In light of the recent request by the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) to review the Supreme Court’s verdict in the Mubarak Sani case, it is imperative to critically assess the role and responsibilities of the CII. The Chief Justice’s stance on this matter is not just commendable but essential. In cases involving religious sensitivity, particularly blasphemy allegations, the judiciary must exercise the utmost caution to ensure that justice is not only served but also perceived as fair and impartial.

The CII’s pursuit of this review risks overstepping its mandate, potentially transforming the Council into an entity more aligned with punitive actions rather than its intended role as a guiding body. The primary function of the CII is to assist the government in formulating laws that are in harmony with Islamic principles while also promoting interfaith harmony and presenting a moderate, inclusive interpretation of Islam. This mandate is crucial in a diverse society where the potential for religious discord is ever-present.

However, by engaging in matters of blasphemy and pushing for reviews of court rulings, the CII risks venturing into the territory of more extreme elements, such as the Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP). This is a path the CII should consciously avoid, as it detracts from its primary mission of fostering understanding and moderation within the Islamic framework.

The Chief Justice’s approach should serve as a guiding principle for the CII. It is a reminder that the role of religious institutions in legal matters should be one of counsel and guidance, not of exerting pressure on the judiciary. Upholding this distinction is vital for maintaining the integrity of both religious and judicial institutions in Pakistan. The CII must resist the temptation to stray into areas best left to the courts and instead refocus on its core mission of promoting a balanced and harmonious interpretation of Islamic teachings.