|
| November 30, 2007 | Friday | Ziqa’ad 19, 1428 |
A free Palestine next year?
Growing intolerance
Purpose of punishments in Islam
OTHER VOICES - Pushto Press
ISLAM seeks to protect society from the dangers of crime. The objective of giving punishment for certain crimes is not to give somebody torture, humiliation or dismembering of any limb. Punishments in Islam are given to achieve some higher objectives and have been considered an integral part of Islamic justice.
THIS is a defining moment for President Musharraf’s leadership. He can carry forth the process of reconciliation that he initiated in the last weeks as the army chief with adversaries like Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, who have now returned from exile to take part in politics. This is a good beginning made and must be built upon. At a time when Mr Musharraf could have taken a safe passage out of a political mess of his own making by stepping aside as the COAS and president, he decided to give that safe passage to the army. He has served his institution well by sending it back to its professional duties, to deal with the growing threat of extremism and other challenges. Now it is time for him to serve the cause of national unity by lifting emergency rule and establishing his own credentials as a civilian head of state willing to work under a fully restored Constitution. The need now is for greater national reconciliation to keep the integrity of Pakistan as a viable polity, and not as a state to be ruled by military might alone.
This is no time for egotism to prevail. The president should invite all politicians to a dialogue to evolve a consensus on revamping the caretaker administration and reconstituting the election commission. The election must be held on January 8 as planned; it should be fair and seen to be fair. This is where the beginning of a meaningful transition back to constitutional rule lies. If the process entails some give and take, for instance, acceding to the opposition’s demand that Mr Musharraf seek a vote of confidence from the incoming assemblies, so be it. If that is the condition for getting all political parties to participate in the election, it should be met. The public perception is that the judiciary is no more independent. Hence the ongoing political process can only be validated by the next parliament. The suggestion should be welcome for the post-election dispensation to have any credibility.
One says this because the last eight years of Mr Musharraf’s rule as the army chief-cum-president were a roller-coaster ride, but his ensuing stint in the presidency as a civilian head of state can be likened to a hurdle race if he does not reach out to the opposition now. An election boycott by any or all of the opposition parties will erode the election’s credibility; any government brought to power as a result of the election held under the current caretaker dispensation and the existing election commission will not cut it with the people as being above board. The president’s argument to the West that Pakistan needs much longer time than expectations of it to make a transition to democracy is flawed. It comes at a time when the people here are crying out for the restoration of civil liberties and for seeing some credibility to return to the political process. The opportunity should not be lost because this nation cannot withstand another political turmoil and stay as one.
THE world will watch with hope and doubt the implementation of the principles mentioned in the joint document signed at Annapolis to ensure the emergence of a sovereign Palestinian state by the end of the next year. On Wednesday, with President George Bush playing host, President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert met to mark a symbolic beginning of the follow-up talks as laid down in the documents signed by the three leaders. The document is vague, full of diplomatic pitfalls and heavily loaded in Israel’s favour. There are interlocking clauses that make a smooth talks process an impossibility. According to the document, Mr Abbas and Mr Ehud will have bi-weekly meetings to advance the process of negotiations, but the talks will be conducted by a steering committee consisting of the heads of the three delegations. This committee will set up a work plan to ‘establish and oversee’ the work of the negotiating teams to address “all issues.” Then the document speaks of the 2003 roadmap, which has long been dead, and calls for the establishment of an American-Israeli-Palestinian ‘mechanism led by the US’ to follow up on the implementation of the roadmap. The document does not fail to emphasise that “the US will judge and monitor the fulfilment of the commitment of the two sides” to the roadmap. The document and Mr Olmert’s subsequent statement make it clear that the talks will be ‘bilateral… and continuous’, but the last paragraph repeats that the implementation of “the future peace treaty will be subject to the implementation of the roadmap as judged by the United States”.
The document is silent on the issues to be tackled, for it merely speaks of ‘core issues’. Western analysts have interpreted this to mean the status of Al Quds, the final boundaries of the Palestinian state and the refugees’ right to return. However, the document and the analysts say nothing about the settlements, which Israel has continued to build and expand. There is also no mention of what Yasser Arafat called ‘the Middle East’s Berlin wall’, which the International Court of Justice has declared illegal. Given Israel’s track record in dishonouring international pledges and America’s categorical support to all Israeli violations of UN resolutions and treaties, it is doubtful Mr Ehud and Mr Abbas will succeed where Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin failed, especially because both Likud and Hamas have denounced the document.
‘FLEXIBILITY and accommodation’ were two attributes that were stressed at a recent seminar on peace and conflict management held in Karachi. Indeed, these are indispensable for smooth inter-state relations as they are for evolving a culture of tolerance at home, more so in a society that is divided by sectarian, ethnic, caste, economic and other differences. Unfortunately, in Pakistan, no space has been allowed for these attributes to take root as multiplying socio-economic woes and the inability to keep up with fast-changing lifestyles have resulted in numerous frustrations. New values clashing with traditional mores have created misunderstandings, while increasing religiosity has clouded judgment and bred resentment among different sects. Instead of accepting an individual’s right to his beliefs and counting pluralism as a source of strength in society, we tend to reject all non-conformist ideas. Increasingly, it is becoming difficult to avoid confrontation and find a middle path.
Perhaps, the most obvious manifestation of this is the fanaticism which we are witnessing in our border areas, in Swat and quite often in our larger cities. Bombing girls’ schools and burning down video shops on the grounds of religious transgressions and immorality are signs of the growing intolerance in society. But instead of tackling these, with the help of the more liberal sections of society, the government has itself chosen the path of intolerance by putting curbs on the media and civil rights. Nor has there been an attempt on its part to introduce economic reforms that could lead to a more equitable distribution of income and resources, thus lessening the despair and frustration of the underprivileged. The prerequisites of a tolerant society are ensuring fundamental freedoms and having strong forums for the redressal of grievances. Without these, ‘flexibility and accommodation’ cannot be expected to play their due role.
For most of the crimes, Islam recommends corporal (bodily) punishment. However, it is carried out only as a last resort after a thorough effort at reforming the person has totally failed. (Quran, 5:39)
In Islam each human being is responsible for his or her actions. This simple truth provides the whole basis for the justification of punishment; for fulfilling the purpose of this creation, mankind has been granted the freedom to choose and act and the moral sense to distinguish between right and wrong. Responsibility goes with knowledge and freedom. Punishment cannot, therefore, be meted out to one person for another person’s actions, for acts intended but not performed, or for acts done under duress or while not of sound mind.
Everyone must be equal before the law and their guilt must be established by the due process of justice. The punishments in Islam are not prescribed as ends in themselves, as portrayed by the West. The punishments are to promote moral values and welfare of human society. Thus Islamic penal philosophy is unique and remarkable edifice. It is designed to achieve certain objectives and the very first object is retributive in nature. Since the commission of the crime itself is a violation of a divine commandment, therefore it requires the imposition of the punishment. The Quran elaborates this in the following manner:
”As to the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands. This is retribution, by way of example, from God, for their crime: and God is exalted in power.” (5:41) At the same time Islamic punishments possess a preventive mode. Death penalties, amputation of hands or feet, imprisonments, confinements etc are preventive punishments also which prevents the criminal from repeating the crime.
This objective is clearly visible from the verse which prescribes the penalty for the crime of robbery. The Quran says: “and they create mischief and disruption in the world, these people should be removed from the hub of the activity.” (5:36)
At another place Quran prescribes a strict punishment of life imprisonment. It is stated: “Confine them to houses until death claims them.” (4:15) Here, the concept of confinement till death stresses the relevance of punishment as preventive nature.
Another objective of Islamic punishment is deterrence. The Shariah has recommended in some cases that the punishment should be executed in public. There is no leniency in this regard and Islam allows no reduction and mitigation even under any circumstance.
”Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if you believe in God and in the Last Day.” (34:2)
It is further elaborated in the same verse that “And let a party of the believers witness the meting out of the punishment (34:2)”
The objective here is to put fear in the hearts and minds of those who have the criminal intentions. The Quran says: in all such cases punishment must be meted out in public: The Quran tells us that. Special places and arenas should be built and the public should be actually invited to view the punitive act being carried out. The Quran states that “viewing such scenes wherein various punishments are carried out, could serve as a deterrent and a lesson for the public”. (5:38)
A sure and definite advantage is that justice is not only done, but it is also “seen to be done”. There should be no mercy or favoritism shown when inflicting the punishment. The criminal would be so punished that he would never think of committing the crime -any crime again.
In some cases Islam guarantees redress to the aggrieved party. The feeling of revenge in some cases is so high that it is very necessary to satisfy it. It is significance of Islamic penal system that all crimes which fall under this category have been declared compoundable offences. The Quran says, “O believers: the law of retaliation is prescribed to you in cases of murder: the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the woman for the woman. But if any remission is made by the brother of the slain, then grant any reasonable demand and compensate him with handsome gratitude.” (2:178)
This methodology is called Qisas in Islam and is made to satisfy the feelings of revenge of the victim. One can compound other bodily injuries and accept the blood money in place of retaliation. This idea is stressed in the following verse: “But if any remission is made by the brother of the slain, then grant any reasonable demand and compensate him with handsome gratitude. This is a concession and a mercy from your Lord. After this whoever exceeds the limits shall be in a grave penalty.” (2:178)
While awarding punishments Islam also seeks to reform the criminal. The Quran often makes mention of repentance in association with the crimes that it deals with, making it clear that the door to repentance is open whenever the criminal abandons his crime and behaves properly. Quran says: “And God is exalted in power. But if the thief repents after his crime and amends his conduct, God turns to him in forgiveness, for God is most forgiving and merciful.” (5:42)
The punishment is a recompense for the crime. It is undesirable to treat a criminal lightly who threatens the security of society with danger. The criminal should receive his just recompense as long as he is pleased with taking the path of evil instead of the path of righteousness.
It is the right of society to be secure in its safety and the safety of its individual members. Once Hazrat Umer said on an occasion, “I would confine the criminal in the jail unless I am convinced that he has repented and reformed himself.”
The philosophy behind Islamic punishments is that crime is crime and that it has to be checked. Evil should not be taken lightly, because if unchecked and unpunished, it can wrap the entire society. Islam seeks to protect society from the dangers of crime.
It is common knowledge that if crimes are not countered with serious punishments, then society will be in grave danger. Islam seeks to make social stability and security widespread, making life in society secure and peaceful.
Dialogue with the Taliban
Afghan Shura (National Parliament) has reiterated its demand for a dialogue with the Taliban and all other opposition groups. The session which was attended by both the houses and members of different commissions demanded an action plan for talks with the opposition groups.
The demand comes at a time when the President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, has already divulged his contacts with those Taliban factions that are not linked with Al-Qaeda. The demand by the members is that the government should immediately announce the initiation of a dialogue with the non-Al Qaeda Taliban under the auspices of United Nations Organisation. It seems that the Afghan government has started developing close contacts with the Taliban.
Meanwhile, the Taliban officials have not yet contradicted the Afghan government’s claim of having contacts with them. This development shows that there is a genuine progress towards re-conciliation in the Afghan society. This is a good omen for the people of Afghanistan.
In our view, reconciliation is the call of the day. It is now a well-known fact that the Afghan imbroglio cannot be resolved through the use of force. The general masses of Afghanistan have been in severe distress because of the gradual increase in the turmoil in Afghanistan for the last several decades.
One would like to suggest even to the opponents of the government in Afghanistan to join the mainstream political institutionalisation of the Afghan state. If the opponents believe that they represent the people of Afghanistan, they must participate in the upcoming elections and exercise their right of representation. — (Nov 26)
The return of Nawaz Sharif
Chief of Pakistan Muslim League-N and former prime minister of Pakistan, Mian Nawaz Sharif, reached Lahore the other day in a special plane… along with his wife, Begum Kulsoom Nawaz, and brother Mian Shahbaz Sharif. A large number of workers of Pakistan Muslim League greeted him at the airport. Mr. Sharif is a moderate politician whose homecoming is considered another step towards real democracy in Pakistan.
At a time when the elections in Pakistan have been announced and the leader of another party has also been allowed to return, General Musharraf has taken a praise-worthy step to allow Nawaz Sharif to return.
The sacked Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, had earlier passed a verdict in which he had asked the government to facilitate the return of Nawaz Sharif. Nawaz Sharif had tried to return on September 10 but was sent back to Saudi Arabia. One of the reasons for the removal of Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry is said to be the hearing of a case related to the forcible return of Nawaz Sharif in his first attempt at homecoming.
The homecoming of Nawaz Sharif indicates that all politicians of Pakistan understand their due role and will sacrifice their personal interests for the interests of the people of Pakistan. Pakistan is presently facing multidimensional problems, and if the politicians of this country do not realise the gravity of the situation, history will never forgive them. The politicians have to renew their pledge to work for the collective interest of the people and the country. They also have to install internal accountability mechanisms and democratic institutions within their own parties. — (Nov 26)
— Selected and translated by Khadim Husain