Ali Eteraz has an informative column on Comment is Free about discrimination against Pakistan’s 3 million Hindus.
The immediate inspiration is a recent lynching of a Hindu factory worker in Karachi, after it is alleged that he uttered blasphemous words about Islam and the Prophet Muhammed. The family of the man who was murdered have suggested that he may have been killed for other reasons, and his co-workers have merely invoked blasphemy as a convenient ruse for a murder committed for more prosaic reasons. It is unclear whether his killers will be prosecuted, though there does appear to be some legal interest in doing so.
In his column, Ali Eteraz rightly condemns the institutional discrimination that exists against religious minorities in Pakistan, including the establishment of separate electorates for Hindus (dating from 1973), and an anti-Ahmadiyya blasphemy law that was first instituted by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and then enhanced by Zia ul-Haq in 1982.
One of the commenters on Comment is Free also linked to this article in the Washington Post, which describes Pakistan’s anti-blasphemy laws in greater depth. Reading that article reminded me how complex Pakistan’s legal system is. I think Ali Eteraz’s sincere hope is that the Blasphemy Law in particular ought to be immediately repealed. For my part, I must admit I have no idea whether that is a realistic possibility or not. However, we might remember that Pakistan’s legal community took a heroic stance last fall in the face of Musharraf’s anti-democratic actions. Perhaps they can do so again.
Not repeating what the earlier commenter said, there is no comparison of the situation of religious minorities in Pakistan.
There was ethnic cleansing in India during 47, but not as clean as that of Pakistan. There are no mass scale killings of minorities in Pakistan because they form a miniscule percentage and are more or less hidden from the public view. I’d assume zero -communal riots in India if Muslims formed 2% of the population and India was declared a Hindu country with death penalty awarded for blaspheming idol gods. 🙂
Ikram quoted from an article:
Chachaji sites article from The Dawn
The family of the deceased may be trying to preempt the accused hiding behind a possible anti-blasphemy shield and thats why they are saying this. On the other hand it is possible, as Razib #47 mentions, this crime fits a pattern of criminals using a loop-hole to settle scores or achieve other objectives.
I think you are taking up an unworthy cause of Bihari Muslims in Bangladesh. As far as I know, these folks were part of the “razakars” hand in glove with the Pakistani army in their atrocities against Bengalis in the 1970-71 period. Of course, Kids who were born after that should not be made to suffer the sins of their ancestors. But it is not like their parents are not culpable of any blame.
http://www.dawn.com/2008/04/12/nat21.htm
Let’s be real. Everyone has a problem with difference. Most people are bigots to some degree. The difference is how you manage it.
White people in the U.S. just move away and create another enclave. In Pakistani, they shoot or blow one another up. In India, they burn the person alive and rape their daughters. Just slight cultural differences.
Amardeep:
Thank you for high-lighting the piece. I also want to apologize for the various errors and oversights in the piece that have been pointed out here and there. I don’t think they take away from the thrust of the piece.
Razib:
You talk about the democratic impulse of Pakistan and assume many a thing about it, especially vis a vis the hudud. However, Islamization occurred for the large part, under a dictator. Second, the 1973 constitution, which made Islam the State religion and introduced divisions upon the basis of religion – i.e. stripping Ahmadis of their faith – was effectively written without broad consultation, and at a very difficult time (after defeat in 1971). In other words, “democracy” wasn’t really ever in effect when these things were introduced.
Still, fact is, Islamizat is real. The issue isn’t what the people think. The issue is how to defeat it. I recently gave a talk at Emory where I argued that the most appropriate place for the this kind of supremacism and legal segregation and anachronism to be defeated will be the courts — which require political stability. As an example I used the issue of the Public Morality Bill of 2006 which was struck down in the Supreme Court. The secular court essentially defeated the Islamists with a historical argument rooted in Islam’s history.
The same thing, actually, impelled the passage of the Women’s Protection Act. The operative thing that brought about change to the rape laws — and you might remember this from the States of Islam days — wasn’t that the legislature passed the bill. The issue that really struck a nerve was the argument by Muslim scholars (liberal ones obviously) who said that for a raped woman to be left open to an accusation of adultery was un-Islamic.
In ’73 Pakistan tipped over when Islam became state religion. Before it, you didn’t have to bother by citing to Islamic precedents for anything, afterwards you do. Its a harder battle, but its not an impossible one. It can be won as long as there is rule of law. This is why dictatorship is so pernicious.
Over the Musharraf presidency, the Supreme Court fell behind 11 years in its case load.
Also there is an open case about the ISI’s involvement with elections since 1976 that is before the SCT that needs to be heard. Its been sitting there since 98 or so.
All of these conversations about rights need to keep going back to political stability: why is it that Pakistan’s democratic institutions are not stable and get run over by the military? Why is this allowed? So on and so forth…
intolerance is intolerance–
what does anyone gain from trying to make excuses for horrific deaths of innocent people??
Hindus, Sikhs, and members of other religious minorities should NOT be mistreated by either the government or the extremist Muslims in Pakistan or Bangladesh.
Muslims should NOT be mistreated by either the government or extremist Hindus in India.
Both countries need to take active steps to spread TOLERANCE in their respective societies and stop pointing fingers and allowing for such ridiculous murders to take place.
Our respective religions advocate for peace, love, and justice– not hate, death, and intolerance.
Kush,
What are you talking about, guy? There were the Sindhi-Mohajir riots in ’72 that claimed the lives of a few dozens. Oh yes, there was this ‘minor’ riot in ’71 which killed off over a million people and created a new nation. After Benazir Bhutto was killed, there were a few more dozens killed in rioting. That’s not even counting the Baluchi riots or the low-level civil war against the Pashtuns, which have killed as many as 2,259 Pakistani soldiers.
42 · Kush Tandon said
The murder of the co-worker in this case was not a lynching. “Lynching” hardly makes sense outside of an American context, nor does this murder resemble a lynching. Calling it such, as the poster does, is shameless and inaccurate sensationalism.
Noblekinsman,
I used the word “lynching” following the reporter for Dawn, who also used the word. The basic definition of ‘to lynch’ is to execute without due process of law.
Apropos Pakistani Hindus, there’s a film called RAMCHAND PAKISTANI by Pakistani-born, New York resident Mehreen Jabbar that will premiere during the Tribeca Film Festival. It’s based on the true story of a Hindu boy who accidentally crosses the border with India, where he is imprisoned as a Pakistani spy.
I agree with you Pakistans legal system is very comlex http://www.material-spiritual.info
I am surprised that there are so many comments condemning pakistan here. An islamic country treats non-muslims badly… this isn’t exactly breaking news, is it?
Pakistan was not exactly formed on the basis of equality. If Pakistani muslims wanted to give minorities the same rights as Muslims, the land of the pure would not have been formed in the first place.
While the Hindu-Muslim divide does not contribute to significant tension within Pakistan (although it is a significant component of Indo-Pak tension and of course, communal tension within India) – there are many other schisms within Pakistan that ought to be mentioned, as some people already have: Christian-Muslim; Shia-Sunni; Ahmadiyyas vs Others; Punjabis vs Non-Punjabis; Mohajirs vs ‘Natives’. These result in a significant amount of communal (the word in Pakistani usage is ‘sectarian’) conflict, and frequent violence and deaths. Gender discrimination and relative status issues are also a big cause of violence in Pakistan, as indeed they are also in India.
Though the separate religious electorates are now gone, Pakistan has reserved 17% of seats in both state and national legislatures for Women. Many well-connected women (relatives of prominent male politicians) got party tickets, and have been elected to Parliament; but on balance, this is probably better than no representation. Pakistan’s House Speaker is today a woman, just as in the US. Women can contest both from the reserved seats and from the general seats, and men are not excluded from voting in the seats reserved for women. Bangladesh has also implemented a 15% reservation for women in its legislature. I would favor a similar reservation for women in Indian legislatures.
Whether reservations (or, on occasion, even separate electorates) are a step forward or back depends on the motivation and the implementation. The end of separate religious electorates is a step forward in Pakistan only if religious minority candidates begin to be elected from general seats in numbers. Let’s hope that happens as the system, and democracy itself takes hold. If not, then even the token representation afforded by the separate electorates is gone, to be replaced by nothing, which would be a step back.
Pakistan was not exactly formed on the basis of equality. If Pakistani muslims wanted to give minorities the same rights as Muslims, the land of the pure would not have been formed in the first place.
hm. that’s actually not the official story of the founding 😉
36 · Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery said
Minorities in Pakistan know their place in society. Take a headstrong, nationalistic Pakistani leader. Everyone, at least the majority community, adores him. Their love for him borders on idol worship. Take a disgruntled Hindu or Christian or any other person of a vulnerable community. He/She shoots the leader in the head. Tell me, the majority community wont react in animalistic ways? Luckily its never occured. Might I add, members of the majority community in India are just as vulnerable as minority communities when it comes to riots. Take the Hindus in Kashmir, Kerala ’46, Northeast States, and other notable areas. Ill add a cliche for giggles: Dont compare apples and oranges. Or Samosas and pakoras (corny, I know)
Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery – “There have been no mass scale killings of minorities in Pakistan at the level of India (for example Sikhs in Delhi or Muslims in Gujarat).”
We Pakistanis have an unhealthy penchant for ignoring the genocidal deeds of our nation, such as, the 1971 massacre of a million Bengali Hindus and Muslims. Indeed, the Pakistani [mostly Punjabi] “Muajahids” took pride in raping and murdering the “baniya” women by the thousands.
“Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery – “There have been no mass scale killings of minorities in Pakistan at the level of India (for example Sikhs in Delhi or Muslims in Gujarat).”
Dude you really missed the mark with this comment and the implied comparison. Not that India doesn’t have an abysmal record of its own.
Pagal_Aadmi, would you rather be a middle-class Muslim in India or a middle-class Hindu in Pakistan?
I would favor a similar reservation for women in Indian legislatures. Chachaji,
You should Guha’s “India After Gandhi”, and the whole discussion of women reservation discussed in Constituent Assembly. Many (majority) of women leaders and lawmakers in the Constituent Assembly were dead against women reservation in Indian legislatures. You should read the lively debate.
There is significantly high percentage of women in Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, Vidhan Sabhas, and Panchayats.
Women speaker of the House, etc. happened in India…..eons ago, some examples Sarojini Naidu (the first Indian Governor in 1949), Najma Heptullah (Deputy Chairman, Rajya Sabha in 1980). Currently, the two king makers in Indian politics are Sonia Gandhi, and Mayawati, and trouble shooter par excellence is Uma Bharati.
I meant: You read should Guha’s “India After Gandhi”
Ok Kush, I’ll read that as “You should read Guha’s “India After Gandhi” 🙂
I started it in earnest but haven’t finished it yet. Maybe I will.
Fine, we had Najma Heptullah, but as you note she was Deputy Chairman, in the Upper House. The actual representation of women in the Lower House has been small, both in absolute and in relative terms. On a worldwide comparison, India is #106 out of 140 countries in the percentage of women parliamentarians in the Lower House, after Malta. Pakistan is #43 as of its previous Parliament; and Bangladesh would be around #75, based on the 15% reservation. India’s percentage of women in the Lower House is about half the Asian average of 17%, as well as the Sub-Saharan average of 17.3%.
So there is a problem here, and it ill behooves the world’s largest democracy to have such a pitifully low percentage of women in the lower House of Parliament. Sonia Gandhi or Mayawati are powerful women, but the idea is not to have just one or two powerful women but to empower women more broadly. Pakistan’s women parliamentarians, including the Speaker, are relatives of male politicians, and I expect this kind of thing is true to some extent in Bangladesh also. Plus, there is some segregation in the seating arrangements in the House. Still, I view that as better than not having female representation.
Some of these things might happen in India if India had reservations, but it is happening even without it. So I think the symbolism and reality of having, say, 20% or 30% women in the Lower House is real, and regardless of what the (largely unrepresentative) Constituent Assembly may have deliberated on it sixty years ago, I support it today. The initial symbolism can lead to real changes later.
Islamic marriage law /now the state law of pakistan, prohibits nonmuslims from marrying muslims unless they convert to islam. Strategically this means there is always going to be growth in muslim population and decline of minorities. The population growth of muslims in India can be attributed to it too.
Fine, we had Najma Heptullah, but as you note she was Deputy Chairman, in the Upper House.
Because, Vice President of India is the ex-officio Chairman of the Upper House, Rajya Sabha.
So amongst Rajya Sabha Members, Deputy Chairman is the highest post. The day to day matters is taken care by Deputy Chairman, and is the real person running the upper house.
More details here.
Of course. Good point, and I should have noted it myself. But it is only the Lower House that is directly elected, and the rest of my point stands, without taking anything away from Najma Heptullah’s achievement in becoming the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha.
Amitabh writes: >>Dude you really missed the mark with this comment and the implied comparison.
Amitabh – AMFD has a talent for writing seriously about something that’s actually a tongue-in-cheek comment. It took me a while to get used to his sense of humour.
M. Nam
Most of the Hindus in Pakistan live in Sindh. I am not Hindu, but I grew up in Sindh and had Hindu classmates in School, College and University.
Frankly, there is lots of room for improvement in Pakistan in terms of minorities’ rights. How and when that would happen depends on the political situation as Ali Eitraz mentioned in his post up thread.
In Sindh there are many economic tiers in Hindu population like in any community. Most of the Hindus are peasants and workers like most of their Muslim counterpart. Kohli and Bhel are mostly laborers and work in the fields or on construction sites.
Doctors, engineers,Landowners, traders, small rice husking or flour mills owners’ form the Hindu middle and the business class.
Besides two Hindu majority districts in Sindh, some small cities like Jacobabad, Sukker, Larkana, and Dadu have Hindu communities.
Last twenty or so years were really not good for the Hindu community and they stepped back politically. Things are changing now. A Hindu from Tharparkar district contested elections against the former Pakistan PM Shoukat Aziz on the PPP ticket. He lost then but this time around he won from a nonhindu majority area. He is a provincial Minister now in Sindh along with two other Hindus.
Every major Sindhi newspaper and there are four or five of them, have Hindu columnists and reporters. One Amar Sindhu, a woman columnist is my favorite. She is not the kind to holdback and expresses her political views quite forcefully on national or local issues.
Cricketer Danish Kanaria and before him, Anil Dalpit have played for Pakistan. They are not ethnic Sindhi. Their families moved from Gujarat long before the partition. Some Hindu businessmen in Karachi have Gujarati roots.
Interesting, I thought there was only one. I understand that the conservancy staff in much of Pakistan’s municipalities (and even the military) is staffed by dalit Hindus (and to a lesser extent by recently converted Christians from among them). At the time of Partition, when all order had broken down and Hindus were being attacked indiscriminately – in both wings of then Pakistan – Jinnah is known to have made an appeal to the rioters to spare the municipal custodial workers, and to them a a promise of protection. Bal Thackeray who was then a cartoonist for the Bombay Chronicle (with RK Laxman) lampooned Jinnah dau-in and day-out, for driving out the well off Hindus while holding back the less fortunate ones. Thackeray said that while the better off Hindus could manage a living in Pakistan, the poor and marginalised Hindus were going to be condemned to a life time of toil in Pakistan, doing jobs no one else would do. Bal’s father Prabodhankar Thackeray was a fiery social critic, as was his close friend Savarkar! From what little I have read, the dalit Hindus of Pakistan (as well as Bangladesh) have almost no interaction with the well off Hindus except when they travel to Hinglaj or Quetta.
A few years back we also heard about the purohit of a Lahore mandir being invited to the Punjab CM’s house on the occasion of Holi to conduct a puja of sorts. The Punjab CM is reported to have gladly accepted a tilak on his forehead from the pandit!
Thats a good development LOL. Also there is one sikh in the pakistani army.
64 · chachaji said
First the government needs to estimate the number of women who actually contest for various seats. If lets say the real issue at hand is education then the government should focus more on that aspect instead of reserving seats for possibly incompitent prospects. On a side note, reservations do instigate further anger towards benefitted communities which in turn may lead to instability and possibly riots. Of course, I doubt men would riot against women.
maybe indians should worry about the mass massacre of gujrat before they pointout “1” occurence of abuse in karachi against a hindu as the general attitude of pakistanis towards religious minorities. mr amardeep I noticed ur a sikh , y dont u ask ur sikh yatrees who vist lahore every year to visit religious shrines if pakistanis are hospitable or violent like BJP hindus. this is typical indian double standard just like india wants everyone to biocott chinese olympics for tibetan oppresion but continues to oppress kashmiris. shame on you.
Hassan,
Chill out. You can’t make a comparison between what happened in Gujarat and this. Both are completely awful in their respective ways. I don’t know about everyone else, but let’s try to keep to the issue itself instead of “but look what happens in India\Pakistan\Bangladesh, there this ain’t that bad”.
Agha Hassan:
Amardeep is a practicing Sikh, and this we all respect of him. His Sikh Community will just as quickly to take up for a Muslim’s cause as they will a Christian’s cause, and they have a rich history which proves this. Regarding hospitability: I’m 100% sure that the people of Pakistan are very hospitable. I’ve seen their hospitality with my own eyes, and during my darkest times, they’ve provided me with a shoulder to lean on and an ear to talk to. Also, BJP Hindus are hospitable. They, too, have provided me with a brotherhood in much the same way that my non-BJP friends have done. It’s remarkable that I’m promoting the hospitality of Pakistanis and BJP Hindus, and I’m neither of these two groups.
Regarding a double standard: The SepiaMutineers were the first to condemn the Gujarati riots, and many of their authors and lurkers, like myself, condemn religious, ethnic, socio-economic, and gender based biases and trespasses in all forms. Many of us, but not all of us, want some dialog and awareness for the Tibetan people and the Kashmiri people. Personally, I don’t see a moral equivalence between the Hindu victim in Sindh and Kashmir, so we’ll leave that for another topic.
May Allah bless you, and thanks for posting. All of us Lurkers love this dialog which allows us to understand one another and make our points.
Khudo Hafiz, BM
82 · hassan said
ERRATUM IN MY PREVOUS POST:
84 · boston_mahesh said
Good morning my brethers and seesters, may peace be upon you. ahem… Pardon my hinglish. I am not surprised you are justifying the killing by equating it to Godhra. Osama laden justified 9/11 with Iraq war, didnt he? Sometime I wonder how did shahrukh khan became a superstar in the violent BJP hindu country?
Khuda office
must see docu about the plight of some….
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=15elGwkFUYE&feature=related
Sometime I wonder how did shahrukh khan became a superstar in the violent BJP hindu country?
LOL Omg, like totally! how did he!!?? btw, are you being sarcastic? It’s hard to tell because I’m relatively new to SM.
Khuda office Take it easy mate.
Good evening my brethers and seesters .. may you rest in peace… LOL Since Amardeep deleted my previous post, here I am again again. I hope he doesnt delete this one coz this is just a Q. I have a genuine question for muslims and Pakistanis in general. What do you think is the reason for conflict between muslims and non-muslims in every corner of the world, be it India,Pak,USA,UK,Isreal,france,spain etc and how can it be addressed?
Khuda office (hey I am at my office, what do u expect?)
82 · hassan said
india oppresses kashmiris or do kashmiris oppress the original hindus/buddhists/sikhs? and most bjp people are regular human beings, not killers.
topcat sounds like a troll to me….
89 · Topcat said
Because it is a religion deep-rooted in intolerance (this coming from an ex-Muslim). “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned”
Hey dudez
I’ts an ABCD here. howza all doing??
anywayz Iz justa wundering my head off whether therez any good hindu sitez out in them thar boondocks where iz can be learning them hinduz viewpoint(z). to tell the truth, i’m getting a little tiredz of all the abcd tomgreenery.
keep it real.
over and out
Amardeep, thanks for posting this. In a time of excessive political correctness, we also need to address real relevant issues brutally just like the american media. Indian media tends to be a little too soft on the culprits much like our escapist Indian movies. We need desi Bill Mahers and Colberts to speak about issues of religion and islamic fanaticism in particular. Its ok to call it islamic fanaticism because thats what it is. If u want to sit on the fence not wanting to risk the hostility of muslims thinking the issue will resolve then god help you. We need to collectively assert that islamic fundamentalism just like nazism is incompatible with humanity as they both failed to embrace diversity.
“1 occurence” LOL. Since you love to compare genocides, how about this for a comparison. Count all the Hindus that have been killed by Muslims since the beginning of time and count all the Muslims killed by Hindus in the same time period. You will understand why it is funny you use Gujarat to insist that India is the genocidal maniac while Pakistan is “nation of peace”.
These are very general sentiments, no specifics, just my 2 cents:
I am Pakistani but an outsider due to my isolated upbringing in Canada. So it’s easy for me to say this: Islam needs to reform to the point where it’s easy for Muslims to say this in places like Pakistan. See the problem just isn’t that the predominant Islamic theology is intolerant of other faiths, but it’s also that it’s intolerant of questioning and reform among Muslims themselves. Another part of the problem with trying to denounce the intolerant aspects of Islam is that it is always seen as an attack on Muslims themselves, their very identity. In Pakistan, where religion is the core of our identity, this matters even more and it’s hard for the common person to see things otherwise. If we were able to live with Hindus and others in peace, then what was the point of creating Pakistan in the first place? I am not sure how we will get to the point where we can peacefully coexist with others without animosity and angst, but I do know it will have to involve introspection on the part of Muslims themselves. Some amount of careful criticism of Islam from outsiders may help, but if it’s laid on too thick, then there only will be war and increased hostilities. So this is tricky business.
I think the more basic point which we all need to remember is that Pakistan is not and never was a secular democracy. It was created as a muslim homeland, and that religious tradition still controls. Blasphemy laws are commonplace in virtually every islamic state, whether democratic or not. It exists from Malaysia and Indonesia to Saudi Arabia. The lone exception being Turkey. I agree with the ridiculous aspects of a blasphemy law, but let’s get real. In the muslim world it is the norm not the exception. The mere fact that many Pakistanis are working hard to rally against them needs to be applauded, but this is a larger issue of religious intolerance.
What about the thousands of peaceful Kashmiri Pandits forced to leave their homes by Pakistani supported terrorists? They have been living in Kashmir long before there was an Intolerant religion called Kashmir. Name one Islamic country good to its religious minorities? Someone please answer my question. You speak of Gujrat as if its the only page in Indian history. What about the thousands of Kashmiri’s killed by Pakistani terrorists in Kashmir? You think 400,000 Pandits from Kashmir live in refugee camps because they want to? The Congress has failed them. When the government takes no action to protect its majority then what happens? From the Gujrati side, Saudi Arabia spends millions building mosques there. That’s why people do not feel secure. Because they know what happened to HIndus in Kashmir.
I am just tired of the political correctness on the part of the liberals in India. That is precisely why people are voting for the BJP. They are tired of the way Congress has handled the security and defense of its majority. So before you blast Gujrat situation, understand that the people voted for the BJP for a reason- they want to be safe in their country.–Not saying I am for everything that BJP does like trying to re-write history and such though. But when pleople are not happy you have to ask why and not resort to simple answers like HIndu fundamentalism is growing. What is it a reaction against?
Pakistan is disintegrating because of the very terrorists it supported against India. Who supported the TAliban? The govt. of Benazir. Check out the moive Charlie Wilson’s War– one thing the movie does not show– how the Pakistanis siphoned 1 billion of the U.S. money that went to Afghanistan through Pakistan to support the terrorists in Kashmir. But it has backfired on them. They are disintegrating as a result of their own home grown problems and the terrorism they supported. They say they are against the war against terror and obtain American money and support them nonetheless without batting an eyelid. India is too politically correct. This will backfire on India when they will have no national security and cannot protect their majority.