HIJACKED

https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/06/27/hijacked/

Sahih Bukhari quotes the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) as saying: ‘Make things easy for people, and do not make them difficult. Cheer people up and do not drive them away.’

It is strange then, that most of those who have a voice in the matter of religion and how it pertains to life consider there is something wrong with it if religion is simplified and made easy to understand, or if it fails to make life difficult for it followers. They like to surround religion by mystique and an aura of exclusivity so that not only are they alone supposed to know what is right and what is not, but disagreeing with them is considered to be tantamount to blasphemy.

Needless to say, there are many exceptions. Mercifully.

There is of course the fact that knowledge is power. The Church in medieval times wielded huge power over its people, investing heavily in the perception that it was the gatekeeper to paradise. “Cross them in any way, shape or form, and you could yourself barred from the gates of paradise.” Nobody, neither a peasant nor a king, was able to pluck up courage, or sufficient power to oppose them.

The clergy was not given a huge role in Islam, perhaps because it tends to be this way. Few groups, after all, would not grab at such a ‘heaven sent’ opportunity for power if presented with it, and the clergy is not above it.  And yet we have it, a clergy.

And by this clergy, religion is presented as approving of acts analogous to putting pebbles in one’s shoe and self-flagellation, but the hardest to understand is the largely prevalent belief in unquestioning obedience without any attempt at understanding. Anyone who raises a voice of reason, anyone who believes in education, who attempts to teach along the principles of logic, is made to leave. The recent dismissals from educational institutions of great minds and rational individuals show this, and such cases are increasing. To deprive our young from exposure to such minds is a loss that will not be easily overridden.

If anything has brought Pakistan to the brink of where it is, it is this – more than corruption, more than the failures of its political regimes.

The fact is even more evident today in the way authorities appear powerless to implement their own rules. The way now, when distancing is so crucial in preventing the spread of covid-19, they were induced to resume congregational prayers. While some mosques are said to be adhering to SOPs, not all of them are, but they carry on. It is understandable that it is hard to impose a lockdown on commercial activity. But on prayer, when it can as well take place at home, what coercion is used unless it is that not to pray in a mosque is made out to be a sin?

This of course appears to have taken place in Saudi Arabia as well where, following a statement saying that Haj would not take place this year. authorities appear to have changed tack and allowed a limited number of persons to perform the pilgrimage. It is a surprise to find that far from considering it wrong to put fellow humans at risk God apparently approves of it.

And so we have witnessed a massive funeral for a respected religious scholar in Karachi, who died this month. The funeral was attended by many scholars, and thousands of the scholar’s students, in this time of covid-19.

Allah says in the Holy Quran: “If anyone saves a single life, it is as if he has saved all of humanity.”

If this injunction is followed to its logical conclusion, what of those who endanger many lives?  Which taking part in that massive congregational event has certainly done.

We need to learn more about what has been taught by the great Prophet of Islam (PBUH), to understand the religion better, for which we need discourse both verbal and in print. Yet this month in Sindh, the provincial assembly ‘unanimously adopted a resolution’ asking to make it mandatory to write “Khatim-un-nabiyyeen (last prophet)” along with the name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) ‘wherever the holy name is used, in official documents, newspapers, magazines, television, radio and wherever this holy name was used.’ This measure hampers discourse, not the other way around. There is also the fact that there are non-Muslims in this country whose beliefs are protected by the Constitution. Why should they say any such thing, in exactly the same way as a Muslim would not wish to speak of Jesus the son of God in a Christian country? In which case, are only Muslims permitted to speak of the Holy Prophet of Islam (PBUH) in Pakistan?

It is not pleasant to find something so precious hijacked towards an unsavoury destination, but it has been. May God bring us back to the straight path. Who dares say that that is not expected in Islam?

WHO LET THE DOGS OUT

https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/06/21/who-let-the-dogs-out-3/

That must be the song ringing in the Pakistan People’s Party’s ears these days, a song that fits neatly with the rest of the story below.

What with Cynthia Ritchie’s allegations, the MQM leadership under a ruling of murder and some of its top brass under arrest, the PPP must be feeling the heat. The same heat that feels like welcoming breeze to some others. Be that as it may, Cynthia Ritchie’s allegations have another side.

Whatever and whoever Ms. Ritchie, who has lived here for ten years, is; whether or not anyone had the right to call her in to ‘investigate’ matters in Pakistan as she says is the case, however many ‘privileges’ she enjoys, is a separate matter. Without any reference to the individuals she has pointed fingers at, because there is no way of knowing if those accusations are genuine- her claims of the harassment suffered by women in general at the hands of men in general, are distressingly true, and when there is even a grain of truth in a matter, it warrants attention. And what Ms. Richie has said contains more than just a grain.

“I understand why some women choose to wear burqas as a protective cover to keep the men from staring,” said Ritchie, speaking of her experience of Pakistan. “It’s important to note that both women and men stare, but men are more obvious. In Islam, men are taught to lower their gaze in front of a woman, but that does not happen often.”

These lines are shamefully true. Female workers walking to and from work regularly experience harassment by men on the street, and unless their employers act on their behalf, the police is likely to be added to their list of harassers, with a few merciful exceptions.

Women drivers have similar experiences, and this is the reason why women cyclists are so rare in this country as to be almost non-existent. And yet, the religious right which never condemns and even propagates this attitude, seems to have the power to override the government, the courts and whoever else tries to disagree with them. This in itself is a situation as scary as any nuclear threat. Which way is our country headed? When will the government and the people realise the importance of everyone staying within their legal limits?

Jirgas, often responsible for terrifyingly cruel judgements against women, were given legal sanction in Pakistan by a bill passed in the National Assembly in 2017. The bill gives constitutional cover to Jirgas and Panchayats, the ‘kangaroo courts’ to be found all over this country. Their decisions include ‘honour’ killings, pedophilia, kidnapping, forced marriage and all sorts of other horrific rulings. A national daily reported the case of an eight-year-old girl who was accused of adultery. As a result she was stoned to death by the villagers on the jirga’s orders. An eight-year-old child. A child.

Women are sold or forced into marriage to pay for the crimes of men in their family. There was the case this year of a seven-year-old given in marriage for a crime committed by a family member. And of course there is always the well-known case of Mukhtaran Mai who was gangraped on the orders of a tribal council, as revenge for a crime committed by a kinsman. She spoke up against the matter. Normally women do not. They are expected to kill themselves in shame following the rape. Which occurred as a result of a crime committed by someone else. Where’s the logic or the  justice, much less the humanity here?

There is also the harassment suffered by women in the public light by their colleagues such as the scene created on public television by Talal Chaudhry, during which he addressed derogatory remarks against Kanwal Shozab, and called her names. Mr. Chaudhry is not new to such actions.

There have been many, many such cases, such as Amir Liaquat’s lecherous tweet featuring Sherry Rehman. This man Liaquat, the man whose academic degrees have been declared fake, has been a member of the National Assembly on a PTI ticket since 2018.

Cynthia Ritchie mentions other kinds of harassment as well.

“I’ve also seen both sexes mistreat their servants, servants’ children, and scream abuses at poor people in the markets. In Pakistan, abuse is not as openly discussed as it is in the West. Abuse seems to be more acceptable as long as one maintains a luxury lifestyle.”

This also is only too true. There was just this month the tragic case of eight-year-old Zahra who was hired by a couple to look after their one-year-old child.

There are laws prohibiting child labour in Pakistan, but more than 11 million children are still working in this country, in homes, in factories, and elsewhere, many of them as indentured labour. Zahra was one of those unfortunates. She was killed by her employers, at their admission, when she let loose one of the birds they sold.

Remember, eight years old and working. Eight years old and murdered. Why could no one save her? Is this the Land of the Pure? Don’t even think of Riasat-e-Madina, the biggest, saddest joke.

THE LONG ROAD TO CHANGE

https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/06/07/the-long-road-to-change/

Freedom, a positive change in attitude, and better laws come about neither easily nor by force, and certainly not by keeping people in ignorance of the facts. They sort of slip into place after years… sometimes generations of struggle and often an uncomfortable sort of partnership between people and their government, but a partnership nevertheless, both working towards a clearly identified goal. Each side gives way gradually, often unwillingly, with concessions and conditions until the desired results are achieved. If either party digs in its heels and does not yield the result is a stagnant, unprogressive society mired in unacceptable ideas and practices.

Here’s an example. Africans first arrived in North America in 1619 as slaves, seized from a Portuguese slave ship by the British and brought to what was then a British colony. Within a period of 200 years, almost 500,000 Africans were brought as slaves to America where they laboured on plantations in the south. They were an affordable workforce; it was largely due to their labour that the colonists came to enjoy great economic and military advantages.

Several states of America became independent of the British in 1776 and the United States of America came into being.

Slavery at the time was protected by the US Constitution, but by the early 19th century the slave states had a problem: they felt that their free slaves were organising themselves to encourage escapes and revolting against their white owners. This was when the Americans started a forced migration of the erstwhile slaves to Liberia which became an American colony. That is a separate story.

For those who remained in America, they became safe from slavery to a limited extent when Abraham Lincoln came into power. Lincoln believed that the federal government could not legally forbid slavery, but as the Commander of the Armed Forces he could take action against the states rebelling against the limitation, an observation that can only come from a leader who understands the constitution and the law.  So he took action against those states, and that was the American Civil War. After the Civil War, the 13th Amendment was promulgated which abolished slavery.

The 13th Amendment was followed by the Civil Rights Act in 1866 which gave those black Americans born in the country greater civil rights. The 13th Amendment was followed by the 14th a year later which granted citizenship to black Africans in America. The 15th Amendment in 1870 allowed African-Americans (men only) voting rights, after which African-American men also started looking for office work and gaining admission into schools. The fight for women’s suffrage and other freedoms is yet another separate story.

Later on that year, extremist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan also became more powerful; their terrorist activities prevented blacks from fully utilizing their newfound status as citizens. Racist attitudes only become stronger in the 20th century with greater institutionalized racism and legal discrimination against black citizens.

Gradually however the Civil Rights Movement became stronger. Its protest mostly took the form of sit-ins, boycotts, civil disobedience, and other means of peaceful protest, and its cause was upheld by various Supreme Court judgements which was important. It all culminated…to cut a long story very short, in a black man becoming President of the country for two consecutive terms between 2009 and 2017.

It took an interaction, and an effort… not always concerted but allowed, between the superior court, the executive, the legislature and the people of the country to come to that conclusion.

Racism has not gone away in the USA. It is alive and well there and all over the world, and very much so in our country. If racism does not seem to be dislodge-able in the USA remember that the battle has at least begun. One day, when the present divisive and self-serving setback to the process currently lodged in the presidential office leaves, the issue may work itself towards a resolution, although it is not likely to go away until those who are the butt of racism are no longer downtrodden and weak. The best that can be done is to protect the rights of the victims of racism by means of the law, and by means of long, patient indoctrination of society… but mostly by means of laws that are firmly enforced.

Has that taken place in Pakistan? What happened to the constitution that said all citizens of the country were equal? Where does the Ahmadiyya sect stand now, the Hazaras, the Shiites? Where is the eastern wing of the country? What happened? Where were the protests, then and now? Where are the textbooks encouraging debate on what happened in 1971, where is the encouragement of debate in itself, as opposed to battle, protest as opposed to rioting? Have the superior courts of the country shown themselves to be unbiased and indeed superior? Has the battle here even begun?

There is a difference between protests and riots. While the latter is understandable, it is often a segment of society taking advantage of the former. It is best therefore not to put oneself in a position where one can be blamed instead of attracting support. A riot does not constitute a rational standing up for rights, it is a desperate reaction accompanied by looting, destroying, and as such it gives a convenient reason for those looking to stop the process, to use violence and force to suppress the voice of dissent. This method of dealing with unrest only leads to a temporary, unsettling kind of peace which today is Pakistan.

TRACK AND TRACE

https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/06/01/track-and-trace/

• Shouldn’t there be consent first?

It seems the government is employing military technology to fight the corona virus. This technology is normally used to hunt down terrorists to discover what they’re up to by enabling the user to listen in to their telephone conversations, to note their movements to see who they are in touch with. This now is being used against the victims of corona, to ‘track and trace’ those infected with the virus, and by listening in to their phone conversations to discover whether those they are in communication with are also infected. This is of course being done by monitoring our phones.

Is this a good idea?

This strategy is not restricted to Pakistan alone. It is also being used by other countries for example Israel. Whether or not it is a good idea for those other countries to use it is not the remit of this column.

The government of Pakistan has failed dismally to come up with a coherent strategy to deal with the pandemic – much less adhere to whatever strategy it does produce. Its calls for lockdown have been ignored by the public, and the so called ‘religious’ lobby has ignored restrictions on mosques and congregations and done exactly as it pleased.  It has laid down and repealed instructions to educational institutions. It is now falling back upon threats against the government in Sindh for continuing the lockdown in that province, seeing that it must be seen to be doing something. This government and all previous governments are therefore hardly the most competent authority to trust with listening in to one’s private conversations – if one must entrust someone with such a thing.

Pakistan has a massive population. Almost three quarters of this large number of people have access to mobile phones, and a quarter to the internet. This surveillance involving all these people has been started without prior consent of the people of Pakistan.  Furthermore, organizations entrusted with this surveillance by the government do not always work in a salubrious manner.

Privacy international.org tells us that Pakistan is signatory to:

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that “no one shall be subject to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family or correspondence.” The ICCPR also commits Pakistan to ensuring the protection of other rights that rely on the protection of privacy, such as freedom of expression and freedom of association.

The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights In Islam affirms that: “a) Everyone shall have the right to live in security for himself, his religion, his dependents, his honor and his property. (b) Everyone shall have the right to privacy in the conduct of his private affairs, in his home, among his family, with regard to his property and his relationships. It is not permitted to spy on him, to place him under surveillance or to besmirch his good name. The State shall protect him from arbitrary interference. (c) A private residence is inviolable in all cases. It will not be entered without permission from its inhabitants or in any unlawful manner, nor shall it be demolished or confiscated and its dwellers evicted.”

The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan also establishes the right to privacy as a fundamental right. Article 14(1) of the Constitution confirms that “the dignity of man and, subject to law, the privacy of home, shall be inviolable.”

Yet Pakistan’s constitution also includes a wide-ranging exception to the primacy of fundamental rights. The provisions of Article 8 do not apply to any law relating to the ‘proper discharge’ of the duties of the Armed Forces or the police.

It is a cause for concern therefore to find that a strategy such as track and trace this is being employed, perhaps with the best intentions.

By employing this method the way it has, the government of Pakistan has failed to protect its citizens and has acted in contravention to its own laws, and in contravention to the other agreements it is signatory to.

Where, you wonder, is Covid-19 likely to stop and politics begin? When taking the step to bring in this surveillance, have any safeguards been put into place to ensure that this surveillance does not extend to other things that are unrelated to ‘viral matters’? Are there any guidelines in place to bring this surveillance to an end once the virus dies down or will it continue to try and unearth matters that have nothing to do with the Coronavirus?

And why were the people of this country not on board at the time that this measure was taken, why was their permission not obtained?

This is not a good idea at all.