Yesterday, it was reported that the Pakistani Minister for Minorities (a Cabinet-level position in Pakistan’s government) was shot by gunmen yesterday thought to be Muslim extremists. This follows the assassination of a Pakistani governor in early January, also by Muslim extremists. In the first case, the Minister was a Christian and in the case of the governor, a Muslim. They both had criticized the country’s blasphemy laws and suggested their removal or amendment. These killings follow years of harassment, persecution and violence against those accused under Pakistan’s blasphemy laws.
Pakistan is an often-misunderstood country for those who do not regularly follow it and a very complex place. It is much more religiously heterogeneous than the generally (but not entirely) homogeneous Arab states. While the overwhelming majority of its 174 million people are Muslim (95% by the latest U.S. State Department estimates), there is a very sizable (although not in percentage) Christian community and a number of other denominations in the country. It is also racked by internal divisions between more extreme and tolerant versions of Islam, and subject to tremendous outside pressures from India, Afghanistan and the United States (especially as an ally in the war against al-Qaeda).
The common perception of Pakistan around the world, especially as reported in the media, is a land of extremists–not without fault, as there are large number of religious extremists and it was the birthplace of the Taliban. It is seen as promoting a very rigid and conservative form of Islam, fostering extremism and being an unreliable ally in the U.S. war against the Taliban and al-Qaeda. While there is undoubtedly some truth in this, as evidenced by the news stories above, it is does not fully explain the realities of religion and Islam in Pakistan. The government, stuck between the pressures of the West and their own desire to maintain calm and the pressure of very conservative portions of the populace, has to strike a careful balance between both postures. Thus, what Pakistan has been is a mixture of extremism and tolerance.
It is worth explaining, however, what the actual realities of religion in Pakistan are, including the laws and measures of the land. Seeing this helps explain how such events as the ones described above can happen and help to understand the complexity of the forces that led to them.
Pakistan is a self-declared Islamic state, saying “Islam shall be the state religion of Pakistan.” The Constitution further promotes the Islam, requiring the teaching of Islam, correct printing of the Qu’ran, following of Islamic moral standards, and the mandatory payment of zakat (charity money mandated by the Qu’ran). The Constitution also requires that “all laws shall be brought in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam.”
The Faisal Mosque in the Pakistani capital
To this end, the government gives a definite favoritism to Islam. The only public holidays are Muslim, the government supports Muslim pilgrims to attend the annual hajj in Mecca, and provides a chaplaincy corps for Muslim soldiers but not others.
At the same time, religious freedom is protected. In the Preamble to the Constitution, “adequate provision shall be made for the minorities freely to profess and practice their religion and develop their cultures.” The Constitution then explicitly states this freedom saying “subject to law and order and public morality, every citizen shall have the right to profess, practice, and propagate his religion.” The Constitution further makes it a duty of the state to provide and develop minority rites.
So, on a legal level, Pakistan seems to acknowledge the realities of its demographics: it makes itself a Muslim state due to the Muslim majority, but also gives religious freedom due to the presence of sizable minorities. However, religious and religious-based legislation muddies the reality.
The first provision that causes one pause is the passage in the Constitution, saying all legislation must be brought in line with Islamic injunctions (i.e. shari’a). The Shari’a Act of 1991 also creates a similar requirement, making shari’a the supreme law of the land. From this basis flows a great deal of legislation (not of all of which was passed by independent Pakistan, such as the Penal Code which is based on the colonial era Indian Penal Code created by the British).
The first of these laws is the Blasphemy Laws, which are sections of the Penal Code addressing speech against religious figures. These laws prohibit the speaking of any words “with malicious intention of outraging the ‘religious feelings’ of any class of citizens of Pakistan.’ This passage was passed in the 19th century by the British colonial administration. In 1982, under the government of General Zia ul-Haq (which took a strong turn toward a conservative interpretation of Islam), special provisions prohibiting specific speech against Islamic figures was also passed. These articles prohibit any speech against Islam, the Qur’an, the Prophet Muhammad or his family and the first four Caliphs of Islam (the Rashidun). Penalties can range from 10 years to a death sentence (in the case of blasphemy against Islam).
Supporters of the Pakistani blasphemy law
*Interestingly enough, many of the exact same passages found in the Pakistan Penal Code which are strictly enforced as blasphemous can be found, word for word in the Penal Codes of other countries, such as India, Bangladesh, Malaysia and Brunei, to name a few.
The other legislation of note that strongly incorporates shari’a are the Hudood Ordinances, passed in the early 1980s. This group of 5 laws addresses “Qur’anic” matters such as adultery, theft and armed robbery and mandates shari’a punishments for such acts. It also requires shari’a levels of evidence to prove such crimes. While on paper these laws seem very straight forward and in line with historic Islamic law, what has happened is the criminalizing of victims of certain acts. For example, under the ordinance discussing adultery, four male Muslim witnesses are required to prove adultery. When a woman is raped, it is uncommon that there were witnesses. Thus, instead of prosecuting the rapist, the woman can be charged under such laws with adultery.
Given such an environment with laws that promote Islamic law, religious life for some in Pakistan has become very difficult. The blasphemy laws, while designed (in theory) to protect all religions and Islam (a common prohibition in Islamic countries, as it is part of shari’a), have been completely hijacked by people with agendas. It is not uncommon to find persons accusing others of blasphemy not for legitimate religious reasons, but due to personal or professional rivalry. The blasphemy laws are also used to harass and discriminate against religious minorities (as a majority of those accused under such laws come from minority groups). The judicial process involved with blasphemy cases is rarely fair, as extremists fill courtrooms and threaten retribution on those acquitted of blasphemy charges or those who might acquit persons on the charges. Most cases simply never resolve, leaving the person in detention indefinitely or resolve with the person being unjustly found guilty or simply leaving the country to protect themselves. (A quick search on GoogleNews or LexisNexis for “Pakistan blasphemy” will illustrate just how profound this trend is.)
With the laws and their misuse, an environment of extremism and intolerance has been created at times. Of particular target in Pakistan has been the Ahmadi community. Ahmadis are an “offshoot” of Islam that follows the tenets of Islam, but believes their founder was a latter-day prophet (considered heretic by orthodox Muslims). More so than almost any group in Pakistan, the climate has targeted Ahmadis. There have been laws passed against the Ahmadi community (as part of the Penal Code), prohibiting them from performing “Muslim practices” such as calling their places of worship a mosque, reading the Qur’an, reciting traditional Muslim prayers, dressing like Muslims or even greeting each other like Muslims. They also cannot be buried in Muslim cemeteries, proselytize, or travel on hajj to Saudi Arabia. This discrimination has gone as far as to affect voting rights. As Pakistan reserves seats for religious minorities, people must be identified by their religion on voter identification in order to cast votes appropriately (one vote is done in the normal representational manner independent of religious affiliation). The government has specifically put sections on voter registration forms (and other identification documents) requiring Muslims to take an oath affirming that Muhammad was the final prophet of Islam and denouncing Ahmadis and their founder, things that an Ahmadi would not do. This discrimination is also practiced socially, shunned and harassed by other Muslims.
But at the same time as the government has created these seemingly biased laws and promoted Islam at the expense of other religions, they still take measures to protect minorities and promote a more tolerant climate. The government created the Ministry of Minority Affairs in 2004, elevating it to a Cabinet position in 2008. It has also fought a long battle against terrorist and extremist groups (in conjunction with the U.S.) under the auspices of the Anti-Terrorist Act (although some have argued they have done this in a half-hearted manner). Former President Musharraf also tried to amend both the Blasphemy Laws (in 2000) and the Hudood Ordinances, albeit unsuccessfully due to popular protests. However, the government has successfully passed measures that require more rigorous investigation of blasphemy cases (in 2005) and protecting women, especially those involved in cases related to the Hudood Ordinances (in 2006).
Muslim Protesters against a blasphemer in Pakist
Thus, as my title indicates, is a situation where the country vacillates between extremism and tolerance. The government at the same time kowtows to religious extremists and religious conservatives, but at the same time tries to maintain a more moderate, tolerance atmosphere within the country, knowing that this middle road is probably necessary to prevent the country from slipping into a situation where a force like the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan rules the country.
The last remaining question, though, is to why this is in any way important, especially in light of the major and fundamental changes happening in the Arab world at present. Pakistan, in many ways, is one of the models for the Muslim world. If Pakistan can maintain a fairly strict observance of Islam as the state-sponsored religion but at the same time protect the rights of its non-Muslim citizens and social calm at the same time, it can provide a prototype for other Muslim societies to do the same. In places like Indonesia and Malaysia, also with large Muslim populations and a tradition of democracy and modernization, the same pattern could be followed. In a different sense, Arab countries (even Saudi Arabia) could do the same. If Pakistan can combine its desired version of Islam and protect all others, the possibilities lie ahead.
