ISLAMABAD, Jan 29 The Federal Shariat Court (FSC) asked the Frontier government on Tuesday to inform it about its stand on a set of petitions challenging the Frontier Crime Regulation (FCR) of 1901 for “being repugnant to the injunctions of Islam”.

A full bench of the FSC comprising Chief Justice Haziqul Khairi, Justice Allama Dr Fida Mohammad Khan and Justice Salahuddin Mirza took up 15 identical petitions challenging different provisions of the FCR which, according to petitioners, violate Islamic commands.

When the case came up for hearing on Tuesday, the court was informed that the representative of the NWFP government, Advocate Qari Abdul Rasheed, was not present.

The FSC adjourned the proceedings for February 7 and directed the NWFP government to submit detailed comments on the petitions.

At the last hearing on October 10, 2007, the same bench in Peshawar had ordered the Frontier government through its advocate general to explain why was the provincial government not implementing the FSC verdict which had asked the government to repeal the FCR of 1901.

In 1980, a full bench of the FSC comprising then Chief Justice Aftab Hussain, Justice Fakhre Alam, Justice BGN Kazi, Justice Chaudhry Mohammad Siddique and Justice Maulana Malik Ghulam Ali had ordered the repeal of FCR while hearing the case of Mohammad Riaz against the federal government. But the government had failed to introduce any amendment to the FCR after the judgment.

The stand taken by the federal government at the hearing in Peshawar was that the FSC had no jurisdiction over Fata under an ordinance promulgated by former president Ziaul Haq in 1985 under which FSC`s jurisdiction had been curtailed.However, the then deputy attorney general had told the FSC that the federal government had introduced certain reforms to the FCR through a reforms committee headed by Mian Ajmal, a retired judge of the Supreme Court.

The court had directed the DAG to produce a report on the reforms, but the Fata secretariat had failed to produce the records.

The petitioners had requested the FSC to declare sections 8, 11, 22, 23, 26, 30, 32, 33, 34, 36 and 40 of the FCR as contrary to Islamic injunctions as the FCR lacked provisions dealing with inheritance, pre-emption, Shariah Laws Limitation Act, Qanun-i-Shahadat and other issues.

They said that under section 22 of the FCR, all inhabitants of a locality could be held responsible for the offence of others, adding that the political administration usually fined people and demolished their houses without giving them opportunity to clarify their position.

The petitions also cited Verse 165 of Sura al-Ana`m of the Holy Quran which reads “Each soul is responsible only for his own self.”

They said that the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, religious scholars and jurists had already termed the FCR a `black law`.

The petitioners argued that laws of pre-emption, inheritance, limitations and other issues had never been enforced in the tribal areas in accordance with the commandments of Islam.

In 1979, a Shariat bench of the Balochistan High Court had declared the FCR a bad law and not in line with the principles of justice and equity introduced by Islam.

The respondents in the petitions are the federal secretary of Justice and Law Division, NWFP government through the home and tribal affairs secretary, NWFP law secretary, FCR commissioner, Bajaur Agency political agent and his assistant.