Blasphemy: words to be killed for

The fact is that in previous cases ordinary citizens who were accused falsely, most all the time falsely, of committing blasphemy were killed. This is the first time when people who occupied high public office posts were killed, on the charges of committing blasphemy or sympathizing with those who were committing blasphemy.

Ahmadiyya Times | News Watch | Int'l Desk
Source/Credit: Voice of Russia | Moscow
By RUVR | March 3, 2011

Interview with Javed Jabbar, the former senator and minister of information and media development under Pakistani president Musharraf.

My first question is about the blasphemy law – what kind of phenomenon is that? When did it first appear in Pakistan? What is it? Could you tell us a little bit about it?

In many countries in the world where religion is recognized as major influence or a factor of the society countries have laws to prevent abuse or disrespectful references to be made to those personalities who are considered sacred figures. The origin of the blasphemy law is South Asia, in what is now called India and Pakistan.
It was originated ironically with the British presence in South Asia when they were occupying this part of the world. At that time there was tension developing between the Hindu community, the Muslim community and others. The intention may have been to prevent one community from becoming offended by the nature of the references made by other communities about the Prophet of Islam, or, vice versa, by Muslims against other holy personalities. So that was the origin. The basic change that happened in Pakistan had two stages: the one during the regime of General Zia-ul-Haq between 1977 and 1988, there was an attempt to use religion to conceal the desire for personal power. So religion became a new factor in introducing laws that took the name of Islam, but actually missed to represent the spirit of Islam. The blasphemy law was not directly framed at that time. However there were other ordinances that weakened human rights in the country and made it very easy for people to make false accusations against others. Unfortunately after the death of Zia-ul-Haq, it was in the yearly 1990s, during the elected phase of Pakistan’s history, that death penalty for anyone accused of saying something disrespectful of the Prophet of Islam, as well as the procedure by which very junior level officials could take notice of such accusations were made part  of law. So this is the historic background. The current problem now is that many people in our country feel that allowing junior level people and junior level judges to take note of the charges leads to a lot of innocent people being falsely accused of blasphemy, by people who just misunderstand, or are intolerant, or who are hateful of other people. So this is what is called the whole controversy and the problem of the blasphemy law in Pakistan today.

Do I get it right that the very notion of blasphemy is now understood rather loosely, or is there a set definition of blasphemy?

From an academic point of view someone who raises an issue questioning the authenticity of a certain statement or a saying contributes to the Prophet of Islam, but from another person’s point of view, just questioning that might amount to blasphemy. But there are several categories of words or actions that are used to cover or describe the act of blasphemy. For example, if someone has a piece of paper in his hands, and either deliberately or unconsciously throws that paper, on which, there are maybe written the verses from the Holy Koran, or the name of the Prophet, someone looking at this person throwing this paper to a basket can say that this person was committing blasphemy because he disrespected the sanctity of the words of the Holy Book and the name of the Prophet. That is one way to do it. Another form is during a discussion or a conversation: if a Muslim or a non-Muslim questions some aspect of the Prophet’s life, just the act of questioning can be misrepresented as committing blasphemy. That is why the amendments suggested to the law required that notice of such charges should be taken by at least the High Court judge, a senior, experienced, mature, legal authority, and that the responsibility for investigating the charge should be on a minimum senior police officer level, and not entrusted to a junior level police officer, who is subject to local pressure or intimidation, by those who want to make false charges.

But then, Mr Jabbar, do I get it right that these days a campaign to abolish this law is on in Pakistan, is that correct?

No, there is no attempt to repeal the law itself, because 97% of the people in Pakistan are Muslims, and they hold the personality of the Prophet of Islam in very high reverence. They have the ultimate regard for his personality, so no Muslim would want complete repeal of this law. What has happened in Pakistan is that many people see that the current law needs to be amended and improved. There are some people who think that death penalty is too harsh, because the Prophet himself during his lifetime was a very respectful and tolerant person, he was never vengeful even against those who were very critical of him. So people like myself believe that in that spirit of compassion and forgiveness the death penalty in the present law should be removed and some other punishment can be introduced for causing offence to the feelings and sentiments of Muslims.  But at the moment there is a strong segment of opinion, which says “don’t touch the law at all”, don’t even change the procedure, let it be exactly the way it is, any change is not acceptable.

Mr Jabbar, as far as I understand, since the beginning of the year, there have been already two murders of public officials somehow connected with the discussions about the law.  So in which way have they been connected?

In the first instance, Governor Salman Taseer of the Punjab was assassinated because he was being accused of asking for the complete removal of the law. He didn’t do that, he did two things: one is that he said this is a bad law and it should be amended and improved, and the second thing which he did, he went to the prison where a Christian woman had been accused and convicted by a low court, and her appeal was still pending, it had not even gone to the High Court, either to the Supreme Court. So she was in jail, and the serving governor went and asked her to appear before the media, in which he said this is an unjust law. That act inflamed people with extreme mentality, and they said this governor was being disrespectful not only of the law, but also of the Prophet of Islam, even though he was not being disrespectful. So his own bodyguard unfortunately tragically assassinated him.  The second instance occurred yesterday - the serving Federal Minister for Minorities, Mr Shahbaz Bhatti was attacked. He had security protection, but he himself chose not to keep his security guard when he was visiting his mother. That does not excuse or pardon that terrible act of assassination, it has upset the overwhelming majority of the people in Pakistan, because while we are predominately Muslims, throughout the country there are hundreds of Christian churches, where people peacefully attend their church services, and, more importantly, tens of thousands of Pakistani Muslim children attend Christian schools every day, and they are very happy with the quality of the education. So there is no widespread anti-Christian sentiment in our country. This is a terrible episode committed by strange fanatics who do not represent the Pakistani society.

Right. And my last question: have such killings occurred before? Some media claims that this is an indication of high tensions within Pakistan. Is that correct?

The fact is that in previous cases ordinary citizens who were accused falsely, most all the time falsely, of committing blasphemy were killed. This is the first time when people who occupied high public office posts were killed, on the charges of committing blasphemy or sympathizing with those who were committing blasphemy. So this does signal a new phase in the battle against these fanatics and extremists. It has never been as bad as it is now. Equally it is strengthening the resolve of the people who want to challenge such extremists and combat them. All people today feel deeply hurt and want to prevent these fanatics from continuing their killings.

To find out more on the issue, read or listen to our Burning Point program from March 3, 2011 in Radio section.




Read original post here:Blasphemy: words to be killed for