| 18 May 2004 | Tuesday | 27 Rabi-ul-Awwal 1425 |
Gujrat violence
President Pervez Musharraf has made the welcome announcement at a convention in Islamabad that the government intends to set up an independent human rights commission to ensure implementation of HR standards in the country.
Called the National Commission for Human Rights, it will have an independent status and "report, review and advise" on rights' violations in Pakistan. But the more significant part of the president's speech at the convention related to the controversial Hudood ordinances and the blasphemy laws, which were enacted by a military dictator, and honour killings.
These laws did not have the nation's sanction, because they were not framed by parliament, nor were the legal community, the media and all sections of ulema consulted. The ordinances were drafted on the basis of the recommendations by a small section of the ulema who had chosen to ally themselves with Ziaul Haq for political reasons.
Thus, almost the entire body of liberal opinion and many among the ulema themselves had serious reservations about these laws when they were enforced through ordinances. A non-elected parliament later rubber-stamped them.
The argument on the issue has never been concerned with defending blasphemy, which when established must be punished. The emphasis has always been on pointing out that the blasphemy and Hudood laws have been a source of grave injustice in their implementation, especially where women and minorities are concerned.
As the president pointed out, in many cases they have been abused to settle personal scores. More regrettably, such has been the power of the bigotry unleashed during Ziaul Haq's times that courts found it impossible to work independently and do justice to the innocent wrongly accused of an offence under these laws.
With regard to laws dealing with sex offences, women are the worst sufferers in cases of rape. Invariably, it is the woman who is arrested the moment she accuses someone of rape.
This is the most extraordinary part of the law because of the absence of the fundamental concepts of equity and justice, for it punishes the victim before it tries to seek out the real offender of the crime.
In one case, a blind girl who was raped languished in jail for years because she was asked to identify the rapists - which, of course, she was in no position to do. For these reasons, the Hudood and blasphemy laws need a thorough revision and amendments so as to remove the lacunae which go against justice and fundamental human rights.
It would be most unfortunate if some people were to try to create an impression as if a review of these laws was a move against Islam. What is being debated is the view of a large section of the ulema, the legal fraternity, intellectuals, human rights organizations and women and minority groups that these laws are actually against the true spirit of Islam.
They would be nearer to the Islamic concept of equity and justice if the views of all sections of the ulema were taken into consideration in deciding an appropriate course of action and then urge the elected parliament to amend or reenact them.
Points requiring immediate attention concern rape and the registration of blasphemy cases. Even before the military takeover of October 1999, sane opinion had been demanding procedural changes in the registration of blasphemy cases.
President Musharraf himself once suggested that the (then) deputy commissioners be required to inquire into an alleged act of blasphemy before a case could be registered. This was meant to ensure against the registration of false cases motivated by personal enmity or blind prejudice.
However, the government backtracked in the face of resistance from those very elements who had sided with Ziaul Haq in framing these unjust laws. Similarly, sections concerning rape need to be revised, for the victim cannot be punished for a crime others have committed against her person.
As the president correctly observed, nobody should shy away from debating these laws, because the idea is to remove loopholes and weaknesses which make it possible - indeed easy - for interested persons to abuse them for settling personal scores or for reasons of blind religious hatred.
It would be wrong to try to whip up religious sentiment over the issue. There is a parliament, and for that reason the question needs to be debated threadbare by the people's representatives.
On a larger plane, let the issue be discussed freely by the media, scholars and ulema belonging to all schools of thought. It is only when a consensus has been reached after a free and open national debate that parliament can be moved to amend the existing Hudood and blasphemy laws or enact new ones - to ensure against injustice and exploitation inherent in the existing laws.
The commission now proposed should work in cooperation with rights groups already in the field and take note of the recommendations made by the National Commission on the Status of Women in January.
Gujrat violence
The death of 14 people in an armed clash in Madina Syedan village of Gujrat comes in the wake of a string of bloody incidents across the country. It shows that violence as a mode of settling scores is becoming rampant.
It also suggests that the hold of the administration on law and order is fast loosening. There are conflicting claims about the motive behind the incident. Earlier reports had suggested that the dispute revolved round excesses committed by a proclaimed offender in his bid to occupy the house of one of his rivals.
Exchange of heavy fire between the rival groups had started in spite of efforts of the local naib nazim to broker a reconciliation. It has now emerged that the proclaimed offender had beaten and injured the wife of his rival over a minor dispute three days earlier and also set fire to his crop.
Though the matter is being investigated, it leaves many questions unanswered. Why did the police not take action against the proclaimed offender earlier? He was after all involved in a murder case.
Trouble in the village must have been brewing before the actual occurrence. Were the authorities not aware of this? If they were not, this is a serious lapse on their part.
And how is it that the rival groups had easy access to firearms? It means that weapons are not hard to come by, and in any case, their easy availability even in rural areas is very disturbing.
Coupled with the mysterious killing of six persons of a family in Lahore the previous day, the Gujrat massacre points to a dangerous trend. In the Lahore tragedy, even the complainant was later found murdered, deepening the mystery killings.
If there is a sectarian dimension to one or the other incident, as alleged, this a cause for greater concern. The tragedy came amid rising tensions over violent clashes between the police and the lawyers in the wake of ugly developments in the bar-bench relations in Lahore last week.
But even otherwise armed violence of different kinds is on the rise and seemingly precious little is being done to rein it in. Crime and violence, besides heightening tension, are claiming a heavy toll of life and undermining public confidence in peace and public order.
The Gujrat incident is particularly instructive in that it shows lack of public confidence in the police and administration. When one of the affected persons visited the police station for registering a case, the personnel there are said to have refused to entertain the complaint.
He sought the villagers' support, which perhaps aggravated the situation. In any case, if the rival groups had confidence in the police, they might have acted with restraint and not taken the law into their own hands.
The incident also underscores the need for better police vigilance and an effective dispute-resolution mechanism at various tiers of the local government.