Alhamdulillah, in the above post, I have answered ALL points/objections which are forwarded against the Ordinance as causing injustice to women. If someone else has any other objection, feel free to ask... I am always happy to discuss the issue.

@jsmawais
Thanxxx 4 sharing ur comments

First of all, I want to say things which I forgot to say in my previous post:-

In Zafran Bibi case, she was acquitted by the FSC on the fact that she became pregnant as a result of having intercourse with her husband. She was not acquitted because Jamal Khan had raped her.
The million-dollar question which no one has ever posed is: Why didn't Zafran Bibi tell others that she had "intimate moments" with her husband???
Only God knows the exact answer to this question. I surely would not like to bear the burden of accusing a chaste lady of a heinous sin, but still, this fact adds a grain of skepticism to the whole case. (Wallahu Aalam!)

There is one more aspect to these cases which is not usually emphasized in the media. I quote here an extract from Dr. Abdullah's article on Hudood Ordinance:-

It may not be too remote a possibility that to make more money, some or all of these NGOs use financed rapists. (Only God Knows Better!)
This is further strengthened by a fact which is quoted by Dr. Abdullah in the same article:-

I don't believe in everything which I read and therefore, I decided to do some research on my own. I WAS SHOCKED TO FIND THAT HE WAS NOT LYING!!!

Source: http://www.icco.nl/documents/pdf/EN%...0juli%2003.doc [See page 26 for the name of Aurat foundation in the list of those who applied for funding & were evaluated.]


I continued the research and visited ICCO's website. From there, I contacted the relevant person to provide me a summary of the funding given to Aurat Foundation.
I wrote:-
I have not received the reply yet!

By doing more research, I found from the CII's Interim Report on the Hudood Ordinances that the Aurat foundation had, since then i.e. after receiving the funds, prepared the following books:-
(1) Hudood Ordinance, Kitab-o-Sunnat ki roshani mein by Dr. Muhammad Tufail Hashmi (Aurat Foundation, Peshawar : 2004)
(2) Hudood-o-Qisas-wa-Diyat Ordinance ka tanqidi jaiza, Quran-o-Sunnat ki roshani mein by Dr. Muhammad Farooq Khan (Aurat Foundation, Peshawar : 2004)
(3) Qanun-i-Zina per Ek nazar by Justice Javed Iqbal (Aurat Foundation, Peshawar : 2004)

Thus it is proved by concrete evidence that the Aurat Foundation received funds in late 2002 from the Western donor, ICCO, for nothing other than criticizing the Hudood laws!!!

It is noteworthy that people like Dr. Muhammad Farooq Khan and Dr. Tufail Hashmi got exposure wholly through Aurat foundation by writing books on Hudood Ordinance & Qisas Wa Diyat Laws. These people, to my knowledge, had no status at all before that. Most likely, they are 'pawns' in the hands of Aurat foundation and they have lied many times too. One example of such lying by Dr. Tufail Hashmi has been discussed on page 1 of this thread.

Here a question arises as to why are the Western countries object the hudood laws? The answer, at the very base, is for spreading unipolarity, imperialism, etc. under the veil of a New World Order. For establishing this new world order, they spread Islamophobia to justify the invasion of sovereign Muslim states, to get a million troops on their land, to rob away their oil resources, to commit a Muslim holocaust and make it appear like sectarian violence & finally, establish a puppet government to control the states remotely.
According to an article which appeared in The Times (London), issue of 13 April (or maybe 17), 1979, "In a span of just 150 years, 60,000 books were written against Islam." If you calculate, this means that on average, every day a book is written against Islam. This is an article of 1979 when there was no 9/11, Al-Qaeda, Osama, etc. yet! Now-a-days, the figures would be even mind-blowing!
This is also seen from the fact that on minimal things related to hudood, special attention is given by European and US media. One example was that of the Mukhtara Mai Case.
Similarly, when Gen. Musharraf passed the Law Reforms Order, 2006, BBC reported this "international event."
Even a minimal Zara Sochieye Debate on Geo TV was such an 'important development' that the Zionist controlled-newspaper New York Times reported it. Surprisingly, it was titled After TV debates, Pakistan may ease laws regarding reporting rape.
How could these Zionists be sure that Pakistan would ease laws when it hadn't done so after NCSW & so many other NGOs' recommendations? Did they know in advance about this development or did they themselves draw the map for this development?
Geo being connected with government seems to be established by a number of evidences, but, government connected with Zionists is even interesting!

A PUBLIC SERVICE MESSAGE



The CII's Interim Report on the Hudood Ordinances is still available online.

BACK TO THE ARTICLE
First of all, the fore-most thing to be kept in mind is that tazir can always be awarded, so neither the criminals will get a free hand, nor will injustice be caused to women by the condition of four witnesses. Thus the hadd for zina or zina-bil-jabr is there as a rare & hard punishment.
Secondly, Anwar Syed is not raising any question on the 'hudood ordinance.' No! He is directly raising doubts about the Shari'ah itself!!! This is the worst & most pathetic thing which I find in the DAWN newspaper. They don't hesitate to knock off the Quran and Sunnah in the light of their own sweet opinion.
Thus we know by this time that removing hadd and the subsequent condition of four witnesses, will not have any effect on the status of women. It will only add one more to our account of sins that we removed a Quranic law from the statuary books!
Still, Anwar Syed is of the opinion that the implementation of hadd on any criminal is "impossible", because of the strict evidence requirements. He argues that having a law which would "never" be enforced is stupidity. Let's discuss this issue of availability of witnesses for zina and zina-bil-jabr.

We should note in the beginning that punishments are of 4 types:-
(i) Deterrent
(ii) Retributive
(iii) Pervertive
(iv) Reformative

Hudood for zina and zina-bil-jabr are deterrent punishments for hardened criminals which will rarely be awarded. In one of the most famous ahadith, the Prophet (SAW) said: "Revert the hudood from the Muslims as much as possible." Furthermore, during the era of the Prophet (SAW) and the first four pious caliphs i.e. Khulfa-e-Rashideen, the hands of only 5 persons were amputated.
The condition of four witnesses is no doubt strict and four witnesses will not be available everyday, but, it is also wrong to say that they would "never" be available. Such a thing is but conjecture!
In case of zina-bil-jabr, there have been many cases in Pakistan where feudalists and vaderas would rape girls openly in streets! Here, many times MORE THAN FOUR witnesses are available. I still remember a case of Multan which was reported by Geo TV in which a woman was stripped of her clothes right in the street; the shyless criminal went on further to do the unethical act in public! He even dragged the woman's naked body through the streets of the village! Similarly, there have been cases where when a rapist tries to rape a girl or is raping her, she starts screaming and four or more persons gather in the place (usually neighbours.) There have been a such cases in many cities of Pakistan-- including Karachi.
In case of zina, the strict punishment is not for people doing such actions in public, since, no one would ever do such a thing. Even if they tried to do that, most likely they would be stopped by people. A few may say that four persons would thus have seen them doing such a thing, but, its too illogical to believe that such a thing would ever happen!
Hadd in case of zina acts as a deterrent for perverted people who frequently visit 'free-sex places' such as brothels, etc. Many a times, it happens that the police, who may be sometimes accompanied by journalists, visit the place by surprise. Many people are thus caught red-handed doing shameless acts and four or even more people are available as witnesses. [Recall that the FSC ruled in Muhammad Abid vs. The State (PLD 1988 FSC 111) that police officials can be witnesses in cases of zina & zina-bil-jabr.]
I remember a case of such nature myself; it was reported by Geo's program FIR (First Information Report). The case was not only reported, but, various clips from the brothel were also included. The brothel was camouflaged under the label of Bismaa Beauty Parlour. When the police and the Geo FIR team broke in, they caught several people red-handed, in actions! EVEN A TV MODEL NAMED NEHA WAS ARRESTED FROM THE BROTHEL, WHO CAME THERE AS A PROSTITUTE.

Probably, it was due to the above reasons that the Parliamentary Select Committee, consisting of Sher Afgan Nyazee and others, which was reviewing the Women Protection Bill, 2006, restored the enforcement of hadd upon testimony of four witnesses, in case of rape.

Although, I have answered all points of objection, but still, I want to present my thoughts on the above statements of Anwar Syed.
The Quranic spirit is that the believers should act as servants of Allah and just like servants have to obey the commandments of his/her master, without asking for their rationale, so's the case here.
The Quran says in unequivocal style:-
Similarly, the Qur'an says on numerous occasions that Allah knows each and everything. In the famous Ayat-ul-Kursi, it is said:-
The Quranic style of belief is not that one first weighs Allah's commandments in the light of his intellect and if he finds them logical, he takes them & if he finds them not to appeal his common sense, he disposes them off.
Anwar Syed says in answer to this view that such an attitude would not eliminate the question; it would make it stare in our face.
Although, I have answered this question off already, yet, it must be emphasized here that in some places, we would not be able to answer off such questions.
In such cases, I would like to say that the question has no significance at all! If one truly believes that Allah is Al-Hakeem (Full of Wisdom) and the Quran is Allah's Word, then each & every injunction of the Quran must be Full of Wisdom too. In a similar fashion, every injunction of the Quran has been revealed by the One Who Has Complete Knowledge of all things.
If I ask you as to why laws need to change with time or evolve, then you will say that several things change with time. If we look closely, we find that our knowledge & view of the universe changes with time, due to expansion of knowledge and development in science & technology. We revise the existing laws, according to new knowledge, since they were based on old knowledge, which has become out-dated. All these efforts are actually directed at improving the laws to get the best possible law, which is up-to-date with science & technology.
Now, if one were to have obtained all the knowledge & technology, he would promulgate the best possible law based upon all of his knowledge, wisdom and intellect. Such a law would require no further evolution, since, evolution is required for things which are imperfect. Laws become imperfect & out-dated, due to lack of enough knowledge at that time.
Thus Allah (SWT) has Complete Knowledge of all things in the true sense of the word. He is Al-Hakeem (Full of Wisdom) and thus His Divine Laws are the best possible there can be. A perfect thing can not be further perfected or evolved; how will we put more water in a glass which is already filled?
SO, IF ONE IS SATISFIED & TRULY BELIEVES THAT ALLAH IS AL-HAKEEM & FULL OF KNOWLEDGE AND HIS LAWS ARE THE MOST PERFECT THERE CAN BE, THEN HE DOES NOT NEED TO WORRY AT ALL ABOUT ANY QUESTION!!! But, if there is some defect or doubt in one's belief, then he will stay restless and will soon be astrayed by Satan.
Of course, this does not mean in anyway whatsoever that one should not try to find out the immense wisdom behind the Divine Laws. It only means that lack of knowledge of the rationale of Divine Laws, should not be made base for disposing off the Quran and Sunnah from legislation!
[This is my personal view-point on the above issue...]

Phew... this fixes up Syed Anwar's article.

I would be even more thankful to the seniors if they kindly respond to my objections which I raised on their posts. Right now, the discussion is stuck as I am not aware of what is going in the minds of the senior members.

The Daily DAWN
Issue of October 7, 2006

Robber awarded 7-years RI
KARACHI, Oct 6: The district and sessions judge, South, Agha Rafique Ahmed Khan, sentenced a robber to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years.
The judge also imposed a fine of Rs. 50,000 /- on Syed Saleem Hussain who would have to undergo an additional six month in term in case of default on the payment.
The accused was caught red-handed while looting Sarfaraz Hussain on March 31 this year within the limits of Preedy police. The police also seized the looted Rs. 1,000 /- and a pistol from him.
Meanwhile, the additional district and sessions judge, Central, sentenced a kidnapper to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years.
Asif Saleem was found guilty of having kidnapped nine-year-old Aysha on March 10, 2005 within the limits of Azizabad police.

Personal Note: DAWN newspaper was careful in NOT naming Hudood Ordinance as the cause of justice to people here!

How Hudood law is hurting society
by Roshaneh Zafar
She presented one new argument which has not been posted in this thread by anyone yet. Hazrat Umar (RA) discontinued amputation of hands when there was famine in Arabia. He did this because the society was in a miserable state. Pakistan is also in a similar state and therefore, the hudood need to be abolished.

To answer this stupid, very-oft repeated argument, I reproduce what I once posted elsewhere:-
Some arguments seem to be very tall, but, they just need a slight jirk to fall to the earth!

Enough for now... my fingers are bruising!

Regards,
Abdul Rehman.

While answering the last argument, I forgot to give the complete explanation.
The Sunnah has made mandatory that amputation of limbs be dropped during famine. This is condition posed by the Nas itself and not by common sense or other logical theories.
Hudood are subject to various conditions and once they are fulfilled, there is no choice to drop them. This is because of the fact that Hudood (except Qazf) are Haqqullah i.e. Right of Allah.
One more saying of Hadrat Umar (RAA) may be useful to explain the above point; it is reported by Imam Nasa'i in his Sunan; its narrator is Abdullah ibn Abbas (RAA).
Feel free to ask questions or raise objections...

Abdul Rehman,
Peshawar, Pakistan.

I have come across a website which has been uploaded recently. It is maintained by two MNAs viz. Dr. Fayyaz Aalam Siddique and Sameeha Raheela Qazi. It contains very good, comprehensive & propaganda-free articles on the issue. It is recommended to pay a visit to this site and read the various articles given there.

I have decided to upload my articles to an open website, so that everyone can read it without becoming a member of my Yahoo! group.
I will soon upload my article Lies & Distortions by Geo TV about Hudood Ordinance to my website. Right now, I am restructuring and rewriting a few areas of the article again, so as to make them better and up-to-date.

Regards,
Abdul Rehman.

TRUTH UNVEILED
C.J. (Chief Justice) of the SCP (Supreme Court of Pakistan), Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhary, during suo moto hearing of a case, observed:

"The Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 is getting criticism and objections only because of handling of hudood cases by police in such a manner."

Thank God! He is not one of those West-poodles!

The Daily DAWN
Issue of October 13, 2006

Rape victim booked for adultery: SC orders inquiry
ISLAMABAD, Oct 12: The Supreme Court on Thursday took serious notice of a case in which a woman was raped but she was booked by police for zina bil raza (adultery).
A bench comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhary and Justice Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi ordered a judicial inquiry into the matter.
Complainant Nasreen Mai was kept in illegal confinement for 11 months by Iqbal, a relative of her father and her father's landlord Ali Muhammad Saamtia. During this period, she was raped by Iqbal as a result of which she became pregnant and gave birth to a child. The two culprits stole her one-month-old child and murdered.
"The Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 is getting criticism and objections only because of handling of hudood cases by police in such a manner," the chief justice observed during suo motu hearing of the complaint of Nasreen Mai.
During the hearing, the court was told that 46 rape cases registered under the hudood laws in District Layyah were awaiting investigation for months for want of a senior police officer.
DPO Layyah Nazim Shahid informed the bench that under the law, hudood cases, especially rape matters, could not be investigated by a police officer less than the rank of an SP. He stated a request was sent to the inspector-general Punjab police on July 6, 2006, for appointment of a senior police officer in the district but so far no step had been taken.
"Therefore, Iqbal is still a free man," the DPO said, adding that being a junior officer, he could not take up the inquiry.
Additional Advocate-General Punjab Syed Azhar Hussain informed the court that Nasreen Mai was married to one Allah Dita but for seven years she remained issueless. After some domestic dispute, she was asked by her father to leave her husband and stay with him.
But Iqbal and Din Mohammad Saamtia, the AAG said, took her away and kept her in illegal detention for eleven months during which she was raped by Iqbal. When she became pregnant and subsequently gave birth to a child, the family members of the landlord killed the baby, the AAG added.
When asked why was an adultery case registered against Nasreen, the DPO explained that the police registered the case on the basis of the finding of the District and Sessions judge Layyah.
However, the bench noted that the DJ Layyah, while compiling his report, had relied upon the investigation of police instead of conducting an independent judicial inquiry.
The bench remanded the case back to the DJ Layyah with instructions to conduct fresh inquiry and ordered police to register a new case on the basis of new findings of the DJ Layyah.
[The Daily DAWN, Vol.LX, No.281, Friday, October 13, 2006, p.3]

ANALYSIS
The following things are revealed by the above news item:-
(1) Police & judges are responsible for converting rape cases into adultery, not the Hudood laws.
(2) Since, this is not a defect in law, but, in the law-enforcing agencies, consequently, the law-enforcing agencies need to be corrected and not the hudood laws.
(3) President Musharraf's Law Reforms Order, 2006 further proves the above two points, because, it added Section 156-B to the CrPC. According to that section, no person shall be arrested for zina [not zina-bil-jabr] by the police, except on order of an authorized Magistrate of a court of competent jurisdiction. Since, this section brought no relief, it can be safely concluded that changing laws will do nothing; police needs to be reformed and made free of corruption.
(4) Section 156-B added to the CrPC by the Law Reforms Order, 2006 requires that no police officer below rank of SP (superintendent) shall investigate zina [not zina-bil-jabr] cases. This has proved to be a nuisance as investigation of zina cases has further slowed down.

Conclusion: The only solution to these problems is to reform the police system!

Hope to hear some comments from the readers...

Regards,
Abdul Rehman.

I have completed & uploaded my article Lies & Distortions by Geo TV about Hudood Ordinance. You can either download it or read it online. For best viewing, download the article, unzip it and use MS WORD XP to read it.

This is an extremely good article for those who are inspired by Geo TV's effort Zara Sochieye. It also explains why we are against the Jang group. Those who have read my detailed posts in this thread will find repetitions in this article in a few areas.

I also uploaded a FAQ to my website: Why do the hudood laws require that a separate case be filed for Qazf?
I will make a detailed post regarding the Women Protection Bill in a week or two (Insha Allah).

Regards,
Abdul Rehman.

(deleted...)

[Sorry about my carelessness in the last post...]

The article Kal Aur Aaj by Dr. Fayyaz Aalam Siddique. [Source: Pages 1, 2 & 3]