KARACHI, Oct 25 Legal experts, religious scholars and human rights activists came together to discuss the blasphemy laws here on Saturday. Though the speakers differed on how to correct the situation, there was a near uniform sentiment that the laws are unjust and are used to settle personal scores.

The seminar — 'The blasphemy law an objective assessment from religious, legal and social perspectives'— was organised at the PMA House by the People's Resistance, a civil society organisation.

Eminent jurist retired Justice Rana Bhagwandas served as chief guest. “Ziaul Haq made the amendments to the [blasphemy] law to prop up his rule using the name of Islam,” he said with reference to the present laws. “Who would be senseless enough to commit blasphemy in Pakistan? These laws have created a negative image of Islam across the world. They have been used to persecute minorities as well as Muslims. They are used to settle scores,” he added.

Constitutional expert Advocate Zain Sheikh argued that the laws were unconstitutional. Giving the background of the laws, he said that the Objectives Resolution of 1949 was made an integral part of the constitution in 1985. “However, the aspect of the resolution that is overlooked is the fact that it guarantees freedom of belief to the minorities in Pakistan.

“Sections 295-b and c are unconstitutional per se and as applied. They also violate the Objectives Resolution. They should be amended to bring them in line with the constitution. A change in the mindsets of bigots who incite mobs to violence is also needed,” he observed.

Islamic scholar Dr Khalid Zaheer was of the opinion that according to the Holy Quran, a person cannot be put to death for blasphemy. He said that as per Quranic standards the death sentence could only be given for murder or endangering the lives of others. He said if a Muslim country decides to enact a law against blasphemy, the law should apply to the revered figures of all religions. “The state, not individuals, should enforce this law. Ulama have a great responsibility in this regard.”

Dr Zaheer said in his experience he had heard many “so-called” Muslim Pakistanis using utterly disrespectful language about the faith, yet had failed to come across a non-Muslim Pakistani who had been disrespectful of Islam. He added that people should refrain from using the word 'kafir' and use the term non-Muslim instead. He observed that instead of repealing the blasphemy laws, the punishments should be reduced, for instance lessening the prison terms. The scholar also said that those who take the law into their own hands are considered rebels according to the religious point of view.

Hilda Saeed of the Women's Action Forum said that the changes made in the blasphemy laws by Gen Ziaul Haq opened the door for vigilantism as people took the law into their own hands. “The law is wrong and must be done away with. Pakistan has one of the poorest records when it comes to protecting minorities”.

Bishop Ijaz Inayat Masih, chairman of the Interfaith Friendship Forum, said that society had failed at multiple levels to promote human values. He added that commercialisation had entered all religions. “Extremism and social injustice go together. Our thinkers should not remain silent. Corruption is eating away at our very being. Those who favour Section 295-c are playing God. However, God has allowed us freedom of belief.”

M. Prakash, chairman of the Minority Rights Commission of Pakistan, said the desire of Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah for minorities in Pakistan to have equal rights has unfortunately remained unfulfilled. “Sixty-two years have passed, yet our hopes remain unrealised. The blasphemy laws are the creation of a dictatorial regime. The minorities have played a positive role in Pakistan, yet the laws have been misused [against them],” he observed.

He added that “the minorities respect the religion of Islam. But we want the blasphemy laws to be repealed.” He admitted that repealing the laws was not easy as though the nation's moderate political parties and civil society favoured this stance, “some of our religious friends oppose it”.

Mr Prakash said that all stakeholders should come together and find a solution. “Whatever the minorities want, it cannot happen unless we have the support of the majority. We can hold 1,000 seminars and nothing will happen.” He added that the burden of proof in a blasphemy case should be on the accuser and in case the accusation is found to be false, the accuser should be put to death.