Saved from death
DIPLOMACY notched up a partial victory this week as Zulfiqar Ali, a Pakistani citizen sentenced to death by firing squad in Indonesia, was included among the 10 individuals whose executions have been suspended by Indonesia. A trial that was marred by evidentiary and due process flaws, according to human rights activists, should never have been the basis for his long-term incarceration, let alone grounds for his execution. This paper opposes the death penalty in all its forms and, given the grim record of executions here in Pakistan over the past 18 months, it is an altogether welcome development that Ali’s case appears to have sparked a national conversation on the potential unfairness of judicial systems. Indeed, that conversation should be extended to the problem of draconian punishments against alleged drug offenders inside Pakistan and abroad. Saudi Arabia, for example, has a terrible and insistent policy on alleged drug smugglers that has seen several Pakistani citizens executed over the years. The full-throated and wholehearted defence of Ali — morally correct and laudable — should be extended to all Pakistani citizens facing the tyranny of flawed justice in all countries.
Indeed, one of the travesties of the Pakistan criminal system is the range of crimes for which the death penalty can be handed down. While the long fight to have capital punishment abolished in all its forms here continues, attention over the medium term also needs to be paid to the scope of the penalty. Kidnapping and drug trafficking are just two of the crimes that can result in a death sentence even if no one was killed while the crime was being committed. Can it really be said that the death penalty deters drug smuggling or drug-related crimes in Pakistan? Is the criminal justice system really punishing major drug offenders, or are those caught and punished by the state individuals at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder and without access to adequate legal representation? Ali has rightly become a cause célèbre, but there are many Zulfikar Alis languishing in Pakistani prisons and on death row. At the very least, there ought to be a review of the scope of the applicability of the death penalty here.
There is also the issue of due process: the right to a fair trial and reasonable standards of justice applied right from the investigation phase all the way through to appeals and clemency requests. The 21st Amendment has virtually obliterated due process for terrorism suspects tried in military courts and the appeals process in the Supreme Court thus far has brought to light disturbing testimony of victims’ families and their lawyers. Fundamental rights are non-negotiable as ought to be due process, especially when the death sentence is a possibility. Zulfiqar Ali must be saved and so should many other Pakistanis in prisons abroad and at home.
Communalism in Sindh
FOR some time now, the pluralistic Sufi ethos of Sindh has been under threat from the forces of bigotry. The recent disturbances in the district of Ghotki appear to be part of this ugly trend. On Wednesday, two teenagers belonging to the Hindu community were shot while at a tea shop in the district; one of the victims, Sheetan Kumar, died on the spot. Tensions in the area had been high as earlier reports had emerged about the alleged desecration of the Quran. Local police officials say the suspect involved in the alleged desecration, and who had apparently embraced Islam, was mentally unstable. As is the case whenever matters of such a sensitive nature occur, the reported desecration and the murder sparked communal tension in Ghotki, with protest demonstrations and closures of markets.
When cases of this nature transpire, it is essential that the state and community members immediately act to calm the situation and not let extremists exploit sentiments. Otherwise, tragic consequences can ensue, as in this incident with the senseless murder of the teenager. The case needs to be pursed and the killers of Sheetan Kumar must be brought to justice. But in the longer term, there is a pressing need to address the overall issue of extremism in Sindh. While some groups did hold demonstrations to condemn the communal violence, which should be appreciated, more sustained efforts are required in this regard. The Hindu community in Sindh has been targeted before, with temples and other buildings belonging to the faith group being desecrated and attacked. The forcible conversion of Hindu women is another issue that has fuelled communal divisions. Amongst the factors that have led to this situation over the years is the fact that militant and sectarian groups have made inroads in many of Sindh’s districts. This, along with the growth of madressahs — with some seminaries affiliated with hard-line groups — has contributed to the changed social and religious ethos of Sindh. It is important that members of the community — intellectuals, ulema, elders — reinforce the traditionally tolerant nature of society in Sindh. However, the state can perhaps make the most difference in stemming the extremist tide in two major ways. First, it must punish those involved in the murder, harassment and intimidation of minority citizens. Second, the authorities must clamp down on the activities of banned groups across the province before they do even more damage to Sindh’s fabric.
Merkel’s admirable stance
RARELY has a politician adhered so unwaveringly to principles when his or her political survival itself is possibly at stake. But Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, has proven herself to be of stronger mettle than most. On Thursday at a news conference in Berlin, she robustly defended her open-door refugee policy that has seen Germany take in more than one million asylum-seekers in 2015, mostly from war-ravaged Syria. Even as she described the recent attacks in her country and across Europe as “shocking, depressing and terrifying”, she insisted that Germany’s stance must continue to be based on humanity and compassion and that those committing acts of terrorism wanted to create divisions in society based on differences in culture and religions.
Ms Merkel’s steadfastness is commendable, as is her long view of the situation — particularly given the circumstances in which she has expressed them. Europe has been rocked by a series of terrorist incidents in the last few months. In Germany itself, the last two weeks have been particularly harrowing with four attacks in different parts of the country; the perpetrators in at least three, according to German police, were either asylum seekers or refugees inspired by Islamist ideology. Since then, the xenophobic, racist impulses that have long been on the boil — and which gained further traction when waves of desperate asylum seekers began to arrive on European shores in 2015 — have found more takers. The revulsion and fear among the public has also given ammunition to Ms Merkel’s political opposition as well as some of her own party colleagues to denounce her policies. Nevertheless, Ms Merkel has stood her ground. Earlier, she countered the massive anti-migrant protests that erupted in the wake of her welcoming attitude to refugees, with her determined ‘wir schaffen das’ (we can manage it) mantra, even while acknowledging the challenges that the influx posed. She continues to demonstrate that a true leader is guided by principles that are not held hostage to political expediency or narrow populist sentiment.
Source: Editorials
Published in Dawn, July 31st, 2016