comment
It’s about majority, not the minority
Taseer’s brutal murder and the subsequent abdication of responsibility and courage by key actors had to lead to Bhatti’s appalling assassination
By Adnan Rehmat
Pakistan’s constitution is a creature as confused as the state it governs. Article 25 in its Part II titled “Fundamental Rights and Principles of Policy” guarantees equality of citizens while Article 20 guarantees the freedom to profess and practice a religion of your choice. Article 17 guarantees the freedom of association and Article 26 promises non-discrimination.
And yet in the constitution’s Part I, titled “Preamble”, Article 2 declares only one faith, Islam, to be the state religion while Articles 42 and 91(3) dealing with the oaths of the offices of the president and prime minister mandate them to be only Muslims. This despite Article 8 guaranteeing that laws inconsistent with or in derogation of fundamental rights to be void.

comment
Pall of censorship
What happened to Rahat Fateh Ali Khan should not be made a blanket excuse to enforce restrictions on artistes and their activities
By Sarwat Ali
The question of permissions and NOCs (No Objection Certificates) has again raised its ugly head in the light of what happened to Rahat Fateh Ali Khan in India.
There was a time when it was next to impossible for certain categories of professionals to travel abroad because NOC had to be sought from the relevant ministry. For artistes it was very difficult to get one, particularly for India, and all who got one had to pull strings and often shake the bell that rang loud in the quarter from where the mightiest of the land ruled. Only the favourites were able to get permission to travel and perform in India.

Considering the spiritual in art
In Rahat Naveed Masud’s art, images that fabricate a narrative are part of a vocabulary which offers a pleasure to eyes as well as
indicates a higher message
By Quddus Mirza
When asked if he believes in God, Marquez the celebrated author from South America replied he did not have faith in God but in superstitions. Similarly, many others believe in spirituality even though they do not accept religion as a divine doctrine. In our times, the urge to search, and then associate with spiritual matters, is widely popular. But the fascination for spirituality is not a new phenomenon; from the introduction of Islam till the present times, the spiritual element has been a visible if not dominant element both in our personal lives and social spaces.

Saffia apa for all
For her, music is a happy reward
By Noor Jehan Mecklai
It’s always a treat to sit with Saffia Beyg, founder-director of Sampurna, a society formed in 1999 for the preservation of classical music. The word sampurna means complete harmony, indicating the seven notes of the raga.
Sampurna is dedicated to the welfare of classical musicians in Pakistan. A few years ago the compere of a Sampurna show introduced a five-year-old protege of Saffia apa, and asked the audience for a sponsor for his education and training. Then with the co-operation of Infaq Foundation, Sampurna paid for the education of the children of sitar nawaz Sajid Hussain. Also, it provided shelter to sarangi nawaz M. Hussin.

comment
It’s about majority, not the minority

Taseer’s brutal murder and the subsequent abdication of responsibility and courage by key actors had to lead to Bhatti’s appalling assassination

By Adnan Rehmat

Pakistan’s constitution is a creature as confused as the state it governs. Article 25 in its Part II titled “Fundamental Rights and Principles of Policy” guarantees equality of citizens while Article 20 guarantees the freedom to profess and practice a religion of your choice. Article 17 guarantees the freedom of association and Article 26 promises non-discrimination.

And yet in the constitution’s Part I, titled “Preamble”, Article 2 declares only one faith, Islam, to be the state religion while Articles 42 and 91(3) dealing with the oaths of the offices of the president and prime minister mandate them to be only Muslims. This despite Article 8 guaranteeing that laws inconsistent with or in derogation of fundamental rights to be void.

Clearly this is a muddle. When the constitution, the vision and mission statement of a country, institutionalises discrimination among its citizens —  on the basis of faith, no less – a license is created for the privileged citizens to use this patronage to run roughshod over the constitutionally ‘lesser citizens.’  And they’d only be asserting their ‘constitutional right’ to be ‘right’ over those who are constitutionally ‘wrong’.

‘Logical’ murders

Punjab Governor Salman Taseer’s murder and Federal Minorities Affairs Minister Shahbaz Bhatti’s assassination are the logical outcome of a compact signed in constitutional ink. Both murders are related to the issue of opinions that these two illustrious Pakistanis in public service aired on the issue of the application of the country’s controversial blasphemy law. Their assassins publicly asserted their “right” to be offended at a view contrary to theirs, which was merely that the law could be made more effective to stem the tide of its misuse that has landed dozens of people in jail without recourse to the prospects of justice.

With the abject failure of the state to enforce Article 9 (right to security of person), Article 19 (freedom of speech), Article 17 (freedom of association) and Article 14 (inviolability of dignity of man), in addition to the articles mentioned above, forces in the country professing political dominance based on religion see no hurdle in their way to assert themselves through violence.

This is especially true in the backdrop of the climate of fear that prevents all key sections of the state from sticking their necks out for principles like equality of citizens and equal protection and support from the state.

Denialistan

The ominous milestone that was Taseer’s brutal murder and the subsequent abdication of responsibility and courage by key actors in shaping a legal, principled response to it simply had to lead to Bhatti’s equally appalling assassination. First came the failure of political parties —  the federal government failed to make a strong, vocal show of force on addressing not just the issue of blasphemy, but also to start a debate on the very nature of fundamental rights and how everyone should be guaranteed them. Not only were the colleagues of Taseer in the ruling PPP scared to attend his funeral prayers, the entire Senate agreed to not offer a prayer for the assassinated — thereby endorsing the idea that the clerics had the last word on people’s position in the afterlife.

Then came the clerics and electoral parties established on the basis of faith like Jamaat-e-Islami and Jamiat Ulema Islam, as well as sectarian groups. Not only did they fail to openly condemn the act of a murder on grounds of belief but actually came out in force in defence of the killer and challenged the state and government against proceeding strongly against the killer. The lawyers, in general, went a step further offering free legal aid to the killer.

The top judiciary, otherwise happy to be billed as independent and just and working in public interest, stood out in relief in their deafening silence on the issue. No suo moto, no pressure, no threat, no hurry to dispense justice.

The armed forces, of course, couldn’t care less unless one of their own (like Musharraf) was a target, in which case they would even court martial civilians. Which left the “independent” media for the defence of the harassed non-Muslim citizens and their supporters, but not only did the media fail to contextualise the issue and educate the people by providing clear, unbiased analysis of what was wrong, it actually fanned prejudice, violence and extremism by giving airtime to unelected, non-representative groups at the cost of moderate and centrist forces that have been voted by the people. The media, in general, equalled the sectarian and religious parties in proving their “Muslim-ness” when they were not even required to do so.

All to their own

The result: Bhatti —  a symbol of Pakistan’s fig leaf to the principle of equality. Because there was a collective failure by the state, government, parliament, judiciary and media, the license to kill anyone interpreted by anyone else as threatening Islam acquired a ‘value-added’ non-legal legitimacy. Here was a killer —  Mumtaz Qadri —  who openly admitted to his act with several other colleagues witness to his gruesomeness and yet no one seems in a hurry to prosecute and try him. Not the state, not the governing party of Taseer, not the judiciary. The assassin has been garlanded as a hero and has, astonishingly, been practically exempted from the applicability of civil laws.

While the political compulsions of the ruling party —  which has lost so many of its leaders including Zulfikar Bhutto and Benazir Bhutto —  could be excused for not committing hara-kiri, those of the collective parliament, judiciary and media cannot be. Only they could have stood up and countered the appalling doctrine of inequality of citizens. When there were reports of an assassination plot against the chief justice of a high court a few months ago, the entire judiciary immediately mobilised to defend its own. When the media recently lost one of its own in Karachi, there were strong sectoral protests and campaigns for justice that continue. When the military gets attacked, there is an inevitable major crackdown.

Only the parliament has consistently failed to defend their own by not agreeing to remove constitutional anomalies that make the intolerantly intolerant Pakistan of today possible and allowing comfort margins to tolerate undemocratic forces. It repeatedly gets dissolved by dictators, loses its prime ministers to intrigues and its cabinets to conspiracies and is now losing its best and brightest to bigotry and terrorism but still fails to move beyond cosmetic condemnations. For parliament to prevail and be given the strength to prevail it must be fair to all Pakistanis and treat them equally in respect of all rights, not make exceptions to fundamental rights.

Crossing the Rubicon

If the parties, military, judiciary and media think they are immune to religious bigotry and terrorism in general, they are merely hiding their heads in the sand. Together with the people they make up the Pakistan of legitimacy and if they do not act on a new, express compact of equality, then one by one they will be the victims of their own exceptions. To be sure they are next in line.

It is not an issue of minorities in Pakistan but of majorities. It is not what minorities want but what do the majorities want. Pakistan is at a crossroads: we have been in denial of our abnormality and will now have to come off the fence and decide what kind of society we want to become. For sure we can’t be both democratic and intolerant. We can’t aspire to a bright future when we practice a dark past that has been cast off by the world as evil. We can’t excel if we discriminate amongst ourselves on the basis of faith, clan or gender. We can’t progress if we allow violence to take over our lives. There is no rocket science involved here. Unless there is an equal stake in Pakistan for all its citizens, irrespective of their faith, nationality, ethnicity or gender, we can’t have an equal chance to progress in this world. The abyss beckons if we don’t decide now.

The Shahbaz I knew

By Saadia Salahuddin

Shahbaz Bhatti was a young university graduate when I first met him. He was extremely concerned about the killings of Christians on blasphemy charges. This was 1992. He came to The News office in Lahore with a murder story from Faisalabad on charges of blasphemy and then the famous Salamat Masih blasphemy case from a village in the Gujranwala district. A passionate activist, he was following another case of similar nature. One day he came and said he had given my name to the HRCP which was taking journalists to Gujranwala district jail, where the three men accused of blasphemy in Salamat Masih case were kept. From there we were taken to the relatives of the accused. It was reported in all the papers the next day.

In the report that I filed I failed to mention that it was the HRCP that took the journalists. A colleague questioned why I did not write that it was HRCP’s initiative. I appologised, but to be honest I viewed it as Shahbaz Bhatti’s initiative and I got a chance to go there because of him.

The case that was being heard in Gujranwala District Court by a local lawyer was soon shifted to Lahore High Court. Hina Jilani, a known lawyer, was the counsel. I remember how happy he was when he came to inform me that the case had been taken up by Amnesty International. Also, I remember how devastated he was when he called to inform me that the two adults accused in the Salamat Masih case were killed while they were waiting for public transport outside the Lahore High Court. The accused, who had been given death threats, were accompanied by two policemen to the court on public transport with their hands cuffed. The only survivor was Salamat,10.

Shahbaz found all this very disgusting. He never came again with any story after that. He was up to something more important — legislation. He was working from the platform of Christian Liberation Front. Till a few years back he would send a greeting card of his party every year which we would put on the notice board with other cards.

He became parliamentary secretary and then the federal minister for minorities. I did not hear from him all these years, but we could see he had his eyes on the big picture. He was pressing for legislation where it was most needed. I read in today’s newspaper that he had warned, “They are going to get me one day.” He was right because it was not just the blasphemy law; he was also protecting the properties owned by Christians in Pakistan. He was committed and well aware of the possible consequences of what he was doing. Certainly, a brave man.

comment
Pall of censorship

What happened to Rahat Fateh Ali Khan should not be made a blanket excuse to enforce restrictions on artistes and their activities

By Sarwat Ali

The question of permissions and NOCs (No Objection Certificates) has again raised its ugly head in the light of what happened to Rahat Fateh Ali Khan in India.

There was a time when it was next to impossible for certain categories of professionals to travel abroad because NOC had to be sought from the relevant ministry. For artistes it was very difficult to get one, particularly for India, and all who got one had to pull strings and often shake the bell that rang loud in the quarter from where the mightiest of the land ruled. Only the favourites were able to get permission to travel and perform in India.

And if anyone bypassed or ignored the multiple levels of clearance set he/she was immediately accused to being anti-state. Many a time a person of international stature would ignore the governmental strictures to be with his fans or admirers but the concomitant danger of being castigated always lurked round the corner. Faiz, Quratulain Hyder, Faraz and Josh to name a few were always hounded by super patriots as every word, gesture and meeting was put under the microscope of loyalty to the country.

But then good sense prevailed as winds of a more open society started to blow and the travel restriction was removed. It did not remain necessary to get permission from the relevant ministry to visit India. Many went on a travel visa and did not have the permission to perform, but they did perform and also managed to earn a few bucks in the bargain.

And nobody grudges the artistes making money through their art except those who were not making it. If they are not able to do so then they resort to other means of money making. It is wise and more dignified to let the artists make money through what they can do best — sing or dance or act or write or paint.

What happened to Rahat Fateh Ali Khan should not be made a blanket excuse to enforce restrictions on the artistes and their activities. Rahat Fateh Ali Khan’s indiscretion or violation of the rules should be treated as an individual case and dealt with on merit. It should not be an excuse or a pretext to spread the pall of censorship all across the horizon as well.

As it is, due to security concerns, many acts of words and thoughts have been curbed and if not curbed directly has bred self-censorship that puts caution and discretion before truth and creativity. In these difficult times one should not fall for the easy temptation of banning everything out of sight, putting everything on the block of exclusion, rather than nurture a more complex society, just a carry over of our complex heritage.

Let us look at the situation on the whole — Indians films are being imported and exhibited in Pakistan after a gap of decades, and a great many people see the Indian TV channels including the music channels. Even if there is a ban on showing Indian news channels, other channels are open to be viewed and then there is the internet and the YouTube. These are more pronounced in the production processes where Pakistani productions are put though the grill of postproduction process. It is dictated by convenience, economies of scale and quality rather than loyalty and patriotic fervour.

At the same time, the piracy of audio-visuals is more freely available than anywhere else in the world — Pakistan being a huge market for Indian entertainment industry. Our own film industry has gone for a six and our television channels too have surreptitious back channel links with networks across the border.

And being a small industry or segment it tends to get sucked into that bigger vortex. The answer in the past was protectionism but we all know that protectionism may work for a shorter time period; it does not work well and beneficially all the time. Protectionism could not save the Pakistani cinema and it cannot save forever our productions. It is only quality and quantity that does have a more lasting impact.

Over a long stretch of time the trade between India and Pakistan of resources, both human and material, have been conducted through a third party. Not only does the process become more convoluted, it also adds to the costs to accommodate and pacify that third party. At times, due to government’s hard line policies the credit is not given where it is due.

Pakistan has been a loser and Pakistani artistes have been on the receiving end. If a few Pakistani artistes, on the force of their talent, can travel and contribute across the border let them do it rather than put restrictions and hurdles in their way.

The cultural environment and definitions are changing all the time but the poignant question is: what kind of society do we want Pakistan to be? A closed puritanical society where all forms of expression and manner of celebration is driven underground, where no distinction is made between art, entertainment and vulgarity? Such restricted environment discourages an open debate on what is being staged and this results in the loss of quality.

It all boils down to control — how much control does the state want to exercise on its citizens. Usually authoritarian regimes are notorious for advocating greater control than democratic ones. Weak governments allow certain pressure groups to exercise controls by either keeping their eyes closed or inefficiency. Freedom then becomes a hit and run affair. Only those caught are indicted, the rest are assumed to follow the censor policies.

Considering the spiritual in art

In Rahat Naveed Masud’s art, images that fabricate a narrative are part of a vocabulary which offers a pleasure to eyes as well as
indicates a higher message

By Quddus Mirza

When asked if he believes in God, Marquez the celebrated author from South America replied he did not have faith in God but in superstitions. Similarly, many others believe in spirituality even though they do not accept religion as a divine doctrine. In our times, the urge to search, and then associate with spiritual matters, is widely popular. But the fascination for spirituality is not a new phenomenon; from the introduction of Islam till the present times, the spiritual element has been a visible if not dominant element both in our personal lives and social spaces.

The spiritual aspect, initiated by the Sufi saints in the subcontinent, has manifested itself in multiple forms; ranging from religious to cultural and political arenas. During the autocratic reigns and dynasties in India, the Sufis through their teachings, conduct and words (poetry) not only commented upon the situation of their times, but offered a mode of resistance too. There are examples in Sufi poetry which while narrating a love story or a folk tale has verses about invaders, tyrannical rulers and conditions of the population.

However this dimension of our spiritual past is often forgotten and those poets and sages are usually presented as mere folk bards or saints with vernacular wisdom.

Along with the political side, these spiritual guides used to offer a solace for tormented souls — not by promising them a safe and permanent place in heaven, but by making them reflect upon the realities at hand. They would make an individual understand his condition, nature of universe and the intricacies of faith. Long before the invention of sessions with a psychotherapist, our Sufis were satisfying this need of fellow human beings, in addition to questioning and investigating the matters of existence and being.

Philosophical queries, aesthetic constructions and political connotations found in the great works of our Sufis are still being dealt with. Various poets, writers, theorists and artists have been addressing these issues; each seeking to formulate an expression that despite being in its different format or genre can have a lasting effect upon human psyche and soul.

Such are the concerns expressed in the art of Rahat Naveed Masud displayed in her solo exhibition held from Feb 23-March 5, 2011, at the Ejaz Galleries, Lahore. The visuals in her paintings, apart from their symbolic meaning, stand for their poetic and painterly qualities. Her main area of interest has been the Sufi sensibility, which she has been exploring through her work; Sufi subjects are part of her search to unfold truth that lies not far from us, but is often hidden and needs to be unravelled.

Like a saint, an artist also spends his/her life searching for the meaning of reality. In this process, various elements contribute towards formulating and unfolding the content beyond the apparent. In the art of Masud, images such as parrots, cages, locks, keys and red roses have special significance; these bring forth a narrative which is mainly populated with a woman or dominated by a geometric shape. Birds, flowers and key, lock and cage can all be retraced as potent symbols for a human being bound in a world that is both beautiful and unbearable. The keys and the locks and the cage denote the condition of soul captivated in the body and in constant surge to free itself and merge with the greater Soul. Likewise, the parrot and rose may suggest how beauty, or life for that matter, is ephemeral and merely an illusion.

Masud employs the figure of a young girl and the shape of a square in her canvases because both can allude to the soul of a person who is longing to join the divine, which is a perfect entity. The square, surrounded by dark hues or shades of gold, also suggests the primordial sacred form that has appeared in many cultures and faith, including Muslim, Tantric and several others. This eternal form along with references from our familiar world create a cosmos that, much like the traditional Sufi poetry, is personal yet has a wider appeal. And like the choice of verses in Sufi poetry, the interplay of various colours is crucial in deciphering the content and enjoying the form. In that respect, colours in the art of Rahat Naveed Masud possess a symbolic connotation.

Masud mostly prefers strong hues such as blue, red, orange and yellow. These shades invoke an emotional response due to their vivid quality, but more than that these connect her canvases to the creative expression of this region that is manifested in local craft, popular costume and decorations on buildings, including the traditional tile work. Colours of identical intensity disclose the artist’s link to the culture and how the artefacts of a society are perceived and regarded as a coded language to communicate higher meanings in a lyrical tone. In addition, one is aware of sensitive surfaces — such as skin of mango, texture of fruit crates and petals of roses — painted by her in a masterly manner.

The painterly as well as the lyrical substance evident in the art of Rahat Naveed Masud is also based upon the painter’s deep understanding of the tradition of music and poetry in our region and in her belief that art can be a means to liberate man from his surroundings. This journey of transcendence does not just take place in the physical realm but it happens on conceptual level too. A phenomenon of art that was once described by Merleau-Ponty: “I do not look at the canvas as a thing; my gaze wanders in it as in the aureole of Being.” Hence in Masud’s art, images that fabricate a narrative are part of a vocabulary which offers a pleasure to eyes as well as indicates a higher message. In that sense, her art represents the true soul of these lands and times, in which body and soul, self and other, past and present and many other dichotomies are blended to create a unique and perfect entity.

|Home|Daily Jang|The News|Sales & Advt|Contact Us|

BACK ISSUES