Soon after getting settled into state affairs, General Ziaul Haq turned to Balochistan. This time he really meant business, perhaps because he now believed that Zulfikar Ali Bhutto might have rightly guided him on the matter.
On Jan 1, 1978, only a little over five months after the July 5 coup, Gen Zia drew the curtains over the Hyderabad Tribunal and released all 52 Baloch and Pakhtun leaders, in the hope that this would help restore peace. The General pledged that he wanted to make fresh beginnings to pacify the Baloch and Pashtun nationalists and remove their misgivings.
All had hoped that political bickering, which had cast clouds of distrust in the past, would change in sympathy and understanding. Conceivably, it was too distant a hope.
Disgruntled, educated Baloch youth hardly felt content with the end of the Hyderabad Tribunal; they needed something more — something that could reduce their everyday miseries and restore their fundamental rights. The Baloch, through nationalist outfits such as the Baloch Students Organisation (BSO) and other political organisations, continued to raise their voice.
But on Dec 9, 1979, a young Baloch student named Abdul Hameed was arrested and accused of firing at a military officer from the state of Oman named Colonel Khulfah Nasir.
The Omani officer was in fact in Balochistan on a mission of scouting and recruiting: there was a socialist insurgency in the Omani province of Dhofar, and the Omani government was enlisting Baloch youth as
members of the Royal Oman Army, who could engage in suppressing the local Omani uprising and silence their struggle.
Every time an opportunity to heal wounds in Balochistan presents itself, newer injuries tend to be inflicted. Balochistan still needs a compassionate, humane, political solution
Abdul Hameed Baloch was 22 years old at the time of his arrest. A brilliant student at the Government College Turbat, Hameed was also an active member of the BSO; his organisation had opposed the recruitment of Baloch youth for Omani rulers.
The charge, when framed, accused Hameed of firing at the Omani officer but added that the bullet actually killed another man named Ghulam Rasool. The case was prosecuted in a special military court presided over by Lt-Col Ikram Nabi.
During proceedings, the prosecution changed its stance claiming that the man killed by Hameed’s bullet was Abdur Razaq and not Ghulam Rasool. The defence located the father of Abdur Razaq, who testified in court that his son was alive. Once more, the prosecutor changed the victim’s name and said that the victim was indeed Ghulam Rasool and not Abdur Razaq.
Every time the name of the victim was changed, the defence lawyers and many common people lambasted the case, claiming that a mockery was being made of justice and that the case should be disposed of immediately. Without listening to the defence, the special military court sentenced Hameed Baloch to death.
The defence responded by filing a petition in the Balochistan High Court (BHC), raising a legal point of evidence about Hameed having been convicted of murdering someone who was actually alive. And therefore, the defence argued, Hameed’s execution needed to be stopped.
On Oct 24, 1979, the military governor, Lt-Gen Rahimuddin Khan, reiterated that the sentences handed down by the military court would be carried out. But BHC Chief Justice Mir Khuda Bakhsh Marri soon issued a stay order, prohibiting the Mach jail authorities from carrying out the sentence.
With every change in the political setup, the feeling strengthened among the Baloch that the state did not understand their problems. Many Baloch felt alienated by the state since the very beginning, as they felt deprived of their rights in all walks of life: jobs, share in natural resources extracted from Balochistan and even representation in decision-making institutions.
With the promulgation of the PCO on March 24, 1981, when the high courts were deprived of the right to intervene in verdicts handed down by military courts, martial law authorities across the land breathed a sigh of relief. In Balochistan too, they found themselves armed with unquestionable power; they could now prepare for the execution.
On June 11, 1981, Hameed Baloch was hanged in Mach jail.
The case of Hameed Baloch was not an isolated one — it was a continuation of the policy that had been followed ever since Balochistan had become part of the state. Without weighing the legitimate grievances of the Baloch, their demands were condemned as separatist.
The police and other security forces continued to arrest Baloch men on flimsy grounds and put them in jails for indefinite periods. Their escaping to the mountains was the product of such harassment; a policy first enforced by Ayub Khan.
With every change in the political setup, the feeling strengthened among the Baloch that the state did not understand their problems. Many Baloch felt alienated by the state since the very beginning, as they felt deprived of their rights in all walks of life: jobs, share in natural resources extracted from Balochistan and even representation in decision-making institutions.
The issue of their share in natural gas is a glaring example: even though natural gas was discovered in 1952, Balochistan did not get it before 1986, and that too when Gen Zia established a corps headquarter there. The issue of Gwadar also fuelled alienation.
In such a historical and political context, the hanging of Hameed Baloch only worsened the situation.
Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, June 7th, 2015
On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play
Dear visitor, the comments section is undergoing an overhaul and will return soon.