituted the Federal Shariah Court and made “Sharia” as supreme law of the country. It was made supreme law by the Parliament in 1991. In 1998 a proposal was made to officially adopt Muslim Islamic Law as the law of land, which would bring about even more persecution. Despite hardships, Christians preserve in love
boldly sharing Christ.
Besides its implicit attack on the validity of the Constitution, perhaps the most dangerous aspect of the Sharia Act is that it declares an undefined entity to be the supreme law of the country. Sharia is defined as “the injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Qur’an and Sun’nah,” but no universally accepted codification of these injunctions exists, nor in the nature of the case can such a codification exist.
The problem about assessing the effect of the Sharia Act on women or minorities or in terms of general human rights is that the Act does not address this issue directly, except in the protection clauses put into it at the last minute. Yet the Act poses a real threat.
Sharia has pushed the minorities away from the country’s mainstream. This law has taken away the basic rights of minorities and they are not practically involved politically, socially, economically, etc. After the imposition of the Sharia Law minorities feel more insecure than ever. Laws such as Blasphemy Law, Women Protection Bill, Qisas-o-Diyat, which means Blood Money, Qanoon-e-Shahadat that is the Law of evidence etc., are hanging sword on their heads. Any group of fundamentalists or any individual can use these laws against any other group or individual to settle personal disputes. The Blasphemy law specifically is used more often against the religious minorities, especially Christians and Ahmedis.
The blasphemy law is a part of the Pakistan Penal Code, which was introduced in 1860 by the British Government to protect religious feelings. It may be observed that Section 295 provides protection to worship places of all classes of religions living in the subcontinent. It does not contain element of discrimination or preference to any class. It maintains equality of all before the law. The law appears to maintain mutual harmony and peace as well as to promote sense of mutual tolerance, understanding and respect in the multifaceted society of the subcontinent. This section represents the typical example of a secular democratic law for benefit of all and loss to none. However, it gradually was envenomed and the additions in it made this law a weapon of eradication.
There have been instances of intolerance relating to the blasphemy laws, promulgated by General Zia in 1985. They state that whoever says anything disparaging about Holy Qur’an and Muslims can be punished by life imprisonment and that anyone who blaspheme against Prophet Muhammad is liable to the death penalty.
The blasphemy law continues to be abused because of its vague formulation, which allows arbitrary enforcement. In addition, it only takes the testimony of four Muslims to bring about a conviction. It is not worthy that in several cases complaints have been filed at the insistence of local clerics or members of the Islamic parties. The motives are varied and some seem to be purely because the accused is a member of minority faith. In other cases, this fact is exacerbating by economic or professional rivalry.
The blasphemy law is based upon sections from 295 to 298 of the Pakistan penal code. Actually, these sections had a different influence and basis before 1980. As for example section 295 was about the punishment of injuring or defiling place of worship, with intent to insult the religion of any class, it states that,
‘Whoever destroys, damages, or defiles any place of worship. On the other hand, any object held sacred by any class of persons, with the intention of insulting the religion of any class. or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage or defilement as an insult to their religion, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.’
Similarly, Section 296 is about Disturbing religious assembly. And it says that,
‘Whoever voluntarily causes disturbance to an assembly lawfully engaged in the performance of religious worship, or religious ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.’
Then Section 297 is about trespassing on burial places, etc, which states that,
Whoever, with the intention of hurting the feelings of any person or of insulting the religion of any person, commits any trespass in any place of worship or on any place of sepulture or any place set apart for the remains of the dead, or offers any indignity to any human corpse, or causes disturbance to any person assembled for the performance of funeral ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine or with both.’
Then Section 298 is about Uttering words etc with deliberate intention to wound religious feelings. And it states that,
‘Whoever, with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of any person. Utters any word or makes any sound in the hearing of that person, or makes any gesture in the sight of that person, or places any object in the sight of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.’
In 1927 section 295-A was introduced because of the failure to convict one Rajpal who had written a scurrilous tract against Prophet Mohammad. Rajpal’s acquittal led to serious Muslim–Hindu communal tension. To fill the lacunae in the laws that had enabled his acquittal 295-A was introduced by Act XXV of 1927. This was the second blasphemy law, And then in accordance to this law
Section 295A was stated as the Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious believers.
‘Whoever, with deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class of His Majesty’s subjects , by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations, insults or attempts to insult the religion or religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years , or with fine, or with both.’
Thereafter the laws remained unchanged until 1980. Between 1918 and 1947 there are only 4 reported cases in India under sections 298 and 295-A i.e. the blasphemy laws. Between 1947 and 1986 there were only 5 reported cases in Pakistan.
All the above laws also continue to be part of the Indian and Bangladesh Penal Codes.
In 1980 section 298-A was introduced. This was the third blasphemy law.
Section 298-A, which is about the Use of derogatory remarks etc. in respect of Holy Personages, states as follows,
‘Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations, or by any imputation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of any wife [Ummul Mumineen]. Or members of the family [Ahle-bait], of the Holy Prophet [Peace be upon him].or any of the righteous Caliphs [Khulafa-e-Raashideen] or companions [Sahaaba] of the Holy Prophet [Peace be upon him] shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine or with both.’
Section 295-B, which was about Defiling etc. of copy of Holy Qur’an. States that,
‘Whoever willfully defiles damages or desecrates a copy of the Holy Qur’an or of an extract there from or uses it in any derogatory manner or for any unlawful purpose shall be punishable with imprisonment for life.’
Finally, in 1986 the final addition was made: 295-C , which has become one of the draconian laws for the entire minority especially Christianity in Pakistan.
Section 295-C, which is about the Use of derogatory remarks, etc. In respect of the Holy Prophet [pbuh]. It states that,
‘Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad [Peace be upon him] shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life and shall be liable to fine.’
The two technical changes introduced with this law are that for the first time blasphemy becomes a capital offence. Further, in 1991 the Federal Shariat Court ruled that the option of life imprisonment was to be removed and the death penalty became the mandatory punishment for this offence. The second innovation is that this is the only law in the entire Penal Code that requires the presiding judge be a Muslim. The other noteworthy aspect of this section is the absence of the expression willfully or intentionally in the text of the law. Disregard of the element of will or intention in the law makes the whole environment suspicious of the reason that “will” or “intention” is an essential part of human behavior in the context of identifying a criminal offence. Thus under section 295-C, a person committing offence without “will” or “intention” is awarded death sentence at par with the one committing it “willfully” or “intentionally.” We can see that law is required to punish the “unintentional” offence on the same scale as in the case of “intentional” one, without any justification.
Some bad examples of blasphemy law
Christian Minority is being called Kafir (Atheists) in Pakistan. They do not have the right to life. Fundamentalist Muslims kill Christians and that is considered obligation (For entry in Paradise). To date several innocent Christians have been extra judicially murdered by fundamentalists such as Mukhtar Masih, Tahir Iqbal, Naseem Bibi, Yousaf Ali, Manzoor Masih, Naimat Ahmar, Emmanuel Masih etc. and even Justice Arif Iqbal Bhatti was shot dead in his chamber for acquitting Salamat and Rehmat Masih. During General Pervaiz Musharraf government 86 cases have been registered against Christians, Muslims and Hindus to date, excluding Ahmadis. 10 victims of blasphemy law have been extra judicially murdered during trial and inside the prison.
Christians are the main targets by the fundamentalist and religious political parties. The law is being used for forced conversion, forcibly taking over the lands and businesses of Christians, hindering the preaching of Christian faith and for settling personal scores, rivalries and vengeance. Nevertheless, these laws have proved to be the most injurious weapons of active religious persecution by the extremists with encouragement from the government.
Muslims on the other hand also face these problems but only those who are being declared as non-Muslims by the majority known as Sunni. The other sects of Muslims who are declared as non-Muslims are Ahmedis, Shias, Bahais, Zakris, etc. They are also accused and charged of blasphemy to settle personal disputes.
Many innocent persons have been falsely accused under these laws and the number is still on the rise. Victims are severely manhandled and even murdered by mobs and individuals; their families go in hiding. They have to leave their home or even their homeland and their dear ones and accept exile to save their lives. Their worship places, houses and localities are attacked, burned and destroyed. Those accused have to undergo fierce media trial. Throughout the process of arrest, investigation and trial anyone showing sympathy with the accused is liable to harassment and allegations being made against them of acting in a non-Islamic way. Police are pressurized and blackmailed, judges are threatened, harassed and have been killed. Even if the accused is acquitted, he/they are still-hunted and killed by the extremists. There are still many in the jails waiting for their trial.
The legal procedure, under Islam can hardly be called as impartial or fair for in the matter of witnesses all sort of injustice emerge. A Non Muslim may not testify against a Muslim. For example a Muslim may rub a non-Muslim in his house with impurity. The evidence of Muslim is admitted.