[DAWN] THE Council of Islamic Ideology has yet again illustrated the utter irrelevance of its existence and its capacity for dredging up matters that would do well without its input.
Following a meeting of the Council, its chairman Maulana Sheerani said that the body will recommend to the government that three pronouncements of divorce at a time should be criminalised -- even though they would nevertheless have the effect of dissolving the marriage -- because it is against the spirit of the religion.
The Moslem Family Law Ordinance, 1961 has already laid down the procedure for divorce and the CII's statement only sows confusion in a social milieu where tradition and custom, especially in matters of marriage and divorce, often take precedence over legislation.
Moreover, not for the first time, the body has rejected as un-Islamic the clauses of the Moslem Marriage Act, 1939 that allow women to seek divorce on the grounds of their husbands' remarriage without their consent. During its deliberations, the CII also arrived at the conclusion that only women above the age of 40 could become judges and that too on condition that they observe purdah.
The CII, particularly in recent years, has been on a consistently regressive march, its statements arousing derision and outrage in equal measure. And as is the wont of those who use religion as a crutch to pontificate on social issues, the fixation of its members has largely been on women's rights -- more specifically, on how to circumscribe them further.
It has shown itself resistant to logic and technological advances, not to mention judicial precedent. In 2013, for example, it said that DNA evidence -- used the world over to definitively affix criminal responsibility -- should be treated only as supplementary evidence in cases of rape, contrary to several judgments by Pakistain's superior courts in which DNA results have been admitted as primary evidence.
Instead, the CII urged reliance upon the testimony of four eyewitnesses as primary evidence, thus conflating rape with adultery, for which such evidence is required under the law.
Then last year, it said that laws barring child marriage were 'un-Islamic', notwithstanding the evidence of the terrible physical and psychological toll this inhuman custom exacts upon minors, particularly girls.
One may well question the wisdom of retaining the CII on the statute books at all, that too with a parliament bound by the constitutional stipulation that no law will be passed contrary to the Koran and Sunnah.
The judiciary and media also play a watchdog role over the content of proposed and existing legislation.
Although the recommendations of the Council are not binding upon parliament, it serves as a platform for unelected representatives of right-wing persuasion to influence public debate and create roadblocks in the way of progressive legislation. The public should no longer have to suffer the ponderings of this august body.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2015 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[DAWN] At the societal level, several hard, ugly realities that have gone largely ignored by the majority are being confronted, even if reluctantly.
Foremost is the one that is also perhaps the most ironic: that religion and the pulpit have been hijacked by groups and individuals intent on spreading mischief and sowing divisions; society itself has been infected by deep-rooted extremism that is exacerbating already dangerous divisions.
This may not necessarily lead individual citizens to resort to physical violence, but it certainly constitutes the bed from which the seeds of intolerance and bigotry take nourishment; the fact that Lion of Islam views are rife in society explains why it has taken Paks so long to recognise the problem, despite suffering years of witnessing innocents being slaughtered.
Like all societal malaises, the path to redemption is fraught with challenges, but some measures are readily apparent. These should apply immediately to the misuse of mosques in general, and in particular to the Friday sermons in which views that are divisionary and that often amount to outright hate-speech or incitement to violence are disseminated.
These must be curtailed. One solution can lie in crowd-sourcing: citizens can be encouraged to report violations, with the state then stepping in to investigate and apply the law.
All mosques and their khateebs should be registered with the government, and the merits of requiring religious figures to apply for a licence to deliver the Friday sermon, which goes out over loudspeakers, can be considered.
It is already the case that the Friday congregations can only take place in some, and not all, places of worship; the oversight net can be tightened by the law requiring that all sermons be recorded and the records kept in order and be readily available.
To stem the tide of extremism in society, extraordinary measures are needed. Perhaps even more than the state, it is the people themselves that need to step up to the challenge.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2015 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[DAWN] In the long, convoluted history of the Pak state banning murderous Moslem groups, the present episode may be the most mysterious: a US government spokesperson has publicly and explicitly welcomed a decision by Pakistain to ban several more murderous Moslem groups, even though absolutely no one in government here has made any such announcement.
If US State Department Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf's assertion in a news briefing on Friday proves true -- "We welcome [the decision] to outlaw the Haqqani network, Jamaat-ud-Dawa ...the front organization of Lashkar-e-Taiba... , and I think about 10 other organizations linked to violent extremism," Ms Harf is quoted as saying -- it would demonstrate that the bad old days of Pak leaders treating external powers as more relevant and important in matters of national security than, say, the Pak public or parliament have never really gone away.
Even more problematically, the latest move -- if, indeed, it is announced soon, as Ms Harf has claimed it will be -- would bolster the perception that Pakistain is fighting militancy at the behest of others, especially the US, and not because this is a war that this country must fight and win for its own survival.
There is no doubt that the Pak state needs to do more against a much wider spectrum of murderous Moslem and myrmidon groups operating its soil.
Focusing on simply the so-called anti-Pakistain murderous Moslem networks such as the TTP will only produce medium-term results, perhaps, but guarantees long-term failure in the fight against militancy. This is both because of the overlapping nature of murderous Moslem groups -- operational, strategic and ideological -- and because a long-term future where the state is in competition with militias for predominance inside Pakistain is not a future that ought to be acceptable to anyone in this country.
So yes, the Haqqani network needs to be banned as does the Jamaat-ud-Dawa and sundry more names that may come to light soon. But without a zero-tolerance policy against militancy, there will be no winning strategy.
Zero tolerance certainly does not mean simply military operations and heavy-handed counterterrorism measures in the urban areas; what it does suggest is a commitment to progressively disarm and dismantle murderous Moslem groups and the wider myrmidon network that enables those groups to survive and thrive.
Of course, simply banning more groups will not mean much unless the previous bans are implemented, the new bans cover all incarnations of a murderous Moslem group, and there are sustained efforts by the law-enforcement and intelligence apparatus to ensure banned ...the word banned seems to have a different meaning in Pakistain than it does in most other places. Or maybe it simply lacks any meaning at all...
organizations do not quietly regroup once the initial focus fades. That has never happened before.
And the present is even more complicated. What will a ban on the Haqqani network mean in practice given that the major sanctuary in North Wazoo has already been disrupted by Operation Zarb-e-Azb ..the Pak offensive against Qaeda in Pakistain and the Pak Taliban in North Wazoo. The name refers to the sword of the Prophet (PTUI!)... ? What will banning the JuD mean for the Falahi Insaniyat Foundation? Will the government offer answers -- to anything?
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2015 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[DAWN] At the societal level, several hard, ugly realities that have gone largely ignored by the majority are being confronted, even if reluctantly.
Wazoo
