What we are going through is not something that could ever be defined as our normal behavior and outrage at something that is so grotesquely unjust and unfair, which we cannot reconcile with our collective sanity. Our natural sense of empathy has been abused again by our contractors of Islam. Yes, today, Aasia Bibi has been failed once more by our own institutions—institutions that are supposed to deliver justice, except that, we don’t really know how we define justice in Pakistan. You see, we cannot use our conscience; especially when it comes to matters where sanctity of our Holy Prophet’s (may peace be upon him) is concerned. It is needless to say what love of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) really is about—however, what we do know is that we don’t want our religion to be considered as anything that repel the people from our Prophet’s (Peace be upon him) love and mercy-- which these street clerics, the blood-thirsty, heartless people with filthiest minds and mouths think is not unconditional. They don’t realize, that it is their violent and dirty antics that is bringing more shame and disgrace to Islam. Our religion, if we ever tried to understand it and read it neutrally, we’d be able to see where people like Bernard Shaw and Lezlie Hazleton are coming from to show their appreciation and admiration for the life and personality of our Prophet (May peace and blessing be upon Him). They’re not bringing in their arguments in favor of our Prophet through emotions—but through neutral academic research which they find to be clicking well with their empathic values. And the beauty of our Prophet (Peace be upon Him) is anything that the rabid clerics here want to show us. Some of us don’t adhere to the image that is conscientiously incomprehensible to us. But many of us do, and reassert that our religion is indeed intolerant (God-forbid) and thus giving enough reasons to people like Terry Jones to burn more copies of our Holy Book, and Charlie Hebdo inking more caricatures to humiliate Muslims.
Look around. Twitter is trending popularly #HangAasiaBibi. The moderate Muslim youth is saying unfashionable things like “I support freedom of expression but she should be hanged for blasphemy”. Sit in a drawing room and engage in a light chitchat on how Aasia Bibi has brought Islam and Pakistan a bad name, while sipping away your cold drinks. As I am penning this down, hundreds of people are outside Supreme Court chanting slogans forcing the judiciary to hang that blasphemer, where about three thousand policemen in riot gears are watching over them, ready to deal with any mishap. They’re not even letting the court take due process of the law. Right since the day she was accused of blasphemy over a bowl of water in the berry fields, to the day Salmaan Taseer was gunned down—she remained consistent in her denying saying anything to insult the Prophet of Islam. She still denies to have said the things that had blown out of context and accused her of such, which she, being a minority, could not even imagine to have dared uttering.
After the initial sentencing at a lower court, the case was appealed in Lahore High Court again, which upheld the death sentence under 295-C of the Penal Code—the reason for upholding the sentence are queer, and even astonishing. One such was that the inconsistent evidence (the witnesses’ conflicting statements) against Aasia Bibi was not cross-questioned, or was done so half-heartedly, by her then defense lawyer, Muhammad Nazim Shehzad, who had, perhaps willingly, helped weakening her case further.
Leaving aside the inconsistencies in the statements of the chief witnesses and also accusers where they claim Aasia herself confessed to the crime in front of about thousands of people five days after the incident-- we cannot rule out that no intimidation and threats and bullying took place when she was forced to confess before a crowd of thousands (as according to one witness). We must also not forget how the honorable judge of Lahore High Court was intimidated and threatened by the extremists and a staunch right wing lobby at the bar for even thinking about passing a verdict in her favor.
Long before that, it was believed through the inside sources, that the then president, Asif Ali Zardari, was about to grant a constitutional pardon to Aasia Bibi in 2010, but before it could even materialize, Lahore High Court came with one of the most bizarre, perhaps even unconstitutional judgment barring the head of the state from exercising his right to pardon before LHC’s verdict. There are no surprises there as to what circumstances and factors led to pressurizing an honorable court to take such an undemocratic measure, the Chief Justice orchestrating such was himself later found one among the jeering crowds congratulating Mumtaz Qadri for assassinating Punjab Governor, Salmaan Taseer over his “blasphemy” for calling for reforms in the laws. He also defended this cold murderer in the court.
Any talk against the obviously draconian law had taken precious lives. Salmaan Taseer, Shahbaz Bhatti and Advocate Rashid Rehman tell us a story of the helplessness that we feel about it. An attempt was made by Sherry Rehman in the tenure of last government to bring in reforms in the law, but she was forced and harassed into killing the draft even before it saw the light.
Why is it that the law is controversial? Since people are so insistent on its religious value, then it should discussed with religious arguments as well. Not all our worthy foul-mouthing Twitterati and public “Islamic scholars” know that Advocate Ismaeel Qureshi, the writer of the Blasphemy Law that we know was promulgated in Gneneral Zia’s era, himself later accepted that there were many mistakes made in the law. What has made the confusion is the misunderstanding and misappropriation of the religious texts that erroneously make us to believe that blasphemy is an unpardonable offence.
Many lawmakers and politicians refuse to talk about it, and even if they do, they embarrass themselves with their dubious statements to media in their attempt to appease both the liberals and the clerics.
In an interview with Al Jazeera a few months back, Imran Khan, convincingly told the anchor that the laws are not a problem. But admitted:
“It is true you have to tread a very thin line. Anything perceived to be… sacrilegious, yes your life is in danger… It is a very difficult subject living in Pakistan.”
Even if we are to look at it emphatically, we know there is a problem—that problem is that anyone can get indicted for blasphemy, with the burden of proof resting with the accused, and not so much with the accuser. Also, even if, by miracle, the accusation is proven to be false, there is no indictment against the accuser whatsoever, for maligning an innocent person with heavy a crime calling for capital punishment.
Not speaking against the faults in the law means you do not care about a common pattern we see in cases of blasphemy against the non-Muslims. i.e, entire non-Muslim communities leave their neighborhoods for fear of clerics’ reaction. No one cares anymore that in Aasia’s village where this alleged blasphemy incident took place, an entire non-Mulsim population evacuated the place, including the accused’s family, for fear of Muslim mob anger. No one sees how their houses and properties are then conveniently claimed by those who accuse them of blasphemy, and this is not something new for us. Let’s revisit Rimsha Masih, the minor, mentally challenged blasphemy accused girl could be saved only because a seminary boy came out to discredit the chief accuser who fabricated the evidence himself by putting in the charred pages of the Holy Quran in the bag carried by the helpless girl. The funny thing is, despite the cleric committing this act of “blasphemy” himself, he was never indicted for literally doing what he accused the girl of. On the other hand, despite being innocent, all her non-Muslim neighbors left the area in fear of the clerics’ rage. She herself and her immediate family had to be immediately flown outside the country for safety once she was acquitted by the court. And the clerics continue to rule here, victoriously. What shame.
Today, we have witnessed another helpless day at the Supreme Court. Aasia Bibi had filed a petition against death sentence that was scheduled to be heard today. However, Justice Hameed ur Rehman excused himself from it; adjourned the hearing for an indefinite time until a new bench is formed to take up the matter. This may appear something as the honorable Judge “rescuing” himself from the case, however, his act also carries another meaning to the world—that he wants to help, but is being prevented from siding with the truth that he knows the case merits. Otherwise, it is a wonder for us why wouldn’t he just take an easy course and uphold the sentence again.
What happened in Supreme Court today comes in a day after the threat issued by Lal Masjid administration that said:
“We are seriously concerned at the efforts for the release of blasphemous Aasia Masih and will consider those blasphemous who defend her, whoever they are and on whichever position they are working”
This reaction was prompted by the news leaked in the social media that the state was serious this time to let her go, amidst the international pressure and lobbying by human rights groups.
Perhaps, now is the time for the state to seriously ponder over the issues of blasphemy cases in the courts—perhaps a more secretive policy concerning them should be adopted, that can let the courts work without much public uproar that can negatively affect the impartiality and even safety of legal personnel.
But we need a voice.
But we must also remain apprehensive of making use of media without a well thought out strategy behind it.
The media hype was created since the very initial stages of Aasia Bibi’s case, which, instead of doing any good, had alerted the clergy, allowed them to organize and assemble to sabotage the case before it caught public fire. The backlash was unprecedented and uncontrollable, making it quite impossible to dispose off the case on humanitarian grounds without creating much ruckus, like in other previous blasphemy cases where the accused could be quietly sent off to safe places along with their families with the help of law enforcement authorities being well aware of the ways to make best use of the loopholes in the system---but this has become difficult now.
Yes, it is true, the public must be made aware of the injustice meted out by the helpless in the law. Yes, public opinion must be formed and promoted to counter the irrational clergy who even refuse to allow one to speak his mind against gross injustice in the society. Yes, proper lobbies must be formed to move the arguments among the lawmakers in the parliament, and yes, our struggle must be doubled to have this law reviewed again, if not repealed, for taking out any lacunas that can easily be used to exploit the helpless victims. Yes, we all should generate voice—but we must have a plan, and it should not be done so without wisdom, with all pros and cons, risks and benefits analyzed in media mobilization so that it may not directly hurt the person whose case is still sub judice in the court.
Let us hope, that the voices of reason also assemble, organize and perpetuate empathy in our public forums—and that all good, sincere efforts towards this are not lost altogether or jeopardized.