ALLIANCE AGAINST DISCRIMINATORY LAWS (AADL)

DAWN KARACHI, July 14, 1997

The chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), Asma Jahangir, said on Monday that there were "two governments" in the country, and one of them was run by what she called "the agencies".

She said that the agencies had their "agents and sympathizers" in places like the "education department, the bar associations, parliament and in the courts".

The HRCP chairperson was speaking at a seminar organized by the Alliance Against Discriminatory Laws (AADL), a 14-member umbrella organisation made up of human right's group. Tehrik-i-Niswan, led by Khalid Ahmed and Sheema Kirmani presented several dramatic scenes highlighting the often secondary and subservient role that women were relegated to the Pakistan society.

Ms. Jahangir said that although people worked for the agencies in every country, but in Pakistan they were given prominence whereas in other countries these elements were marginalized. She said the agencies would never do anything on their own and were guided by their "two arms" who had been put in place by Gen Ziaul-Haq.

Speaking before a packed FTC auditorium Ms. Jahangir said that Pakistan was going through a very difficult phase. She said that the laws were made for those who used them for their own benefit. She said the Hudood Ordinance was made "only for men" to suppress women and the underprivileged.

She said according to Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution the legislators should be "angels" and asked which one of them is an angel. Ms. Jahangir said all discriminatory laws must end. The blasphemy law, she said, was surprisingly made not during a martial law regime but when there was an assembly.

The HRCP chairperson said as soon as democracy, "no matter how stunted or immature got under-way, certain forces started doing their work".

She said there were never any blasphemy cases or sectarian incidents during the time of martial law or even during the time of the caretakers but when an elected government came to power these incidents began occurring.
Ms. Jahangir said that people who tried to speak out against the vested interests and asked for justice were glared at and harassed. She said the vested interests started calling people who want justice enemies of Islam. She said the HRCP had long ago said that the Federal Shariat Court was not needed but when it had said this it was ridiculed. Now when the judgment came in the Judges Case, the Supreme Court called the FSC a "dumping ground".

The HRCP chairperson said the attitude of the courts in Hudood cases needed to improve and become more progressive. She said the judges "talk of morality" but send women in Hudood and similar cases to Darul Aman without taking into consideration that a woman might want a different choice for herself.

Speaking from her personal experience in defending people accused under the blasphemy laws, the HRCP chairperson said that the prosecuting lawyer in the famous Salamat Masih case, after the judgment was announced, supervised the deliberate demolition of her car parked in the court premises.

She said during the case hearing, three lawyers would be standing behind her while she would be making her submissions before the court and on one occasion a lawyer sitting in the audience even got up and abused her. In addition to this, Ms. Jahangir said, another lawyer who had nothing at all do with the case had appeared before the court. The court, she said, never took notice of these occurrences. And when the judgment was read out in the Salamat Masih case, she (defence lawyer) was not allowed to be present in the room.

One of the opposing lawyers, Ms. Jahangir said, had printed a libellous pamphlet defaming her religious beliefs and as many as three judges had written forewords to this book. She said that when she approached the learned judges and asked that would it not be embarrassing if she filed a defamation suit against the writer of the pamphlet and the judges might be dragged into the proceedings, she said she got the answer; "People ask us to write forewords all the time, who has time to read the whole book".

The other speakers at the seminar were lawyer and activist Hina Jilani and columnist and academic Eqbal Ahmed. Ms. Jilani said that the proposal that 33 per cent seats be reserved for women was very necessary, given the past and ongoing discrimination against women.

She said the reservations should however be for a limited period of time till when women could come in large numbers in parliament so that issues that were close to them could be advocated for at the highest policy - and decision-making levels. Ms. Jilani said her experience as a lawyer had shown that those affected by the Hudood laws, especially women, often had to face very difficult times with the policy. One example, is, she said, that the police when they register the case do not specify whether it is Zina (Section 10 [2] or Zina-bil-jabr (Section 10 [3]) which carries punishment for the woman also.


Resolution adopted by 600-plus participants of the Conference held by Alliance Against Discriminatory Laws (AADL) at Finance & Trade Centre Auditorium, Karachi, on 14th July 1997.


AADL presents before the participants of this Conference a resolution to the effect that:

* In the new constitutional package proposed by the Government,
33 percent representation be guaranteed to women in all elected political institutions of the country.


* Hudood Ordinance be repealed forthwith.


* Discriminatory Laws like "Blasphemy Law" be repealed.