what is your opinion,what do you say about this.Comment

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought assistance from the legal counsel defending Mumtaz Qadri — convict who assassinated former Governor Salman Taseer in 2011— to focus his arguments on the question of permitting individuals, in the current times, to deal on their own with an accused of committing blasphemy — that too on hearsay.

“Will it not instill fear in the society if today everybody starts taking law in his own hand by dealing with the sensitive matter like blasphemy himself — without consulting the courts — that too without going into the true facts,” inquired Justice Asif Saeed Khosa while heading a three-judge Supreme Court bench.

The bench had taken up two identical appeals against the March 9 Islamabad High Court judgment of accepting Mumtaz Qadri’s plea to annul provisions of the Anti Terrorism Act (ATA) 1997 for assassinating Punjab Governor Salman Taseer.

Advocate Mian Nazir Akhtar had moved appeal on behalf of Malik Muhammad Mumtaz Qadri, while the other by the federal government also assailing the IHC verdict.

The high court had dismissed Qadri’s petition against the award of death sentence under the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) but accepted his application to void ATA’s Section 7 that asks for the punishment of death for committing acts of terrorism.

Quoting instances like Nov 4, 2014 Kot Radha Kishan where a Christian couple was lynched or that of a Nowshera where a Christian was accused of blasphemy with the connivance of the local police merely because he had property dispute with someone, Justice Khosa inquired whether individual has the right to act on his own in such matters without even ascertaining the facts first.

Also read: Mumtaz Qadri’s supporters arrested

Justice Dost Muhammad Khan, a member of the bench, also emphasised the need of exercising restraint because blasphemy cases were sensitive in nature and prone to be misused.

Allowing individuals to deal with such matters on their own was fraught with danger especially in divided societies like ours when our religious scholars were even reluctant to offer prayers after members of other school of thought, he maintained.

“Today’s Pakistan is not the one envisioned by Quaid-e-Azam since it has been fragmented in different sects and ethnicities instead of becoming one nation because of personal greed, benefit, self-interest and intolerance towards other sect and non-Muslims.”

Justice Khan also quoted his experience when being a senior judge at Abbottabad he got stuck in traffic because of a protest by some religious leaders against the infamous caricatures.

“In that traffic jam an ambulance with a woman in labour pain was also suffering immensely,” the judge regretted adding we were in a habit of punishing innocent fellow Muslims for the follies of those who were sitting comfortably in the West.

Salman Taseer was assassinated outside his residence adjacent to an upscale market in the federal capital on Jan 4, 2011.
http://www.dawn.com/news/1211306/sc-...sh-blasphemers

The authority to punish any individual rests with the state and state only.Due process of law is an absolute requirement.Court should take a bold decision,no religion allows to kill a person because of his views.

Indeed it is a brave decision by supreme court to brand Qadri as a Terrorist.

monk can you quote hadess with refrence here which says " k jo meri (Muhammad PBUH) ki shaan main gustaakhi kre usko "qatal" kr do or some thing like that.
and what do you say about it k jab courts saza na dain ya delay krain nabi(s.w) ki shaan main gustakhi par toh phir awam ka ghusa bja hay tb iss trah hota hay jese qadri nain kia.what do you say

I really doubt that penalty of blasphemy is death. For the sake of argument let's assume that it's death then many question arise, who will define the "blasphemy" ? who will judge that blasphemy has actually been committed? Who will execute the penalty if blasphemy has been committed ?

Can any individual be a jurisprudent, judge and an executioner? If every individual is charged with such huge responsibility then will there not be a chaos and terror ? I leave you to answer these intriguing questions!

SC nailed it but what if court fails to provide justice or the process gets too slow that for sure will bring more frustration amoung people as this is really sensitive issue but yes if one really commit it thn he/she should be punished accordingly

Sent from my GT-I8262 using Tapatalk

The judicial system of Pakistan is such that allows renowned money-launderers and their abetting mistresses to get off the hook clean as ever, but reel guardians of the honor of Islam and ideology of Pakistan in. Ghazi Mumtaz Qadri only acted when the government failed to act in the honor of the explicit restriction provided in the Article 19 of the Constitution and section 295 of the PPC, to guard the honor of Islam's Beloved Holy Prophet (abundant blessings and peace be upon him). He acted to please the Sovereign of Pakistan (One as per the Constitution also), the Sovereign of the Universe, Allah. Everyone's entitled to his/her views, I am with Ghazi Mumtaz Qadri. If anyone, instead of differing positively as is the person's right, indulges in attacks on my person here just because of my views which I believe is shared by the overwhelming majority of Pakistan (mostly poor and lower-middle class people) -- thrashing forum rules and decorum, then such a person be prepared to face a befitting response from me too.

First of all you need to prove that penalty of blasphemy is death. Secondly did Salman Taseer actually committed blasphemy? Lastly, can any individual (despite his level of education) judge that blasphemy is committed.?

The Supreme Court decision has become case law now, so every citizen of Pakistan must respect that decision .If you're not respecting this decision then you're siding with terrorist as Supreme Court of Pakistan has rightly ruled that Qardi is a terrorist.

They theory " if government isn't providing justice then one must take law in it's hand" has created TTP. Are you also lover of TTP after all they are advancing the cause of Islam since government of the day failed to do so.

I know that Most of the People in Pakistan stand with Qadri that's why Pakistan has become a living hell!

The Punjab governor was murdered to try and suppress for all time any debate about the controversial applications of the country’s blasphemy laws. In assassinating Salmaan Taseer, the murderer, Mumtaz Qadri, was attempting to intimidate and silence the country itself.

The assassination was the very definition of terrorism — a national political motive rooted in a very perverse understanding of religion. Had the so-called Qadri exception that the Islamabad High Court had seemingly endorsed been allowed to stand, defence teams around the country would have invoked them in the case of sectarian attacks and the murder of non-Muslims.

The Supreme Court has corrected that potential historic wrong and it is hoped the detailed judgement will elucidate on how and why what Qadri did constituted terrorism.

To truly honour Salmaan Taseer’s memory, however, the country’s blasphemy laws need to be revisited. No rational individual can suggest that the law is not seriously abused and has a flawed construction when it comes to blasphemy.

Disproportionately, the blasphemy laws have been invoked against the poorest in society and among non-Muslims — a negation of the constitutional equality guaranteed to all individuals. But the effects go deeper.

Today, the mere allegation of blasphemy can result in instant death at the hands of a charged mob.

A distorted set of laws has allowed extremist elements to intimidate and repress an entire society. That must not be allowed to continue.

Perhaps the next step to recovering the nation could be to revisit the conviction of Aasia Bibi.

Published in Dawn, October 8th , 2015

Mr. Monk, I disagree with you.

The Honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan is not above the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973. Nothing is above the Sovereign of Pakistan, no matter how high a governmental authority or institution. The Constitution is the most supreme of laws and it reads that the Sovereign of Pakistan is Allah and Allah alone. No law in Pakistan even the law formed by precedents should go against the Shar'iah, as per the Constitution of Pakistan.

Salman Taseer became a violator of the article 19 of the Constitution of Pakistan, when he started his speeches against the glory of Islam by targeting the blasphemy law, that is a sacred law since it guards the honor of Holy Prophet (abundant blessings be upon him), Quran and holy personages [may Allah be pleased with them].

Al-Hafiz Abu Ishaq Ibrahim bin `Abdur-Rahman bin Ibrahim bin Duhaym recorded that Damrah narrated that two men took their dispute to the Prophet , and he gave a judgment to the benefit of whoever among them had the right. The person who lost the dispute said, “I do not agree.” The other person asked him, “What do you want then” He said, “Let us go to Abu Bakr As-Siddiq.” They went to Abu Bakr and the person who won the dispute said, “We went to the Prophet with our dispute and he issued a decision in my favor.” Abu Bakr said, “Then the decision is that which the Messenger of Allah issued.” The person who lost the dispute still rejected the decision and said, “Let us go to `Umar bin Al-Khattab.” When they went to `Umar, the person who won the dispute said, “We took our dispute to the Prophet and he decided in my favor, but this man refused to submit to the decision.” `Umar bin Al-Khattab asked the second man and he concurred. `Umar went to his house and emerged from it holding aloft his sword. He struck the head of the man who rejected the Prophet’s decision with the sword and killed him. Consequently, Allah revealed verse 65 of Chapter 4. [Tafseer Ibn-e-Kaseer]


In my view, liberal-secularist, Western-wannabe inglorious slaves of the West bark against Ghazi Mumtaz Qadri and hence become rebels of the Constitution, the state and its ideology and they shall continue to bark, for all the majority of Pakistan cares.

The monopoly over violence rests with the state/judiciary or else there is no state and chaos/anarchy.