PAKISTAN

One step forward, two steps back

BLASPHEMY laws in Pakistan are among the harshest in the world and are frequently used to discriminate against, isolate or otherwise harm minority groups. According to the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion, in 2001, 40 Muslims, 23 Ahmadis, 10 Christians, and 2 Hindus were charged with blasphemy. (E/CN.4/2003/66)

Amended in 1996 with the insertion of section 295C in the Penal Code, blasphemy laws now entail: "Use of derogatory remarks ... [respecting] the Holy Prophet. Whoever by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Mohammed shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine".  Since 1992, the death sentence has been mandatory.

The definition of blasphemy under section 295C is relatively open-ended, and the arrest of a person reported to have committed blasphemy requires no warrant. No preliminary investigation is required before the filing of the First Information Report (FIR) by a local police officer. Once "the testimony of a reliable man" has been registered, the FIR is filed and the person arrested.

President Musharraf had announced that he would amend the blasphemy laws to lessen their abuse by providing for a preliminary investigation by the Deputy Commissioner prior to filing an FIR. This would have guaranteed a non-trivial protection against arbitrary arrest and greater independence from local authorities who are often subject to local, religious and political pressures. However, Musharraf abandoned the reforms a month later "at the unanimous demand of the ulema [Islamic clerics] and the people".

The absence of an impartial inquest system opens the door to the use of blasphemy laws to settle personal quarrels, business disputes, and land rights issues. For instance, Ayub Masih, who was imprisoned since 1996 for allegedly suggesting to a Muslim that he should read Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses, was acquitted of blasphemy charges by the Supreme Court in August 2002. The Court determined the real basis for the allegation was a private land dispute. Amnesty International said that the case demonstrates that the blasphemy laws are frequently abused and are "an easy tool to have people imprisoned" for ulterior motives. The Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion noted that despite Masih's acquittal he remained "concerned that death sentences continue to be handed down for apostasy". (E/CN.4/2003/66) 

These laws also serve as a destructive tool in the hands of religious extremists. In July 2002, Zahid Mahmood Akhtar was stoned to death after a cleric used a loud hailer to issue a fatwa ordering his execution. Mr Akhtar was detained in 1994 on charges of blasphemy, but was released three years later after a court determined he was mentally ill. Since release, he had been living in another city, but returned to his village a week before being killed.

Details of offences are rarely, if ever, made public, since under Pakistani law, the reiteration of the words that constitute the offence can, in itself, be a legal offence.

Although no blasphemy detainees were executed in the past year, a cleric convicted of blasphemy was shot and killed by another prisoner, under circumstances that Amnesty International considers to indicate that the prison guards were in complicity with the plot.

The case of the Ahmadis

The Pakistan Ahmadi community is a principal subject of religious discrimination. The Ahmadis consider themselves Muslims but disagree with the majority Sunni Muslims on the finality of the word of Prophet Mohammed. In 1974, a constitutional amendment declared the Ahmadis a non-Muslim minority. Under the separate electorate system, therefore, the community was effectively excluded from the political process.

Since 1984, the legal apparatus in Pakistan has actively criminalised the Ahmadi faith. Ahmadis suffer from numerous restrictions on religious freedom and widespread societal discrimination, including violation of their places of worship, banning of burial in Muslim graveyards, denial of freedom of faith, speech, and assembly, and restrictions on their press.

In 1993, the Supreme Court ruled constitutional Section 298(c), which forbids Ahmadis from professing to be Muslims and from using Muslim practices in any practice of their faith. The Court held that Islamic phrases are in essence a copyright of the Islamic religion. The use of Islamic phrases by Ahmadis was deemed equivalent to copyright infringement, an offence under the Trademark Act of 1940. Also, under the ruling, use of Islamic phrases by Ahmadis was held to be blasphemy; therefore, an Ahmadi claiming to be Muslim is in per se violation of the blasphemy laws.

Following the US invasion of Afghanistan, Pakistani Christians have increasingly been the subject of private party violence. In April 2002, a Christian church was attacked by Islamic extremists with automatic weapons. Reportedly, the government has been reluctant to open a case on the incident.

PRESS FREEDOM

Pakistan has a somewhat mixed record in its protection of press freedom. After September 2001, the Minister of Information directed the media not to criticise the United States; however, according to Reporters Without Borders, the Urdu-language press was relatively free to publish criticism of the war in Afghanistan, and more recently both English-language and Urdu-language press has been critical of the US invasion in Iraq. 

In September 2002, the government enacted the Defamation Ordinance, which places the burden of proof on journalists charged with defamation. The measure also provides that, a journalist's failure to show proof at trial would results in a fine or prison term, and it was widely criticised by members of the national press. In October 2002, the government established a press oversight board to monitor the quality of journalism in the country. Although composed of senior editors and journalists and allegedly "autonomous and independent" of the government, there are concerns that the Council is designed to dampen dissenting viewpoints.

During the past year, the Special Rapporteur communicated several concerns regarding press freedoms to the government. (E/CN.4/2003/67) In March 2002, the government was pressuring the publisher of the paper The News to fire the editor and three reporters for reporting on the abduction of the American reporter Daniel Pearl. In May 2002, a British investigative editor and his two Pakistani guides were arrested for suspicion of espionage at the Afghan-Pakistan border, despite being credentialed members of the press. In July 2002, the Special Rapporteur sent an urgent appeal on behalf of a journalist for the local daily newspapers Bachabar and Lashkar who was arrested on criminal charges for criticism of police efficacy. In July 2002, the managing editor of the daily Jasarat was abducted by Pakistani intelligence agents (ISI) and interrogated and eventually released after publishing an article about an ISI officer. Following his refusal to disclose the author of the article the editor was threatened with kidnapping and murder, and followed by suspected ISI members. In April 2002, 23 journalists were allegedly assaulted by baton-wielding police in Faisalabad after the journalists walked out of a rally for President Musharraf. In April 2002, a television cameraman was assaulted and nearly killed by Musharraf's henchmen at a polling station in Abbottabad for his alleged failure to film Musharraf's sympathisers. In July and August 2002, the offices of the Evening Special and Morning Special newspapers were sealed for a month by the government of the province of Sindh because of the alleged publication of vulgar language and obscene pictures. The government of Pakistan has not responded to any of the above communications.

In October 2002, President Musharraf enacted the Freedom of Information Ordinance intended to expand on a 1993 Supreme Court decision that interpreted the Pakistani Constitution to confer the right to receive information. According to the British freedom of expression watchdog Article XIX, "The Ordinance includes a number of positive features, such as the inclusion of an interpretation clause, the right of appeal ... a clear time frame for the release of information, and the inclusion of courts and tribunals in the definition of public office. At the same time, the Ordinance has a number of weaknesses, including an excessively broad regime of exceptions and a restrictive approach to the definition of 'public record'. In addition, the Ordinance does not include obligations on public bodies to maintain their records in good condition and to publish key categories of information, a system for promoting freedom information and educating civil servants, or the granting of specific investigative powers to the [reviewing courts]".

Problems in the NWFP

The tribal region on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan is ruled by the fundamentalist Islamist coalition Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal or United Council of Action, which made significant gains in the October 2002 parliamentary elections. Upon gaining power, the Islamists have taken several actions that clamp down on the freedom of expression and religion. One of first actions of the new local government was to remove from some public places advertisements it deemed offensive to Islam. The police have now launched a campaign against musicians, including beating up a local singer in January 2003.

Also in January 2003, a local political writer, Fazale Wahab, was murdered because of his criticism of the local religious leadership and politics. The assailants have not been apprehended.

In a theme that resonates through Pakistan, India, the Middle East and the US, it can be seen that local government officials try, in the absence of meaningful policies, to garner popularity by appealing to deeply held religious convictions. Civil and political rights will be in jeopardy in this region in the coming year and the Commission should closely monitor the situation.

The Commission should urge the UN Special Rapporteur on religious intolerance to visit South Asia and report on the rise of religious fundamentalism and its effects on the enjoyment of human rights by minorities. The Pakistani government must realise that the surest way to gain the legitimacy it tried to manufacture through a sham election is to steadfastly protect the civil and political rights of its citizens.