Blasphemy laws Wednesday, December 15, 2010 Nauman Asghar http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=20414&Cat=9&dt=1/... The recent awarding of the death penalty to a Christian woman on charges of blasphemy has sparked a debate in the country on the need to review the blasphemy laws. In a number of Muslim countries, blasphemy is dealt under state law. Article 156 (a) of Indonesia's Criminal Code forbids "anyone from deliberately, in public, expressing feelings of hostility, hatred or contempt against religions with the purpose of preventing others from adhering to any religion" and forbids "anyone from disgracing a religion." The maximum penalty for violating Article 156 (a) is five years' imprisonment. Our blasphemy laws dates back to the original 1860 Indian Penal Code in which Articles 295 and 298 were inserted, keeping in view the religious sensitivities of the inhabitants of the subcontinent. Blasphemy was not an offence punishable with death. Besides, the sections shared universal application and did not refer exclusively to one faith. These provisions also required malicious intention integral to the offence concerned. In 1927 the law was amended to incorporate clause 295-A which reads: "Whoever with deliberate intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens... by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations, insults the religion or the religious beliefs of that class... shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or both." Later, after independence, the term of punishment was increased up to ten years. Zia-ul-Haq added new provisions in the form of 195-B, 295-C, 298-A and blasphemy under Section 295-C became an offence punishable by death.
The wording of the blasphemy law in Article 295-C is vague and ambiguous. According to Section 295-C, any person who, "by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the name of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is liable to be punished with the death sentence or imprisonment." Here the element of "ill-will" or malicious intention has been disregarded. In October 1990, the Federal Shariat Court ruled that the "penalty for contempt of the Holy Prophet (PBUH)... is death and nothing else." The ruling also noted that "no one after the Holy Prophet (PBUH)... exercised or was authorised the right to reprieve and pardon." The FSC also directed the court to remove the punishment of "life imprisonment" for the offence of blasphemy under 295-C. The bill in this respect was passed by the Senate but could not be approved by the National Assembly. In 1993 a bill was introduced in parliament to extend the scope of 295-C by including the words "the names of Prophet Muhammad's (PBUH) companions and family members," but no legislative enactment could be effected in this regard. It is not uncommon for the accusers to be motivated by religious bigotry, personal prejudices, selfish gain or professional rivalry. Prosecution often relies on unsubstantiated oral testimony of the complainants. The offence has been made cognisable and non-bailable. Ill-treatment and torture in police custody are commonplace. The judicial proceedings are protracted and the judges presiding over the proceedings of the case are given death threats and intimidated by local clerics. In October 1997, Justice Arif Iqbal Bhatti was murdered because he had acquitted two men accused of blasphemy. In the present state, blasphemy laws in Pakistan can be and are easily misused. The provision of capital punishment for blasphemy without the strictest possible safeguards is inimical to the fundamental rights of minorities. A democratic evolution of the country requires a level playing field for all groups inhabiting the land, irrespective of differences of caste, colour, creed and religion. If the PPP government wants to prove its credentials of a liberal party, it must take the initiative to rectify this state of affairs.
Loading...
10:30
barelvi vs deobandi wahabi part-1by stylishamjad73,090 views
chanda wasool kerny k liy ikhtalaaf peda krny kya munasib he ?? kya alim islam ka asal masla yehi he jo Hazrat sahib ne fermaya ya kuch aur bhi he jis ka adraak krna zaroori he?
treatan1234 7 months ago
those who know not has no right to speak...............he is as true as existence of universe................surely wahib is greatest fitna in humanity........
ferozak37 10 months ago
Agree with you Shah Sahib - Wahabi's are indeed Kaffir. We need people like yourself to stand up to these Wahabi Mushirqs. Allah protects you from the Wahabis.
lymnaea1 10 months ago