ISLAMABAD  -   The Islamabad High Court Friday continued its proceedings in a petition challenging the amendment in the oath of Khatm-e-Nabuwwat in the Election Act 2017.A single bench of IHC comprising Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui conducted hearing of the petition and appointed Advocate Muhammad Akram Sheikh, Advocate Babar Awan and Advocate Aslam Khaki as amicus curiae in this matter.During the hearing, Advocate Hafiz Arfat, counsel for the petitioner completed his arguments while Acting Director General NADRA submitted the record of registered Ahmadis in the country.According to NADRA report, there are 1,67,473 Ahmadis are registered with the authority while there were 10,205 people who got changed their religion from Islam to Qadiani.Justice Siddiqui asked from the acting director general NADRA that if the Authority76 was empowered to change religion on Computerised National Identity Cards (CNICs). At this, he said, there is no such option in NADRA’s system. He added that in the past, people submitted fake affidavits to have their religion changed on CNICs. Then, the IHC bench directed the authority not to change religion of any person on CNIC without its permission till further orders. Justice Siddiqui remarked that Qadianis in order to secure government employment used to change their religion to Islam on CNICs and when the purpose was served, they reverted back to their original religion after retirement.Earlier, the IHC bench had appointed Professor Dr Hafiz Hassan Madni, Institute of Islamic Studies University of Punjab Lahore, Dr Mohsin Naqvi, ex-member of Council of Islamic Ideology, Professor Dr Sahibzada Sajid-ur-Rehman, Member of Council of Islamic Ideology and Mufti Muhammad Hussain Khalil Khel from Karachi as amicus curiae to render their assistance on the following points.The points are whether an Islamic state can frame a law which identifies or deems a non-Muslim as Muslim directly or indirectly; whether a non-Muslim could be permitted in an Islamic state that they show or present themselves as Muslims; whether it is tantamount to deceive the state if a non-Muslim dubs himself as a Muslim; what is the responsibility of the state if the answer of abovementioned question is in positive; whether it is not obligatory for an Islamic state to have fully aware of religion and religious creed of all of its citizens and formulate an effective and comprehensive procedure in this regard and whether it falls in the domain of violation of basic human rights to get information about the religion or religious faith of a citizen.–Staff Reporter