OPINION | Death penalty for WhatsApp message – EU condemns blasphemy laws in Nigeria

An appeal is under way for a Nigerian man, Yahaya Sharif-Aminu, a Sufi musician in his early twenties, who is awaiting the death penalty in Kano State in the northern part of Nigeria. 

Photo: Blanchi Costela/Getty Images

Tragic human rights violations that inherently accompany blasphemy laws, such as those in Nigeria, need to stop urgently, writes Georgia du Plessis.

---

Yahaya Sharif-Aminu, a Sufi musician in his early twenties, is imprisoned and awaiting the death penalty in Kano State in the northern part of Nigeria. If his appeal fails, he will be hanged. His "crime"? Sharing a WhatsApp audio message allegedly insulting the prophet Muhammed.

Nigeria is one of only seven countries in the world—including Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, Brunei, Mauritania, and Saudi Arabia—with criminal blasphemy laws for which a person can be sentenced to death. Blasphemy laws in Nigeria are an offence found under Islamic law and criminalise religious expressions by the mere fact that they are offensive to some. Despite the Nigerian Constitution stating the contrary, the Kano State Sharia Penal Code mandates the penalty of death by hanging for insulting the Quran or any Muslim prophet. Laws such as this Penal Code, are a flagrant violation of the international right to freedom of religion or freedom of expression (especially articles 18 and 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) and a grave and inhumane act of censorship. 

Condemnation of blasphemy laws 

This week, the Parliament of the European Union in Strasbourg almost unanimously condemned blasphemy laws in Nigeria by adopting a resolution specifically focusing on the case of Yahaya - "blasphemy laws are in clear breach of international human rights obligations, in particular the ICCPR, and contrary to the Nigerian Constitution, which guarantees religious freedom and freedom of expression." During the Parliamentary debate on the resolution, Katalin Cseh, Member of the European Parliament, stated that the "fact that a person can be sentenced to death just for expressing themselves is a travesty of justice…"

Yahaya was first arrested and charged with "blasphemy” in March 2020 accompanied by a mob burning down his home. In August 2020, he was convicted and sentenced to death by hanging behind closed doors by the Hausawa Filin Hockey upper-Sharia court. The conviction was overturned, and a new trial ordered based on procedural irregularities. Sharif-Aminu remains in prison without bail while awaiting the Supreme Court's ruling. If he were to be tried again, it is highly unlikely that he would not be convicted and sentenced to death again. 

READ | Blasphemy convictions spark Nigerian debate over sharia law

Many others have also been significantly harmed by Nigeria's blasphemy and religious insult laws. Also referred to in the European Parliament resolution is Deborah Samuel Yakubu, a Christian college student from Sokoto. In May 2022, she was stoned and beaten to death by her classmates and her body burnt because of blasphemy allegations. 

Despite this bleak outlook, there is a glimmer of hope. The Nigerian Constitution protects the freedoms of thought, conscience, religion, and expression, including the ability to "receive and impart ideas and information without interference." Unlike the six other countries with death penalty blasphemy laws, Nigeria's Constitution prevents both federal and state governments from adopting any religion as state religion. For example, Sharia law can only be adopted for "personal matters". Also, the Supreme Court is Nigeria's highest court, and its word is final in all cases – including blasphemy laws. This case is historical in that it presents the first-ever opportunity for the Supreme Court of Nigeria to declare blasphemy laws unconstitutional. 

Violation of the African Charter

Not only does Nigeria's blasphemy laws violate the Nigerian Constitution, but it also violates the African Charter and the international right to freedom of expression and freedom of religion or belief, especially article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This is more reason for the Supreme Court to declare the blasphemy laws unlawful.

READ | Nigeria frees Muslims accused of murder over blasphemy

The case of Yahaya has received significant international attention. For example, the legal advocacy organisation, ADF International, has directly supported this case and its lawyer Kola Alapinni. Advocating for the protection of fundamental freedoms and promoting the inherent dignity of all people, this organisation has been one of the major driving forces to bring attention to the fate of Yahaya and thousands of others subject to these draconian laws. Several major news outlets, such as CNN and BBC have also reported on this matter.

On 28 September 2020, United Nations human rights experts and bodies urged the Nigerian government to overturn the death sentence for Sharif-Aminu saying that "artistic expression of opinion and beliefs, through songs or other media – including those seen to offend religious sensibilities – is protected in accordance with international law. The criminalisation of these expressions is unlawful." His lawyer, Kola Alapinni, spoke on his behalf on the main stage of the 2023 International Religious Freedom Summit and asked everyone to "speak up loudly on Yahaya's behalf". 

Now, further international pushback and pressure comes from the European Parliament resolution condemning the fate not only of youngsters like Deborah and Yahaya but also of all those affected by such blasphemy laws and persecuted due to their faith. The resolution calls upon Nigeria to immediately withdraw the use of capital punishment for blasphemy and take steps towards the full abolition of such laws. 

These tragic human rights violations that inherently accompany blasphemy laws, such as those in Nigeria, need to stop urgently. The strong condemnation of blasphemy laws in Nigeria by the European Union will hopefully prompt the Nigerian government to release Yahaya, abolish blasphemy laws altogether and free all others convicted under these draconian laws. 

- Georgia du Plessis is a Legal Officer at ADF International, and a Research Fellow at University of the Free State.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for SUFIS 

Pakistan: Police blasphemy killings raise new concerns

M. Raja in Islamabad
DW

Activists say two separate cases of police killing men accused of blasphemy have opened a new dimension in a long-running human rights problem for Pakistan.

The family of a man who was accused of blasphemy said he was killed by police

Image: Allah Bux/AP/picture alliance

Last week, Shah Nawaz, a 32-year-old doctor in Pakistan's Sindh province, was shot by police, who claimed he had resisted arrest after being accused of insulting Islam's Prophet Muhammad and sharing "blasphemous" content on social media.

Nawaz's family rejected the police's claims and said he was killed while in custody after surrendering to police. The family said authorities told him he would have a chance to prove his innocence.

It was the second such killing in a week. On September 12, a 52-year-old man in Balochistan province was killed while held in custody at a police station for blasphemy accusations.

The killings drew condemnation from the independent Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), which said in a statement it was "gravely concerned by the alleged extrajudicial killing of two people accused of blasphemy."

"This pattern of violence in cases of blasphemy, in which law enforcement personnel are allegedly involved, is an alarming trend," the HRCP statement said.

A long-running problem in Pakistan

In religiously conservative Pakistan, speech considered insulting or criticizing Islam is punishable by death.

Although no one has ever been formally executed by the state under blasphemy laws, in dozens of cases, lynch mobs have killed those accused before a trial could take place.

Muslim mob in Pakistan accuses Christians of blasphemy  02:16

Pakistan, in recent years, has witnessed a surge of blasphemy-related killings. In numerous cases, mere accusations have unleashed lynch mobs.

Last year, blasphemy accusations triggered mobs that attacked Christian neighborhoods in the eastern province of Punjab, burning several churches and displacing hundreds of people from their homes. Christians have said those involved in the violence have yet to be put on trial.

In 2011, a former governor of Punjab province, Salman Taseer, was murdered by his bodyguard over his support for reforming Pakistan's blasphemy laws.

"Such killings are the combination of religious intolerance, deeply influential religious forces, and the state being unwilling or unable to confront the problem," Michael Kugelman, a South Asia expert at the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars, told DW.

In some cases, accusing someone of blasphemy can be used to settle personal scores, vendettas or to seize property.

"There is no need to go to court, just a public accusation of blasphemy will gather and incite vigilante mobs to lynch the accused, without waiting for any court case," Tahira Abdullah, a human rights activist, told DW.

Ruth Stephen, a Pakistani minority rights activist, told DW that accusing someone of blasphemy can be used "strategically to settle personal scores."

She added that the government of Pakistan "organizes and enables" religious extremists, which contributes to the problem of blasphemy killings.

Abdullah said a long-term solution would be for authorities to "review and amend the laws and procedures, which were tampered with illegally and unconstitutionally by unelected military dictator Zia-ul-Haq in the 1980s."

Can the government intervene?

The HRCP has demanded the government ensure an independent inquiry into the recent blasphemy deaths at the hands of police.

A member from Pakistan's minority community protests after a Christian man was convicted of blashphemy in July 2024Image: Fareed Khan/AP/picture alliance

However, analyst Kugelman said that Islamist hardliners are "deeply influential" in Pakistani politics, and "civilian and military leaderships have been unwilling to antagonize them."

"We have seen throughout Pakistan's history that those who exploit blasphemy laws, and those who justify violence against alleged violators of those laws, are treated with kid gloves by the Pakistani state," Kugelman said.

Activist Stephen said that the international community should put pressure on Pakistan's government to take action against blasphemy killings, for example, with the threat of sanctions.

The US Commission on International Religious Freedom has regularly asserted that Pakistan is one of the world's strictest and most frequent enforcers of blasphemy laws.

However, analyst Kugelman said that he doesn't think the international community will go as far as enacting sanctions over blasphemy-related killings.

"But we've seen the problem repeatedly flagged by Western governments, including the US in its annual religious freedom reports. Of course, simply flagging the problem won't make it go away, but at least it keeps the issue front and center internationally, and that's critical."

"International pressure can't stop rising mob killings, but it can keep the issue on the radar. And that at least puts pressure on the Pakistani government, knowing that key capitals, especially in the West, are concerned about a problem that Islamabad has been unwilling or unable to stop," he added.

Pakistan: Officer Shehrbano Naqvi retells 'blasphemy' rescue  03:23

Edited by: Wesley Rahn

Pakistan: Report looks into blasphemy prosecutions and online religious expression

Bytes for All (B4A)
25 April 2024



Police officers stand guard outside a cathedral during a Sunday service, in Lahore, Pakistan, 20 August 2023, after a mob attacked several Christian churches over blasphemy allegations. ARIF ALI/AFP via Getty Images

Report highlights that the rise of the internet has led to an increase in blasphemy prosecutions in the country.

This statement was originally published on pakvoices.bk on 19 April 2024.

A new report by Bytes for All, Pakistan, a leading digital rights organization, sheds light on the concerning rise of online blasphemy cases in Pakistan and the ongoing legal challenges. Titled “State of Online Blasphemy Cases and Unfolding Legal Saga”, the report delves into Pakistan’s legal framework surrounding blasphemy and its impact on online religious expression.

The report highlights that the rise of the internet has led to an increase in blasphemy prosecutions in Pakistan. Social media platforms are often used to disseminate allegedly blasphemous content. The misuse of blasphemy laws has a chilling effect on freedom of expression online. Religious minorities are particularly vulnerable to blasphemy accusations.

Pakistan’s constitution guarantees freedom of speech, but restricts speech deemed offensive to religious sentiments. The penal code includes blasphemy laws, criticized for misuse and abuse, enabling prosecution for online content deemed to disrespect Islam. The report emphasizes a concerning surge in online blasphemy prosecutions in Pakistan with the internet’s rise. Social media platforms are identified as a common hotspot for the spread of alleged blasphemous content. The report underscores the misuse of blasphemy laws as a barrier to free religious expression in online spaces. Individuals expressing themselves freely online risk facing blasphemy accusations, fostering a climate of fear and self-censorship.

The report underscores the particular vulnerability of religious minorities, including Hindus, Christians, and Ahmadis to blasphemy accusations. Ahmadiyya, a faith based group, not recognized as Muslim by the statute, are targeted specially, as documented in this report.

The report urges the Pakistani government to undertake a legislative reform to ensure blasphemy laws comply with international human rights standards. The report further emphasizes the need for measures safeguarding religious minorities from baseless blasphemy charges, including establishment of a redress mechanism enabling blasphemy accused to access legal remedies, for example, lawyers.

The report is available at: https://bytesforall.pk/publication/state-online-blasphemy-cases-and-unfolding-legal-saga

What the history of blasphemy laws and the fight for religious freedom can teach us

Photo by Priscilla Du Preez 🇨🇦 on Unsplash
person holding book while standing on field

The Conversation

November 13, 2024


Some 79 countries around the world continue to enforce blasphemy laws. And in places such as Afghanistan, Brunei, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, violation of these measures can result in a death penalty.

While the U.S. is not among those countries, it also has a long history of blasphemy laws. Many of the U.S. colonies established blasphemy laws, which became state laws. The U.S. Supreme Court did not rule that blasphemy was a form of protected speech until 1952. Even then, it has not always been protected.

As a scholar of religious and political rhetoric, I believe the history of U.S. blasphemy laws reflects a complex fight for the freedom of religion and speech.
Early US blasphemy laws

U.S. colonies often developed legal protections for Christians to practice their religion. These safeguards often did not extend to non-Christians.

Maryland’s Toleration Act of 1649, for example, was the first Colonial act to refer to the “free exercise” of religion and was designed to protect Christians from religious persecution from state officials. It did not, however, extend that “free exercise” of religion to non-Christians, instead declaring that anyone who blasphemes against God by cursing him or denying the existence of Jesus can be punished by death or the forfeiture of their lands to the state.

In 1811, the U.S. witnessed one of its most infamous blasphemy trials, People v. Ruggles, at the New York Supreme Court. New York resident John Ruggles received a three-month prison sentence and a US$500 fine — about $12,000 in today’s money — for stating in public that “Jesus Christ was a bastard, and his mother must be a whore.”

Chief Justice James Kent argued that people have freedom of religious opinion, but opinions that were malicious toward the majority stance of Christianity were an abuse of that right. He claimed similar attacks on other religions, such as Islam and Buddhism, would not be punishable by law, because “we are a Christian people” whose country does not draw on the doctrines of “those imposters.”

Several years later, in 1824, a member of a debating society was convicted of blasphemy by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court after saying during a debate: “The Holy Scriptures were a mere fable, that they were a contradiction, and that although they contained a number of good things, yet they contained a great many lies.” In this case — Updegraph v. Commonwealth — the court argued that it was a “vulgarly shocking and insulting” statement that reflected “the highest offence” against public morals and was a disturbance to “public peace.”

By the end of the 19th century, a prominent free thought movement that rejected religion as a guide for reason had begun to emerge. Movement leaders embraced the public critiquing of Christianity and challenged laws that favored Christians, such as blasphemy laws and mandatory Bible readings in public schools.

Unsurprisingly, as historian Leigh Eric Schmidt has noted, speakers and writers in the movement regularly faced threats of blasphemy charges.

By this time, however, even in cases where freethinkers were convicted of blasphemy, judges appeared to offer leniency.

In 1887, C.B. Reynolds, an ex-preacher who became a prominent free thought speaker, was convicted of blasphemy in New Jersey after he publicly doubted the existence of God. He faced a $200 fine and up to a year in prison. The judge, however, only fined Reynolds $25, plus court costs.

While it is unclear why Reynolds was offered leniency, historian Leonard Levy suggests that it may have been to avoid making Reynolds a martyr of the free thought movement by imprisoning him.

Protecting blaspheme as free speech

Growing calls for religious equality and freedom of speech increasingly swayed blasphemy cases in the 1900s.

In 1917, for example, Michael X. Mockus, who had previously been convicted of blasphemy in Connecticut for his free thought lectures, was acquitted in a similar case in Illinois.

While expressing dislike for blasphemy, Judge Perry L. Persons argued that the court’s job is not to determine which religion is right. He said “the Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, Mahammedan, the Jew, the Freethinker, the Atheist” must “all stand equal before the law.”

Then, in 1952, the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case of Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson after New York rescinded the license for the film “The Miracle.” The film was deemed sacrilegious because of its supposed mockery of the Catholic faith.

The high court ruled that states could not ban sacrilegious films. That would be a violation of the separation of church and state, it ruled, and an unconstitutional restriction on freedom of religion and speech.

Even after the Supreme Court decision, Americans continued to occasionally face blasphemy charges. But courts shot the charges down.

In 1968, when Irving West, a 20-year-old veteran, told a policeman to “Get your goddam hands off me” after getting in a fight, he was charged with disorderly conduct and violating Maryland’s blasphemy law. When West appealed, a circuit court judge ruled the law was an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment.

Despite these rulings, in 1977, Pennsylvania enacted a blasphemy statute banning businesses from having blasphemous names after a local businessman tried to name his gun store “The God Damn Gun Shop.” It was not until 2010 that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court deemed this statute unconstitutional.

The decision followed a case in which the owner of a film production company sued the state after his request to register his company under the name “I Choose Hell Productions, LLC” was denied on the grounds that it was blasphemous. Citing the 1952 Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson case, the judge ruled that the statute was a violation of First Amendment rights.

A sign of democratic freedom

As historian David Sehat highlights in his book “The Myth of American Religious Freedom,” since America was founded there have been strong disagreements over what religious freedom should look like. Blasphemy laws have been a key part of this clash.

Historically, many Americans have viewed the laws as justifiable. Some believed Christianity deserved special protection and reverence. Others, including some Founding Fathers such as John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, have viewed the same laws as unconstitutional restrictions of free speech and religious expression.

There has recently been growing attention to the rise of Christian nationalism, the belief that the United States is or should be a Christian nation. Amid this rise, there have been attacks on free speech, such as the increase in book bans and restrictions on public protests. I believe it’s important that we, as Americans, learn from this history of the fight for the freedom of religion and speech.

Kristina M. Lee, Assistant Professor, University of South Dakota

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

BLASPHEMY

Pakistan ‘vigilantes’ behind rise in online blasphemy cases


By AFP
October 14, 2024

The families of young Pakistanis say their relatives were duped into sharing blasphemous content by strangers online

 - Copyright AFP Aamir QURESHI

Zain Zaman JANJUA

Aroosa Khan’s son was chatting on WhatsApp but suddenly found himself the target of “vigilante” investigators who accused him of having committed blasphemy online, a crime that carries the death penalty in Pakistan.

The 27-year-old is one in hundreds of young men standing trial in Pakistan courts accused of making blasphemous statements online or in WhatsApp groups, an offence for which arrests have exploded in recent years.

Many of the cases are being brought to trial by private “vigilante groups” led by lawyers and supported by volunteers who scour the internet for offenders, rights groups and police say.

The families of young Pakistanis, including doctors, engineers, lawyers, and accountants, say that their relatives were duped into sharing blasphemous content by strangers online before being arrested.

“Our lives have been turned upside down,” Khan told AFP, saying that her son, who has not been named for security reasons, had been tricked into sharing blasphemous content in the messaging app.

One local police report suggests that the vigilantes may be motivated by financial gains.

One such group was responsible for the conviction of 27 people who have been sentenced to life imprisonment or the death penalty over the past three years.

Blasphemy is an incendiary charge in Muslim-majority Pakistan, where even unsubstantiated accusations can incite public outrage and lead to lynchings.

While they date back to colonial times, Pakistan’s blasphemy laws were ramped up in the 1980s when dictator Zia ul-Haq campaigned to “Islamicise” society.

AFP has attended multiple court hearings in the capital Islamabad, where young men are being prosecuted by private vigilante groups and the FIA for blasphemous online content.

Among them is Aroosa’s son — who had joined a WhatsApp group for job-seekers and was contacted by a woman.

She sent him an image of women with Quranic verses printed on their bodies, his mother said, adding that the contact then “denied having sent it and asked Ahmed to send it back to her to understand what he was talking about”.

He was later arrested and prosecuted by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA).



– ‘Noble cause’ –



The most active private investigation group is the Legal Commission on Blasphemy Pakistan (LCBP), which told AFP they are prosecuting more than 300 cases.

Sheraz Ahmad Farooqi, one of the private investigation group’s leaders, told AFP that more than a dozen volunteers track online blasphemy, believing that “God has chosen them for this noble cause”.

“We are not beheading anyone; we are following a legal course,” Farooqi told AFP outside a courtroom that heard 15 blasphemy cases, all filed by his group.

He said that most of the accused were addicted to pornography and were disrespecting revered Islamic figures by using their names and dubbing voices attributed to them over pornographic content.

He acknowledged that women were involved in tracking and arresting the men, but they were not members of his group.

Cases can drag through the courts for years, though death penalties are often commuted to life in prison on appeal at the Supreme Court and Pakistan has never executed anyone for blasphemy.

A special court, attended by AFP, was formed in September to expedite the dozens of pending cases.



– ‘Vested agenda’ –



The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) reported that multiple vigilante groups were working in a “dedicated manner” to “witch-hunt” people for online expression or to fabricate blasphemy evidence using social media with “vested agendas”.

“All such groups are formalised by self-declared defenders of majoritarian Islam,” the group said in a report published in 2023.

A 2024 report by police in Punjab province, the country’s most populous province, that was leaked to the media said that “a suspicious gang was trapping youth in blasphemy cases”.

“The Blasphemy Business” report was sent to the FIA with recommendations to launch a thorough inquiry to determine the source of the vigilante groups’ funding.

Two FIA officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, told AFP that they had received the report but denied that their office was acting on the tips of vigilante groups.

The FIA did not respond to requests for official comment.

An official involved in prosecuting the cases told AFP outside the court: “Not a single person arrested was trapped by any manner. They committed the crime.”

“The law is very clear about it, and we have to enforce it as long as the law is there.”

Arafat Mazhar, the director of Alliance Against Blasphemy Politics, a group advocating against the misuse of blasphemy laws, told AFP that the alarming rise in cases was not because people “are suddenly more blasphemous”.

He said the rise in the use of messaging apps and social media and the ease of sharing and forwarding content was a significant factor.



– Shunned –



The accused struggle to find defence lawyers willing to represent them and the slightest accusation can turn an entire family into pariahs.

Nafeesa Ahmed, whose brother is accused of sharing blasphemous images on WhatsApp and whose names have also been changed, said her family was shunned by close relatives.

“There is a massive cost that families of accused are bearing. First of all, our security or lives are at risk,” she told AFP.

She said some of the families have sold thousands of dollars worth of houses and gold, given to brides on their wedding, to fight the cases.

Dozens of families which have formed a support group have protested in the capital calling for an independent commission to investigate the vigilante groups and their role in prosecuting Pakistanis for blasphemy.

“In this society, if someone commits a murder, he can survive because there are thousands of ways to come out of that but if someone is accused of blasphemy he cannot,” said Nafeesa.

“When it comes to blasphemy, the public has its own court and even family members will abandon you.”

SOCIETY: DEFYING THE MOB

Masood Lohar

Published October 13, 2024 
EOS/DAWN

PAKISTAN

Thousands turn up to demand justice for Dr Shahnawaz Kumbhar in his hometown of Umerkot, Sindh on September 25, 2024 | Social Media


The swiftness with which the blasphemy allegation against Dr Shahnawaz Kumbhar, a 36-year-old doctor at a government hospital in Sindh’s Umerkot district, spiralled into violent bloodlust, reflects the deadly intersection of religious extremism, personal vendettas and mob violence.

It did not matter that the alleged blasphemous remarks appeared on the doctor’s social media account, which he insisted had been hacked. The people wanted blood, and the police, it seems, were too willing to comply. A hardline cleric announced a bounty of five million rupees, while local law enforcement went into hyperdrive to apprehend the doctor.

OF MURDERERS AND SAVIOURS


The doctor was arrested by the Umerkot police from Karachi a day later, on September 18. He was killed a little after midnight on the same day, according to a high-level police report, “in a staged encounter” that took place in the jurisdiction of Sindhri police.

The local police in-charge, Sindhri Station House Officer (SHO) Niaz Khoso, claimed that the doctor was killed “unintentionally”, but the doctor’s family and rights group disputed the claim.

The day after the murder, the SHO, along with high-ranking police officials from Mirpurkhas and Umerkot, were seen in video clips uploaded on social media being feted as heroes by the same hardline cleric who had offered the reward for killing the doctor. The videos also show a local lawmaker, part of the Pakistan Peoples Party, congratulating the policemen.

The groundswell of support for Dr Shahnawaz Kumbhar, who was murdered over blasphemy allegations, eloquently articulates Sindh’s culture of tolerance, rooted in its Sufi traditions…

In one of the videos, the now-suspended SHO can be heard saying that he wasn’t worthy of such a task, but was grateful to God for giving him the opportunity, while referring to Dr Kumbhar’s extrajudicial killing.

Meanwhile, the doctor’s family wasn’t allowed to perform funeral rites, and an enraged mob snatched the body and set it on fire. A brave Hindu youth, Premo Kohli, tried to protest and protect the body, but the mob attacked him as well. Despite that, he still retrieved the badly burnt body once the enraged mob had left.

The incident spread terror throughout Umerkot, the only district in Pakistan with a Hindu majority. There was palpable fear of a blasphemy accusation, like a sword dangling on their heads, and many felt that they could be ‘next.’

But what was truly worrisome was the emerging complicity of the police, who had played the role of the executioner. A week earlier, another blasphemy accused had been shot dead while in police custody in Quetta, with the cop hailed as a hero.

Dr Shahnawaz Kumbhar



AN UNEQUIVOCAL RESPONSE

But unlike the reaction in Quetta, and in the majority of blasphemy cases elsewhere in the country, the public response in Sindh was altogether different.

It likely has as much to do with the brave act of the Hindu youth, who stopped the lynch mob from completely burning the body, as it does with Sindh’s long history of Sufi saints.

A week after the murder, on September 25, thousands of people from across Sindh flocked to Dr Kumbhar’s village to take part in his funeral, in an unequivocal response to right-wing bigotry. Manji Faqeer, a prominent folk artist, sang Sufi tunes at the grave as it was garlanded with petals.

This defiance is the product of the deeply ingrained culture of religious tolerance and interfaith harmony that Sindh has maintained over thousands of years. It dates back to poets and saints of the Sufi genre, such as Shah Abdul Latif Bhitai, Sachal Sarmast and Lal Shahbaz Qalandar, who are revered for their message of love, peace and harmony.

This is also reflected in numbers. According to a study by the Centre for Research and Security Studies, published in 2022, 89 people were killed in Pakistan for allegedly committing blasphemy between 1947 and 2021. There were roughly 1,500 accusations and cases during this period. Of those, 1,098 cases — more than 70 percent — were in Punjab. In the same period, Sindh reported 173 cases.

With their latest and most unequivocal response to blasphemy accusations, the people of Sindh have compelled the provincial government to take action. Since then, several high-ranking police officials have been booked in the case, along with the cleric who offered the reward for Dr Shahnawaz’s murder.

A HISTORY OF INJUSTICE

A similar pushback was witnessed in the case of Mashal Khan, who was murdered on the campus of a university in Mardan by a mob in 2017, but it tapered off with the accused acquitted.

Many other cases have followed a similar trajectory, with the blasphemy accused either murdered, going into exile or forced to rot in prison — with the recurring theme being that they are denied the right to fair trial.

It includes academic Junaid Hafeez, who was given the death penalty over social media posts. In 2014, a year after his arrest, his lawyer was gunned down in his office. Hafeez was given the death penalty in 2019 and remains on death row.

The case of 14-year-old Rimsha Tahir of Islamabad is equally chilling, after a court found that she was wrongly accused of blasphemy. The cleric accused of planting the evidence was, however, acquitted after witnesses retracted their statements.

Even in the case of the recent murder of the blasphemy accused at a police station in Quetta, the victim’s family has pardoned the policeman, meaning that he would get away scot-free.

EMBOLDENING FANATICISM

The frequency with which those who instigate blasphemy accusations and take part in mob violence escape justice has emboldened many others. This can be tracked by the increase in not just the number of reported blasphemy cases, but also the recent spate of attacks on places of worship belonging to Pakistan’s persecuted Ahmaddiya community.

The cases in which the perpetrators have to face justice is rare, such as that of the murder of Sri Lankan national Priyantha Kumara. Many in civil society believe that the death sentences handed out to the perpetrators were given due to the victim being a foreign national and the resultant outcry over it globally.

The systemic abuse of blasphemy laws has tarnished Pakistan’s image globally, and gives credence to the perception that there are strong strands of religious intolerance and extremism in the country.

The horrific spectacle of vigilante ‘justice’ inflicted by lynch mobs, captured in real-time on cell phones by individuals taking part in it — and often shared with pride on social media — speaks volumes about how deeply entrenched the exploitation of religious sentiments is in Pakistan.

The strange and chilling fact is that the blasphemy laws themselves are almost never enforced in these cases. The mobs circumvent the legal system to seize power and administer their own form of ‘justice.’

A CLARION CALL OF RESISTANCE

But as opposed to previous episodes of mob violence, where response to the violence and brutality has often been limited — if not completely muted — the response from the people of Sindh has been clear: they want to stand against such injustice.

The groundswell of support for the victim and his family, who continue to face harassment from religious hardliners, has provided a template for people in other parts of the country to take a stand against those preaching violence.

The swiftness of this organic response, which saw a province-wide mobilisation, and support from the rest of the country, is a reminder that the culture of resistance and tolerance remains strong in Sindh. It eloquently articulates the need to protect those accused of blasphemy so that they get a fair trial.

The state must now respond in a similar manner, by instituting legal reforms to ensure that such tragedies are not repeated.

The writer is a climate change expert and the founder of Clifton Urban Forest. He can be contacted at mlohar@gmail.com.
X: @masoodlohar

Published in Dawn, EOS, October 13th, 2024

SMOKERS’ CORNER: SAFEGUARDING SINDH

Nadeem F. Paracha 

Published October 6, 2024

Illustration by Abro

Last week, protests erupted in Umerkot, a city located at the edge of the Thar Desert in Sindh. The protests were held to condemn the extrajudicial killing of a doctor who had been accused of committing blasphemy. The Sindh government confirmed that the accused was killed by the cops who had arrested him. His dead body was then snatched by some ‘fanatics’ and set on fire.


This horrific incident shocked a large number of ethnic Sindhis, who are in majority in Sindh outside the province’s multi-ethnic capital, Karachi. For over two decades now, Sindhi media and Sindhi scholars have been airing concerns about the ‘radicalisation’ of Sindhis.

However, the Sindhi-majority regions of Sindh have not witnessed as many incidents of ‘religiously motivated violence’, as have the country’s other provinces — especially Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP). For example, according to a 2022 report, out of a total of 1,415 cases of blasphemy registered by the police between 1947 and 2021, 1,098 were in Punjab and just 173 in Sindh.

Even though there were even fewer such cases registered in KP and Balochistan, these two provinces (and Punjab) have witnessed far more incidents of sectarian violence and Islamist militancy than Sindh. However, Sindh’s ethnically diverse capital Karachi is somewhat of an exception. Its streets witnessed sectarian warfare in the early 1980s and then, from the mid-2000s, the city became a hub for various Islamist groups to raise money for their militant activities, through extortion, kidnappings, robberies, etc.



Incidents of violence and killings in the name of religion in Sindh are the remnants of a state-sponsored project that is no longer in play — but also indicate that secular forces need to secure social spaces they have abdicated to extremists

In 1979, the state had started to roll out an ‘Islamisation’ project. Sindh, apart from its capital Karachi, somewhat succeeded in avoiding the impact of the project. Over the decades, though, the project began to mutate and started to be navigated from below. It eventually fell in the lap of multiple segments of the polity. These segments began to use the contents of the project for lucrative evangelical purposes, and to accumulate social power. In many cases, the contents were also used to bolster anti-state Islamist militancy.

Karachi, despite being impacted by the outcomes of the project, has remained largely secular due to its diverse ethnic make-up, massive size and cosmopolitan nature. The rest of the province, on the other hand, which has a Sindhi majority, has often frustrated many attempts to radicalise this majority. This is largely due to the inherently pluralistic and ‘moderate’ disposition of Sindhis.

In a 2021 study, the Karachi-based researcher Imtiaz Ali noted that “Sindhis have unwaveringly discarded those who have denied their traditions of tolerance.” According to Ali, “the progressive literature widely circulated in Sindh has played a huge role in developing resilient minds.” Ali adds that Sindh’s arts are influenced by Sindhi poetry that is largely feminine in nature and tightly tied to Sufism. This has shielded Sindhis from being overwhelmed by the outcomes of the ‘Islamisation’ project that has wreaked havoc in Punjab and KP.

Those concerned about the rising incidents of religious extremism among Sindhis are of the view that the incidents are the outcome of the resources and effort that the state once invested in its bid to ‘Islamise’ the Sindhis. These efforts were part of a larger scheme formulated by the state that wanted to ‘Islamise’ polities in Sindh, Balochistan and KP. The state believed that ‘political Islam’ and a vigorous propagation of Islamic rituals were effective tools to neutralise Baloch, Sindhi and Pakhtun sub-nationalisms.

The scheme was a success in KP, mainly due to Pakistan’s role in the anti-Soviet ‘jihad’ in Afghanistan, which was lavishly bankrolled by the US and Saudi Arabia. Some political commentators have suggested that, since Pakhtuns by nature are religious, the state was able to lure them towards more extreme expressions of the faith. These expressions were being propagated by the state and by its Islamist assets to romanticise the Afghan insurgency against Soviet troops. As a result, secular Pakhtun sub-nationalism lost a lot of traction in KP.





The scheme to radicalise the ethnic Baloch in this regard was not as successful, though. Baloch society can be conservative, but it is inherently secular. Most Baloch insurgencies before the recent one were driven by leftist ideas. However, Balochistan’s ‘Pakhtun belt’ was more receptive to the ways of the scheme.

Indeed, while the overriding purpose of the scheme was to neutralise Sindhi, Baloch and Pakhtun sub-nationalisms, one of the spillovers of the scheme and of the ‘Islamisation’ project was the eventual radicalisation of Punjab — the country’s largest and most powerful province. In fact, the scheme was often viewed by non-Punjabi sub-nationalists as the work of Punjabi elites. This is thus a case of the chickens coming home to roost. Another ironic outcome has been the recent alliance between secular Baloch separatists and militant Islamists in Balochistan.

However, the claim that such schemes are still being rolled out may not hold much truth anymore. With China firmly in the picture and anti-state Islamist militancy stalling Pakistan’s new economic and regional aspirations, the state is now trying to assert itself against the outcomes of its own schemes. It is clearly planning to completely overcome these, even if this requires an entirely reformed state structure in the areas of economics, judiciary and even within the military establishment. This is unfolding in plain sight.

This is why the increasing frequency of sporadic, religiously motivated violence in Sindh is probably a belated outcome of a scheme that is no longer in play. This violence in Sindh is more the handiwork of groups who, years ago, had entered through a window that was opened in Sindh by the scheme. Gradually, through madrassas [religious schools], these groups began to flex the contents of the now-defunct ‘Islamisation’ project. The groups are trying to accumulate social power and influence because they have found no mentionable electoral traction in the province.

The ‘left-liberal’ Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) remains Sindh’s largest political party. It has won four consecutive elections in Sindh, from 2008 onwards. Its vote bank has continued to swell. The sweeping PPP wins in Sindh have made sure that no Islamist groups or their allies are able to enter the Sindh assembly. Sindhi sub-nationalists, who were once at the forefront of maintaining the indigenous secular disposition of Sindhis, have disintegrated. In fact, recently they were seen riding on the coattails of conservative/anti-PPP Sindhi elites.

With Sindh electorally secured, the PPP will have to invest a lot more in the social areas that have been vacated by the Sindhi sub-nationalists and are being occupied by the radical Islamists. It’s time that the party secures these areas as well.

Published in Dawn, EOS, October 6th, 2024

NON-FICTION: A GLORIFIED HISTORY OF SINDH

Soonha Abro 

Published October 13, 2024

Sindhis in a Global Context: Past, Present, Future, and Origins (2600 BCE to…)
By Dr Maqbool A. Halepota
Halo Publishing International, Texas, USA
ISBN 978-1-63765-584-9
444pp.

Dr Maqbool A. Halepota’s Sindhis in a Global Context: Past, Present, Future, and Origins (2600 BCE to…) is an ambitious project that attempts to chronicle the rich history of Sindh from 2600 BCE up to present times. This includes the prehistoric period in Sindh, the Indus Civilisation and discovery of Mohenjo Daro, the Vedic age, the conquest of Sindh by the Arabs, the indigenous Sindhi rulers, and the British colonial period in the province.

He, then, provides an account of the post-1947 period, including Pakistan’s martial law periods, as well as some important political movements, such as the anti-One Unit movement and the Movement for Restoration of Democracy (MRD). The author also touches upon the movements and spread of the global Sindhi diaspora and, briefly, the future outlook for Sindhis.


The book is a rather informative and somewhat enjoyable read. The portions on prehistoric Sindh, especially its origins, as well as the reigns of the Persians, the Greeks and the Arabs, were particularly interesting because these are not very familiar topics for Pakistani readers. In fact, it would be an excellent idea to include more of such material in school history textbooks, so our young children can begin learning about these portions of our local history at a young age, irrespective of whether they are Sindhis or not.

The process of rediscovering the history of the Indus Civilisation and the excavation of Mohenjo-Daro, in much greater detail than the tiny portions on the topic one read in history textbooks during school, proved to be an immensely enjoyable experience and informative. Readers interested in learning more about the various aspects of Sindh’s history can also benefit a lot from the excellent bibliography included at the end of the book.


An ambitious and informative book about the history, culture and politics of Sindh through the ages is not critically rigorous enough but could still serve as a starting point for future research

For a book of such a huge magnitude and potential, it regrettably contains some glaring editorial errors. It includes some unfortunate factual errors, which could have been easily verified through a simple Google search. For instance, the year of Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s death is incorrectly cited as 1947 on page 167, instead of 1948. Furthermore, the citations given throughout the text are rather disorganised. Another particularly bothersome aspect of the book is that it lacks an index, without which it is quite difficult to search for any specific information within the book. This will make it rather difficult to use for any scholars researching on Sindh.

Moreover, the book also lacks consistency in the transliterations of non-English words, mostly from Arabic and Sanskrit, and occasionally from Sindhi. This inconsistency adversely impacts one’s reading experience, because one is unaware of how to pronounce an unfamiliar word. The author has also neglected to provide a clarifying ‘Note on Transliterations’ that describes the correct pronunciations of all the non-English words used throughout the book. Such notes are considered an important convention in academic writing.

However, for a book directed at a more general readership, a suitable solution would be to do away entirely with transliterations and corresponding diacritic marks. It is acceptable to do so when writing an academic text directed at a more general audience, instead of a purely academic one. Collectively, these weaknesses spoil one’s general enjoyment of reading this most informative book. This issue could have been dealt with by the text undergoing a much more meticulous editorial process and guidance to the author.

Finally, this book claims to present the ‘glorious’ history of Sindh to the readers, especially directed at those hailing from Sindh. Indeed, the history of Sindh is immensely rich and intriguing for any history enthusiast. It is also true that Sindh has been plagued by numerous serious problems throughout its history, and continues to be affected by them even today. The painstaking research that went into writing this book is undeniable. However, these historical facts are presented with hyperboles, unsubstantiated claims and a complete lack of critique.

For example, the first half of the book, which tells the story of Sindh’s origins, its prehistoric, Vedic and Arab past, is written in an overly glorifying tone. Then, the tone switches to that of lamentation in the second half, mourning the various discriminations and oppressions meted out to Sindhis throughout history. This could have been avoided completely by conducting a critical but deeply sensitive evaluation of the historical facts and examining them for their impact on the currently existing issues affecting Sindh. This would have made this book a truly definitive history of Sindh. By doing so, it would have genuinely benefited numerous generations of readers, Sindhi or not, and academic researchers across the world.

Despite its weaknesses, Sindhis in a Global Context is undeniably an important text about Sindh’s history. It is not the definitive historical work on Sindh that it had hoped to become but, nonetheless, it does provide several points that could help formulate further research questions in the future.

Although the author intends it to be read primarily by Sindhi youth, it would be of greater interest to readers who are actually enthusiastic about history, as well as academic readers and scholars seeking further knowledge about the rich history, culture and politics of Sindh. It would be useful if the book were made more accessible to readers, especially to its targeted readership, by making it available at bookshops and libraries within Pakistan.

The reviewer is pursuing an MPhil in English literature.

Her research focuses on various South Asian literary traditions, including Anglophone literatures of South Asia, feminist literary criticism, resistance movements and resistance poetry, as well as Urdu and Sindhi literatures

Published in Dawn, Books & Authors, October 13th, 2024

The politics of blasphemy: Why Pakistan and some other Muslim countries are passing new blasphemy law

Ahmet T. Kuru, Professor of Political Science, San Diego State University

THE CONVERSATION
Mon, February 6, 2023 

People gather around the body of a man who was killed when an enraged mob stoned him to death for allegedly desecrating the Quran, in eastern Pakistan in February 2022. AP Photo/Asim Tanveer

On Jan. 17, 2023, Pakistan’s National Assembly unanimously voted to expand the country’s laws on blasphemy, which carries the death penalty for insulting the Prophet Muhammad. The new law now extends the punishment to those deemed to have insulted the prophet’s companions, which could include thousands of early Muslims, with 10 years in prison or life imprisonment.

Human rights activists are concerned that the expanded laws could target minorities, particularly Shiite Muslims who are critical of many leading early Muslims.

Pakistan has the world’s second-strictest blasphemy laws after Iran. About 1,500 Pakistanis have been charged with blasphemy over the past three decades. In a case covered by the international media, Junaid Hafeez, a university lecturer, was sentenced to death on the charge of insulting the prophet on Facebook in 2019. His sentence has been under appeal.

Although no executions have ever taken place, extrajudicial killings related to blasphemy have occurred in Pakistan. Since 1990, more than 70 people have been murdered by mobs and vigilantes over allegations of insulting Islam.

My research shows that blasphemy laws historically emerged to serve the political and religious authorities, and they continue to have a role in silencing dissent in many Muslim countries.
Blasphemy and apostasy

Of the 71 countries that criminalize blasphemy, 32 are majority Muslim. Punishment and enforcement of these laws vary.

Blasphemy is punishable by death in Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Brunei, Mauritania and Saudi Arabia. Among non-Muslim-majority countries, the harshest blasphemy laws are in Italy, where the maximum penalty is two years in prison.

Half of the world’s 49 Muslim-majority countries have additional laws banning apostasy, meaning people may be punished for leaving Islam. All countries with apostasy laws are Muslim-majority. Apostasy is often charged along with blasphemy.

Laws on apostasy are quite popular in some Muslim countries. According to a 2013 Pew survey, about 75% of respondents in Muslim-majority countries in Southeast Asia, the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia favor making sharia, or Islamic law, the official law of the land. Among those who support sharia, around 25% in Southeast Asia, 50% in the Middle East and North Africa and 75% in South Asia say they support “executing those who leave Islam” – that is, they support laws punishing apostasy with death.

Firefighters in a factory torched by an angry mob in Jhelum, Pakistan, after one of the factory’s employees was accused of desecrating the Quran, Nov. 21, 2015. STR/AFP via Getty Images

The ulema and the state

My 2019 book “Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment” traces the roots of blasphemy and apostasy laws in the Muslim world back to a historic alliance between Islamic scholars and government.

Starting around the year 1050, certain Sunni scholars of law and theology, called the “ulema,” began working closely with political rulers to challenge what they considered to be the sacrilegious influence of Muslim philosophers on society.

Muslim philosophers had for three centuries been making major contributions to mathematics, physics and medicine. They developed the Arabic number system used across the West today and invented a forerunner of the modern camera.

The conservative ulema felt that these philosophers were inappropriately influenced by Greek philosophy and Shiite Islam against Sunni beliefs. The most prominent name in consolidating Sunni orthodoxy was the respected Islamic scholar Ghazali, who died in the year 1111.

In several influential books still widely read today, Ghazali declared two long-dead leading Muslim philosophers, Farabi and Ibn Sina, as apostates for their unorthodox views on God’s power and the nature of resurrection. Their followers, Ghazali wrote, could be punished with death.

As modern-day historians Omid Safi and Frank Griffel assert, Ghazali’s declaration provided justification to Muslim sultans from the 12th century onward who wished to persecute – even execute – thinkers seen as threats to conservative religious rule.

This “ulema-state alliance,” as I call it, began in the mid-11th century in Central Asia, Iran and Iraq and a century later spread to Syria, Egypt and North Africa. In these regimes, questioning religious orthodoxy and political authority wasn’t merely dissent – it was apostasy.
Wrong direction

Parts of Western Europe were ruled by a similar alliance between the Catholic Church and monarchs. These governments assaulted free thinking, too. During the Spanish Inquisition, between the 16th and 18th centuries, thousands of people were tortured and killed for apostasy.

Blasphemy laws were also in place, if infrequently used, in various European countries until recently. Denmark, Ireland and Malta all recently repealed their blasphemy laws. But they persist in many parts of the Muslim world.

In Pakistan, the military dictator Zia-ul-Haq, who ruled the country from 1978 to 1988, is responsible for its harsh blasphemy laws. An ally of the ulema, Zia updated blasphemy laws – written by British colonizers to avoid interreligious conflict – to defend specifically Sunni Islam and increased the maximum punishment to death.

From the 1920s until Zia, these laws had been applied only about a dozen times. Since then, they have become a powerful tool for crushing dissent.

Some dozen Muslim countries, including Iran and Egypt, have undergone a similar process over the past four decades.

Dissenting voices in Islam

The conservative ulema base their case for blasphemy and apostasy laws on a few reported sayings of the prophet, known as hadith, primarily: “Whoever changes his religion, kill him.”

But many Islamic scholars and Muslim intellectuals reject this view as radical. They argue that Prophet Muhammad never executed anyone for apostasy, nor encouraged his followers to do so. Criminalizing sacrilege isn’t based on Islam’s main sacred text, the Quran, either. It contains over 100 verses encouraging peace, freedom of conscience and religious tolerance.

In Chapter 2, Verse 256, the Quran states, “There is no coercion in religion.” Chapter 4, Verse 140 urges Muslims to simply leave blasphemous conversations: “When you hear the verses of God being rejected and mocked, do not sit with them.”

By using their political connections and historical authority to interpret Islam, however, the conservative ulema have marginalized more moderate voices.
Reaction to global Islamophobia

Debates about blasphemy and apostasy laws among Muslims are influenced by international affairs.

Across the globe, Muslim minorities – including the Palestinians under Israeli occupation, Chechens of Russia, Muslim Kashmiris of India, Rohingya of Myanmar and Uyghurs of China – have experienced persecution.

The Rohingya of Myanmar are among several Muslim minorities facing persecution worldwide. Rakhine state, Myanmar, Jan. 13, 2020. STR/AFP via Getty Images

Alongside persecution are some Western policies that discriminate against certain Muslims, such as laws prohibiting headscarves in schools.

Such laws and policies can create the impression that Muslims are under siege and provide an excuse for the belief that punishing sacrilege is a defense of the faith.

Instead, blasphemy laws have served political agendas of populist politicians and their religious supporters in Pakistan and some other Muslim countries.

Moreover, these laws contribute to anti-Muslim stereotypes about religious intolerance. Some of my Turkish relatives even discourage my work on this topic, fearing it fuels Islamophobia.

But my research shows that criminalizing blasphemy and apostasy is more political than it is religious. The Quran does not require punishing sacrilege: Authoritarian politics do.

This is an updated version of a piece first published on February 20, 2020.

This article is republished from The Conversation, an independent nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. If you found it interesting, you could subscribe to our weekly newsletter.

It was written by: Ahmet T. Kuru, San Diego State University.

Read more:

At 75, Pakistan has moved far from the secular and democratic vision of its founder, Mohammad Ali Jinnah


Execution for a Facebook post? Why blasphemy is a capital offense in some Muslim countries