CHAKWAL: A ‘blasphemy’ accused was sentenced to death and also to 10 years’ imprisonment on Monday, sources told Dawn. Soofi Mohammad Ishaq of Talagang town had been facing the charge since 2009. On Monday, an Additional Sessions Judge of Jhelum sentenced him to death and 10 years’ imprisonment and fined him Rs200,000. Soofi Mohammad Ishaq was settled in United States where he worked as a cleric. He returned to Talagang in 2009 and was given a warm welcome by hundreds of his disciples. His followers also kissed his feet, but some people objected to the act of “bowing down before Ishaq” and later accused his followers of branding him a prophet. Later, Ishaq’s rivals launched a campaign against him and a young man named Asadullah, allegedly at the behest of his Deobandi mentors, lodged a complaint at the Talagang police station. He accused Ishaq of committing blasphemy. Police booked Ishaq under sections 295A and 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code and his case was heard by Chakwal’s Additional Sessions Judge Sajid Awan. After completion of hearing, the judge set a date for announcing the judgment, but later he wrote a letter to the Lahore High Court’s Rawalpindi bench, informing it that he could not announce the verdict because of security risks. “Judge Sajid Awan pleaded to the LHC that as he is deputed in Chakwal, he cannot announce the verdict because of security risks and, therefore, the case should be referred to another district,” said Advocate Chaudhry Mehmood Akhtar, the counsel of the accused. REFERENCE: Cleric sentenced to death in blasphemy caseNabeel Anwar Dhakku January 31, 2012 http://www.dawn.com/2012/01/31/cleric-sentenced-to-death-in-blasphemy-case.html
Use of Blasphemy Law to settle Personal Enmity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOU8KowGsn8
The LHC referred the case to Jhelum’s district and sessions judge, who marked the case to his subordinate Additional Sessions Judge Chaudhry Mumtaz Hussain, who announced the verdict on Friday. Informed sources told Dawn that Soofi Ishaq had been appointed Gaddi Nasheen of the shrine of Pir Fazal Shah. This, according to sources, infuriated complainant Asadullah, who belonged to Pir Fazal Shah’s family, and he used the opportunity to register the blasphemy case against Ishaq. “My client pleaded to the court that he cannot even think of committing blasphemy.” He told the court that he believed that the holy prophet (peace be upon him) was the last Messnger of Allah,” Advocate Chaudhry Akhtar Mehmood said. When contacted by Dawn, Asadullah claimed to have seen followers of Ishaq bowing their heads before him and heard them chanting slogans of “Yaa Rasool Allah”. When asked why other religious leaders did not move against Ishaq, he said: “I was the first to see the way Ishaq’s followers behaved and I recorded it on my camera. And Allah has given me the courage to move against the blasphemer.” REFERENCE: Cleric sentenced to death in blasphemy caseNabeel Anwar Dhakku January 31, 2012 http://www.dawn.com/2012/01/31/cleric-sentenced-to-death-in-blasphemy-case.html
Allaamah Kaukab Noorani Okarvi Declares: Deobandis are Kaafir (Apostate)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nfde2WGvf3w
Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 1 (Column Kaar - 8th Jan 2011)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdGXvX7UbeE
Source: Express, 8 January 2010
Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 2 (Column Kaar - 8th Jan 2011)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhy8DAUQKnk
"As it was the unanimous demand of the Ulema, Mashaikh and the people, therefore, I have decided to do away with the procedural change in registration of FIR under the blasphemy law" (General Musharraf, Dawn 17.5.2000). How was public opinion determined? No one asked me! Is the reference to ulema and mashaikh to the self-proclaimed ones or men and women of Islamic learning? And did populism prevail over Islam? Why was no attempt made to enter into a debate, or at least a learned Islamic discourse? What was the role of the two ministers (religious affairs and law) who are primarily concerned with this issue? One does not recollect any valuable contribution from these two sources. The sad fact is that deterioration has set in every aspect of national life. The most acute realization of this is felt whenever there is any interaction with the government. There is no substitute for learning and debate, and we are managing to do without either and consequently suffer. The government seems to have decided for all of us that in Pakistan 2000 our exposure to Islam is to be funnelled through the myopic, self-styled 'guides', whose principal contribution has been spreading hatred and attacking the foundations of the state. No attention is being paid to the true learned men and women of Islam, because unlike the camp which propagates violence in achieving their goals, these true Muslims do not make even a feeble attempt to be heard. Pampering this group does not serve the cause of Islam, is contrary to shariat and departs from the methodology adopted by Jinnah and those who devotedly worked for attaining this homeland. There is no substitute for knowledge, dialogue and niyat (intention). Let us learn a lesson from history. My father, Qazi Muhammad Isa, who was principally responsible for bringing Balochistan into the fold of Pakistan, was a member of the Balochistan Law Reform Commission. The other members included Balochistan's governor, Amir-ul-Mulk Mengal, and Mr Fazle Ghani Khan.These gentlemen informed me how my father had handled a potentially explosive situation. The Balochistan Law Reform Commission made visits to a number of different places to gather public opinion. On a visit to a traditional-conservative Pathan area they were accosted by the elders and ulema who demanded the enforcement of shariat and objected to the work of the Commission, which was perceived by them to be anti-shariat. It transpired that the local Pathans had taken strong exception to recording the names of their womenfolk on the recently introduced national identity cards. This according to them was un-Islamic and therefore unacceptable. My father inquired whether the delegation would be kind enough to enlighten him about the names of Islam's first convert and wife of the Prophet (PBUH) and the Prophet's daughter married to Hazrat Ali.Hazrat Khadija and Hazrat Fatima was the prompt answer. Upon hearing this, my father inquired whether the names of these distinguished ladies could be taken if Islam was against this practice. The delegation fell silent and abandoned their objection to the name insertion in the identity cards. They then said "zhumz shariat ghoaru" ('we want shariat') and not "Angrezi qanoon" (English law). My father responded that the Commission could report this desire and wanted the delegation to help them. He suggested that this could be done if the delegation was prepared to abandon certain prevailing but un-Islamic practices. He advised that they should waive accumulated usury which was due to them (Pathans being notorious and usurious moneylenders), stop the cultivation and trade in intoxicants (opium and hashish) and recognize the shares of mothers, widows and daughters in inheritance. (Men divide the ladies' shares among themselves and the revenue records of these and many rural areas of the country, reveal the virtual absence of a female population). The delegation immediately backtracked saying that this was not possible because these were their established tribal practices and had been validated by jirga. On being asked whether they wanted the endorsement of jirga practices contrary to shariat, the delegation beat a hasty retreat never to be seen or heard of again. Knowledge and reason were subsequently to prevail upon superstition and exploitation. The light of enlightenment vanquished the darkness of ignorance. Men of peace achieved this, men who adhered to Quaid's ideals and men who did not command armies. In contrast, an all-powerful government, having been granted by the Supreme Court the power to amend the Constitution, failed to effect, what from a legal perspective was an insignificant amendment in the law. The amendment which the government wanted to bring about was that any report of an offence of blasphemy should in the future be made to the district magistrate and not at the police station. A practice of settling personal vendettas by lodging false reports of offence of blasphemy (Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code) against a person or persons intended to be harmed has developed. The fact that in Pakistan lodging of such FIRs has become matter of frequent occurrence confirms the misuse of this provision of the law. Needless to stress that in a predominantly Muslim country any derogatory or disrespectful remark about the Prophet (PBUH) is unthinkable. Only one bereft of any reason or sense could risk inviting society's wrath and possibly worse by indulging in any such sacrilegious utterances. To check false allegations of blasphemy from being made and Islam wrongly exploited for vendetta or for settling personal scores, which is anathema to a (true) Muslim, it was essential that the power of the police to entertain an FIR be curtailed. In advocating such a change General Musharraf was not acting against the interest of Islam. Undoubtedly, he was well intentioned but perhaps did not have the requisite support from his team to counteract the agitators. Occupying ministerial positions but bereft of vision and knowledge they could only advise an expedient retreat. The action could only encourage the tendency to use religion to harass and persecute one's enemies and rivals. The insistence on retaining the jurisdiction of the police in preference to that of the district magistrate, who is a more senior member of the administration, is incomprehensible. Unless those agitating against the proposed amendment were doing so because they considered police stations more malleable and amenable to pressure and inducement and, therefore, were ideally suited to their questionable purpose and interests. Is our government so out of touch that it does not realize that the poor, the rich, the Muslim, the Christian, the literate, the illiterate, citizens of Pakistan, if they are united in a view, it is that Pakistani police stations are dens of inequity, and not citadels which best preserve Islamic values. The maximum punishment for blasphemy in Pakistan is death, or imprisonment for life, and also fine. There is no discretion for imposing a lesser sentence. The process which may result in the passing of this sentence commences upon the lodging of an FIR in a police station, often on payment of a bribe, and in many cases without a shred of evidence, except the word of a self-described alim. There is no punishment prescribed for lodging a false report. Eminent ulema have over the centuries written copiously on the subject. They have deliberated on whether blasphemy (insulting the Holy Prophet, sabb al-Rasool) without an element of apostasy (repudiation of Islam, sabb Allah, riddah) is an offence in Islam. They have considered the significance of the Prophet (PBUH) not acting against those who renounced Islam and vilified and defamed him. Included among these were Abd Allah b. Abi Sarh, Ikramah b. Abi Jahl, Safwan b. Umayyah, and Hinda, the wife of Abu Sufyan. A writer on the subject states that, "some Jews also addressed the Prophet with the words, 'death be upon you, (al-sam alaykum), but, in none of the reports did the Prophet order any punishment." They have thus determined that the offence is not hadd (ordained by God) but tazir. Imam Abu Hanifah maintained that a dhimmi (non-Muslim) is not liable to the death punishment for the offence of blasphemy. Islam is a religion which stands for peace and insists on justice. God almighty advised the Holy Prophet and early believers to develop their inner resources through patience and resilience. "Quite a number of the people of the Book wish they could turn you back to infidelity after ye have believed - from (their) selfish envy, after the Truth hath become manifest unto them, but forgive and overlook" (surah Al-Baqarah, verse 109). A commentator on this verse says: "It teaches that the success of Islam had naturally made the un-believers insecure and envious, and that under such circumstances a punitive approach would not produce the desired result". "And ye shall certainly hear much that will grieve you, from those who received the Book before you and from those who worship partners besides Allah. But if ye persevere patiently, and guard against evil - then that indeed is a matter of great resolution (the best course with which to determine your affairs)" (surah Al-Imran, verse 186). It is noteworthy that the law in its present form does not consider the question of repentance. Is this Islamic? "The Hanafis and the majority of the Shafis consider blasphemy to be in the same category as apostasy and have ruled that repentance is admissible in both cases. Thus, the blasphemer, like the apostate, is to be asked for repentance on three consecutive days, which will be counted from the time of conviction" (Freedom of Expression in Islam by Dr Mohammad Hashim Kamali). REFERENCE: NEED TO CHECK MISUSE OF BLASPHEMY LAW (28 May 2000) EDITOR'S NOTE: An article entitled "Need to Check Misuse of Blasphemy Law" by Qazi Faez Isa, was published in DAWN, Karachi, on Sunday, May 28, 2000 NEED TO CHECK MISUSE OF BLASPHEMY LAW BY QAZI FAEZ ISA http://ecumene.org/INRFVVP/blasphemy.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldTfFnU2bGM
The blasphemy laws were legislated and subsequently made more strict to ensure protection to the minorities. But some recent incidents have shown that even the Muslims were victimized under the present blasphemy law on the complaint of other fellow Muslims. The most recent example is provided by gory murder of Yusuf Kizab in the Kot Lakhpat Jail by an activist of the banned Sipahe-i-Sahaba. Yusuf had been sentenced to death sentence under the blasphemy laws. The worst example was the suicide of Father John Joseph some four years ago. On the eve of May 6, 1998 Dr Joseph, the Bishop of Faisalabad, committed suicide in front of the Sessions Court, Sahiwal to protest against the death sentence of a Christian Ayub Masih, pronounced by the court under the blasphemy law. The minority communities were never satisfied with the blasphemy law. They have been opposing it since its promulgation. Their protest against it became louder when a mandatory death punishment was incorporated in the Section 295-C of Pakistan Penal Code in 1991. The blasphemy law was enacted by the British to protect the religious sentiments of the Muslim minorities in the subcontinent against the Hindu majority. After the creation of Pakistan as the Muslims were no more a minority, the law should have been abolished. But it was made more stringent: Section 295-A was enacted in 1927 (Pakistan Penal Code). In 1980, Section 298-A was inserted. In 1982, Section 295-B was introduced. In 1986, Section 295-C was legislated. In 1991, life imprisonment was replaced with the mandatory death penalty in the Section 295-C. When the blasphemy laws were not harsh and the Muslims were tolerant towards the non-Muslim minorities, the latter remained mindful of the religious feelings of the former. As they grew intolerant towards the minorities and the capital punishment was incorporated in the law, the cases of blasphemy started occurring more frequently. From 1948-1979, 11 cases of blasphemy were registered. Only three were reported from 1979-1986. Forty-four cases were filed from 1987-1999. In 2000, 52 cases were registered - 43 against the Muslims and nine against the Non-Muslims. This shows, the law is being ‘abused’ more blatantly by the Muslims against the Muslims to settle their scores. ‘Blasphemy’ has been made an offence against the state. Anybody can go to a police station and register a case under Section 295-C against any person. The police would immediately register a case and arrest the accused without checking the veracity of the facts. A mohrrar (constable) is academically not competent to judge whether or not the circumstances constitute an act of blasphemy. The greater irony is, the death sentence under S. 295-C to a non-Muslim. This can be challenged in the Supreme Court. Ibne Tamia in his book Asare Mal Maslool has referred to a note of Hazrat Imam Abu Hanifa who says that a non-Muslim cannot be sentenced to death for blasphemy because such a penalty falls in the category of hadd (a sort of maximum punishment). When a Muslim blasphemes against the Holy Prophet, he becomes a murtid (a person who repudiates Islam after embracing it) whose punishment is death. A non-Muslim cannot be a murtid because he is already a kafir (non-Muslim). Therefore, the ‘hadd’ punishments are not applicable to the non-Muslims. They could be punished only under tazir (non-hadd punishments). The semi-literate mullas argue in the support of the death sentence saying that there is an ijma (consensus) on this issue by the founders of the four Fiqhs. If this plea is correct, then why Imam Abu Hanifa (the great Muslim scholar and the founder of the Hanafi school of thought) holds a contrary opinion? After Jinnah's death, the ruling elite embraced the Machiavellian politics of the colonial rulers and divided the nation on religious, sectarian and linguistic bases. The blasphemy law is an integral part of this baleful politics that has made Pakistan a deeply divided society. History is full of incidents that remind us of the great love, amity, unity, and affinity between the Muslims and the non-Muslims. A Pakistani author Ahmad Salim relates one such incident in his book, Pakistan aur Aqaliyatein. He writes that Ahmadabad was in the grip of Hindu-Muslim riots in 1969. During those days, a small locality, Mimobai that consisted of around 145 houses - 35 belonged to the Muslims and the rest were of the Hindus - had been reduced to ashes. A Sikh namely Kalyan Singh, one of the eye witnesses to this gory event, told the aid workers that an armed mob of furious Hindus came to the non-Muslim elders and asked them to identify the houses of the Muslims so that their (non-Muslims) property is not harmed. But they refused to do that. The mob threatened to set all the houses on fire. Even this could not intimidate them and the frenzied Hindus torched all the houses. Kalyan Singh said: “The Muslims and the non-Muslims had been living together for centuries in Mimobai. They shared each other's happiness and grief. How could we face Bhagwan if we had saved our houses while letting the mob torch the houses of our Muslim brothers, sisters, mothers, uncles!!” REFERENCE: The Impact of The Blasphemy Law by Mohammad Shehzad Copyright © The DAWN Group of Newspapers Issue No.4, September 2002 http://www.sikhspectrum.com/092002/shehzad.htm
Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 4 (Column Kaar - 8th Jan 2011)
Religious holidays in the country are fast becoming marked by violence. Over the weekend, processions celebrating Eid Miladun Nabi in Faisalabad and D.I. Khan were attacked causing death, injuries and mayhem. - Thankfully, the violence was quickly contained and did not rise to the level of terribleness that the country has unfortunately witnessed in recent times. Pakistanis hardly need reminding that the country is in the grip of religious intolerance and violence the war against militancy has touched every corner of the country inflicting a terrible toll, and for a while certain areas were virtually ceded to the militants without a fight. But there is another, more insidious, religious poison that is spreading, largely unnoticed, across the country, and it is not quite as easy to explain as the territorial ambitions of the Taliban. That poison has pit Sunni against Shia, Deobandi against Barelvi, Muslim against religious minorities — and it defies easy categorisation. The only thing its various strands seem to have in common is a hatred for everything that is `different`, where `different` is inevitably judged as an unacceptable deviation and therefore deserving of punishment, even death, in many instances. Reference: Religious violence Dawn Editorial March 1, 2010 http://archives.dawn.com/archives/32519
URL: http://youtu.be/kXWAQ7gbSiY
Deobandis says Barelvis are Kaafir (Apostate) - Part - 2
URL: http://youtu.be/dxPluNViVlk
Invariably — perhaps suggesting where the cure must first begin — a steady diet of dogmatic preaching is to be found wherever such violence occurs. In Faisalabad, the khatib of a local mosque was arrested on charges of inciting people to violence. It will take great political will but such violent elements need to be purged from the mosques and madressahs, for without that it will not be possible to roll back the tide of hate that is threatening to engulf the country. Nor should it be viewed as some-thing that is impossible to do. After all, only a few years ago, processions such as those witnessed on Saturday were low-key and passed off peacefully. What is new is the sense of one-upmanship each group wants to have a bigger and louder affair and is ever keen to rattle or taunt rival groups. In the event, the police and local administrations largely manage to do a good job and keep tensions to a minimum. But that is mere fire-fighting and ends up dealing with only the symptom and not the disease. The infrastructure of hate that has slowly taken hold at the grass-roots level is really what needs to be dismantled. Further delay in initiating that process will only cause the problem to grow in magnitude. Reference: Religious violence Dawn Editorial March 1, 2010 http://archives.dawn.com/archives/32519
Blasphemy Law & Violence - 1 (Reporter - Dawn News Jan 2011)
URL: http://youtu.be/gCP6zi5bZ0k
Blasphemy Law & Violence - 2 (Reporter - Dawn News Jan 2011)
URL: http://youtu.be/ZkgrjVmuNoc
Ahl e Hadith (Wahabis) on Deobandi Tableeghi Jamat Attaullah Dayrvi
Ahl e Hadith (Wahabis) on Deobandi Tableeghi Jamat Attaullah Dayrvi
Blasphemy Law & Violence - 3 (Reporter - Dawn News Jan 2011)
URL: http://youtu.be/nAjIjqWpHTA
For English Translation of the above quotes click the links: Saudi Fatwa Against Tableeghi Jamat but Jang Group Promotes Kufr/Shirk/Bida'at. http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2011/08/saudi-fatwa-against-tableeghi-jamat-but.html SAUDI SCHOLARS ISSUED FATWA AGAINST DEOBANDIS - Tablighi Jamaat - Teachings of Shirk in the book - Fazail Amaal - SAUDI (Muslim) FATWA AGAINST THE SCHOLARS (Muslim) OF DEOBAND AND DEOBANDIS (Muslim) - The Necessity For the Imaam To Have Correct Aqeedah Author: Shaikh Badee ud-Deen Shah as-Sindee (Pir Jhanda of Pakistan) Glimpses of some of the beliefs and practices of the Deobandite Hanafis which are not free from great deviations in Aqeedah, Tawheed and Manhaj. An excellent article. Saudi Fatwas against Pakistani Mullahs & Anarchist Mullahs of Pakistan. http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2011/01/saudi-fatwas-against-pakistani-mullahs.html
Ahl-e-Hadith (Wahabis) on Deobandi Sufism by Attaullah Dayrvi
Ahl-e-Hadith (Wahabis) on Deobandi Sufism by Attaullah Dayrvi
Blasphemy Law & Violence - 4 (Reporter - Dawn News Jan 2011)
URL: http://youtu.be/WjsSs712CSo
Blasphemy Law & Violence - 5 (Reporter - Dawn News Jan 2011)
URL: http://youtu.be/3br0F_DIbok
Blasphemy Law and Deobandis (as Per Deobandi Books)
Blasphemy Law and Deobandis (as Per Deobandi Books)
Mullahs Calling Kafir to others - Samaa TV Discussion 1-2
URL: http://youtu.be/Xkq1I6v2c74
Blasphemy Law and Barelvis (as Per Deoband)
Blasphemy Law and Barelvis (as Per Deoband)
Mullahs Calling Kafir to others - Samaa TV Discussion 2-2
URL: http://youtu.be/tlGfunU50pw
Blasphemous Jamat-E-Islami and Mawdudi
Blasphemous Jamat-E-Islami and Mawdudi
The Idea of Pakistan - Prof Mehdi Hasan (1-2)
URL: http://youtu.be/ILxBkLmeCJ4
Blasphemy Law and Shias (as Per Sunnis)
Blasphemy Law and Shias (as Per Sunnis)
The Idea of Pakistan - Prof Mehdi Hasan (2-2)
URL: http://youtu.be/K0Rn1RO4mqE
Who is Blasphemous Gustakh Kaun by Abul Qasim M Ismail
Who is Blasphemous Gustakh Kaun by Abul Qasim M Ismail
Barelvi Mullah says Every Pakistani is KAFIR (Apostate)
URL: http://youtu.be/FTANZusPICU
Sentiments were exploited against Salmaan Taseer: Ashrafi - * Pakistan Ulema Council chairman says whosoever declared it was justified to kill Taseer should come on media to prove his claim before nation - Daily Times Monitor - LAHORE: Pakistan Ulema Council (PUC) Chairman Allama Tahir Ashrafi has admitted that late Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer was right in his claims regarding the misuse of the blasphemy law against minorities and said that sentiments were exploited against him, a private TV channel reported on Saturday. Ashrafi maintained that there had been several statements of Taseer, in which he had condemned the blasphemy, adding that not only the late governor, but many Ulemas, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q) leaders had also spoken in similar manner. He pointed out that none of them was a mufti, who decreed that Taseer had turned to be a non-believer, saying that it was the work of a mufti and Darul Iftaa to deliver such edicts. Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) chief Fazlur Rehman and Abul Khair Zubair, a few days back, maintained that no authentic mufti gave an edict of killing Taseer, the channel quoted Ashrafi as saying. The PUC chairman questioned that why the blasphemy law was not implemented when on 12th Rabbiul Awwal of this Islamic year (in 2010), some 750 copies of the holy Quran and several books of Hadith and Tafseer were set on fire by unidentified people at late Allama Ziaul Haq Qasmi’s residence in Faisalabad and a footage of this incident was also present.
“After the incident, Sunni Ittehad Council Chairman Sahibzada Fazal Karim sought registration of an FIR under 295-C against Zahid Qasmi, son of late Qasmi. Both the sides, sects ‘Deobandi’ and ‘Barelvi’, requested police seeking FIRs against each other, but the issue was resolved later,” he recalled and questioned why such a settlement was not counted as blasphemy or profanity, the channel reported. Ashrafi also questioned that the case of Aasia Bibi was in court and “if the high court releases her”, the clerics would, then, accept this decision or not. Adding to the same point, he said, “If the clerics accepts her release by the high court, then who would be responsible for Salmaan Taseer’s blood.” He strongly criticised those who had been providing safety to the murdered the governor, the channel said. Ashrafi further said, “If an accused says that he/she has not committed blasphemy, even Ulema-e-Ahnaf have the capacity to acquit him/her.” Salmaan’s matter was political, he added. He questioned why this matter gained attention when Fazlur Rehman quitted the coalition. He also said that Mazhar Saeed Kazmi, brother of former religious minister Hamid Saeed Kazmi, was now saying that it was not appropriate to offer the funeral prayers of Salmaan Taseer. “This is so unfortunate. Why Kazmi did not talk such thing when he was enjoying the ministry of religious affairs,” he added.
Neither Salmaan Taseer was Rajpal nor Mumtaz Qadri was Ghazi Ilm Din Shaheed, the PUC chairman said and claimed that even the most impious person could not dare to commit blasphemy. Salmaan’s statement was on record and he could not even imagine doing so, he maintained. He recalled that Taseer’s father MD Taseer was the person who provided a death-bed to Ghazi Ilm Din Shaheed and Syed Ataullah Shah Bukhari called Taseer’s mother his sister. He said that the governor could be a bold person, offensive to a maulvi but he could not be a blasphemer. Ashrafi said that the one who declared that it was justified to kill Salmaan Taseer should come on media and prove it in front of the nation. Senior Analyst Syed Mumtaz Shah, who also participated in the TV programme, said that, in 1981, there was a baton-carrying mob, in which two parties were raising different voices on Naara e Risaalat and were harming each other. One was saying Ya Rasool Allah and the other was saying Muhammad-ur Rasool Allah, he said, adding that cases were filed against each other. Renowned Journalist Abbas Athar said that Barelvi ulemas banned offering Salmaan’s funeral prayers, adding that they had also remarked on the funerals of Lal Mosque’s girls that they were against the state. He questioned that did Mumtaz Qadri, being on duty, showed his loyalty with the state by shooting the governor. He asked that why not his treachery be highlighted. He also said that the biggest problem in the blasphemy law was that “when anyone gets blamed for committing blasphemy then it suddenly becomes a mob’s law”. He said that whenever it would be exposed there would be money behind the assassin and conspiracy too, adding that Mumtaz Qadri was not alone in it.
Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) member Azam Nazeer Tararr advocate said that everyone was agreed on the punishment of blasphemy, but haste was used while imposing it. He said that an inquiry should be made for complaints against the government officials, adding that “our problem is that the law is handed over to those who don’t have any training to bear the public pressure and use to surrender in front of it”. He said that according to the constitution, everyone had the right to defend themselves, adding that Article 4 and 9 defended the basic rights of living. He further said that extrajudicial killing was the violation of the constitution and human rights, adding that Taseer’s murder was an extrajudicial killing, which could not be justified. He further said that there was a decision of the Lahore High Court (LHC) former chief justice, Khawaja Sharif, present in the light of a Hadith saying that “the Prophet (PBUH) said that 10 guilty ones can be freed but no innocent can be punished on the base of doubt”, the channel said. Reference: Sentiments were exploited against Salmaan Taseer: Ashrafi * Pakistan Ulema Council chairman says whosoever declared it was justified to kill Taseer should come on media to prove his claim before nation Daily Times Monitor Sunday, January 09, 2011 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2011%5C01%5C09%5Cstory_9-1-2011_pg7_18
No comments:
Post a Comment