Does Hasba bill conform to the Quran?

THE Supreme Court of Pakistan has virtually struck down the Hasba bill as many of its provisions were found to be contrary to the Constitution of Pakistan. The Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) legislators presume that they champion Islam and others are its detractors, but they and every Muslim are obliged to consider whether the Hasba bill and what it seeks is in consonance with Quranic tenets.

The first paragraph of the preamble of the Hasba bill is copied from the opening words of the Objectives Resolution of 1949. “Whereas sovereignty over the entire Universe belongs to Almighty Allah alone and the authority to be exercised by the people of Pakistan through their chosen representatives within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust”.

The ‘people of Pakistan’ and its ‘chosen representatives’ are matters not specifically addressed in the Holy Quran. Any attempt to elevate the status of the ‘chosen representatives’ unpleasantly invokes the divine right of kings or maybe the zillae subhani doctrines, an anathema to Islam. Neither parliament nor government can assume to be the spokesman of God.

The Holy Quran specifically states that the exercise of authority by them is “to try you” (Al Quran 6:165) the rulers, and not the governed.

The second preamble of the Hasba bill and what it seeks to achieve is the principle of “amer-bil-maroof” (enjoining the good) and “nahi-anil-munkar” (forbidding the evil). The Hasba bill empowers the Mohtasib and the Hasba Force to ensure compliance by arrests, detentions and the imposition of fines. This was done without considering whether ‘good’ can be forced and ‘evil’ subjected to punishment.

Let us suppose that a Muslim does not pray or fast. Can such a person be compelled? The answer comes from the Highest Authority.

“Let there be no compulsion in religion” (2:256). “If it had been thy Lord’s Will, they would have all believed, all who are on earth. Wilt thou then compel men against their will to believe!” (10:99). “Do not the believers know that had Allah willed, He could have guided all mankind?” (13:31). “If it had been His Will, He could indeed have guided you all” (6:149).

“The sufficient security of belief is in its own integrity and needs no other constraining factor. There will be reaches of inner evil which systems of power, or regimes of authority, do not redeem — perhaps even fail to identify.

Political order can, at best, only attain a modicum of justice and honesty. The integrity of faith is compromised if it covets, or employs, sanctions” (Kenneth Cragg, ‘Muhammad in the Quran’).

Disobedience of some Quranic commandments, for instance, committing murder, to be punished because the Quran prescribes punishment and ordains that it be carried out. There are other matters which the Creator instructs us to do, such as offer our prayers, the performance of which cannot be enforced by any person or State. Any attempt to force a person to pray or punish him for not praying would be against the Islamic Faith.

The Holy Quran promises Gardens of Paradise to the submissive observant and the Fires of Hell to the arrogant disobedient.

The freedom to worship and the freedom of choice are bestowed by the Merciful Creator. Fulfilment of His dictates earn His pleasure; disobedience His wrath.

The Hasba bill seeks to set up the institution of a Mohtasib and Hasba Force to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Islamic Faith by imprisonment and fine. In doing so the Hasba bill upsets what is laid out by our Creator in the Holy Quran.

The Quran tells us that we are being judged in this world. Each good we do and each evil is constantly recorded. This conduct, duly recorded, will have its recompense on the Day of Judgment.

The architects of the Hasba bill want to compel ‘good’ and punish non-compliance. If by compulsion one prayed, kept fast, gave charity and went on Hajj, there would be no rising to the test that God sets down for us. A test only a person exercising free-will can meet.

The Hasba bill also permits the Mohtasib and the Hasba Force to enforce “Islamic values and etiquettes” and issue binding directives, which, if not followed could result in penalties. Conveniently, these “Islamic values and etiquettes” have not been identified in the Hasba bill, permitting the Mohtasib and the Hasba force to dictate them at their whim and fancy.

The size of one’s shirt, the wearing or non-wearing of the veil, the keeping of a beard, or, for that matter, the manner of walking could be taken up for scrutiny.

From a purely Quranic standpoint, force cannot be used to commend or denounce any particular practice or compel conformity.

The discretion implicit in the general words, “Islamic values and etiquettes” permits is unlimited for comfort. The Quran clearly lays down every prescription and prohibition and then proceeds to lay down consequences of its breach. The Benevolent and Merciful Creator places no obligation on anyone without having first “explained it in detail” (7:52, 9:11, 10:5). In brazen self-righteousness the formulators enactors of the Hasba bill have given individuals (Mohtasib and Hasba Force) powers that the Highest Authority does not exercise.

Compelling someone by threat of punishment towards ‘good’ was not even permitted to Prophet Muhammad, (peace be upon him) “I am not set over you as a wakil” (10:108). Nor were such powers granted to other Prophets who preceded him.

The Prophets were bearers of good tidings, conveyers of the Message, to give counsel, warn, persuade and guide (3:20, 5:99, 6:48, 6:107, 7:2, 7:62, 7:184, 7:188, 10:2, 10:108, 11:12, 11:25, 11:34, 11:57, 13:7). They were not granted powers to fine or imprison the non-performing believers or non-believers.

Another novel invention in the Hasba bill is to enable the Mohtasib and the Hasba Force to “watch” over us. Subjecting human conduct to such scrutiny is reminiscent of the Spanish Inquisitors.

Such ‘watch’ has no place in Islam. On the contrary, the Quran records what Prophet Shu’aib said to his people: “I am not set over you to keep watch” (11:86) and the Last Prophet was told: “We have not made you a watcher over them” (6:107). Those most eager to take upon themselves burdens which Prophets were not made to bear would do well to pause and think.

The Mohtasib, and members of Provincial and District Advisory Councils who were to take up this vigil would be appointed from among those holding “a certificate of Shahadat-ul-Aalimah”. Only the holders of this certificate have been bestowed the title of ‘scholar’ by the Hasba bill.

Such a restrictive definition of ‘scholar’ is contrary to the Holy Quran and without precedent. Men and women of learning and knowledge are not degree holders in Islam. They are those “endowed with knowledge” (12:76), “those having knowledge” (3:18), those who “contemplate the (wonders of) creation in the heavens and the earth” (3:191), “people who understand” the signs of Allah (6:98), the “people who think” (6:126), “those who understand” (9:11, 10:5), “those who fear Him” (10:6), “those who reflect” (10:24, 13:3) and “those who remember Allah standing, sitting and lying” (3:191).

If the ‘directives’ of the Mohtasib and the Hasba Force are not abided punishment would followed. A different interpretation of the Faith would be no defence. By accepting the Mohtasib’s interpretation as the only permissible one is tantamount to setting up a priestly class, that Islam rebuts.

“They take their priests ... to be their lords in derogation of Allah” (9:31). The Quran urges that we do our own ‘thinking’ (tafakkur), ‘pondering’ (tadabbur) and ‘reasoning’ (‘aql) and not blindly follow designated ‘scholars’.

Everyone is required to reflect and understand the Quran (4:82 and 47:24), no priestly class is to lead, watch or carry the burden. Nothing comparable to the Ecumenical Councils of the Christian Church which could authoritatively declare what constitute ‘right doctrine’.

To ensure that no one challenged the Mohtasib’s interpretation of Islam all opportunities to question his conduct or legal status have been blocked, including the jurisdiction of courts. Such blanket immunity and exclusion from scrutiny is profoundly un-Islamic. History records differences of opinion arising out of the interpretation placed even by the Rightly Guided Caliphs. The Hasba bill reserves for its Mohtasib a far higher status by excluding the possibility that the Mohtasib may err.

The MMA now wants to table a revised version of the Hasba bill in the provincial assembly, as the Supreme Court has declared that it conflicted with the Fundamental Rights set out in the Constitution. However, far more fundamental is the fact that the very concept behind the Hasba bill is contrary to Islam. “Say: Will you instruct Allah about your religion!” (49:16). “Say: Do you know better than Allah?” (2:140).

IMF’s hard prescription

THE visiting IMF staff mission has identified high inflation and rising international oil prices as two serious challenges confronting Pakistan’s economy. To meet these challenges the mission has offered a five-point prescription to Islamabad. First, it wants the government to maintain macroeconomic stability while sustaining a high growth rate through higher rates of private and public investment with a significant portion of the latter going into human capital and skill development. Second, timely implementation of second-generation reforms. Third, improvement in tax collection and the broadening of the tax base. Fourth, keeping a tight leash on the monetary policy by adjusting interest rates. Fifth, consistency in pursuing basic fiscal laws and policies. At the same time, the mission has also warned that with the economy facing capacity constraints and inflationary pressures and given the need to adjust to the effects of trade loss, there is little room for a more accommodating fiscal stance. But, then, while one has no disagreement over the list of challenges identified by the mission, one wants to know how Pakistan can do all that it has prescribed under circumstances that make it difficult for it to adopt a more accommodating fiscal stance.

Without meaning to underplay the good work of the IMF in maintaining the world economic order, one is constrained to point out that its economic prescriptions for developing countries facing difficult situations have often been counterproductive. With revenues dipping, the cost of doing business going up because of high rates of inflation, and incomes shrinking as a result of loss in trade, there is no way Pakistan can sustain a higher growth rate while maintaining macroeconomic stability without generous injections of concessional assistance from abroad as happened in the three years leading up to 2003-04. Even under normal circumstances, higher growth rates do result in higher inflation. But since the resulting expansion of the economy generates more jobs and puts more money in the hands of the workforce, the harsh side-effects of higher inflation are kept to a minimum. But these are difficult times. The steep rise in world oil prices is pushing up the cost of doing business to uneconomic levels, thus undermining Pakistan’s capacity to sustain a higher growth rate.

On the other hand, the increase in inflation is the result more of supply shortages, especially of essential food items, rather than an outcome of an expanding economy. In such a situation, the copybook prescriptions of the IMF can hardly be helpful. Therefore, it would be advisable for the government not to try to do the impossible. Governments in the 1990s when there was no fiscal room to manoeuvre as the country was under all kinds of sanctions had tried to implement IMF prescriptions without much financial help from it and had ended up with low growth rates and massive fiscal deficits. So, the need of the hour is to further exploit our present favourable position in the capitals of the rich world and seek increased concessional bilateral and multilateral assistance as well as higher foreign direct investment for infrastructure projects in order to be able to sustain high growth without upsetting macroeconomic stability.

Not all black, not all white

A RENOWNED sociologist from the University of Pennsylvania rightly pointed out in a talk in Islamabad that Pakistani scholars accept easy black and white explanations while narrating history. The main flaw he identified was that in their intellectual pursuit they adopted an ideological position on every issue and converted history into an expression of ideology. One may add that this approach has been the bane of academic research and scholarship in Pakistan. Right from the inception of this country, we have lacked the confidence to face basic issues from a multidimensional point of view. It was felt that any dissent — a deviation from the standard belief or the establishment’s point of view — would harm the country. Hence freedom of expression was traditionally suppressed and free inquiry never encouraged. The situation worsened in the days of General Ziaul Haq when ideology and religion entered the scene and limited the parameters of research and inquiry. Stringent laws were passed and nonconformist thinking on some specific issues, such as the Quaid-i-Azam, the armed forces and religion, was made punishable.

As a result, our intellectuals have been tamed and have stopped questioning many of the widely held interpretations of history. As a consequence, their quest for truth has been stunted and they have forgotten that no issue can be seen in terms of black and white. The fact is that every issue has grey areas and nothing can be all good or all evil. It is the job of an intellectual to unearth all the facts about an event/person and then place them in the wider perspective and finally evaluate them in that context. It is time we learnt to accept people with all their faults and their virtues rather than hero worshipping some (while glossing over their weaknesses) and condemning others as villains (while suppressing their merits). This would give people a better understanding of history and help them develop an objective approach to the present and the future. Scholars who do not become accomplices of the powers that be can play a useful role in this respect.

Telecom standards

IF the chairman of the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) is to be believed, the country’s telecom sector is indeed headed for an upswing. On Thursday, he said that investment made in the telecom sector during 2004-05 amounted to Rs 20 billion and in the next two years hopes for two billion dollars in investment. Although Pakistan was slow to jump on to the telecom bandwagon, it has performed quite well so far. While more new licences for mobile phones, long distance and wireless local loop operators have been issued in the past one year, customers remain frustrated with the poor quality of service. As a regulatory body, PTA desisted, for whatever reasons, from taking stricter action against erring companies, particularly large cell phone providers whose customers continue to complain of poor service. The number of mobile phones in the country will be 15 million by the end of this year, and PTA hopes to double that number in a few years. With a reduction in connection and call charges and stiff competition from new entrants in the field, more people now have access to mobile phones but the quality and reliability of services leave a lot to be desired.

As for the setting up of call centres, an industry that has seen a boom in India, the government would do well to learn from the undersea cable debacle a few months ago as a result of which call centres suffered significant monetary losses. Such crises, caused by short-sighted policies, need to be avoided if Pakistan is to attract the kind of foreign investment it is hoping for. With PTCL now firmly privatized and major players expected to come in the market, the telecom may be in for prosperity but the PTA must do its part of the responsibility as a regulatory body to ensure a level playing field for all, most crucially for the customers.