Tyranny of piety

Can the Pakistan Supreme Court accept that those elected by the people cannot be dismissed from parliament for ‘impiety’?

Written by Khaled Ahmed | Published: November 15, 2014 12:02 am
pak-480 Religion too punishes crime, albeit at times too harshly, like cutting off the hand for pilferage.

 

The world will be surprised to know that the constitution of Pakistan has a provision for piety, the one thing that the nation-state in the 18th century had begun thinking was not measurable. Today, crime is described in penal codes, then punished. Religion too punishes crime, albeit at times too harshly, like cutting off the hand for pilferage. But how can you punish lack of piety, like not knowing a certain Arabic verse of the Quran by heart?

Article 62 of the constitution of Pakistan says that a member of parliament is not disqualified as long as “he is of good character and is not commonly known as one who violates Islamic injunctions; he has adequate knowledge of Islamic teachings and practises obligatory duties prescribed by Islam as well as abstains from major sins; he is sagacious, righteous and non- profligate, honest and ‘ameen’, there being no declaration to the contrary by a court of law; he has not, after the establishment of Pakistan, worked against the integrity of the country or opposed the ideology of Pakistan.”

If you don’t pass this test, you can’t even stand for election — the election officer can ask you to recite a Quranic verse in Arabic — and if you can’t, you can be denied nomination. Of course, the non-Muslim members of parliament are exempted, although subject to possessing “moral character”. For clarity’s sake, sin and crime are clubbed together in religion, whereas the “non-intrusive” modern state doesn’t consider all sins as crime. A policeman in Lahore feels safer nabbing sinners, who are mostly peaceful citizens, in preference to dacoits, who can shoot him dead. The penal code, after a heavy injection of religion, allows him this choice.

There is the provision — “adequate knowledge of Islamic teachings and duties prescribed by Islam” — relating to the practice of piety. What is “adequate”, one may ask? Of course, only the clerical community or those ex-madrasa soldiers of Islam doing jihad can pass these two tests. The Taliban adhere to this provision of the constitution rigorously: warlord Mangal Bagh in Khyber Agency, on the authority of a hadith, burns down the houses of those who don’t attend group prayers in a mosque on Friday.

After reservations expressed by some quarters, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has declared that it will deliver the final verdict on how Article 62 is to be enforced. We don’t know how it is going to handle the “duty” of saying “compulsory” namaz. Laws presently in the statute book can get parliamentarians sacked for drinking “wine” in their hostel.

What will the honourable court do about the “compulsory” (farz) namaz? Muslim courts are always conservative — a “liberal” judge is a curse — and can’t be expected to become “Voltairean” to make religion compatible with modern times.

If the honourable court wants to become “enlightened” and “rational”, it had better look at some recent developments. The Imran Khan government in the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province has announced it is changing its curriculum for textbooks back to what it was before the “liberal” ANP government committed the apostasy of removing dozens of divine verses from science books and set aside large swaths of text eulogising the early Perfect Caliphate.

Most probably the judges — who flee Pakistan after handing down verdicts favouring victims of the blasphemy law — will play it safe. Their interpretation of piety as described in Article 62 will jibe with the views of the growing community of religious scholars attached to madrasas and backed by excitable youths doing jihad. A high court has recently “wisely” decided to confirm the death sentence of a poor illiterate Christian woman, Asiya Bibi, convicted by a scared lower court.

A mentally ill, old British Pakistani, sentenced to death for calling himself a prophet, has been killed in Adiala jail in Rawalpindi by a police guard who had become influenced by the “piety” of another prisoner named Qadri, who had earlier murdered Punjab governor Salmaan Taseer for criticising the blasphemy law. Policemen become brainwashed by “pious” convicts — witness the prison staff in Sindh enslaved to the righteousness of Omar Sheikh, who had a hand in killing American journalist Daniel Pearl in Karachi.

The Arab-funded Islamic University in Islamabad has come under fire and could suffer in the court of law because its students staged a mock UN debate allowing the display of “Israeli culture”. Divine edicts may exist to dub this a lapse from piety.

No woman has been stoned to death, although she deserves stoning after reporting rape. Why? Because her testimony is not equal to that of men. Iran is closer to the piety of Article 62 because it regularly stones them. No hands have been cut off in Pakistan. Does that mean no one steals in Pakistan? Most politicians could lose one hand, if not both.

Muslims are unfortunately yoked to democracy, which they don’t really like because of its “imperfection”. It tolerates “impiety” and yet carries on. We hear in India many MPs have criminal cases going on against them, and yet the world says democracy flourishes in India while it languishes in Pakistan.

Can our Supreme Court accept that once a man is elected by the people, he can’t be dismissed from parliament on grounds of “impiety”? Many pieties are private; should the court break into the privacy of the elected person through suo motu cases? A drunkard may serve the people better than a cleric who apostatises fellow Muslims. The court will have to side with the cleric.

Reason is fleeing Pakistan, together with most non-Muslims targeted by the blasphemy law. Hindus are fleeing Sindh because of the rising tide of rape through the “piety” of conversion. In Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, now restoring “piety” to the curriculum, the families of 127 Christian women and children killed last year by terrorist outfit Jundallah have not been paid the promised compensation.

How will the Supreme Court reinstate reason to save Pakistan from dying of excessive “piety”? Curricula undermine reason, science education declines. Despite the BJP, the Indians have a technology platform that sends a space vehicle to Mars. The last time we used technology in elections, it failed on the first day and will not work if we ape India and stage the next one through computers.

Pakistani scientists are usually more “pious” than rational. But a maverick nuclear scientist named Pervez Hoodbhoy has “heretically” created the Eqbal Ahmad Centre for Public Education “online” (eacpe.org) that seeks “to foster the use of science and reason to understand nature and society so as to better enable all citizens of Pakistan to participate fully in the political, economic, social and cultural life of their society”.

Here is an actual alternative to the pieties of Article 62. But I must confess the popularity graph of Hoodbhoy in Pakistan is nothing that I can write home to my mother about. For a pious man, it is not a good idea to be seen together with him, and I don’t know how he would fare in the honourable court if he were dragged there for having misled people like me.

The writer is consulting editor, ‘Newsweek Pakistan’

For all the latest Opinion News, download Indian Express App

  1. D
    Dharma
    Nov 15, 2014 at 12:03 pm
    Sir I usually admire your articles. But in this one I find one glitch. "Despite BJP", India landed a vehicle to Mars. That reveals what you think of BJP (which I dont want elaborate) and that is very contrary to what many Indians think including the liberals whose vote share has propelled the party to majority wherever they fought the recent elections. BJP has come to symbolise hope, confidence and reurance in our abilities. I dont think BJP would have got here if it stuck to religious ideologies. Ultimately what happens in India is due to what people in India want - the party that resonates with those needs get to power and will atleast partially enable what they are voted for. The same goes for any country, I think, if true democracy is allowed to function. So the credit for those achievements are due to the people of India and partially to the leaders. Just a few thoughts that I wanted to share with an eminent person who I see as a rare light of hope in an otherwise dark country. Keep spreading the light sir.
    (0)(0)
    Reply
    1. R
      Raji
      Nov 15, 2014 at 8:56 am
      Scientific research needs an open mind. But religion in stan wants to kill that. All this is again giving a bad press to their religion. Even previously tolerant people are hardening their stance against Islam. The practice of the religion seems to want to complete kill freedom of thought. I am so glad I am not living in stan. But when I hear some hardline clerics and politicians in India speak, I am filled with dread of what might happen to India if these so called seculars got the upper hand in India.
      (0)(0)
      Reply
      1. K
        Khalid Shaikh
        Nov 18, 2014 at 3:01 pm
        stan's consution is so shady, and so full of contradictions that one can easily see where the country is headed.
        (0)(0)
        Reply
        1. M
          mohanK
          Nov 15, 2014 at 10:24 am
          The sorry state of affairs in stan is emulated , though in a diluted version, by indian reformers as well. Statements like `hindus are natural patriots´ put pressure on other communities to display their loyalty to their country. If in stan matters are judged on religious basis, the right wing hindus take it for granted that india is a hindu country, and just being a hindu undoubtedly fulfills the condition to be a truly indian citizen , galvanising religion and nationalism. Thus the indian nationalism has discreetly integrated hindu elements into it´s national ideny, defying which, either by difference in belief or thought system,could become a treason.
          (0)(0)
          Reply
          1. S
            Suresh Vyas
            Nov 15, 2014 at 4:07 pm
            I respect the writer--Khaled Ahmed--for writing the article.Dear K. Ahmed Sir:You know very well that Islaam irrational. It does not give freedom of thought, speech, and action. So then, why you hold on to Islaam? Why not publicly quit Islaam?Is it because you fear that the s or to Gov. will kill you? Koran says that one who quits Islaam must be killed. Is that your fear?No, I have no interest to convert anyone; but I know that religions can be objectively compared to find out which religion has higher potential to cause peace at personal or global level. So, anyone has freedom to quit any religion and accept any other religion or no religion.So, I am asking why not you exercise that freedom?I also know that most likely your ancestors a few centuries ago were Hindus who were forced to accept Islaam. They cannot be happy in haven knowing you still hold on to Islaam.I wish and pray you make all decisions rationally based on the truth, and share the truth with the world.jai sri Krishna!
            (0)(0)
            Reply
            1. Load More Comments