Are we as a nation educated? The answer: no. Does perversion prevail? The answer: yes.
Shortly after General Pervez Musharraf took over this country, in October 1999, he was photographed by a foreign press photographer with his family - his wife, his parents, and his two Pekinese, Buddy and Dot. With the publication of the photo, the outcry from the self-proclaimed pious and righteous was immediate. They were outraged that Islamic norms had been defied by the leader of an Islamic country.
God did indeed create dogs, but, according to these interpreters of Islam, they are counted as amongst his less desirable creations with whom his supreme creation, man, should not associate too closely. The general took the hint. Why give the unreasonable, the bigots and the fanatical element an additional chance to air their voices? Buddy and Dot disappeared from public view. They happily lived out their lives, in seclusion, at Army House, Rawalpindi.
For the information of the clerical brethren, and in case they are unaware of the fact, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the creator of the country whose 'ideology' they now so ardently protect, was a dog lover and up to the time he could, his work and travels permitting, he kept dogs as house pets. In the national archives of Pakistan can be found photographs of Jinnah with his sister and his dogs. It is doubtful if anyone in the past had the guts to criticize his affection for his dogs, or would even dare to do so at this extremist point in time.
In our press two weeks ago came a story on an institution which calls itself the Jamaat ud-Dawwa and distributes textbooks to our school-going children all over the country. An official at the Rawalpindi centre is quoted as having defined the purpose of their books: they are aimed at inculcating a truly Islamic spirit in Pakistan's youth, to introduce them to the 'inspirational ideas and objectives of Islam' and to teach them that Islam is 'a complete way of life'.
Now what exactly are the ideas, objectives and way of life? They are taught that it is the right of the Muslims of all countries to rule the world, and to kill all non-Muslims who oppose them in their aim. They are taught that the infidel is a coward, and that when attacked by a holy warrior, a mujahid, he melts with fear. The holy warriors have been sent by God to fulfil His mission. Art and music are forbidden; not so plastic guns with which the children are equipped and taught to shoot down balloons. They are instructed to mercilessly beat up all non-Muslims. Literature extols the heroics of the young jihadis. To be killed fighting the infidel is to attain true glory and the delights of paradise. "Every student should become a holy warrior," teaches one textbook, and "we should all be willing to lay down our lives for the great nuclear power that is Pakistan."
Nuclear power? Should they not be taught that the larger part of the world is now intent and bent on the disarmament of the lesser countries which possess such weapons of mass destruction?
One must wonder what young boys are taught on the subject of, for example, the murders which are in our fair land known as 'honour killings' and which are a common occurrence all over the country and upheld not only by the illiterate and deprived but by those whose minds are said to be highly developed. We have one minister in Sindh who reportedly upholds the practice and undoubtedly there are scores of other 'influentials' of the same mind.
One highly influential national politician of long-standing got himself into a spot of bother over his stance on honour killings. Our most honourable former chairman of the Senate, now standing again for election to his former house, whose aspirations to once more be chairman have reportedly faded. Once a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford University, on February 8, 2002, he was sternly censured by the Oxford University Student Union and a motion was passed against him unanimously "condemning the irresponsible behaviour of former chairman of the Pakistan Senate, Mr Wasim Sajjad, for not allowing debate on 'Honour Killing' on the 2nd August, 1999.
The motion demanded the replacement of Mr Wasim Sajjad as secretary of the Rhodes Scholar Selection Committee from Oxford University. The detailed resolution is attached ..... It is disgraceful that Mr Wasim Sajjad holds a position of responsibility within the University." The motion is signed by Will Straw, president of the OUSU, and son of the British foreign secretary.
Excerpts from the resolution read: "Women's rights violations are a centuries-old norm in South Asia. Human rights organizations have been highlighting this issue for a long time, but especially after 6th April, 1999, incident of 'Honour Killing'. These organizations include the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, Amnesty International, End-Violence Working Group, etc. The issue has been widely raised in the international media. Honour Killing is the term referred when a girl is killed by her family for causing dishonour to family, which actions are considered to include choosing a spouse of her own volition. The practice has a long history, but the murder of Ms. Saima Sarwar by her family on the 6th April, 1999, caused a nation-wide outcry and rigorous response of human rights organizations drew attention of the media towards this crucial issue...
"A similar incident of 'Honour Rape' in July 2002 has underscored the need to establish a strong precedent in order to protect women's rights. A Pakistani girl was raped on the orders of the 'elders' of the village as a punishment because her younger brother was allegedly having an affair with a girl from a higher social group. This brutal gang rape was legitimized by the local 'unofficial court' in Pakistan......
"On the 2nd August, 1999, a resolution condemning honour killings was presented in the House of Senate in Pakistan (Upper House of Parliament in Pakistan) after a particularly vicious murder by her own family of a young woman seeking protection at a women's legal shelter. Despite a national outcry, the chairman of the Senate did not even give permission to debate or discuss the resolution - voting was a secondary issue.
"This Senate chairman who did not allow debate on 'Honour Killings' - a shame for all of us - is Mr. Waseem Sajjad, a BCL from the Oxford University. He was a 1966 Rhodes Scholar at Wadham College from Pakistan. He is also the Head of Rhodes Scholarship Selection Committee of Pakistan."
The Council unanimously resolved: "While Mr. Waseem Sajjad's BCL degree cannot be retracted, his appointment as Head of Rhodes Selection Committee is still within the jurisdiction of the University. This council believes in his replacement as the Head of Rhodes Selection Committee as a strong signal of condemnation, and urges the relevant authorities to act accordingly. This would be a highly effective and resonant way of registering dissatisfaction with the continued abuse of women in parts of Pakistan and its toleration by the Pakistani government, and would also underscore the University's support for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 16. This will also support The Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1993."
Must this nation for ever suffer for the faults of the irresponsible - unfortunately for us, they form a substantial number and are too often in positions from where they can wield influence.
After the Musharraf takeover, the question of women's rights in this country was given some recognition and on July 17, 2000, Ordinance No.26 of 2000 was promulgated "...to provide for the setting up of a national commission on the status of women." Grandly it is proclaimed, "and whereas it is expedient to set up a national commission on the status of women for the emancipation of women, equalization of opportunities and social and economic conditions amongst women and men and the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women and for matters connected therewith or incidental to.....".
By a notification dated March 7, 2002, the able former judge of the Sindh High Court, Mrs Majida Rizvi, was appointed the chairperson of the commission. But (and it is the usual 'but') the commission has been given no secretariat and no money, and thus no staff. It remains, after the space of one year, non-functional.
The general has all the powers with him; his government barely counts. Can he not please act and ensure that the bureaucracy moves and that this commission is got onto its feet and is made functional so that it can deliver what it is supposed to deliver. It is responsible for the well-being of half the population of this country, and more particularly, for the mothers of the generations to come.