Pakistan Media Dons Cower Down to Religious Pressure

Last week, after countless wrongful convictions and unjust deaths of women and non-Muslims, the democratic forces in Pakistan got together to demand an end to it all. The demands to abolish Shariat Courts, repeal the Blasphemy Laws, and to denounce the Federal Shariat Court’s attack on the Women Protection Act of 2006 were made, reiterated, and supported through press statements, conferences and demonstrations by nation-wide grassroots organizations yet the mainstream media did not cover any of it.

You saw the first such statement here last week issued by the Insani Huqooq Ittehad (IHI), and the latest was a demonstration in Islamabad where even in terrible weather, over 200 people came out in support of the statement issued by Joint Action Committee (JAC) but no mention of it was made by the media.

The JAC statement is quoted below:
‘We, the members of the Joint Action Committee for People’s Rights Lahore (JAC) and Women’s Action Forum are deeply concerned by the Federal Shariat Court’s verdict on 22.12.2010, that declared four clauses (11, 25, 28 and 29) of the Women Protection Act 2006 as unconstitutional. While the clauses may appear to make no substantive difference to the law the implications will be far reaching as by striking down sections 11 and 28 the verdict insidiously reintroduces the over-riding effect of Zina and Qazaf Ordinances which the WPA had removed. It also confuses the issue of separation of rape from zina that the WPA had established. The verdict of the FSC will certainly cause confusion in the administration of criminal justice.

‘The FSC’s verdict is both political and anti-women. In order to expand its own dwindling powers and encroach upon the jurisdiction of the higher Judiciary as well as the powers of the Parliament the FSC has used WPA (and by extension women, the most vulnerable section of society) as the means to pursue its objective. This attempt by the FSC to extend its jurisdiction beyond that envisaged by the Constitution of Pakistan is evidence of the insecurity of FSC and their keenness to gain greater power and influence through subjective interpretation of the Constitution and law which on the face of it, is unreasonable, malafide and unjust.

‘The preoccupation of the FSC is with procedural requirement of the WPA or other legislative instrument. This has little or no nexus with the scope of the court whose jurisdiction is only to determine whether a law or the provisions of a law is repugnant to Islam.

‘This is unacceptable to us and is indeed contrary to the vision of Quaid –e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah.

‘The Joint Action Committee and WAF urge the Federal government and all four provincial governments who are respondents to this petition to challenge the verdict and ensure that the administration of justice in our country does not deteriorate further and result in intensifying problems of the public in general and women in particular. We expect a show of courage and integrity from the governments.

‘WE DEMAND THAT ALL PARALLEL JUDICIAL SYSTEMS INCLUDING THE FEDERAL SHARIAT COURT AND THE COUNCIL OF ISLAMIC IDEOLOGY BE IMMEDIATELY ABOLISHED.
In case the governments do not come forward the civil society will play its legitimate and expected role in Pakistan.’

The above statement is issued by the the following organizations:
AGHS Legal Aid Cell, Ajoka Theater Workshop, All Pakistan Minorities Alliance, ASR/Institue of Women Studies, Aurat Foundation, Centre for Legal Aid, Assistance and Settlement (CLAAS), Community Support Concern, Democratic Commission for Human Development (DCHD), Democratic Women’s Organization, Education Foundation, Gender Development Organization, Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, International Rescue Committee (IRC), Justice & Peace Commission (MSLCP), Labour Education Foundation, Labour Party of Pakistan, Lok Rehas, Lok Sujag, National Commission for Justice & Peace, Nawa-e-Khawateen, Pakistan Christian National Party, Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research (PILER), Punjab Naujawaan Mahaz, Society for the Advancement of Education (SAHE), Shirkat Gah, Simorgh, South Asia Partnership (SAP), War Against Rape, Women Action Forum (WAF), Women Workers Helpline, Working Women Organization, Commission for Peace and Human Development, Caritas Pakistan Lahore.

For more information on this isuue, check this web page: Baaghi (The Rebel)

The above organizations have, over decades, worked for the democratic rights of women, minorities, workers and other dis-advantaged population groups. Together, these grassroots organizations and their constituencies have fought and won many battles. The introduction of Women Protection Act in 2006 is one such gain. As well, the same population groups have fought religious fanatics by opposing the blasphemous Blasphemy Laws, by supporting rights of workers/peasants/domestic-workers in their daily struggles. And, indeed, these same people have supported the rights of media workers in Pakistan.

The media workers attended the event/s but were unable to get their reports past the desks of their employers. To view the abhorrent role of Pakistani media Dons, check this information released by the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ): Pakistan 2010: 19 Media Workers Killed, 327 Wounded, 1500 Retrenched.

I end this with a comment made in a Yahoo discussion group by a wonderfully brave person who has waged a life-long struggle for democratic and human rights of people in Pakistan. ‘It is quite sad that the demo was hardly shown on the media, despite so many friends braving the weather. Yet if a few dozen clerics get together, we see constant clips on TV.’
.
.

Pakistan’s Women Protection Bill 2006 Snared by Shariat Court

The Women Protection Bill of 2006 that assured at least a minimal protection to women charged under the infamous Hudood Ordinances, has been deemed ‘repugnant to Islam’ by the Federal Shariat Court (FSC).

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission
PAKISTAN: Sharia Court Launches Major Challenge to Protection of Women Act
AHRC-STM-268-2010, December 23, 2010.

On 22 December 2010, after three years and four petitions, the Federal Shariat Court (FSC) of Pakistan declared several critical clauses of the Protection of Women (Criminal Laws Amendment) Act of 2006 unconstitutional. In place of this act that created protections for women, the FSC supports the reinstatement of the Hudood Ordinances VII of 1979, which were used to discriminate against, falsely convict and imprison, and otherwise destroy the lives of hundreds of women.

Although the FSC does not have the power to make or change law, Article 203DD of the Constitution does give the FSC to rule any law which is “repugnant” to Islam based on the Holy Quran and the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). The dangerous, potentially destabilising implications will not be legal but rather primarily social and political, as the FSC declaration will incite Islamic fundamentalists and their supporters to suppress the rights of women for fair trial which they have achieved after a long history of struggle.

The petitioners sought to diminish the Protection of Women Act and reinstate provisions of the Hudood Ordinances concerning the kidnapping, abduction, or forced induction of women for purposes of marriage; kidnapping and abduction to submit the victim to “unnatural lust”; the selling or buying of a person for prostitution; cohabitation under false pretences, such as claims of lawful marriage; and enticing or kidnapping a woman with criminal intent.

The FSC has claimed that elements of the Protection of Women Act are not consistent with Islam and thus violate Article 203DD because they conflict with the FSC’s support of the Hudood Ordinances. The sections in question, 11, 25, and 28, are those pertaining to zina (adultery, rape) and qazf (enforcement of hadd). The FSC advocates the restoration of provisions of Hudood that require women who have been raped to produce four witnesses to support her testimony—and the reestablishment of the right of police to arrest women on a charge of adultery on the basis of their report of rape.

The court also held that sections 48 and 49 of the Control of Narcotics Substances Act of 1997 and portions of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1997 fall under the Hudood Ordinances and should not give judicial powers to the high court instead of deferring to the FSC. The court would attempt to extent the term “Hudood” to cover apostasy, human trafficking, war against the state, and the right of retaliation. The FSC stated that the provisions it states are unconstitutional should be eliminated by 22 June 2011.

The FSC does not have the legal authority to overturn these provisions of the Protection of Women Act, the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, or the Anti-Terrorism Act. The former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, Qazi Anwer, stated that the FSC does not have the constitutional authority to declare laws unconstitutional. Only the high courts and the Supreme Court have that power. Meanwhile, Parliament is the only body that can make laws or amend the Constitution.

Yet the implications of the FSC declaration will be tremendous for Pakistan. Of most concern is the effect the ruling will have on Islamic fundamentalists and the likelihood of a resurgence of support for the Hudood Ordinances and the repeal of the Women’s Protection Act. Extremists may start campaigns against women’s rights and protections similar to those currently ongoing surrounding blasphemy laws. The possibility that these fundamentalists may be incited to vandalism, violence, and extrajudicial killings is very real.

Beyond civil society, conflict and insecurity could provoke the extra constitutional forces to take action to support this extreme religious group over secular opponents—and invite the involvement of external actors which would prefer an Islamic fundamentalist government in Pakistan. The effect may be the destabilization of the government as well as the erosion of authority and support for democratic and civilian rule.

The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
.
.