Dr. Fida Muhammad Khan
In recent years, and particularly in recent weeks, the debate over minority rights in Pakistan has intensified, highlighted by the recent minorities’ rights march. It was surprising to see Indian media inundating its audience with headlines such as “Minorities Demand Equal Rights” and “Minorities Demand Repeal of 295-C.” What was even more interesting was that Pakistani media outlets echoed this sentiment, appearing to be aligned in their coverage. This raises concerns that our media may be conveying a misleading narrative to the world, portraying Pakistan as an intolerant nation. While it is true that minorities in Pakistan face certain challenges, their already vulnerable position complicates their situation compared to others. However, it is crucial to recognize that all Pakistanis are grappling with inflation, rising energy and food prices, and a declining standard of living. Shopkeepers and traders in local markets do not differentiate between customers based on faith. Thus, the assertion that Pakistan is a ghetto for minorities is fundamentally flawed and is often used by certain political and social groups to gain acceptance in the West.
Although the march aimed to advocate for minority rights, its true purpose seemed to diverge from this goal. Instead of addressing the socio-economic and political issues faced by minorities, the organizers and leaders crossed a critical line by demanding the removal of 295-C from the Constitution. Statements from various media outlets indicated that the primary objective of the march was the repeal of this law, rather than highlighting pressing issues such as unemployment or drug abuse within minority communities. The repeated focus on 295-C suggests that the march was primarily about abolishing blasphemy laws in Pakistan.
The advertisement campaign for the march included several banners featuring Aasia Bibi, who was convicted of blasphemy by the high courts but later acquitted by the Supreme Court and flown to Canada on a chartered flight. Former Chief Justice Saqib Nisar reportedly stated even before the case was heard in the Supreme Court that Aasia would be released. It is both unfortunate and surprising that the minorities who marched for their rights seemed to focus solely on 295-C. Did they have no other issues to address? As a student of social sciences, I believe that someone else was speaking for them, presenting a narrative that this was their primary concern. The placards and speeches were directed at blasphemy laws, overshadowing the many other challenges minorities face. It is essential to recognize that while the international community, human rights organizations, and NGOs often rally around cases of blasphemy, they tend to overlook other pressing issues affecting minority communities. Why does the West remain silent on atrocities committed against civilians in conflict zones, yet raise a loud outcry over blasphemy cases? Why do those accused of blasphemy receive admiration and support from the West? These are questions that rational thinkers in the 21st century must confront.
The west through its desi liberal supporters and NGO’s incentivize blasphemy by providing support to the accused, promising them a life in the West with financial and social resources.
The love for the Prophet ﷺ is central to the Muslim identity; as stated in a hadith, a person cannot be a complete believer unless their love for the Prophet exceeds their love for themselves and their family.
Islam has been a liberating force as it liberated Arabia and perfected the message of Allah. It is the final message. It has also been the most influential force against western imperialism and it still offers resistance to west. The west views Islam and Islamic civilization as an enemy. This is why, when someone crosses a red line, the West often supports the accused, as the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ is at the core of Muslim belief.
Those advocating for the removal of 295-C and anti-blasphemy legislation present various arguments, primarily focusing on the misuse of the law, wrongful convictions, and claims of anti-human rights or anti-freedom of speech. Let’s analyze these arguments one by one.
The claim of misuse of the law is largely unfounded. A Muslim risks losing their faith by wrongfully accusing someone without evidence, which ensures that extreme caution is exercised in such matters. Typically, it is scholars who report these cases, and they do so with careful consideration of the facts. In court, the accused has the right to hire a lawyer, present their side of the story, and provide evidence. Courts in Pakistan have often ruled in favor of the accused, as seen in the cases of Aasia and Mubarak Sani. While it is true that the Supreme Court’s decisions can be influenced by political pressures, this does not justify allowing convicted criminals to go free.
The argument regarding wrongful convictions as a basis for removing 295-C is illogical. By this reasoning, we should also abolish laws against homicide or robbery, as they too can be misused. If we accept this line of thinking, it calls into question the validity of all laws, as any law can potentially be misapplied. Laws exist to maintain order, and courts are responsible for determining guilt based on evidence. Ironically, when courts acquit the accused, these same liberal groups trust the judicial process, but if the courts convict based on evidence, they suddenly oppose the legislation.
Regarding human rights, the anti-blasphemy law aligns with the principles of human rights. Just as the faiths of minorities in Pakistan deserve respect, so too must the Muslim faith be honored. It is astonishing to see advocates for minority rights give speeches about respecting minority religions while simultaneously insulting the majority religion. Why should respect be demanded only for minority faiths? As for the death penalty, for Muslims, the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ represents a fundamental red line. The increase in blasphemy cases can be attributed to certain individuals, supported by Western interests, who have been released despite their actions.
Minorities in Pakistan are free to practice their religions, and they do so without restriction. For instance, a grand mosque in Peshawar shares a wall with the city’s largest church, and Christians have never faced issues practicing their faith. However, there are boundaries; Islam prohibits the abuse of any religion, and thus Muslims do not tolerate abuse directed at Islam.
The state must recognize the significance of the finality of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ to the Muslim faith. Members of other communities should also understand the sensitivity of this issue. Likewise, followers of Islam should refrain from engaging in religious discussions that could lead to unnecessary conflict. It is the responsibility of scholars and religious leaders to navigate these discussions, as common individuals may inadvertently escalate tensions.
The author is a Lecturer at the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics (PIDE), Islamabad.
