Pakistan’s blasphemy laws have become tools of oppression against marginalized communities. Despite verbal condemnations from the clergy, the lack of substantive action perpetuates violence and injustice. Recent incidents highlight the urgent need for legislative reform and societal shifts towards tolerance and justice to protect all citizens.
Since its independence, Pakistan has grappled with the issue of blasphemy, a challenge that gained significant traction and severity under General Zia-ul-Haq’s regime in the 1980s. The blasphemy laws initially meant to safeguard religious sentiments, were strengthened and expanded during this period, leading to an in place to maintain religious harmony, the reality on the ground is starkly increasing in their use and misuse. While the official narrative claims these laws are different, marked by brutalities and injustices, particularly against marginalized communities.
The blasphemy laws in Pakistan, especially Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code, prescribe harsh penalties for perceived insults to Islam and its Prophet. Theoretically, these laws apply equally to everyone, but in practice, they disproportionately target non-Muslims, such as Christians, Hindus, and Ahmadis. These communities often lack the socio-political clout to defend themselves against accusations, making them easy targets for those seeking to settle personal scores or incite communal violence.
One of the most harrowing aspects of these laws is how accusations, often based on flimsy or fabricated evidence, can lead to mob violence and extrajudicial killings. The mere allegation of blasphemy can incite crowds to take the law into their own hands, resulting in brutal attacks and lynchings. The judicial process, slow and flawed, offers little protection to the accused. Even if eventually acquitted, individuals often face continued threats to their lives, forcing them into hiding or exile.
The case of Asia Bibi, a Christian woman accused of blasphemy in 2009, highlights the perilous situation faced by those accused under these laws. Despite a lack of credible evidence, Asia Bibi spent nearly a decade on death row before her conviction was overturned by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Her acquittal led to widespread protests and violent demonstrations, underscoring the intense societal pressure and danger surrounding blasphemy cases. Her ordeal exemplifies how the blasphemy laws serve as a tool for persecution rather than justice.
Those who are accused of Blasphemy often face mob violence, imprisonment, or the death sentence. While the government has not yet executed anyone for blasphemy, non-state actors have killed alleged blasphemers. Those accused often languish in jail with limited opportunities for bail. Several of Pakistan’s religious political parties champion the country’s blasphemy law as a way to garner additional votes. In contrast, former government officials who were vocal supporters of reforming the blasphemy law have been killed.
In addition to blasphemy, Pakistan’s penal code includes strict punishments against the Ahmadiyya Muslim community, which comprises nearly 4 million people in Pakistan. In 1984, President Zia ul-Huq introduced Sections 298-A and 298-B, which make it a criminal offense for Ahmadis to call themselves Muslims, use Muslim practices in worship, or share their faith. Ahmadis are therefore prohibited from publicly declaring their faith, obtaining material related to their faith, citing the Qur’an, building mosques, referring to their places of worship as mosques, or making the public call for prayer (the adhaan).
From an Islamic perspective, the treatment of minorities is guided by principles of justice, compassion, and protection of human dignity. The Quran and Hadith emphasize the importance of protecting the rights of non-Muslims living in Muslim-majority societies. Historically, Islamic governance has offered protection and religious freedom to minorities, known as dhimmis, under the dhimma contract, which guaranteed their safety and religious practice in exchange for a tax. This contrasts sharply with the current misuse of blasphemy laws, which violate these foundational Islamic principles by fostering injustice and persecution.
The role of non-political clergy in these cases has been largely passive, with many religious leaders condemning violence and misuse of the laws verbally, but failing to take substantive action to distance themselves or their communities from such acts. Their condemnation, while significant, often lacks the necessary follow-up to effect real change, allowing the cycle of violence and misuse to continue unchallenged. Non-political clergy hold significant influence over their congregations and the broader society, but this influence is rarely harnessed to counteract the misuse of blasphemy laws. Instead of mobilizing their communities to oppose vigilantism and support legal reforms, many religious leaders limit their involvement to verbal condemnations.
Furthermore, the passive role of the clergy extends to their interaction with the legal system. While they hold moral authority, they often do not use their positions to advocate for legal reforms or to support those wrongly accused of blasphemy. This inaction perpetuates a climate where false accusations can thrive, and mob justice is seen as an acceptable response.
In some cases, religious leaders who do take a stand against the misuse of blasphemy laws face severe consequences. For instance, in 2011, Salman Taseer, the Governor of Punjab, was assassinated by his own bodyguard after he criticized the blasphemy laws and supported Asia Bibi, a Christian woman falsely accused of blasphemy. The reaction from some segments of the clergy was troubling, as a portion of religious leaders and scholars praised the assassin rather than condemning the murder unequivocally. This incident highlighted the risks involved for those who dare to speak against the misuse of blasphemy laws and the pervasive influence of extremist ideology.
While the Pakistani government occasionally pays lip service to the need for protecting minorities, concrete actions to reform the blasphemy laws remain absent. The promises on paper, encapsulated in constitutional guarantees of religious freedom and protection, are starkly contrasted by the brutal realities faced by marginalized communities. The dissonance between the stated ideals and ground realities highlights a significant human rights challenge in Pakistan.
In conclusion, the evolution and enforcement of blasphemy laws in Pakistan reveal a deep-seated conflict between legislative intent and practical outcomes. The resultant environment of fear, mob violence, and social ostracism starkly contrasts with both the constitutional promises of religious freedom and the Islamic principles of justice and protection for minorities. The recent, tragic incidents underscore the urgent need for not just legislative reform but also a societal shift towards tolerance and justice. To genuinely uphold the values of protection and equality, Pakistan must embark on comprehensive reforms to curtail the misuse of these laws and safeguard the rights and lives of all its citizens.
