under|progress

More on Mirza Tahir Hussain

Tony Blair spoke publically for the first time yesterday on the situation of Mirza Tahir Hussain, a British citizen who has spent have his life in on death row in Pakistan for a crime he didn't commit. His execution date will conicide with a visit to the country by Prince Charles. It is looking increasingly likely that Musharraf will use Hussain's life for his own political purposes; he doesn't want to be seen bowing to British pressure. He is all too keen to forget, for a moment, that this whole event is another sad and sick chapter in Pakistani "justice", and that even one of the judges on the panel that convicted Hussain said it was a sham prosecution case. No Orientalists to blame here...

Update: The Graun reports that Pakistan has been warned the royal visit will be scrapped if the execution goes ahead.

Update 2: BBC reports stay of execution of two months.

The damning silence over Mirza Tahir Hussain

The plight of Mirza Tahir Hussain has received minimal coverage during Musharraf's visit to Britain this past week.

Hussain was involved in an incident with a taxi during which the latter was shot dead. Hussain was initially found guilty of murder, but eventually cleared by the Lahore High Court in Pakistan, citing a lack of evidence. Nonetheless, he was brought before Pakistan's Kafkaesque Federal Shariat Court for the crime of highway robbery, which has jurisdiction in such cases. This court found him guilty of a crime he says he did not commit, for which there was little or no evidence, and for an incident in which Hussain himself had the honesty to drive the dead body of the taxi driver to a police station. Indeed, one of the dissenting judges in the Shariat Court, Abdul Waheed Siddiqui, said that Hussain was "an innocent, raw youth not knowing the mischief and filth in which the police of this country is engrossed" and that the prosecution rested their claims on  "conflicting, mutually annihilating" versions. He was set to be executed this past Sunday, but the execution has been delayed because of Ramadan. The IHRC, Fair Trials Abroad, has more on the background, as do Faisal Bodi (from back in May) and Sajjid Karim, MEP for North-West England. There is still time to write to the Pakistani High Commision in Britain. The IHRC has more on how to contact the PHCB. Or use Musharraf's website to let him (or his press secretary) know this is a travesty of justice and he should use his powers under Article 45 of Pakistan's constutition to grant Hussain a pardon (and whilst your there also voice your support for this).

What is also apparent in this sorry case, apart from the state of Pakistan's legal system, the corruption of their police force and the refusal of the Dictator to intervene for political purposes, is the damning silence in much of the media in Britain. Hussain is, afterall, a British citizen and a man who, despite not being born in Britain, served in the Territorial Army and was keen to join the regulars. He was willing to die for his country (despite not being born here), but now it seems his country is willing to remain silent and let him die. Imagine, asks Justin Huggler in the Independent, had this case had involved a white 18-year old on a gap-visit. How do you think the whole affair would have been covered?

Update (5/10): Pickled Politics, Eteraz, The UK Today, Bloggerheads, Cunningtitle, Blairwatch, NotSausurre and Wolly Days have more. Also see this illustration at Beau Bo D'or.

Islam and democracy: a review of Iqbal and Gülen

In this month's edition of Renaissance, the monthly English-language journal of Lahore's Al-Mawrid institute, Muzaffar K. Awan has a review of the democratic ideas of Muhammad Iqbal and the modern Turkish thinker Fethullah Gülen. Of Iqbal's view of democracy, Awan says:

"Iqbal [...] did not like the idea of importing the Western democratic system and transplanting it as such in the Islamic world because of its extreme secular stance. He still suggested in his writings that there was no alternative to democracy in the Muslim World. Iqbal observed that if the foundations of democracy were to rest upon spiritual and moral values, it would be the best political system for the world. He wrote in the "The New Era" July 28th, 1917 issue: "Democracy was born in Europe from economic renaissance that took place in most of its societies. But democracy in the Islamic context is not to be developed from the idea of economic advancement alone; it is also a spiritual principle that comes from the fact that every individual is a source of power whose potentialities are to be developed through virtue and character."

Gülen argues that democracy, whilst not perfect, is the best option available for political arrangements since it allows people to govern themselves; this he bases on the Qur'anic principle of individuals and societies being responsible for their own fate:

"As Islam holds individuals and societies responsible for their own fate, people must be responsible for governing themselves. The Qur’an addresses society with such phrases as: “O people!” and “O believers!” The duties entrusted to modern democratic system are those that Islam refers to society and classifies, in order of importance, as “absolutely necessary, relatively necessary, and commendable to carry out.” People cooperate with one another in sharing these duties and establishing the essential foundations necessary to perform them. The government is composed of all of these foundations. Thus, Islam recommends a government based on a social contract. People elect the administrators, and establish a council to debate issues. Also, the society as a whole participates in auditing the administration."

And on the subject of Al-Mawrid, the editor of its Urdu journal Ishraq, Manzoorul Hassan, has been shot in what the newspaper suggests was attempted murder (free registration required). This says something about Pakistani Islam and its violent undercurrent. Al-Mawrid has taken positions on Islamic law in Pakistan which can be described as 'liberal' (that is not confined to the paradigms of traditional authorities), although if you read the works of Al-Mawrid's founder, Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, they're quite conservative. Eteraz and Haroon have more on this.

Update: Haroon has a more detailed discussion in "The Jihad for Democracy".

Pakistan zindabad?

Haroon celebrates Pakistan's 59th birthday and asks what was the point of its creation?

Update: Abu Muhammad also reflects on his country's history, quoting the great Pakistani poet Faiz Ahmad Faiz.

Update 2: Eteraz adds his views on Pakistan's future. And Watandost gives us a review of two books on Jinnah.

What Pakistani doctors think of white people

We've just driven from Makkah to Medinah in a coach, which by no means is roadworthy (and the air conditioning doesn't work properly). The hajjis I've become friendly with are some doctors from Pakistan, who have been practicing medicine in England for several years. We've been forced to stand outside the pilgrims department in Medinah for a considerable period of time, due to a bureaucratic problem. 

One of the doctors, sipping some water, then turns to me and says (together with a twist of the hand so idiosyncratic of Pakistanis):

"Agar ye goron ke haat me ho ta, sab kuch teek chalna ta."
["If this (entire process) was in the hands of white people, everything would have worked properly."]

He appears to seek approval from me, but I can only smile at the comment.

Review of the Pakistani debate on the Hudood Ordinance

Abu Muhammad has a review of a recent debate on the Hudood Ordinance in Pakistan, which was televised on the satellite channel GeoTV (it was also shown on Geo UK and probably on Geo USA). Presenting the case for the 'prosecution' against the Ordinance were Javid Ahmad Ghamidi and Dr. Muhammad Tufail Hashmi; defending the Ordinance were Mufti Muneeb ul Rahman and Maulana Abdul Malik. I only caught the second part of the debate, but I would have to agree with Abu Muhammad's comment that the defence did act like the stereotype of a Pakistani molvi.

Pakistan's paradox

Working offshore has frazzled my brain ('more than usual' comes the cry from the back!). Looking at monitors and the constant motion of the waves is not a good combination. So I've been avoiding computers altogether since returning to terra firma a week ago (and despite sort of promising things, which I'll get around to very soon!). I've been engaging more in human company (siblings and friends), reading books I've not read yet, leafing through books in Waterstone's and Senate House, or wandering around town taking pictures of London, including those bits which aren't that famous.

Last week, one such companion was Haroon, who was in London for the week. Over (a lot of) lunch, one point was raised which we both agreed upon: the two national heroes of Pakistan are an oddity; an unexplained paradox (and further that Pakistan only has two national heroes; we mooted the possibility of Imran Khan becoming a third, but then decided he needed to pass onto the next world before he could have any chance of achieving that status, World Cup or not).

How is that two individuals like Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Muhammad Iqbal have become so revered by a nation which is largely considered 'conservative' in attitudes towards religious practice and belief? Titles and platitudes are heaped upon these men whose deeds, actions and works went against the grain on many occassions. Not only that, but their legacies are contested by many self-proclaimed intellectual, moral and political heirs. Consider that Jinnah was from a sect considered beyond the pale by many (?) Pakistanis; consider that Iqbal deliberately thought outside or against the paradigms on offer to his religious contemporaries, that he engaged in intellectual and moral 'pohla pahli'. And then consider that to this day, I know that at least one major library (maybe more?) in Pakistan (probably the third largest) still refuses to carry books by a Pakistani scholar, who had to flee his homeland because he said something which was either misunderstood or even objectionable by widespread religious sentiment.