Justice on trial

THE divide at the Islamabad High Court when it finally resumed the hearing of Mumtaz Qadri’s petition against his conviction was palpable. Those condoning murder in the name of religion stood on one side — against those prevented from standing on the side of justice out of sheer fear.

The number of lawyers coming out in defence of the late governor Salmaan Taseer’s assassin outnumbered even the security personnel deployed around the court that day. But no one was willing to appear for the prosecution.

No sight could be more decadent than lawyers led by a former high court chief justice and another retired judge standing by a self-confessed murderer. It was perhaps the most shameful moment for a nation when a killer is lauded as a ‘soldier of Islam’.

Many others who were at the forefront of the lawyers’ movement — heralded as the ‘black coat revolution’ that paved the way for the country’s return to democracy — maintained a criminal silence while their colleagues idolised blatant brutality. Has the bar association, which would otherwise have been active in the struggle for rule of law, condemned the action of its members? On trial is our country’s system of justice.

It has taken more than two years for the Islamabad High Court to finally take up the appeal against Qadri’s death sentence. The judge of the anti-terrorism court had fled the country after pronouncing the verdict. His life was under threat and the state was unable to provide him security.

Meanwhile, from his prison cell, Qadri has incited others to kill in the name of Islam. Who would dare uphold the death sentence against him risking the ire of the faithful? But there is little hope of the hearing concluding soon with the state showing little interest in the case. The file of the case is reported to be missing from the attorney general’s office.

It is surely not fear alone that is apparently preventing the judges from upholding the law. It is also to do with rising religious extremism in society that condones murder in the name of Islam. It must have been the way Qadri was greeted by lawyers when he was first produced before the court and the failure of the state to stop thousands of others surrounding the court that has encouraged other fanatics to follow his example. Not surprisingly, we have seen a marked rise in blasphemy-related murders in the country since then.

The murder of a lawyer and human rights activist Rashid Rehman for defending a university professor charged for blasphemy is a prime example of this vigilantism now so rampant in the country. Even if the killers are arrested one is not sure that they will be convicted, leave alone punished. Most appalling was the role of the lawyers who threatened Rashid Khan in front of the judge. The role of these vigilante lawyers is most despicable.

What is most alarming, however, is the role of the former senior judges like Khawaja Muhammad Sharif who held high positions in the country’s judicial structure. It raises serious questions about whether their judgments as judges were influenced by extremist religious views. There may be many others still sitting on various benches. Some reports suggest that several sitting judges have had some links with radical sectarian groups tainting their roles at the highest positions of the legal system. It will be a test for the judges as the Islamabad High Court resumes hearings on Qadri’s petition.

Another troubling question is about the administration’s inaction to the extremist provocation outside the court during the hearing. The presence of hundreds of fanatics chanting slogans in favour of Qadri is aimed at pressurising the judges. The belligerent stance of the defence lawyers is tantamount to a direct threat to the judges.

The brutal assassination of Salmaan Taseer and the growing stridency of religious extremists in its aftermath have widened the ideological divide in the country. Radical clerics publicly cite Qadri’s example to incite others to kill anyone not subscribing to their obscurantist views. They have turned Pakistan into one of the most intolerant societies in the world.

What the extremists have tried to do is to create a sense of fear and suppress the voices of reason and moderation. The forces of radical Islam have succeeded in infusing religion in the very fabric of the state. Many respected Islamic scholars who challenged the extremists and militants have either been killed or forced to leave the country.

More worrisome, however, is the failure of the state to provide protection to its citizens. The extremists have gained ground because of the moral bankruptcy of our political leadership and criminal abdication of the government in the face of extremist violence. Glorification of a murderer is also incitement to violence.

Yet no action is taken against those groups displaying banners hailing Qadri during the celebration of the Prophet’s (PBUH) birthday anniversary. The government seems to have already started backtracking on the national counterterrorism action plan under the pressure of Islamic parties and other radical Islamic groups. It is now unlikely that any action will be taken against those madressahs involved extremist activities and their patrons.

The Qadri case is not only a test for the judiciary, but also for the administration’s commitment to eradicate militancy and violent extremism. It is also the responsibility of civil society and the bar to raise their voice for justice. Qadri is not an individual but a mindset that is represented by people like former justices Khawaja Sharif and Mian Nazeer Akhtar and their ilk in the lawyers’ community.

This is not a battle between liberals and extremists, but between those who preach religious intolerance and violence and those championing the cause of rule of law and religious harmony. It is a battle that will ultimately decide the future direction of the country in a most fundamental way.

The writer is an author and journalist.

zhussain100@yahoo.com

Twitter: @hidhussain

Published in Dawn, February 4th, 2015