|
|
|
|
 |
 |
  |
interview New
confessions Yeh
Woh Change of course Last Sunday’s church bombing in Peshawar caused outrage and the public support for holding peace talks with the Pakistani Taliban seems to have declined considerably By Rahimullah Yusufzai It should surprise nobody if the resolve of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s government to pursue a negotiated solution of the decade-old conflict in Pakistan has weakened in the wake of the two recent incidents that happened a week apart in the troubled Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province and in which 87 persons, including an army general and 83 members of the Christian community, were killed. A
service scorned Sceptic’s
Diary
“It was definitely an effective protest, not a movement” Khawar Mumtaz, Chairperson National Commission on Status of Women and leading women’s rights activist talks about the society’s reaction to rape cases, recourse to justice and media’s all-intrusive coverage By Alefia T. Hussain The News on Sunday
(TNS): The response to December 16, 2012 gang rape that took place in Delhi
symbolises the struggle against rape, a full-fledged movement that mobilised
masses for sexual crimes against women in India. Contrarily, even after the
rape of a five year old girl, a movement even slightly resembling that in
India could not be launched in Pakistan. Would you agree? Khawar Mumtaz (KM):
Unfortunately, rapes happen all the time in Pakistan. We have had some
horrendous rape stories but this certainly was the worst of its kind. In
India, too, they have constant incidents of gang rapes and other forms of
violence against women in rural and urban areas, where the issue is sometimes
taken up publicly. The Dec 16 case became particularly fiery because its
victim was a professional woman from the middle class. So, it hit the urban
middle class immensely as it was very close to home. It was also the
gruesomeness of the act that shook the people. Really, in this case in
India, I feel, both the horrific nature of the violence and the threat coming
close, triggered the uproar. It was the tipping point. In Pakistan, the
five-year-old girl’s rape was equally horrendous. And there was a lot of
reaction, definitely, but it wasn’t a movement. In Pakistan’s women
rights history the real tipping point was the formation of the Women’s
Action Forum (WAF) in 1981; soon after a zina case was registered against a
15-year-old girl who was convicted to be flogged for marrying against her
parents’ wishes. It mobilised a number of concerned women and then slowly
it became a movement. The reaction in Pakistan
usually to any unfortunate incident that demands street protest is insipid,
not many come out of their homes. So, one is compelled to ask in such
circumstances, what is the point of a token protest. Regardless, I must point
out that token protests against the recent rape incident in Lahore were made
across the country, in fact in some cities like Islamabad it continued for
four or five days, and the crowd grew every day. Still I don’t think it
grew to become a movement. It was definitely an effective protest, not a
movement. Essentially, when we talk
of movements we must look for a tipping point and who is hit the most. The
cause/crime has to be something that touches a raw nerve in people. Anger
towards a crime must be channelised properly to take the shape of a movement.
This case in Lahore triggered anger alright. This passive reaction is
reflective of the degeneration of our society, where even a five year old is
not safe in her street, in her playground. Our reactions and reflexes have
become numb because we are in a state of shock every day. Another pertinent question
that arises here is, does a movement mean coming out on the streets only? A
movement can be to ensure that the law takes its course, guarantee the little
girl gets protection, keep pressure on the government for thorough
prosecution and investigation. All this is also part of the consciousness of
the movement — and I think that is happening. Everything does not depend on
street power, although street power is important. We have seen some
organisations yield anti-people street power too. TNS: Odds are always
against the rape victims who normally belong to the lowest strata of society;
the police views rape victims with suspicion; and the situation in courts
isn’t ideal. Please comment on the flaws in the criminal justice system? KM: The real issue is how
the case is followed in our justice system. Conviction rate in cases of
violence against women is 3 to 5 per cent. It’s pathetic. It means
prosecution and investigation process is very weak. This is where we hear of
all the misuse of power and money playing its role. Then there is the issue of
witness protection. Often witnesses withdraw or retract because of threats
coming from the more resourceful people. These factors lead to nothing in the
end. Also we have to realise we
are a stratified society. There are those who have privileges and those who
don’t. The Shahzeb Khan case is a perfect example. Justice system must be
the same for all. Everyone must be equal before the law. TNS: What about the
parallel justice system? Is jirga effective in resolving the cases of
violence against women? KM: Parallel justice system
does not provide justice to women. That’s what we have seen over time. The
National Commission for the Status of Women (NCSW) is initiating a study to
document how jirgas resolve cases of violence against women to see if there
was ever a positive result. But, so far, through whatever we have seen in the
media and otherwise, panchayats and jirgas give away women as bada-e-sulah,
swara and vani — punishments which have been criminalised under the
Anti-women Customary Practices Act. Cases involving crimes
against women must come out of the purview of jirgas even if some people feel
that a jirga provides speedy justice. We see that women are used as
bargaining chips in a range of disputes. The core settling element is always
the woman. It, at best, provides compromise, not justice. TNS: Reporting rape cases
and protecting the identity of the victim – given the dynamics of the new,
frantic and all-intrusive media how best can the identity of the victim be
protected? In the given situation, where the media persons interview parents,
neighbours and relatives etc does it make sense to conceal the name of the
victim? KM: By and large, I feel,
the media has played a positive role in bringing a number of cases to public
notice and because of it we have seen the Supreme Court take suo moto actions
as well. On the other hand, media has a tendency of sensationalising,
announcing as grave and somber crime as rape with fanfare, instead of
focussing on facts and investigations. In this recent case of the
rape of a five year old, the TV reporting was undesirably sensational. One
channel punctuated every few seconds of reportage with the image of the raped
girl being taken into the ambulance. It was so unnecessary. We cannot make a
spectacle of another person’s misery. Some channels are sensitive
to the issue, for instance they will not announce the name of the victim, but
across the board all channels are not. Media persons reach out to the family
members and neighbours and put pressure on them by asking offensive
questions. But you see in such cases
we must pause and reflect for a while on what the story may convey, what is
the reporting doing to whom, is the victim getting a better sense of justice
because of coverage in media. I think just a little bit of sensibility and
sensitivity can help, like seeking permission from the affected family for
what they want shown and read in media. TNS: As the chairperson of
NCSW, how do you view the role of various government departments/bodies in
protecting women’s rights? We may have more women as parliamentarians but
we still do not have a women’s rights minister? KM: I don’t think not
having a women’s rights ministry at the federal level really makes a
difference. Actual violations are now in the jurisdiction of every province
after the 18th amendment. So, more importantly, we need effective women’s
rights ministries and departments at the provincial levels. NCSW is not an
implementation body. Its task is to monitor and make sure the responsible
government departments are implementing the women-related laws and bring back
the issues to policy makers. Therefore, the Commission has the authority and
mandate to ask for any information from any province or department. For me,
the main objective of the Commission is to set up systems where we can
monitor and get feedback as we go along. Take the case of the
Council of Islamic Ideology. As soon as we heard they were discussing DNA
testing in cases of rape, we wrote a strong letter to them, and iterated
cases where DNA testing has already been used as evidence in Pakistan.
Resultantly, the CII seems to have softened its position. It continues to
maintain that it is not primary evidence but has left it to the discretion of
the court. It is NCSW’s responsibility to make sure that what comes out of
the Council is properly scrutinised and examined. I feel, as the chairperson
of the NCSW, I’m not able to do as much as I want to because the Commission
is still not staffed. My rules of business are still not approved. The
procedural work is taking too long for my satisfaction. TNS: To observers and
critics, the pro-women legislation in the Musharraf-era has made Pakistani
women’s rights activists complacent with the status of women in the
country. How do you evaluate the women’s rights movement in Pakistan in
recent years? KM: Complacency comes when
there’s a democratic government in place and when the parliament has passed
some progressive laws in consultation with women’s rights activists, for
example the acid crime bill, protection of women from harassment in workplace
bill, the domestic violence bill in Sindh, the NCSW Act etc. All the work has
come from outside the parliament. The government has been ready to enact it. Today, some of the active
women’s rights campaigners and allies are members of the parliament. But I must emphasise that
the spate of legislation has come about only after exhaustive consultation
with women’s rights campaigners. So I wouldn’t say there’s complete
complacency perhaps the street power has reduced. Because we have a
democratic system in place, I see a different form of activism. The truth is the more
senior, older members of Women’s Action Forum (WAF) are tired and the
younger ones don’t seem to have the same fire at the moment.
Shahbaz Bhatti murder file reopens By Hasan Khan Shahbaz Bhatti
murder case investigation was closed long ago. The sudden confession by some
people held by the police has created a stir among those who have been
following the case. For the capital police — which had closed the files of
this high profile murder for want of evidence — the accidental discovery of
Bhatti’s killers may well be a source of jubilation. Police investigators were
busy interrogating the alleged terrorists, arrested some weeks ago, for their
involvement in planning attacks on installations in Islamabad. A vehicle
laden with 120 kilograms of explosives, was also recovered from the residence
of one of the accused, Hammad Adil, in Bara Kahu — a suburban locality of
Islamabad. Federal Minister Shahbaz
Bhatti was gunned down by unidentified militants in sector I-8/3 of Islamabad
on March 3, 2011. Media reports say, the assassins dressed in shalwar kurtas
arrived in a white Suzuki Mehran and sprayed bullets on Bhatti after
intercepting the minister’s car. The militants left a pamphlet on the
scene, claiming the minister was killed for speaking against the
controversial blasphemy laws. By killing Bhatti — the
lone Christian member of the PPP government —religious extremists silenced
the second strongest voice against the controversial blasphemy laws following
the cold blooded murder of Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer. “Shahbaz Bhatti was
murdered by four people,” said Capt (retd) Mustansar Feroze, a senior
superintendent of Islamabad police. “Omar Abdullah, Hammad Adil, Tanveer
and Abdul Sattar killed the minister. Omar who lives in I-8 sector, stalked
Bhatti.” The capital police launched
several raids in different areas of Islamabad on intelligence reports
following an unsuccessful gun and suicide attack on a mosque in Bara Kahu
area. They arrested Hammad Adil from Subzi Mandi area in I-11 sector while
his brother was taken into custody from Karachi Company in G-9 sector. “It took one or half a
day for Hammad to confess to killing Shahbaz Bhatti and being involved in
several other high profile attacks,” said the police officer. “We are quite satisfied
with the outcome of fresh investigation,” said Shahbaz’s brother, Paul
Bhatti. “My initial response to the confession was; Hammad is trying to win
sympathies by claiming he killed Shahbaz for speaking against blasphemy. This
is how he wanted to become a hero from a terrorist.” The investigators had
interrogated and questioned around 519 suspects apprehended from the
surrounding districts of Islamabad. Presenting a Joint
Investigation Team (JIT) report before the National Assembly Standing
Committee on Minorities in June 2011, the then SSP Islamabad Tahir Alam
informed of winding up the file of this high profile murder. According to Alam, the
JIT interrogated 168 suspected from Rawalpindi, 11 from Islamabad, 15
from Jhelum, 187 from Chakwal and 121 from Attock. Geo-fencing of the area
was carried out but the investigators could not find any lead to trace the
real culprits. PPP leadership avoids
casting doubts on the investigation at this stage. “It’s premature to
express satisfaction over Hammad’s confession. We want the hidden hands
that killed Bhatti to be exposed,” said PPP Senator Farhatullah Babar.
“We’ll be optimistic once the investigations endure trial in a court of
law. We await the final outcome of the process.” An earlier report prepared
on the basis of findings of joint investigation held Ilyas Kashmiri group and
Asmatullah Muawia of Punjabi Taliban responsible for the act. The report said
militants from Tehreek-i-Islami and Ghazi Force including Umar-ul-Bashar,
Ameer Mawia, Abu Saeed and Tahir-ul-Hassan executed the plan who later fled
to Dubai via Sri Lanka. Interestingly, the
investigating officer, SSP Mustansar Feroze, said that Hammad and his
colleagues have no links with any militant organisation. The only thing that
surfaced during interrogation is the relation of Hammad with one ‘Mulla
Hadi’ of Waziristan. “Hammad tells investigators Mulla Hadi is his
teacher,” said SSP Feroze. A military intelligence
official, however, does not agree with the police claim that Hammad and his
colleagues acted individually and are not related to terrorist outfits.
Wishing not to be named, he even disputed some of the claims made by Hammad
Adil. In the beginning, the
police arrested one Zia Rehman with whom Bhatti was having some business
disputes. Zia was later freed after being proved innocent by the court. The
court also released two other suspects Abid Malik and Qari Zia ur Rehman —
the later was arrested via Interpol from Dubai. Paul Bhatti disagreed with
the police claim that the terrorists are not related to al-Qaeda or Punjabi
Taliban. “Shahbaz was receiving threats from al-Qaeda, TTP and these people
must be linked with the terrorist network,” says Paul. Amir Rana of Pak Institute
for Peace Studies (PIPS) said Hammad’s confession ought to be taken
seriously. “Bhatti was killed by elements of Ghazi force — an affiliate
of Punjabi Taliban and al-Qaeda,” he said. “Al-Qaeda never bluffs. Once
they accept something, they never go back on it. It’s a matter of pride for
them.”
All change at 40 By Masud Alam Decades do little to change you, the essence of you. Or do they? From ten to twenty is the biggest leap, that from childhood to adulthood. Thirty is to start planning for retirement, savings and homestead … but all through you have remained essentially the same person with definite strengths and weaknesses and favourite ways of explaining away the weaknesses. Wait till you turn 40. You change, whether or not you resist or facilitate change. It’s not like a revelation that hits you the morning after your 40th birthday. It’s something more subtle and gradual. Seed for change comes like a random signal picked up by a rotating antenna. From a thought it grows into a solid mass like yogurt bacteria. That is when you or those around you notice the change. So it is possible for you to have started the process of change in your late 30s but it grew enough to be noticeable, in your early 50s. Or you can have completed the change before entering the forties — especially if you have anticipated everything from youth to middle age. Forty is just an approximate marker. Approaching and crossing 40 is, for a male, the equivalent of onset of puberty in a girl. The panic, the uncertainty, the embarrassment of growing tits, body hair, excitement of crossing into a more challenging and rewarding phase in life, at once attraction and repulsion towards sex, a renewed interest in boys … Only, males have the obvious advantage of age and experience using which they quickly adapt to the new realities and make the change seem seamless. The largest group of changers of course opts for religion. In a lot of cases it is only expected, but in some, it makes for a ‘sinner to saint’ story. A medical doctor who broke into a mosque during Fajr prayer after a night of debauchery that included all five major sins, and an eclectic cocktail of mind altering drugs, walked out a committed Muslim, and is today the most trusted follower of the imam of that masjid, and is his son-in-law. For the majority though, it’s only about growing a beard and going to mosque. This is the only change that is accepted by the society as legitimate, and is even encouraged. A few salmon-natured men do however turn against the flow in their middle age. Shaji always considered himself an ‘average Muslim’ who stays away from pork and alcohol, religiously. He decided to ‘try’ beer in his end 30s and turned into a regular and unapologetic hard liquor drinker by early 40s. The classmate who was nicknamed ‘maulvi’ in school and college turned an atheist in his middle age. People do all sorts of things in the grip of hormonal upheaval. Boys and girls have injured their newly discovered groins by experimenting with this or that object. Going through a similar surge of the more naughty hormones, middle aged men are much too aware that this is the last surge and after this there is only retreat. So they either decide to make the most of whatever amount of juice is left in them, and earn the title of ‘dirty old man’ aka tharki, or they convert this energy into a catalyst for another pursuit that gives them pleasure. For the last mentioned group, negotiating 40s is like a personal renaissance which allows them indulgences considered taboo at their age. They defy custom and sometimes laws and risk society’s censure in the pursuit of happiness. They do not just adapt to the change, they welcome it and exploit it for their own growth. Khan gave up paan and tobacco, reduced weight, had a hair transplant and laser eye-correction, and is finishing a three year degree programme in acting. He is not yet 50. He does not plan to take up acting as a profession; learning is what gives him a kick and a high. The teacher has ended a decade of self-imposed celibacy and loneliness by falling in love with a woman 30 years younger. They are still sharing moments regularly and are happy for each other’s company and satisfied with the creativity this relationship has lent their separate professions. The sloth joined the gym, the wannabe Devdas turned into an occasional and sociable drinker, the submissive husband fought for a divorce, the urban dweller restarted life as a farmer. ‘Forty is naughty’ rhymes but does not stand to reason. Crossing the threshold may make you very serious, or committed, brave, cowardly, introvert, party animal, spiritual, playful … any number of things. The only assurance is: men will change in their 40s, for better or for worse. And so the more apt cliché to use here is: Life begins (again) at 40. masudalam@yahoo.com
Change of course Last Sunday’s church bombing in Peshawar caused outrage and the public support for holding peace talks with the Pakistani Taliban seems to have declined considerably By Rahimullah Yusufzai It should surprise
nobody if the resolve of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s government to pursue
a negotiated solution of the decade-old conflict in Pakistan has weakened in
the wake of the two recent incidents that happened a week apart in the
troubled Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province and in which 87 persons, including an
army general and 83 members of the Christian community, were killed. The incidents caused
outrage and the public support for holding peace talks with the Pakistani
Taliban seems to have declined considerably. Though the ruling Pakistan
Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and its main rival Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI)
haven’t changed course yet and their leadership has been pleading for
giving peace a chance, the issue of negotiating with the militants has become
even more controversial and has polarised the nation. As his recent press talk in
London on his way to New York for attending the UN General Assembly showed,
the Prime Minister appeared frustrated for the first time since coming into
power after winning the May 11 general election over the lack of progress in
initiating peace talks with the militants despite his sincere efforts. The twin suicide bombings
at the 130-year old All Saints Church in Peshawar on September 22 not only
killed innocent church-goers but also destroyed hopes for finding a peaceful
solution to the increasingly brutal conflict involving Pakistan’s security
forces and the militants. The attacks in quick succession by the two young
suicide bombers killed 84 persons, almost half of them women, and caused
injuries to another 110. It was the biggest and deadliest attack on the
Pakistani Christians, who have suffered attacks in the past as well in
different parts of the country. A week earlier on September
15, Major General Sanaullah Khan Niazi, the general officer commanding for
the Swat region since March this year, was killed along with Lt Col Tauseef
Ahmad and Lance Naik Irfan Sattar in an explosion caused by an improvised
explosive device in Upper Dir district bordering Afghanistan. This was a
major provocation as far as the military was concerned as its leadership had
backed Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s peace initiative despite its reported
reservations over talking to irreconcilable militants who were refusing to
disarm and had violated past peace agreements. Any doubt that the
Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) wasn’t behind the bomb explosion that
killed the general was put to rest when its spokesman Shahidullah Shahid
claimed responsibility for the attack and said that the organisation’s Swat
chapter, whose head Maulana Fazlullah with several hundred fighters fled to
Afghanistan’s Kunar and Nuristan provinces after the 2009 military
operation in Malakand division, had executed the bombing. As the TTP led by
Hakimullah Mahsud has been approached by the government through mediators and
facilitators for talks, an attack by a faction linked to it carried a grim
message that it would continue attacks until its largely unreasonable demands
were met. Ironically, the TTP until
recently had been asking the government to release Taliban prisoners and pull
back troops from some of the tribal areas as part of confidence-building
measures to prove its sincerity before the formal talks. By ordering the
latest terrorist attacks, the TTP and its affiliates destroyed whatever
little trust-building had been accomplished between the two sides through the
painstaking efforts of the intermediaries. In fact, the government would now
be justified in asking the TTP to prove its sincerity towards the peace
process. The TTP didn’t claim
responsibility for the bombing of the church in Peshawar’s Kohati Gate
locality, but suspicions persist about the involvement of one of its many
front organisations in the incident. A TTP statement, issued three days after
the bombing apparently to deflect pressure and criticism by the media and
others in the civil society, pointed out that the militant group, Jundullah,
with which it had no concern had claimed responsibility for the attack. While
conceding that another shadowy group, Jundul Hafsa, was linked to it, the TTP
insisted that the latter had made no claim of responsibility for the church
bombing. However, the journalists in
Kohat and elsewhere who received the phone call from Jundul Hafsa’s
spokesman Ahmadullah were in no doubt that he claimed responsibility for the
attack and tried hard to justify the killing of Christian men, women and
children by arguing that the US drone strikes and the Pakistani military
operations too had killed their women and children in the tribal areas. Regarding the claim made by
Jundullah, suffice it to say that its commander-cum-spokesman Ahmad Marwat
has been invariably claiming responsibility for almost every attack by the
militants in Pakistan without being able to provide any evidence. He even
claimed that the French militant Mohammad Merah, who last year shot dead
seven persons including three Jewish children in France before being killed,
was also a Jundullah fighter. As always, his claim wasn’t true as the
French intelligence worked out the case and found no involvement of Jundullah
in it. If Jundullah having no
capability to carry out the church bombings and lacking credibility due to
its false claims in the past didn’t carry out the attack on the Peshawar
church, it is obvious that the suspicion would fall on the Jundul Hafsa,
named thus to seek revenge for the action by the army commandoes on
Islamabad’s Red Mosque (Lal Masjid) to which the Jamia Hafsa seminary was
attached. The TTP would have to come clean on this issue or dissociate from
Jundul Hafsa as right now it seems there are scores of such small militant
outfits that are running amok and are under nobody’s control. This also
complicates the government’s plans to identify the militant groups willing
to talk and capable of reining in their fighters. With dwindling public
support for the peace talks with the militants, the national consensus that
was achieved at the all parties’ conference attended by 35 political
parties and groups in Islamabad on September 9 is falling apart. Already, some PPP men have
called on the government to review the decision to negotiate peace with the
Pakistani Taliban. Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, the architect
of the project to peacefully end the conflict, has also hinted at reviewing
the decisions made at the all parties’ conference on the Prime Minister’s
return from abroad. The ruling PML-N could still make one last effort to
bring the militants to the negotiating table. Its most steadfast supporter in
this effort would be the PTI Chairman Imran Khan, who has now made the
controversial proposal of opening an office for the Pakistani Taliban to
facilitate peace talks with them. The two parties are poles apart on other
issues and bitter rivals, but their approach to tackling the issue of
militancy and terrorism is identical.
Grief and anger marks the city in the aftermath of the twin attacks on the church By Javed Aziz Khan Nazir Masih has no
words to tell his grandson Shayan as to where his parents and young sister
have gone since September 22. “Terrorists have eliminated my entire family.
I don’t know how to console Shayan who is constantly asking about his
parents and sister Meerab,” says Masih. Nazir’s son, his wife and
their daughter Meerab and Nazir’s second son were killed while his grand
daughter was wounded in the twin suicide bombings at the historic All
Saints’ Church of Peshawar’s urban Kohati Gate area on September 22. The
attack is the biggest so far on religious minorities in the history of
Pakistan. In an earlier attack in
Peshawar in 2008, militants had kidnapped 16 Christians from the University
Town area. However, all the kidnapped men were recovered the next morning
from Bara sub division of the nearby Khyber Agency without any harm. A church
in Mardan was ransacked by some hooligans in the guise of protestors during a
demonstration against the sacrilegious film in September 2012. There is grief and anger in
the Christian colony of Kohati, spread over hundreds of small single storey
houses. Most of the families have lost either a family member or a close
relative in the twin bombings. Same is the situation in the Christian Colony
in Swati Gate, Bara Road, Choti and Bari Laal Kurti, Tehkal and Gor Ghatri.
They are saddened over the deaths of their relatives and friends. “I have
lost my sister and brother-in-law in the attack. Their young daughter is
hospitalised,” said Shahzad, a resident of Swati. A total of 83 persons,
including 36 women, were killed while over 145 were wounded when two suicide
bombers struck at the 130-year-old church in the inner city. The Bishop of
Peshawar Peter Sarfaraz claimed that 139 people were killed in the twin
blasts while 160 others were wounded. The 130-year-old All
Saints’ Church is one of the oldest in the country. It was opened on St
John’s Day on December 27, 1883. Before the construction of the All Saints
Church, the Christians of the city used to worship in the Edwards Mission
School that is located in the neighbourhood of the church and is the oldest
in the region. The school is named after Herbert Edwards, once commissioner
of Peshawar. Those killed in the
September 22 blast included a seasoned educationist of Peshawar and principal
of the Government High School No-4 Peshawar Cantt, William Ghulam, his son
Nowail, who was a student of the final year of MBBS, and a young daughter who
was a student of third year at the Edward’s College. William’s wife
sustained critical injuries and is yet not aware that she has lost her spouse
and two children. The school remained closed
to mourn the death of the head of the institution as a large number of
Muslims received those coming for condolences at the building. Most of the victims of the
blast were poor labourers, sanitary workers while a few were teachers or had
better jobs. “Living here for over one
and a half century they are most peaceful and humble people. Majority of them
speak Punjabi,” said Aftab Ahmad Lala, a senior journalist of the city.
“Majority of them do odd jobs. Those who have been to the missionary
schools, however, are doing better jobs. The financial support and launching
of projects by the European countries and international Christian community
can improve their social and financial status.” Though a few of their
worship places suffered minor attacks in the recent years or received
threatening letters and phone calls, Christians never faced any major threat
despite the worst law and order situation in the country. The community is angry.
Violent protests have been held all over Pakistan, blocking the main highways
for hours, pelting stones at policemen, ransacking public properties and
setting on fire police uniform. Many relatives of the victims ransacked the
emergency ward of the Lady Reading Hospital, complaining against the doctors
and the paramedics. “We don’t want
policemen to be deployed at our worship places but want the government to
provide explosive detectors and scanners so that everybody coming into a
church can be checked,” said a Christian religious leader during a meeting
with Chief Minister Pervez Khattak. Khattak has announced Rs 500,000 for the
slain Christians as well as Rs 200,000 for the critically wounded and Rs
100,000 for those slightly wounded. Security has been further
enhanced in and around the worship places and colonies of the Christians all
over Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The Home and Tribal Affairs Department has directed
all the commissioners, deputy commissioners and political agents to review
the security arrangements for the properties of the minorities. A four-member
investigation team of police and another of the Federal Investigation Agency
are probing the case to find out which group was involved in the attack. Initially, it was reported
that Jundul Hifsa, an affiliate group of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan has
claimed responsibility for the attack but later the TTP spokesman claimed the
group or none of its affiliate was behind the attack on the All Saints’
Church. The writer is senior
reporter The News at Peshawar and can be contacted at javedaziz1@gmail.com
and followed on twitter @JavedAzizKhan
‘Us’ versus ‘them’ narrative BY Waqqas Mir Teaching kids how
to think and more importantly what to think matters for any government — in
fact it matters a lot. The recent controversy in Punjab after the ban on
teaching of a Comparative Religions course puts this in stark perspective. Although the capricious
decision of the provincial government offends sensibilities and, arguably,
the law of the land, the issue merits serious engagement. The provincial
government has couched its argument in liberal terms. This is as fascinating
as it is troubling. Relying on Article 22 of the constitution, the provincial
government argues that Muslim students cannot be made to receive “religious
instruction” regarding other religions. I use the term “religious
instruction” because that is what the constitution says: “No person
attending any educational institution shall be required to receive religious
instruction if such instruction relates to a religion other than his own”.
Regardless of what the
provincial government says, behind the apparently liberal argument lies a
deeply conservative agenda. And this agenda relates to the place of religion
of Islam in Pakistan. From an objective standpoint, the way that religion has
become a central element in almost every major debate in this country is a
remarkable success story for conservative forces — although one with
horrific consequences. Such an agenda is not unique to this country. Most
countries/governments are involved in some national project of shaping young
minds. All systems of formal education, at some level, make allowance for or
rely for their success on, to put it crudely, brainwashing. But lines are
drawn and the Government of Punjab’s claims fail on grounds of logic as
well as law. Keep in mind this is a
Fundamental Right that the provincial government is citing. These are given
to ‘persons’ or ‘citizens’. Is the provincial government enforcing
the rights of citizens on their behalf against a private party? This merits
thought and serious questioning. Notice also a large body of judgements lays
down the rule that fundamental rights in the constitution bind and limit the
state (its agents and state owned entities etc.) but not private actors.
Therefore, it is highly debatable whether Article 22 can even be applied
against a private party. There would be little, if any, support for such a
position in case-law/precedent of the superior courts. A governmental
agent’s actions can be challenged if it discriminates against or interferes
with your freedom of religion — but similar claims, if based on the
constitution, against private parties are likely to fail. I am not convinced
that the state can tell a private actor what to teach. But this is not an
absolute claim. The state can make a law (an ordinary act of parliament or a
provincial assembly) prohibiting teaching of hatred towards others and most
people would respect, even celebrate, that. But in this case the constitution
by and of itself, I contend, does not support the provincial government’s
claims against private actors. Equally important is the
definition of the term “religious instruction”. If a subject is named
World History and it teaches you, among other things, about the evolution of
different religions and their principal teachings then does that make it
“religious instruction”? Surely, the words “religious instruction”
envisage a distinction between teaching the history of the ‘Bhagvad Gita’
or its central message (and this could qualify as teaching history or
comparative religion) versus schooling you in religion-prescribed-rituals
with the expectation of you performing religious obligations of prayer,
worship etc. Still another argument
relates to the meaning of “required” to receive religious instruction. If
the school does not punish you for not taking a course, would it count as
being “required”? What if the school (government or private) teaches it
as an optional subject? But the debate is here to
stay and that is why engaging with it is important. In the Gobitis case
(1940), the Supreme Court of the United States upheld laws (i.e. declared
them valid) that made it mandatory for children in public schools to salute
the flag. The justification for the ruling, among other things, was fostering
national unity. But three years later in the Barnette case (1943), the apex
American court reversed its position. Justice Jackson wrote: “As
governmental pressure toward unity becomes greater, so strife becomes more
bitter as to whose unity it shall be.” And that should remind us
of the strife regarding Islam in this country. Whose Islam are we teaching?
The kind of Islam that, despite claiming to be a religion for all times,
needs to be protected against information relating to other major world
religions? Insecurity characterises
the state and its actions relating to religion in Pakistan. Things are not to
be viewed, words are not to be read/said and questions are not to be asked.
There is something obscene about this project since it is so oblivious of its
hollow foundations. Textbooks for science are also being investigated for
obscenity. If this slide is not arrested by those of us with a voice then
nothing will be off-limits. And I mean nothing. Our state-sanctioned
curriculum quite often defines good and evil, particularly in the context of
history, by linking goodness to ‘Muslim’ and evil to any other religion
that the Muslim-dominated armies fought. These Muslim soldiers in the
subcontinent, the state would have us believe, were not prone to greed, lust
or pillaging. When they won, it was their religion that was responsible. When
they lost, a ‘traitor’ had sided with evil. Bad military strategy or just
being incompetent was/is simply not an explanation. The ‘us’ versus
‘them’ narrative runs through the state’s programme of nation-building.
The derogatory terms thrown around for Christians, Hindus, Ahmadis, Jews etc
should make the state think if it really is possible to fashion a
‘Pakistani’ identity without linking it to religion. Christians, if they
invoke their minority status, are now being told “you are Pakistani, do not
make this about religion.” But that community never made it about religion,
we the Muslim majority ensured that they never forgot their religion — and
what it means in this society. So, whose unity shall it
be? The writer is a practicing
lawyer. He can be reached at wmir.rma@gmail.com or on Twitter@wordoflaw |
|
