Monday, August 6, 2012

Talibanization of Pakistan via Judiciary & Imran Khan.

2012 ISLAMABAD: While hearing a letter filed by justice (retd) Wajihuddin and former Jamaat-e-Islami chief Kazi Hussain Ahmed against obscenity aired on TV channels, Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry observed on Monday that TV channels are “spreading vulgarity” and Pemra is doing nothing to prevent it. The Pemra acting chairman, Abdul Jabbar, who had appeared in the courtroom today, sought a month’s time to do the research, but the court denied his request. The Supreme Court also ruled that it is not yet forming a commission, but only granting a week’s time to the regulatory authority. The chief justice cited some offensive programmes and advertisements and said that one finds it difficult to watch them with family. He also said that some of them are aired even during Iftar time, which should be avoided. The chief justice told Jabbar to categorise programmes with proper ratings – like it is done in the Western media – so that the people should know beforehand what they are watching. The Pemra acting chairman stated that Indian channels were banned in Pakistan to restrain broadcast of any improper programmes and added that the Pakistani channels will now be screened for any such programmes. Jabbar further informed the court that laws related to regularity of the programmes were not well-defined and that vulgarity was relative. “Something which is vulgar to the complainants might not be vulgar to you and me.” While observing that TV channels now air press conferences and programmes against the judiciary, the Supreme Court ordered the Pemra acting chairman to pull out the record related to such programmes and bring it before the court in the next hearing. Justice Chaudhry observed that the court was aware about the TV shows which were aired solely for the purpose of maligning the judiciary. The court also observed that Jabbar is still working as an acting chairman of Pemra, while it has been over a year since he has been inducted. The deputy attorney general requested the court to also take notice of the TV shows that run parodies of politicians and leaders. The chief justice observed that such programmes are “in good humour” and that such programmes “are enjoyed.” Concurring with his statement, Justice Tariq Pervaiz said that such programmes are aired across the world and have never faced any dissent. Justice Pervaiz said that even in the United States, president Barack Obama’s parodies are aired on TV. However, he said that such parodies and cartoons should not be insulting and should not target religion. REFERENCE: TV channels spreading vulgarity, PEMRA doing nothing: Chief justice By Azam Khan Published: August 6, 2012 

Dr Arsalan used CJP House’s address for commercial deals Friday, August 03, 2012  LAHORE: According to reliable sources, Dr Arsalan Iftikhar Chaudhry was using the official address of Chief Justice House, Islamabad, for commercial purposes. He was even using this address for his company with the name and style F.E.A. (Pvt) Ltd. Huge amounts, reportedly over Rs 300 million, were deposited in the account of this company owned by Arsalan Iftikhar with the correspondence address of Chief Justice House. It is a matter of concern that how an account could be opened in the name of a private limited company with the address of Chief Justice House. This is a clear violation of Know Your Customers (KYC) instructions of the State Bank of Pakistan, which are required to be religiously followed by all banks and financial institutions of the country. Legally and morally, it cannot be comprehended as to how the official residence of the Chief Justice of Pakistan can be used for commercial deals. The huge amounts which reportedly were credited as a matter of routine since 2009 in the accounts of Arsalan Iftikhar also raises the question as to why not a single Suspicious Transaction Report (STR) was ever generated. Bankers are under a legal obligation to report all unusual or large transactions to NAB as well as Financial Monitoring Unit (FMU) of the State Bank of Pakistan, which deal with anti-money laundering matters. Under ordinary circumstances, it is the normal practice for the banks to immediately report to the State Bank of Pakistan any transaction that is not commensurate with the financial status of the account holder. In the Arsalan Iftikhar case, it has been widely reported that the present net worth of the Chief Justice’s son is Rs 900 million. It is however relevant to note that until 2007, he was merely a Grade-17 government officer who was totally dependent on his salary or his father. However, no report was ever sent to the State Bank of Pakistan about the sudden surge and accretion in Arsalan Iftikhar’s accounts. This was indeed a phenomenal growth and extremely rare. This non-reporting can either be considered as a great favour to Arsalan by the bankers or they were afraid because the address given for these accounts was the official residence of the Chief Justice of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Against this backdrop, a new case is likely to emerge under the Anti-Money Laundering Act 2010 unless the State Bank, FIA, NAB and other agencies opt to keep their eyes shut for obvious reasons. Whether or not the Supreme Court of Pakistan will take suo motu notice of such acts of Arsalan will be seen in the coming days, especially when the criminal inquiry against him has come to a grinding halt on the orders of the apex court. The bankers nevertheless have violated anti-money laundering laws and may now face penal consequences for ignoring Arsalan’s accounts. Will anyone touch Arsalan? Only the Supreme Court can tell. REFERENCE: Dr Arsalan used CJP House’s address for commercial deals Friday, August 03, 2012 By Our Special Correspondent

Kamran Shahid you are targeting CJ: Justice Wajihuddin Ahmed

SC takes suo moto notice of obscenity in media Ahmad Noorani Thursday, July 26, 2012 ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has converted the letters of Justice (R) Wajihuddin Ahmed, Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Muhammad Hussain Mehnati against obscenity and vulgarity on the media into a petition and issued notices to chairmen PTA and Pemra and has fixed it for hearing on July 27, 2012. The petition is marked 104/2012 and the case will be heard in the open court on Friday. The SC order issued on Wednesday titled “Regarding control of obscene and other objectionable material carried in the media” reads: “Take notice that three separate letters were received from Justice (R) Wajihuddin Ahmad, Qazi Hussain Ahmad, ex-Ameer Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan and Muhammad Hussain Mehnati, Ameer Jamat-e-Islami Karachi on the subject cited above and on placing all these letters before the honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan. His lordship was pleased to call reports from chairman PTA and Chairman Pemra. After perusal of the said reports, the honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan was pleased to pass the following order; ‘Treat this matter as petition under article 184(3). Put up in court. Notice to attorney general, chairman Pemra and to petitioners be issued for 27.07.2012.’ “Take further notice that the matter has been registered as the Constitutional petition No 104/2012 and is fixed for hearing on 27.07.2012 in Court House Islamabad.”The major issues regarding obscenity highlighted in the petition involve airing of illegal Indian channels through cable network, obscene and vulgar dramas on Pakistani channels, immoral advertisements on TV channels, illegal CD channels distributed by cable networks in connivance with Pemra, and in particular the entertainment segments in the news bulletins on Pakistani news channels. Following complaints from the two respected public figures, the Human Rights Cell of the apex court, following CJ’s direction, had sought views from chairman Pemra and chairman PTA, both of whom have given routine bureaucratic responses without any concrete assurance that the menace would be effectively checked and controlled. Chairman Pemra in his response to the Supreme Court wrote: “The local market is flooded with smuggled and pirated CDs, DVDs, decoders, dishes and cards, which are proliferating obscenity through broadcast media and distribution service. On its part, Pemra took action against distribution and sale of illegal decoders and seized the equipment of Zee TV package. This action was challenged in the Lahore High Court (LHC) and the court was pleased to suspend the seizure. “Consequent to which Pemra had to return the equipment. Nevertheless, Pemra has not stopped its efforts in this regard. It may kindly be appreciated that Pemra cannot fully eradicate this menace and it will only be possible with coordinated efforts of all other relevant agencies as well.” It is important to mention here that whenever the Supreme Court takes up the issue of obscenity and vulgarity some objectionable Indian TV channels are closed for a few days but they stage a comeback. Even on Wednesday when the Supreme Court issued this latest order and fixed the case for Friday, sources told The News that Indian TV channels were closed in some big cities. Sources say a huge amount of money is involved in allowing illegal CD channels, distribution of illegal Indian TV channels and in many other similar illegal acts. REFERENCE: SC takes suo moto notice of obscenity in media Ahmad Noorani Thursday, July 26, 2012

Pakistan is one of those unfortunate Islamic Countries where the Political Islamist type of Mullahs, Journalists, Anchorpersons, Newspapers, Analysts and Politicians (PPP/PML-N also included) insult and mock Islam, Quran and Sunnah in the worst possible way and that too to gain some cheap political points and raise doubt against political opponent using the "Holy Name of Islam, Quran and Sunnh" - the latest joke is done by Mufti Ansar Abbasi while opining on the rally of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf and Imran Khan (let me clear one thing Imran Khan and his party have every right to hold rally and say whatever he or his party like) where several commandments were severely openly violated e.g. Music, and Mix Gathering of Male and Female but Ansar Abbasi knows more and opines about Islamic Revolution in Pakistan and what not! Ansar also insist about Ruling through the commandment of Quran and Sunnah whereas his very newspapers i.e. Daily Jang and The News and TV Channel i.e. GEO TV spread not only Deviancy but brazen and naked Apostasy (Kufr), Innovation (Bida'at), Polytheism (Shirk), Vulgarity, Mixed Gathering of Male and Female and worth watching is Jang Group's Entertainment TV Channel which telecast Dramas which cannot be seen together with Mothers, Sisters and Daughters, It is also requested that Ansar Abbasi and Jang Group first implement Quran and Sunnah within their organization by first banning Women Hosts from several of its shows and immediately Ban Woman News Announcers from GEO TV and the second most urgent step to prosecute the GEO TV Administration fopr violating Blasphemy Law GEO TV violates Blasphemy Law of Islam.
بے خبری میں آپ کیسے “جی“ رہے ہیں ۔۔ کیا دیکھہ رہے ہیں ۔۔ کس سے لطف اندوز ہو رہے ہیں ۔۔۔ ذرا سوچئیے ؟؟

Monday, November 07, 2011, Zil Hajj 10, 1432 A.H.

2012: LAHORE, June 28: The Pakistan Tehrik-i-Insaaf and the Jamaat-i-Islami have agreed to launch a joint struggle for upholding supremacy of the Constitution with full support to the Supreme Court, and for holding free, fair and transparent elections under an independent election commission. A PTI’s four-member delegation led by Imran Khan called on JI chief Syed Munawar Hasan at Mansoora here on Thursday. The two leaders discussed the current political situation in the country. JI’s Prof Khurshid Ahmed, Dr Muhammad Kamal, Muhammad Aslam Saleemi and Liaqat Baloch were also present. The PTI and JI leadership also called for setting up an interim government involving all the stakeholders for ensuring free and transparent elections. They demanded that the names of the people killed in drone attacks and military operations should be disclosed so that the facts could be known. They also called for the implementation of the Supreme Court directives in regard to the missing persons. After the meeting, Imran Khan told reporters the two parties had decided to foil all conspiracies against the Chief Justice and the Supreme Court. He said plunderers had ganged up in the name of democracy and wanted to demolish the constitution and constitutional institutions. Mr Khan said Raja Pervez Ashraf had been elected as prime minister only to protect Zardari’s corruption. He said the PTI would not have an election alliance with any party present in the assembly. He said the armed forces should have no role in the formation of the government. REFERENCE: Independence of judiciary PTI, JI to wage joint struggle

Imran Khan and Munawar Hassan media talk in Lahore 28th June 2012


2002: Imran Khan’s choice of candidate for prime minister has left many of his ardent fans, especially women, dumbfounded. The cricketer-turned-politician voted for Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal’s nominee for premier, against the advise of many liberal and progressive members within his Tehrik-e-Insaaf (TI). Imran used his solitary vote in parliament in Rehman’s favour, forwarding the argument that the MMA is the only political force that is independent and does not take dictation from abroad. He maintained that he found himself ideologically and politically close to the MMA, which denounces President Pervez Musharraf’s support to the international coalition in the war against terrorism, especially in neighbouring Afghanistan. “Khan has more than a soft corner for the ousted Afghan Taliban,” a senior leader of his party said on the condition of anonymity. “He thinks that the orthodox religious militia did a great service to Afghanistan and Islam before they became a target of the Americans.” Also, the MMA’s firm stand against Musharraf, especially his series of controversial constitutional amendments, won the heart of Pakistan’s former speedster, he added. Imran’s protracted bitterness towards the Pakistan Peoples’ Party and anger against the Pakistan Muslim League left him with no alternative other than the MMA, which secured 86 votes, including those of the Pakistan Muslim League (N). Khan’s vote for the pro-Taliban cleric has added to the political confusion within his party, which performed poorly in the October 10 elections. “It would have been understandable, had Imran voted for a candidate that was nominated jointly by the opposition,” said a senior Tehrik-e-Insaaf leader. “But by voting for the MMA, he most certainly has lost his standing among the liberal, democratic and progressive elements in society.” Human rights groups and the majority of the moderate and liberal Muslims have been extremely critical of the MMA’s narrow interpretation of Islam and the conservative views of its leaders on women, education, fine arts, television and sports. By voting for the MMA, the Tehrik-e-Insaaf chief has, in effect, endorsed the religious alliance’s stand on these issues as well. Will the women’s wing of the Tehrik-e-Insaaf, led by Jemima, Khan’s British-born wife, endorse the Taliban-like interpretation of Islam? That remains a moot point. Mairaj Mohammed Khan, the Tehrik-e-Insaaf’s secretary general who has spent a lifetime advocating socialism and secular politics, finds it hard to defend the somersaults of the party leader, who has drifted from one extreme (of being pro-Musharraf) to the other extreme (of being anti-Musharraf) within a short span of time. “Even we are finding it difficult to figure out the real Imran,” quipped another of his Karachi-based leaders. “He dons the shalwar-kameez and preaches desi and religious values while in Pakistan, but transforms himself completely while rubbing shoulders with the elite in Britain and elsewhere in the west.” REFERENCE: Will the Real Imran Please Stand Up? By Amir Zia 9 DECEMBER 2002

July 8, 2012 Taliban shoot woman 9 times in public execution as men cheer


July 8, 2012 Kabul, Afghanistan (CNN) -- A shot rings out, but the burqa-clad woman sitting on the rocky ground does not respond. The man pointing a rifle at her from a few feet away lets loose another round, but still there is no reaction. He fires a third shot, and finally the woman slumps backwards. But the man fires another shot. And another. And another. Nine shots in all. Around him, dozens of men on a hillside cheer: "God is great!" Video: Taliban shoot woman 9 times in public execution as men cheer By the CNN Wire Staff July 8, 2012 -- Updated 2157 GMT (0557 HKT)

2011: ISLAMABAD: Chairman Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf, Imran Khan, who had a good day in Karachi on Sunday, says that under his rule no law will be made against Quran and Sunnah. He also hints that the likes of Veena Malik, the actress who remained centre of controversy for a nude photo shoot for an international magazine, would not be allowed to do so in Imran’s Pakistan. While replying to questions asked by The News regarding his Islamic view and vision of Islamic socialism, Imran Khan said that under his rule ‘no law can be made against the Quran and Sunnah.’ Analysts however say both these views of Imran Khan are not contradictory as women can be allowed to wear whatever they like in their private lives but where public morality issues are involved a more Islamic and stricter code of ethics can be followed. This is done in many open and free western countries as well. When asked on a television channel about his views about dress code for women, Imran replied that ‘clearly Veena Malik types cannot do so in Pakistan.’ It is worth mentioning here that Imran, in a television channel, had said that Pakistan will not be a country which would put a bar on dress code for women and women who will be free to wear anything. Tongues are wagging as to how Imran will take the liberal and secular elite along with religious minded people, as both are his supporters. There are many Pakistanis who wish to see the ethical principles of Islam play a more active role in public life. In his book “Pakistan: A Personal History,” Imran Khan referred to Allama Iqbal as the ideological father of the nation, and added that “Iqbal’s teachings have inspired me to a great extent.” In the book, Imran calls Islam a “comprehensive blueprint for how Muslims should live in accordance with the highest ideals and best practices of Islam.” Imran Khan wrote: “If we follow Iqbal’s teachings, we can reverse the growing gap between Westernized rich and traditional poor that helps fuel fundamentalism.” REFERENCE: Imran clear about dress code for women, in private and in public our correspondent Monday, December 26, 2011

Imran Khan Speech at Women Wing Jalsa (May 13, 2012)

PTI: National Anthem at Women Wing Jalsa (May 13, 2012)

video men in some families allow their wives, daughters and sisters to appear in front of men who are not their mahrams, such as their friends and colleagues, and let them sit with them and talk to them as if they were their mahrams. If we advise them they say that this is their custom and the custom of their forefathers, and they claim that their hearts are clean. Some of them are proud and arrogant although they understand the ruling, and others are ignorant of the ruling. What is your advice to them?.

Praise be to Allaah.

What every Muslim must do is not to rely on customs; rather he should refer the matter to the pure sharee’ah. Whatever Islam approves of is permissible and whatever it does not approve of, he should not do it. The fact that people are accustomed to a thing does not constitute evidence that it is permissible. All the customs that people may have in their cities or tribes should be referred to the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Whatever Allaah and His Messenger have permitted is permissible, and whatever Allaah has forbidden must be given up, even if it is the people’s custom. If the people are accustomed to being careless concerning the matter of khulwah (being alone with a non-mahram member of the opposite sex) or of women uncovering their faces in front of non-mahrams, these are false customs which must be given up. Similarly if people are accustomed to adultery, homosexuality and drinking alcohol, they must give up these things. What is customary does not count as proof, rather sharee’ah comes above all things, so the one whom Allaah has guided to Islam has to keep away from that which Allaah has forbidden of alcohol, adultery, theft, disobedience towards parents, severing the ties of kinship and everything that Allaah has forbidden, and he must adhere to that which Allaah has enjoined. 

Similarly the family must respect the command of Allaah and His Messenger, and keep away from that which Allaah and His Messenger have forbidden. If it is their custom for their women folk to appear in front of non-mahrams or to be alone with a non-mahram, they must give up those practices. 

A woman should not uncover her face or anything else in front of her cousin, her sister’s husband, or her husband’s brothers or uncles (paternal or maternal). Rather she must observe hijab and cover her face and head and entire body in front of any non-mahram. With regard to speaking, there is nothing wrong with that, such as returning the greeting of salaam or initiating it, so long as she observes hijab and avoids being alone with any non-mahram, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“And when you ask (his wives) for anything you want, ask them from behind a screen, that is purer for your hearts and for their hearts” [al-Ahzaab 33:53] 

PTI: Imran Khan Arrival at Women Wing Jalsa (May 13, 2012)


“O wives of the Prophet! You are not like any other women. If you keep your duty (to Allaah), then be not soft in speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease (of hypocrisy, or evil desire for adultery) should be moved with desire, but speak in an honourable manner” [al-Ahzaab 33:32] 

Allaah forbade the wives of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to be soft in speech, i.e., to speak in a soft and alluring tone that might give hope to the one in whose heart is a disease, i.e., the disease of desire and make him think that she is easy and has no objections. Rather she should speak in a moderate tone that is neither too harsh nor too soft. And Allaah tells us that hijab is purer for the hearts of everyone.
And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies (i.e. screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way). That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And Allaah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful” [al-Ahzaab 33:59] 

PTI: Fauzia Kasuri Speech at Women Wing Jalsa (May 13, 2012)


The jilbab (cloak, veil) is a garment which covers the head and body; the woman puts it over her head and covers her body with it, wearing it over her clothes. And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer palms of hands or one eye or dress like veil, gloves, headcover, apron), and to draw their veils all over Juyoobihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms) and not to reveal their adornment except to their husbands, or their fathers, or their husband’s fathers, or their sons, or their husband’s sons, or their brothers or their brother’s sons, or their sister’s sons, or their (Muslim) women (i.e. their sisters in Islam), or the (female) slaves whom their right hands possess, or old male servants who lack vigour, or small children who have no sense of feminine sex…” [al-Noor 24:31] 

With regard to those mentioned in this verse, there is nothing wrong with a woman showing her adornment to them. So all Muslim women must fear Allaah and avoid that which Allaah has forbidden to them of showing their adornment to anyone other than those to whom Allaah has permitted them to show it.
Women appearing in front of men

عورت کا مردوں کے سامنے جانا
بعض خاندانوں میں بہت سے مرد اپنی بیوی یا بیٹی یا پھر اپنی بہن کو غیرمحرم مردوں مثلا دوست واحباب اوررشتہ داروں کے سامنے جانے اوران کے ساتھ بیٹھنے اوران سے بات چیت کی اجازت دیتےہیں جیسے کہ وہ ان کے محرم ہوں ، جب ہم انہیں نصیحت کرتے اورسمجھاتے ہیں کہ یہ صحیح نہیں تو وہ جواب ميں کہتے ہیں کہ یہ ان کی اوران کےخاندان اورآباء واجداد کی عادت میں شامل ہے ، اوران کا یہ بھی گمان ہے یہ ان کے دل صاف ہوتے ہیں ۔
کچھ تو ان لوگوں میں معاند ہيں اورکچھ متکبر ہیں حالانکہ وہ اس کے حکم کا بھی علم رکھتے ہیں اورکچھ لوگ اس کے حکم سے جاہل ہیں ، توآپ ایسے لوگوں کو کیا نصیحت کرتے ہیں ؟


ہرمسلمان شخص پر واجب اورضروری ہے کہ وہ عادات اوررسم ورواج پر اعتماد نہ کرے بلکہ اسے شریعت مطہرہ پر پیش کرے جو شریعت مطہرہ کے موافق ہو اس پر عمل کرے اورجو شریعت اسلامیہ کے مخالف ہو اس پر عمل نہیں کرنا چاہیے ، لوگوں کا کسی چيز کی عادت بنالینا اس کے حلال ہونے کی دلیل نہیں ۔

بلکہ لوگوں نے جتنی بھی اپنے خاندانوں ، قبیلوں ، ملکوں اورمعاشروں میں عادات اوررسم ورواج بنا رکھے ہیں انہیں کتاب اللہ اورسنت رسول صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم پر پیش کرنا واجب ہے ، جوکچھ اللہ تعالی اوراس کے رسول صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم نے مباح کیا ہو وہ مباح ہے اورجس سے اللہ تعالی اوراس کے رسول صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم نے منع فرمایا ہے اس پرعمل کرنا جائز نہيں اوراس کا ترک کرنا اورچھوڑنا واجب ہے چاہے وہ لوگوں کی عادت میں ہی کیوں نہ شامل ہو ۔

اورجب لوگوں نے کسی اجنبی عورت سے خلوت یا غیر محرم سے پردہ نہ کرنے کی عادت بنا لی ہو اوراس میں تساہل سے کام لیں توان کی یہ عادت باطل ہے اسے ترک کرنا واجب ہوگا ، اوراسی طرح اگر کچھ لوگ زنا یا پھر لواطت یا شراب نوشی اورنشہ کرنے کی عادت بنالیں تو ان پر بھی اسے ترک کرنا واجب ہے ، اورعادت ہونا ان کےلیے حجت اوردلیل نہیں بن سکتی ۔

بلکہ شریعت مطہرہ تو سب سے اوپر ہے اس لیے جسے اللہ تعالی نے اسلام کی ھدایت نصیب فرمائي ہے اسے اللہ تعالی کے حرام کردہ کاموں شراب نوشی ، زنا ، چوری و ڈاکہ ، اورقطع تعلقی اورقطع رحمی اورنافرمانی وغیرہ اورباقی جوبھی اللہ تعالی نے حرام کیا ہے سے اجتناب کرنا اوردور رہنا چاہیے ، اوراسے چاہیے کہ اللہ تعالی کے واجبات کا التزام کرے ۔

اوراسی طرح خاندان والوں پر بھی واجب ہے کہ وہ اللہ تعالی اوراس کے رسول صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کے احکامات کا احترام کریں اوراللہ تعالی اوراس کے رسول صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کے حرام کردہ سے دوررہیں اوراجتناب کریں ، اورجب ان کی عورتوں کی یہ عادت ہوکہ وہ غیرمحرموں سے پردہ نہیں کرتیں یا پھر ان سے خلوت کرتی ہيں توانہيں یہ عادت ترک کرنی چاہیے بلکہ ان پر اسے چھوڑنا واجب ہے ۔

کیونکہ عورت کے لیےجائز نہيں کہ وہ اپنے چچا زاد ، خالہ زاد ، پھوپھی زاد ، یا بہنوئی یا پھر اپنے دیوروں ، اوراپنے خاوند کے چچا اورماموں کے سامنے ننگے منہ پھرے اورپردہ نہ کرے ، بلکہ اس پر واجب ہے کہ وہ ان سب سے پردہ کرے اوراپنے سر چہرہ اورباقی بدن وغیرہ کوچھپائے کیونکہ یہ اس کے غیرمحرم ہيں ۔

اوررہا مسئلہ کلام یعنی سلام کے جواب اورسلام کرنا وغیرہ کا تو پردہ کے اندر رہتے ہوئے اورخلوت کے بغیر اس میں کوئي حرج نہیں ، کیونکہ اللہ تعالی کا فرمان ہے :

{ اورجب تم نبی ( صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم ) کی بیویوں سے کوئي چيز طلب کرو تو پردے کے پیچھے سے طلب کرو ، تمہارے اوران کےدلوں کے لیے کامل پاکيزگی یہی ہے } الاحزاب ( 53 ) ۔

اورایک دوسرے مقام پر کچھ اس طرح فرمایا:

{ اے نبی ( صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم ) کی بیویو ! تم عام عورتوں کی طرح نہيں ہو ، اگر تم پرہیز گاری اختیار کرو تو نرم لہجے سے بات نہ کرو کہ جس کے دل میں روگ ہو وہ کوئي برا خیال کرے ، اورہاں قاعدے کے مطابق کلام کرو } الاحزاب ( 32 ) ۔

تواللہ تعالی نے اپنے اس فرمان میں نبی صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی ازواج مطہرات کونرم لہجہ اختیار کرنے سے منع فرمایا ہے کہ وہ اپنی بات میں نرمی اختیار نہ کریں تا کہ دل میں بیماری رکھنے والا یا پھر جس کے دل میں شھوت کی بیماری ہے وہ یہ خیال کرنے لگے کہ کمزور ہے اوراسے کوئي مانع نہیں ۔

بلکہ اسے درمیانے لہجہ میں بات کرنی چاہیے جس میں نہ تونرمی ہواورنہ ہی درشتی اورسختی ہو اوراللہ تعالی نے یہ بھی بیان کیا کہ پردہ کرنا سب کے دلوں کی پاکیزگي ہے اوربہتر ہے ۔

اورایک مقام پر اللہ تعالی نے فرمایا ہے :

{ اے نبی ( صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم ) اپنی بیویوں اورصاحبزادیوں سے اورمسلمانوں کی عورتوں سے کہہ دو کہ وہ اپنے اوپر اپنی چادریں لٹکا لیا کریں ، اس سے بہت جلد ان کی شناخت ہوجایا کرے گی پھر وہ ستائي نہ جائيں گی ، اور اللہ تعالی بخشنے والا مہربان ہے } الاحزاب ( 59 ) ۔

جلباب ایسے کپڑے کوکہا جاتا ہے جوسر پررکھا جائے جس سے سارا بدت چھپ جائے اورعورت اسے اپنے سر پر رکھ کر لباس کے اوپرسے اپنے سارے جسم کو چھپاتی ہے ۔

اورایک مقام پر اللہ تعالی کا فرمان کچھ اس طرح ہے :

{ اورمسلمان عورتوں سے کہہ دیجئے کہ وہ اپنی نگاہیں نیچی رکھا کریں اوراپنی شرمگاہوں کی حفاظت کریں اوراپنی عصمت میں فرق نہ آنے دیں ، اوراپنی زینت کوظاہر نہ کریں سوائے اس کےجوظاہر ہے ، اوراپنے گریبانوں پر اپنی اوڑھنیاں ڈالے رکھیں ، اوراپنی زیب وآرائش کوکسی کے سامنے ظاہر نہ کریں سوائے اپنے خاوندوں کے یا اپنے والد کے یا اپنے سسر کے یا اپنے لڑکوں کے یا اپنے خاوند کے لڑکوں کے یا اپنے بھائیوں کے یا اپنے بھتیجوں کے یا اپنے بھانجوں کے یا اپنے میل جول کی عورتوں کے یا غلاموں کے یا ایسے نوکر چاکرمردوں سے جوشہوت والے نہ ہوں ، یاایسے بچوں کے جو عورتوں کے پردے کی باتوں سے مطلع نہيں ۔۔۔ } النور ( 31 )۔

تواس آیت میں مذکور اشخاص کے علاوہ کسی اورکے سامنے وہ اپنی زينت کوظاہر نہیں کرسکتی ۔

توسب مسلمان عورتوں پر واجب اورضروری ہے کہ وہ اللہ تعالی کا تقوی اختیار کریں اوراللہ تعالی نے جوان کی زينت کے ظاہر کرنے سے ان پر حرمت کی ہے اس کے ظاہر کرنے سے بچیں اورانہيں غیرمحرموں کے سامنے زينت کے ساتھ سامنے نہيں آنا چاہیے ۔.

دیکھیں : فتاوی و مقالات متنوعۃ للشيخ ابن باز رحمہ اللہ تعالی ( 6 / 406 ) ۔

2010: The Chief Justice of Pakistan Mr. Justice Ifthakar Chaudhary, who was reinstated to his top position after rigorous anti-dictatorship efforts of champions of democracy and pluralism, has stunned everyone with his recent remarks against the Parliament and secularism. The Chief Justice, who surely is able enough to grasp the real meaning of legal and constitutional terms, said if the Parliament in Pakistan was given a “free hand”, it would, he feared, convert the country into a “secular” state. The Judiciary and the Parliament in Pakistan have locked horns with each other ever since the ouster of former military dictator Pervez Musharraf. Similar to the country’s old political stakeholder, the military, the Judiciary has now emerged as the self-appointed “custodian” of people’s rights against a widely elected parliament. The judiciary has unilaterally waged a war against the so-called “incompetent politicians” and the “disqualified parliament”. Therefore, it believes it is “responsible” to keep a vigilant eye on the performance of the parliament. Similar derogatory views that looked down upon the parliament were vented sometimes back by Qazi Mohammad Anwar, the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association. Ideally, the judiciary should stay away from politics in order to demonstrate some professional discipline. After all the judiciary has a better understanding of democracy, constitution, separation of powers and the rule of law. Now that the judges have stepped up to humiliate the elected parliament, a deliberate attempt is being made to create rifts among state institutions. Thus, it is the time the judiciary’s violation of its constitutional mandate was strictly checked. Judiciary plays a pivotal role in any working, or even defective, democracy. At the same time, it must learn to respect the constitutional mandate of the parliament and understand its limitations. In no functioning parliamentary democracy can the judiciary be placed on a higher position than the parliament. Secondly, one wonders how the Chief Justice of Pakistan interprets “secularism”. If he has the same connotation for secularism which is used by the right-wing political parties in the country (which is la Deen in Urdu) then he is surely leading the entire country towards more trouble. Pakistan, as proven by the popular August 11, 1947 Speech of Mohammad Ali Jinnah (1876-1948), the country’s fonder, was supposed to be a secular state. In Jinnah’s vision, a secular state was not one where no one worshipped any kind of God. Instead, Jinnah believed followers of all religions should have the freedom to practice regardless of what religion they followed. His Pakistan was meant to be tolerant and accommodative of all people irrespective of citizens’ religious affiliations. With some much bloodshed in the country on the name of religion over the past many years, the Chief Justice must understand the way forward for Pakistan is secularism if the country wants to get rid of religious fanaticism that is over taken the country. This country can no longer afford to see its citizens killed in the battle between “good Muslims” and the “bad Muslims”, Sunnis and Shias; and “Muslims” and Ahmedis. The Chief Justice should refrain from playing politics only to win the support of the largely illiterate masses in this country. It is for the Parliament to decide whether it introduces secularism or Islamic Sharia in the country. This important responsibility cannot be given to the judiciary at any cost. The CJP has further scared his liberal supporters. Even those who support the top judge’s argument that Supreme Court of Pakistan should have the power to play the “big brother” role in the country’s politics are equally concerned about the political feelings of the CJP. Who is going to guarantee that the Supreme Court, if granted more powers than the Parliament, is not going to convert the country into a theocratic state? What is going to happen to the rights of the millions of religious minorities who have been victim of the religious zealots over the years? REFERENCE: Why is CJP Afraid of Secularism? ’لامحدود اختیار سے سیکولر ازم کا خدشہ‘ آخری وقت اشاعت: پير 16 اگست 2010 ,‭ 10:49 GMT 15:49 PST

Pakistani Christian Asia Bibi faces death (blasphemy_ 5_51) CNN


The UN special rapporteur urged the government to apply jurisdiction of highest courts enshrined in the Constitution to the whole of Pakistan since many could be deprived of their constitutional rights. She avoided elaborating her observation when asked, but said she believed that “a uniform legal system enshrined in the Constitution is necessary in order to avoid ambiguities and discrepancies in the administration of justice”. In the preliminary report, Ms Knaul said that the recognition of another superior higher court, the Federal Shariat Court, in the Constitution has created an ambiguity. “The existence of two superior courts in the Constitution is problematic and leaves space for interpretations which might be contradicting,” she believed. The UN special rapporteur expressed concern over cases brought under blasphemy law for which she used the term ‘so-called’ and explained that judges had been coerced to decide against the accused even without supporting; as for the lawyers, in addition to their reluctance to take up such cases, they were targeted and forced not to represent their clients properly. In addition, judges, prosecutors and lawyers working on cases related to terrorist acts and organised crime were also often the target of serious threats and attacks from various actors, including non-state actors, she said. As part of her mission, the UN special rapporteur paid attention to the integration of a gender perspective and women’s rights in the justice system, and expressed concern that there were currently no women sitting on the Supreme Court and only two women in the high courts. Ms Knaul said that she was further struck by reports of existing laws, such as the blasphemy law, being misused to target women and strip them off of their fundamental rights. Many stages of the justice system, starting with filing a case with the police, to accessing lawyers and appearing and testifying before courts, were gender-biased, and therefore impeded the full functioning of justice for women, she said. She expressed deep concern over the poor quality of investigations carried out by police service. REFERENCE: UN rapporteur calls for clear criteria for suo motu action

Mumtaz Qadri, murderer of Salman Taseer, showered with rose petals by Lawyers.


Malik Mumtaz Hussain Qadri, the bodyguard arrested for the killing of Punjab Governor Salman Taseer, shouts religious slogans while being taken away by police after he was presented at a court in Islamabad. -Reuters Photo -- LAHORE: Lawyers showered the suspected killer of a prominent Pakistani governor with rose petals when he arrived at court Wednesday and an influential Muslim scholars group praised the assassination of the outspoken opponent of laws that order death for those who insult Islam. Mumtaz Qadri made his first appearance in an Islamabad court, where a judge remanded him in custody a day after he allegedly sprayed automatic gunfire at the back of Punjab province Gov. Salman Taseer while he was supposed to be protecting him as a bodyguard. A rowdy crowd slapped him on the back and kissed his cheek as he was escorted inside. The lawyers who tossed handfuls of rose petals over him were not involved in the case. As he left the court, a crowd of about 200 sympathizers chanted ”death is acceptable for Muhammad’s slave.” The suspect stood at the back door of an armored police van with a flower necklace given to him by an admirer and repeatedly yelled ”God is great.” More than 500 clerics and scholars from the group Jamat Ahle Sunnat said no one should pray or express regret for the killing of the governor. The group representing Pakistan’s majority Barelvi sect, which follows a brand of Islam considered moderate, also issued a veiled threat to other opponents of the blasphemy laws. ”The supporter is as equally guilty as one who committed blasphemy,” the group warned in a statement, adding politicians, the media and others should learn ”a lesson from the exemplary death.” Jamat leader Maulana Shah Turabul Haq Qadri paid ”glorious tribute to the murderer … for his courage, bravery and religious honor and integrity.” Mumtaz Qadri told interrogators Tuesday that he shot the liberal Taseer multiple times because of the politician’s vocal opposition to the harsh blasphemy laws. REFERENCE: Lawyers shower roses for governor's killer AP | 5th January, 2011

Pakistan's private television channels offer a host of programs in current affairs and entertainment but in the absence of an effective regulatory body, talk show hosts can get away with murder. (Photo courtesy Geo TV) - One man that stands out among a plethora of talking heads on TV is Aamir Liaquat, whose foray into televangelism began at Geo TV, Pakistan’s largest media house. There, Liaquat held forth on an array of issues, answering queries on seemingly inane matters like whether a prayer mat could be washed in a washing machine to bigger issues on spiritual matter. He was as reviled as he was beloved. Liaquat has been a subject of intense scrutiny in the media, from his “fake” PhD (allegedly bought online just a few weeks after he reportedly got a Masters degree) to leaked video outtakes in which he was seen cursing profanities prior to coming on camera for a show. He was also hauled up by the police for driving a car with tinted windows in Karachi a few years ago, when it was illegal, but as a then parliamentarian, he was let off scot free, not before the press reported that he was caught with a woman in the car. Despite the drubbing he received, his popularity was not affected until a show in September 2008 in which he castigated Pakistan’s minority Muslim community, the Ahmadis, The two guest scholars he invited on the show said anyone who called Ahmadis Muslims were “waajib al qatl” (worthy of death). One day later, an Ahmadi was shot in Sindh, the following day another prominent Ahmadi was killed. “I have no regrets because it has nothing to do with me,” he told BBC Magazine on July 14. “I’m hurt by what happened and I’m sorry for the families but it has nothing to do with me or anything that was said on my program.” Not everyone brought it. The Asian Human Rights Commission filed a complaint against him saying his cajoling led to the death of the two men following his TV show. Liaquat was also sacked from the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, of which he was a member and had won an election ticket in 2002 with, for the anti-Ahmadi TV outburst, saying his beliefs clashed with the secular party’s ideology. But Geo only suspended his live programs. None of that has dented Liaquat’s popularity, or credibility, who, after a brief spell with a rival TV network where he hosted another religious talk show, signed up with Geo last month to return to his alma mater. Not just as a TV host but also in senior management position -- much to the chagrin of season senior journalists and management at GEO, one of whom, popular political analyst Sana Bucha, resigned in protest. But it appears that Liaquat will ride the waves of this controversy out too, as he is now a brand, loved by cooking oils that he endorses to housewives who wait eagerly for his sermons, for which no one can verify his religious qualifications. Liaquat is not alone in using TV as a platform to air views that cater to right-wing Islam in Pakistan whose presence is felt by the growing numbers of women wearing the niqaab on the streets to the rise in dars (religious sermons) especially tailor made for the elite. Intolerance is evidenced in the collective silence of a democratically elected secular government of the Pakistan Peoples Party which has lost two of its stalwarts to violent and gruesome murders: Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer in January 2011 by his armed guard who murdered the man for the governor's support of a Christian woman languishing in jail on trumped up blasphemy charges to the death of the country's minorities minister a few months later, Shahbaz Bhatti. Weeks prior to his death, Taseer appeared on a TV show with host Meher Bukhari who practically accused the governor of blasphemy as he tried to explain his defense of a Christian woman languishing in jail on what he said were trumped up charges. Taseer was leading a case for a presidential pardon before he was killed in broad daylight. Then the politicians retreated to their corners, ostensibly sensing the mood in the country which had no room for tolerating anything perceived as blasphemous. An innumerable amount of people have been charged in false cases of blasphemy that have led to murders, extra judicial killings and constant threat to lives. REFERENCE: Is Pakistan’s TV evangelism sprouting a dangerous creed of intolerance? Sunday, 15 July 2012

LAHORE: Former chief justice Lahore High Court Khawaja Sharif will defend Mumtaz Qadri, the accused killer of former governor Punjab Salman Taseer, DawnNews reported on Monday. The hearing of the appeal against the death sentence of Qadri will be heard by a two-member bench led by Chief Justice of Islamabad High Court Iqbal Hameed-ur-Rehman. The panel of Qadri’s lawyers including Khawaja Sharif, Malik Jawad, Malik Rafiq and Shuja-ur-Rehman, will be appearing before the court. Qadri signed his appeal papers today in Adiala Jail. Qadri confessed to shooting Taseer dead outside an upmarket coffee shop close to his residence in the leafy capital Islamabad on January 4. He said he objected to the politician’s calls to amend the blasphemy law. REFERENCE: Former CJ LHC to fight Mumtaz Qadri’s case DAWN.COM | 10th October, 2011

Former CJ LHC Khawaja Sharif defends Mumtaz Qadri in High Court


ISLAMABAD: A reported statement by Lahore High Court Chief Justice (CJ) Khawaja Muhammad Sharif that the Hindu community was funding terrorism in Pakistan, irked members of the National Assembly, as many of whom joined minority members and walked out in protest. The lawmakers also demanded Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry take suo motu notice of the CJ’s remarks. Ramesh Lal, a minority lawmaker from the Pakistan People’s Party, raised the issue on a point of order and censured the CJ’s remarks, saying the Hindu community in Pakistan was as patriotic as the rest of the country and the remarks were highly uncalled for. Lal announced a token walkout and was joined by a few other members belonging to different parties, including the Awami National Party. He said the remarks hurt the over three million Hindus in Pakistan, adding the statement was against national unity. Labour and Manpower Minister Khursheed Shah tried to defend the CJ, saying he could not have made such a statement and might have referred to India and not the Hindu community. staff report REFERENCE: LHC CJ’s remarks irk NA members Wednesday, March 17, 2010

BARELY days after the Punjab chief minister was caught playing to the Taliban gallery, another high official from the province is in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons. This time, Lahore High Court Chief Justice Khawaja Mohammad Sharif has sparked outrage for reportedly saying that Hindus were responsible for financing acts of terrorism in Pakistan. The remarks came while the judge was hearing two identical petitions against the possible extradition of Afghan Taliban suspects. It may well have been a slip of the tongue by Mr Sharif, who might have mistakenly said `Hindu` instead of `India` — nevertheless it was a tasteless remark to say the least. Although such remarks warrant criticism what makes them worse is the position of the person who makes them. These sort of comments are the last thing one expects to hear from a judge, that too the chief justice of a provincial high court. What sort of message are we sending to our minorities, as well as to the world, when the holder of such a respected public office makes comments that come across as thoughtless? The Hindu members of the National Assembly walked out of the house on Tuesday to protest the remarks. The members said the comments had hurt the feelings of Pakistani Hindus — and there is no doubt that they had. As it is, Pakistan scores quite poorly when it comes to treating minorities fairly. Remarks such as these put our already marginalised minorities in an even tougher spot, as the patriotic credentials of non-Muslims living in this country are put into question. Though foreign elements may be involved in terrorist activities within Pakistan, maligning a whole community based on its faith is totally unacceptable. Before making such tactless remarks, our public figures should consider how much they dislike it when others equate Muslims with terrorism. A member of the National Assembly quite correctly advised our judges to concentrate on the dispensation of justice in Tuesday`s session. In the meantime, one hopes that Justice Sharif explains his comments. REFERENCE:Tactless remarks Dawn Editorial Thursday, 18 Mar, 2010

ISLAMABAD, March 16: It was a rare, judge’s turn to be judged in the National Assembly on Tuesday as Hindu members staged a walkout to protest at reported remarks by the Lahore High Court (LHC) chief justice alleging Hindu financing of terror attacks in the country. Some members of the Awami National Party too joined the first walkout against the judiciary in Pakistan’s parliament before the protesters were brought back to hear words of sympathy for the injured sentiments and some advice for judges to focus on delivering justice rather than publicity despite a government minister’s statement that the remark by Justice Khawaja Mohammad Sharif while hearing a case in Lahore on Thursday seemed to be “a slip of the tongue”. The protest was the second raised in the house over press reports in as many days after sharp criticism of Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif over his appeal to Taliban in a speech to a seminar in Lahore on Sunday to spare his province terror attacks because of some shared views with his PML-N party. PPP’s Hindu member Romesh Lal, who raised the issue, said sentiments of an estimated four million Pakistani Hindus had been injured by the LHC chief justice’s remarks, as reported in a section of the press, that while terrorist bomb blasts were being carried out by Muslims, “money used for this came from Hindus”. The member said if a country was suspected of sponsoring such attacks it should be named, but blame should not be put on just Hindus who, he said, were as good patriots as other Pakistanis. While drawing attention of President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani to what he called worry caused to Hindus, he appealed to Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry to take suo motu notice of Justice Sharif’s remarks. As Inter-Provincial Coordination Minister Pir Aftab Shah Jilani and some other members of the ruling PPP went out of the chamber to persuade the protesters to return, party chief whip and Labour and Manpower Minister Khurshid Ahmed Shah told the house the judge seemed to be blaming India for financing the Taliban rather Hindus, adding he was sure a clarification would come “by tomorrow”. PML-N’s Rashid Akbar Niwani said judges should devote to dispensation of justice instead of seeking publicity as he also advised the media to exercise “restraint”, particularly blasting unspecified television anchorpersons who, he said, should also be held accountable for their earnings together with “heads of (government) institutions” as often-maligned elected politicians. REFERENCE: A judge is judged in NA, with walkout By Raja Asghar Wednesday, 17 Mar, 2010

2005: Same PCOed Judiciary particularly the present Chief Justice viciously opposed the Hasba Bill (presented by the Religious Parties) to implement Islamic System in Pakistan in 2005. CJ and the same Judiciary attacked an Islamic Bill taking plea that it is in clash with the constitution of Pakistan. Therefore either the Bill was Islamic or the whole Judiciary was Apostate. 

Hasba bill NWFP govt may file petition in apex court Bureau Report August 6, 2005 PESHAWAR, Aug 5: Terming the Supreme Court’s verdict on the Hasba bill in conflict with the constitution, NWFP Law Minister Malik Zafar Azam has asked the president to direct the provincial governor for signing the bill. “The judgment is only an opinion which is neither binding on the provincial government nor on the president and the governor,” Mr Azam said in a press conference here. He said that after going through the detailed judgment, they would consult their legal experts and file a constitutional petition in the Supreme Court for clarifying certain ambiguities in the judgment. “We would decide after the detailed judgment whether to adopt the same bill or to make amendments in it, and if it is again passed by the assembly then the governor cannot withhold his assent,” the law minister said. He said: “Although we respect the judgment of the court, but it has made recommendations of the Council of Islamic Ideology redundant as majority of the clauses of the Hasba Bill declared ultra vires of the constitution were in fact recommended in the report of the council.” Mr Azam stated that in his opinion the Constitution had made it binding on the governor to sign a bill passed by an assembly and by observing that the governor might not sign the bill, the Supreme Court had violated that provision. “How could the apex court place restriction on the powers of the provincial assembly as far as legislation is concerned?” he asked. The president, he said, was the symbol of the federation, and he should not try to undermine the powers of the federating units. He stated that the NWFP government would continue the legal battle. “The political forces should support us in this fight for provincial autonomy,” he remarked. He informed that they would launch a constitution awareness campaign countrywide for making the people aware about the power of the legislature, executive and judiciary. Mr Azam cited various recommendations of the Council of Islamic Ideology, stating that the same had been incorporated in the Hasba bill, but declared ultra vires of the Constitution. “The Council of Islamic Ideology is a constitutional body and under Article 2130(4) of the Constitution, parliament and provincial assemblies should enact laws in the light for its recommendations,” he said and added: “We have not committed any mistake in implementing the recommendations of the council.” He pointed out that Section 25 of the Hasba bill had ousted the jurisdiction of courts in matters taken up by the mohtasib, and the same provision was also part of the laws through which offices of federal, Punjab and Sindh mohtasibs had been set up. What would be the status of those provisions in other laws, he questioned. Mr Azam had to face a volley of questions regarding that ambiguous stand of the MMA on the judgment. Answering a question about terming the verdict in the favour of MMA, he stated that out of the 31 sections of the bill, clauses of only five sections had been declared in conflict with the constitution. He stated that Islamising the laws was the duty of the government and if restrictions were placed on the legislature in that regard, every individual would start their own interpretation of Islam, which would create chaos and anarchy. REFERENCE: Hasba bill NWFP govt may file petition in apex court Bureau Report August 6, 2005 Saturday Jumadi-us-Sani 29, 1426

2007: Hasba Bill partially unconstitutional: SC * Says mohtasib can’t be delegated judicial powers  ISLAMABAD: An eight-member bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the office of the mohtasib (ombudsman), as envisaged in the NWFP Assembly’s Hasba Bill, could not be delegated judicial powers and a seminary-qualified person could not be graded an ‘aalim’ for appointment as a provincial mohtasib. The court said the NWFP Assembly should review the Hasba Bill to exclude controversial sections, otherwise the rest of the bill was okay. The bench was giving its ruling on a reference filed by President Pervez Musharraf, who had sought the court’s opinion on Hasba Bill’s validity. “In our unanimous view, the (court’s) opinion expressed in Reference No 2 of 2005 (Hasba Bill 2005) has been complied with, except for in the provisions of Section 2(11) and section 3(2) of the bill, and this appears to have escaped the notice of the provincial legislature, which may now be given due consideration,” said the Supreme Court in its short order. Section 2(11) carries the definition of an ‘aalim’, and according to the current definition, anybody with a seminary certificate is eligible to be called an ‘aalim’. Section 3(2) prescribes that an ‘aalim’ – who would also be eligible to become a judge of the Federal Shariat Court, according to the bill – could also be appointed mohtasib. However, the Supreme Court has declared that these two sections violate the Constitution. The bench also ruled that violation of a mohtasib’s authority under Section 23 of the bill could not subject a person to punishment for contempt under Section 14 of the bill. The NWFP assembly passed the first Hasba Bill on July 14, 2005, but the Supreme Court, on a presidential reference, declared that several sections of the bill were unconstitutional. The NWFP Assembly passed a fresh bill in November 2006, and claimed it had been drafted in accordance with the SC recommendations. However, the president filed another reference in the court under the SC’s advisory jurisdiction challenging the new bill in December. On December 15, the SC directed the provincial governor not to assent the bill in its present form. Now, the court has ruled that a mohtasib cannot be given judicial powers to prosecute a person who disobeys his orders and a seminary-qualified person cannot be eligible for the post of mohtasib. The Hasba Bill envisages an office of the mohtasib at the provincial level and in each district. REFERENCE: Hasba Bill partially unconstitutional: SC * Says mohtasib can’t be delegated judicial powers By Mohammad Kamran Wednesday, February 21, 2007\02\21\story_21-2-2007_pg1_3

MMA senator contests reference against Hasba bill By Our Reporter July 20, 2005 ISLAMABAD, July 19: Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal’s Senator Prof Khurshid Ahmad has expressed his reservations about the legality and propriety of a reference submitted to the Supreme Court by President Pervez Musharraf under Article 186 of the Constitution in respect of Hasba Bill. “This article of the Constitution provides the president with an opportunity to seek prior advice of the Supreme Court in respect of matters related to the discharge of the functions that are his direct responsibility under the Constitution,” Jamaat-i- Islami’s deputy chief said in a statement issued on Tuesday. He further said it was not a kind of a free-for-all type of provision whereby the president might seek Supreme Court’s opinion on any legal matter under the sun. He emphasized that “public importance” has to be understood in relation to the constitutional responsibilities of the president. The senator said under Article 186, all the eight reference made to the apex court in the past directly related to the constitutional responsibilities of the president. The only reference that related to a provincial issue was made by Ghulam Mohammad which sought to find out whether the provincial assembly was rightly dissolved or not. According to Prof Khurshid Ahmad, the position with respect to Hasba Bill passed by the NWFP Assembly was very different. Here the assembly has passed a bill under its constitutional authority because in respect of administrative courts or provincial ombudsman it is the prerogative of the provincial assembly to legislate. It does not require any prior permission or otherwise any input or intervention from the president or the federal government at any stage. The provincial government is empowered to pass any bill within its constitutional jurisdiction and the governor is bound by the Constitution to either give his assent or send it back to the assembly for reconsideration. He is obliged to give his consent to a bill approved second time by the assembly in whatever form. “The constitution does not empower the governor to refer any matter to the Supreme Court under Article 186 and there is no constitutional provision which entitles the president to seek advice on behalf of the governor, who is expected to use his own mind and judgment,” the senator said. “Prima facie, it is very clear that the reference to the Supreme Court is devoid of legal vires. I would, therefore, suggest that the president should withdraw this petition and should not overstep his constitutional limits and obligations,” he said. Our Reporter from Pindi adds: Jamaat-i-Islami Rawalpindi District Amir Dr Mohammad Kemal, MNA Haneef Abbasi and other office-bearers of the party have congratulated the NWFP government on adoption of Hasba Bill. In a statement issued here on Tuesday, they said the move would help the masses of the NWFP get rid of ‘Thana Culture’ and, thereby, pave way for introduction of Islamic system. REFERENCE: MMA senator contests reference against Hasba bill By Our Reporter July 20, 2005 Wednesday Jumadi-us-Sani 12, 1426 

Imran Khan rejects Hasba, women rights bills By Our Correspondent November 20, 2006 PESHAWAR, Nov 19: Pakistan Tehrik-i-Insaf Chairman Imran Khan on Sunday rejected both the Protection of Women’s Rights Bill and the Hasba Bill and said that both the bills had been adopted with ulterior motives; the former to divide opposition parties the latter to establish a parallel judicial system. The Protection of Women’s Rights Bill, he said, had been passed to introduce a ‘made-in-Washington Islamic system in the country. It is also aimed at dividing the opposition parties. If a law related to women had been in place for more than 26 years, why it was not allowed to continu for one more year?” he said. “We had never accepted the amended bill that had been passed by the National Assembly because it had not been endorsed by an elected parliament,” he said. Referring to the Hasba Bill, he said that if the provincial MMA government was really interested in resolving public issues, it should have concentrated on strengthening the judicial system and reforming the police department, instead of passing a controversial law. He was speaking at the oath-taking ceremonies of the PTI’s youth wing and district Peshawar office-bearers. Newly-nominated PTI district president Hamidul Haq, general secretary Mohammad Asif, Arif Yusuf and president of the party’s youth wing Tariq Meer and press secretary Jawad Ali Shah took oath on the occasion. Imran Khan said that his party would mobilise people to stage anti-government protests, adding that a rally would be held in Kohat district on Nov 28. He said that it was clear now to everyone that President Musharraf would never leave power. He urged the opposition parties to unite on a single-point agenda to make President Musharraf quit government and force him to hold free and fair elections through an independent election commission.He said that he would go to Britain soon to meet former prime minister Nawaz Sharif for launching a movement against the government. Referring to his party’s position about the issue of resigning from parliament, he said that the opposition needed to take a decision to resign en bloc, adding that MMA’s resignations alone might not work. REFERENCE: Imran Khan rejects Hasba, women rights bills By Our Correspondent November 20, 2006 Monday Shawwal 27, 1427

SC blocks Hasba bill By Nasir Iqbal December 16, 2006 ISLAMABAD, Dec 15: The Supreme Court on Friday stopped the NWFP government from enacting the Hasba bill. The court issued the stay order on a presidential reference — the second such referral in a year. The provincial assembly had, on Nov 13, rushed through a revised version of the Hasba bill proposing the appointment of an ombudsman for enforcing ‘Islam’s morality code’. But NWFP Governor Ali Jan Aurakzai withheld assent, terming the bill unconstitutional, in a letter to the prime minister on Tuesday. On Friday a five-member Supreme Court bench, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, asked the Frontier government’s Chief Secretary, the advocate-general and the assembly’s speaker to appear before it during the third week of next month. The court’s ruling came on a presidential reference filed on Thursday, requesting the Supreme Court to take up the matter ‘at the earliest’. Attorney-General Makhdoom Ali Khan said the revised Hasba bill was unconstitutional on the same grounds as those given by the court last year. One of the grounds was that the bill was aimed at setting up a parallel judicial system. Makhdoom Ali Khan argued that the new bill also sought to create a parallel judicial system. On Aug 4 last year, a nine-member Supreme Court bench had blocked the first version of the bill in response to a presidential reference by declaring as unconstitutional several of the bill’s clauses on the powers of the ombudsman. The court had also advised the governor not to sign the bill into law. In its earlier judgment, the AG recalled, the court had declared unconstitutional the district Mohtasib’s office, envisaged in last year’s Hasba bill, as there was already a provision for such an office under the Local Government Ordinance. But the revised bill incorporated the same provision, Mr Makhdoom said. In his reference, the president urged the court to determine whether the Hasba bill respected or not the fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution. The reference also requested the court to determine whether the bill conformed to the principle of separation of powers. The presidency contended that the bill delegated too many powers of the executive and the legislature to the ombudsman. REFERENCE: SC blocks Hasba bill By Nasir Iqbal December 16, 2006 Saturday Ziqa'ad 24, 1427

 Hasba bill infringes personal freedom: SC By Nasir Iqbal September 1, 2005 ISLAMABAD, Aug 31: The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that the state cannot enforce any religious obligation stipulated by Islam, except Sallat (prayers) and Zakat. Authored by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, a 106-page detailed judgment, said that Islamic jurists were unanimous on a point that though zakat was seriously enforced by Hazrat Abu Bakar but for sallat, the only way was through “Taleem” (education), “Tableegh” (preaching) and “Targheeb” (persuasion). The court agreed that private life, personal thoughts and individual beliefs of citizens could not be allowed to be interfered with and held that under the Hasba Bill, the NWFP Assembly had conferred judicial powers on “Mohtasib” (ombudsman) not only to inquire into cases of maladministration of government agencies but also religious and personal affairs of individuals and blocking powers of judicial review by civil and criminal courts.

On August 4, a nine-member Supreme Court bench had declared several clauses of the Hasba bill relating to powers of the mohtasib as contrary to the constitution and had advised the NWFP governor not to give his assent to the controversial law. The unanimous short-order was announced after four-day hearing on a reference filed by President General Musharraf against the bill under the advisory jurisdiction of the court.

Instead of showing haste, the NWFP government should have studied in depth all the reports of the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) before moving the Hasba bill in the assembly, under which discretionary powers have been conferred on mohtasib to create a new offence in consultation with the provincial advisory council, the CJ observed in the detailed judgment. About mohtasib’s powers to remove causes of dereliction in performance and proper arrangements of Eidain and Friday prayers, the CJ observed that offering of prayer was a personal obligation on an individual being the Haqooq Allah. Religiously, mohtasib is not authorized to check negligence or disregard of a person who abandons sallat. Allowing such interference by mohtasib would deny an individual’s right of freedom to profess religion, the CJ said.

It is therefore not correct to suggest that the Hasba bill is in accordance with Islam and if the legislation is accepted and made into law, then a citizen who is held responsible for dereliction will be liable to six-month punishment on the hukumnama (order) of the mohtasib when Sharia does not mandate imposition of penalties on vague offences. The only objective behind making available Hasba police to mohtasib is to strengthen the arms of mohtasib, to implement his hukumnama by force, if need be, the CJ said. Under the law, mohtasib would also have direct interference/access in the family functions in the garb of discouraging extravagance at the time of marriages and other family functions, thus interfering in personal life, freedom of assembly, liberty, dignity and privacy, which is strictly prohibited in Islam. Tracing the history, the CJ recalled that the institution of the office of Hasba did not exist at the time of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and the Khulfa-e-Rashideen. Initially the office of “Amil-al-suk” was created by “Ummayyads” to regulate markets, but later it was expanded into the office of the mohtasib by the “Abbasids.”

History reveals that the term mohtasib was used during the Khilafat of Qazi Mamoon-ur-Rashid when mohtasib used to look after the market business in addition to his religious duties like to reform social life. During the period, the duties of the mohtasib was to inspect instruments of the scales of weights and measures, which were so complicated that the people could be easily deceived. In addition, their duties include keeping vigilant eye over shortcomings and dishonesty that could be committed during preparation and sale of commodities. The judgment also explained that by declaring some sections of the bill as unconstitutional does not mean that leftover sections have been declared in accordance with the constitution. Their constitutionality remains open to be questioned, which can be upheld or struck down as or when challenged before a competent forum. Meanwhile Justice Sardar Mohammad Raza Khan in his separate note expressed reservations on the definition of Aalim (scholar) in the Hasba bill and held that the definition was discriminatory and restricted to only one school of thought. REFERENCE: Hasba bill infringes personal freedom: SC By Nasir Iqbal September 1, 2005 Thursday Rajab 26, 1426

2005: Detailed judgement on Hasba Bill: Hasba restricts basic rights: SC * State can’t enforce religious obligation except salat and zakat ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC), in its detailed reasons for rejecting the Hasba Bill of the NWFP government, has ruled that no legislation could be made to interfere with the private life, personal thoughts and individual beliefs of citizens. In its 106-page detailed unanimous judgement, the SC has laid the onus on the rationale that Hasba was a discriminatory and unconstitutional legislation which gave discretionary powers to the newly envisaged office of ‘mohtasib’, leading to interference in the personal life of citizens and establishing parallel offices of executive and judiciary. “It is observed that private life, personal thoughts and the individual beliefs of citizens cannot be allowed to be interfered with. Islamic jurists are unanimous on the point that except salat (prayer) and zakat (alms) no other religious obligation stipulated by Islam can be enforced by the state,” states the detailed judgement.

The NWFP Assembly passed the Hasba Bill on July 14 with a majority of 68 votes against 34 opposition votes. The bill envisaged an office of mohtasib with special powers to implement Islamic laws in the province. However, President Pervez Musharraf filed a reference the next day seeking the SC’s opinion on the Hasba Bill under its advisory jurisdiction. A nine-member SC bench consisting of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Justices Javed Iqbal, Abdul Hameed Dogar, Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Mian Shakirullah Jan, Javed Buttar and Sayed Saeed Ashhad heard the presidential reference pleaded by Attorney General Makhdoom Ali Khan while Advocate Khalid Anwar appeared on behalf of the NWFP government.

The SC bench conducted the reference’s hearing for four consecutive days and pronounced its short judgement on August 4. The SC judgement declared that Section 10 (sub sections b, c and d); Section 12 (1) (sub section a, b and c); Section 23 (sub sections 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 12, 14 and 27); Section 25 (1 and 2) and Section 28 of the Hasba Bill 2005 passed by the NWFP Assembly were ultra vires to the Constitution. The SC also ruled that the NWFP governor may not assent to the bill in its present form. The sections declared unconstitutional by the SC relate to the powers and duties of the mohtasib, the implementation of his orders, his special powers to implement the Islamic code, restriction on other courts to proceed against the mohtasib’s orders and the punishment prescribed for violation of the mohtasib’s orders. In the detailed reasons, the SC rejected the mohtasib’s office with the contention that “a mohtasib would have direct interference in the family functions in the garb of discouraging extravagance at the time of marriages and other family functions. Such exercise of powers would not only interfere in the citizens personal life, freedom of assembly, liberty, dignity and privacy which is strictly prohibited in Islam”. Detailed judgement on Hasba Bill: Hasba restricts basic rights: SC * State can’t enforce religious obligation except salat and zakat By Mohammad Kamran Thursday, September 01, 2005

No comments: