If we study the history of woman and her contributions to the human society, we will realise that the role of woman in the evolution of society has been far bigger than that of the man. But this struggle has largely been ignored. However, the struggle and movements of women for their basic rights in the west have encouraged the women around the world to stand up for their rights and equality.

As a German feminist put it: The history and books of history are wrong about me and they have conveyed a wrong image of woman because this image in the books of history has been portrayed by men and there is no space for women in this framework of history.

https://youtu.be/izTi6J27ftI

The exploitation of women goes back to the era when there was no concept of society and agriculture and people used to move from place to place for their survival. At that time, whenever two or more tribes developed a conflict with each other over some issue they would resolve it by exchanging women with each other.

If we study the era of Mughal dynasty, we come across some stunning facts about the exploitation of women.

For example, Zaheeruddin Babur was in Samarqand and his arch rival Shebaani Khan had deployed his army around the city so that Babur couldn’t find a way out. When Babur realised that there was no way out, he handed his sister Khanzada Begum over to Shebaani Khan and escaped from Samarqand.

Rajput clans in India had the tradition that their women would burn themselves alive when their husbands lost the war, in order to save their ‘honour’.

History has seen women like Razia Sultana and Chand BiBi in India, “Elizabeth” in England, and Teresa in Austria who played a very important role in the histories of their respective countries but they were always criticised by their contemporaries who held them responsible for all the flaws in the political system.

Pakistani historian Mubarak Ali says, “It was woman who put this animal in the shape of man on the right track”.

When the church was extremely powerful in Europe and had control over all the administrative activities of the state, the status of woman was completely subservient.

According to a Bishop “woman should serve the man silently and she does not need to read or write, the main duty of woman is to produce more and more children”. St. Paul, the spiritual leader of Christianity, had advised women not to speak among men and always keep their heads and faces covered. History reveals that no other institution has exploited the woman more than the church.

Like all the other religions and communities, the woman in Muslim community was also never allowed to get education, equal rights and take part in the mainstream politics. Woman was forced for early age marriage, which is not only her exploitation but also a sin, even according to Islam.

But the things are changing now with urbanization expanding and women demanding their due rights.

In early 1960s Feminism took root in the US and under this movement women stood up for equal rights in society. This was the movement which gave women the courage to speak for their rights. Beside many other demands, this movement asked the governments around the world to provide voting rights to women and equal chances in every field of life.

As these movements grew in momentum, in 1975 UN announced 8 March to be celebrated every year as International Women’s Day.

Like any other country, the women of Pakistan have struggled a lot demanding equal rights. Feminism in Pakistan took root during Zia era when in 1981 women for the first time in the history of Pakistan launched protests against the anti-women Zia regime.

We have come a long way since the anti-Zia protests and women are coming forward now in all walks of life. The impact of this movement can be seen in the progressive policymaking as well as legislation enacted through the years, specifically in Sindh where “Child Marriage Restrain Act” was passed in 2014, increasing the minimum age for marriage to 18 years. “Protection against Harassment of Women at Workplace Act” was passed in Sindh and Blochistan in 2010. Punjab assembly passed the “Protection of Women against Violence Act” in 2016.

Despite these legislations, the number of acid attacks and honor killings has increased over the years. There are huge loopholes still in the law as well in the implementation of the law and unless all the forms of misogyny are rooted out, and until all the women, men and transgender people can enjoy compete equality before law, this struggle for equal rights will continue.

Author: Ali Mansoor

source: Naya Daur

IT was International Women’s Day on Friday. But it was hard for the other half of the country to stay silent for a mere 24 hours. They just couldn’t because the posters/slogans during the countrywide march were just so out there and unacceptable. Even two days later, the ‘tsk tsk-ing’ and the outrage hadn’t stopped.

What were these women thinking? How could they abuse their position by making outrageous demands? And why didn’t they understand their culture and tradition? Where were the serious issues such as rape? Why didn’t they speak for the women from the less-privileged classes? Why did they speak of silly and irrelevant issues (when there are serious issues such as ‘honour’ killings)? Of course, there was great horror for unacceptable and/or frivolous issues such as manspreading; unwanted and unsolicited pictures (as many consider this a staid family paper, I will spare the feelings of all readers by not providing more details); divorce and the price of sanitary napkins.

These were hardly rights issues, it was said.

Many Pakistani men (and even some women) are all for equal rights for women but as long as it does not translate into support for ‘behayai’ (remember the unsolicited pictures), or even slogans asking for men to heat their own food, or find their own socks, or women who want to sit like men.

It seems as if they were arguing for women to have waited — for ‘honour’ killings to end, for inheritance laws to be made equitable, for equal pay to be a reality before bringing up ‘frivolous’ issues such as taboos around divorce or judging women for their clothing choices.

In creating a hierarchy of issues, where would we begin to ask for no harassment on the street or in cyberspace?

After all, in a society where violence against women takes such heinous forms such as wani and ‘honour’ killings, it does perhaps seem out of place to start demanding that men heat their own food.

But this argument is based on the assumption that women’s rights can be listed in terms of priority, and that one can only move down the list once the item above has been marked ‘complete’.

Hence, once ‘honour’ killings are eliminated, only then can one move on to wani, and once there is a ‘check’ in front of this can one perhaps move on to domestic violence. And only after all the acts of physical violence against women are eliminated should we move on to asking for more equitable inheritance laws and equal pay.

But in creating this hierarchy of issues, where would we begin to ask for no harassment on the street (eve-teasing as it is sometimes called in our subcontinental English); would it come before or after harassment in cyberspace? And what about allowing women to decide on birth control measures for themselves? Where would this be placed on the list? And it seems that with such serious issues to contend with, asking for equal representation on corporate boards or more women in cabinets should simply be shelved for the time being.

Second, there is an argument prevalent in the privileged parts of society that if women are not being killed or beaten or stopped from studying or working, they really should not be complaining about other issues. In other words, agitating about mansplaining, sexist swear words, and social views on clothes are not ‘real’ issues when women are being killed or maimed.

But Pakistan is a society where modernity and tradition jostle for space. It’s a place where Mukhtaran Mai is still struggling for justice; where the Muslim world’s first woman prime minister was elected 30 years ago; where women (and men) were apparently killed just seven years ago because a video revealed that they were enjoying music in the presence of men; where we also have laws outlawing sexual harassment at the workplace.

There are parts of the country (and society) where women struggle to marry of their own free will or get an education but in others, women struggle with getting their male colleagues to treat them with respect. And the rights movement will and should talk about all kinds of issues.

To argue that one is more real than the other is to argue that while extrajudicial killings happen, Pakistanis should not crib about the ridiculously high prices the automobile sector charges, because the latter only concerns a more privileged section of society. It’s possible to talk about both the issues and agitate for both at the same time.

Or to use another example, there are some who say that criticism of civilian governments or questions about accountability can endanger democracy in Pakistan. It will not. We can and must work for a stronger democracy and better governance from our political parties at the same time.

Similarly, working women can talk about sexual harassment and about not being heard in work meetings; others can discuss the social taboos surrounding those who have walked out of marriages; and all of them can talk about rape and ‘honour’ killings as well as the burden of juggling work and housework, as in many households, men are not expected to lift a finger at home. These issues need not wait till what is deemed more ‘serious’ and ‘legitimate’ (by some or many) has been addressed.

As we jostle tradition and modernity in our politics and society, half of this country also has the right to talk about all the problems they face whether in the rural areas or in corporate offices.

Last but not least, if some demands seem offensive or ill-suited to our ‘culture’, we need to remember that in some parts of the country, ‘culture’ allows women to be killed. Yet we expect the men from those parts to understand that their ‘culture’ is not acceptable. So why can’t our more urbane, educated compatriots be challenged and questioned about what they deem acceptable?

Let’s not put a limit on what women can dream and aspire to. Even if it makes some of us uncomfortable, at least it’s forcing us to debate and engage on what women rights are.

The writer is a journalist.

Published in Dawn, March 12th, 2019

source: Dawn

Press Release

India, Pakistan #NOWAR #SayNoToWar: Global StandOut for Peace in South Asia

Feb 28, 2019:

In a response to escalating tensions between India and Pakistan, peace-lovers around the globe are joining hands in a Global StandOut for Peace in South Asia. The citizen- initiated event, taking place on Sunday March 3, across various cities globally, was started by Indians and Pakistanis who believe their countries should have good neighborly relations with all issues resolved through dialogue.

We invite peace activists to join where ever in the world they are and stand in solidarity against, war, violence and bigotry in South Asia where tensions between nuclear-armed India and Pakistan have held the region hostage for too long.

StandOuts will take place in cities in USA, UK, Ireland, Norway, India and Pakistan so far on Sunday: Washington, D.C. (Dupont Circle, 3 pm), Boston (MIT main entrance, 4:30-5.30 pm), London (Tavistock Square, 2-4 pm), New York (Peace Fountain, 110^th Street, 2-3 pm), Dallas (Al Markaz restaurant, 12 noon), Michigan (22575, Ann Harbor Tri, Dearborn Heights, 6 pm), Lahore (Liberty Chowk, 7-9 pm), Delhi (Red Fort, 8 pm), Kolkata (Iran Society, 5 pm), Dublin (the Spire, 3 pm), Karachi, (Beach Luxury Hotel, 6 pm), Los Angeles (Pasedena Public Library, 2:30-4:30 pm). Standouts are also taking place in Oslo and San Francisco Sunday (time and place tbd), and on Monday March 4 in Providence, RI (Brown University, Faunce Steps, 12 noon).

People in other places are welcome to join. Those who would like to but are unable to reach a designated venue are invited to get together with friends any time Sunday, 3 March. Carry signs of support in a public space or landmark, then take a picture and share it with the hashtags: #NoWar #SayNoToWar #iStandForPeace #iStandAgainstWar #PeaceInSouthAsia #GlobalStandOutForPeace. You are welcome to include slogans like “I am Indian and I stand with Pakistani peacemongers” or “I am Pakistani and I stand with Indian peacemongers”.

For updates on event locations and times, please visit Facebook page: Global Standout For Peace in South Asia https://www.facebook.com/GlobalStandOutForPeace/

Bilateral peace groups supporting this initiative of individual Indians and Pakistanis include the Pakistan India People’s Forum for Peace and Democracy, Aman ki Asha (hope for peace), Aaghaz-e-Dosti (Start Friendship). Others in support include South Asia Solidarity Group (London), Artists Unite, student organizations at MIT, Columbia University, George Washington University, SOAS (London), SAIS (Johns Hopkins University), Brown University, as well as human rights advocates and peacebuilders.

For further information please contact our facebook page or email  [email protected]

Prime Minister Imran Khan makes surprise announcement to a joint session of Parliament.

source: The Hindu

I wrote this piece for a web dossier produced by Heinrich Boell Foundation for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights‘ 70^th anniversary 2018 – Asma Jahangir – ein bedeutungsvolles Leben, ein inspirierendes Erbe. Sharing now, a year after Asma Jahangir has passed on. This piece doesn’t include her role for peace in the region and in the UN system that I’ve written about earlier and also detailed in a longer essay to be printed in an anthology titled Voices of Freedom from Asia and the Middle East,co-edited by Mark Dennis and Rima Abunasser, TCU, is under publication by SUNY Press. Above: Asma Jahangir at her office; still from my documentary Mukhtiar Mai: The struggle for justice (2006)

By Beena Sarwar

The field on the outskirts of Lahore was full of workers waiting to hear the woman from the city speak. They squatted on their haunches with dull hopeless eyes, the drab greys and browns of their clothes at one with the earth they fashioned into bricks to bake in bhattas — kilns that dot the rural landscape of Punjab and upper Sindh. For their back-breaking labour they were paid in kind, leading to generations of indebtedness as the traditional informal economy transitioned into a cash-based system.

The woman they had come to hear was Asma Jahangir. A petite figure with piercing eyes and short black hair, she clambered onto the roof of a jeep with her driver’s help. As her booming voice with measured pauses rippled across the squatting bhatta workers they “came alive”, recalls Dutch radio journalist Babette Niemel who had travelled to the rally with Asma.

It was a cold winter day in early 1989. On the hour-long car ride over to the field, Asma had pulled out travel mugs of coffee and sandwiches. They returned to Asma’s office by lunch time and Asma got right back to work.

That was Asma. Tremendously hardworking but always a caring and considerate host. Despite the stresses of her busy life, she always made sure there was lunch.

The rally of bhatta workers Asma addressed that day may well mark the moment that she came into her own as a political leader, suggests former finance minister Dr Mubashir Hasan, a founding member of the independent Human Rights Commission of Pakistan that Asma had set up in 1986 along with a host of other eminent personalities.

There are many behind the HRCP’s success as a solid and credible institution. But it was Asma’s consummate skill as an empowering leader who led by example and took others along with her that set the tone.

Her activism coupled with her legal work led to the seminal Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act 1992, a step towards ending the system of generational debt that still holds many in slavery.

Reporting on the issue in those years, I started volunteering with the HRCP. In 1993, Asma got me to contest HRCP Council elections, dismissing my hesitations and leading me by the hand to introduce me to one senior Council member after another. Elected to this policy-making body for six years (three terms) I participated in meetings marked by a high level of debate and discussion. Here I saw and experienced first-hand Asma’s clarity of vision, her persuasive powers, and ability to get people from differing points of view to agree on a minimum common agenda.

I also witnessed her strong sense of media savvy, far ahead of her time. She would send out press releases about important issues she had taken up legally, cutting through the hypocrisy and babble of confusing news. Unlike those who promote their own achievements, she never publicised herself or the awards and recognitions she received.

The cases she took up were at the heart of the social changes and conflicts Pakistan was undergoing in the post-Zia era. This landed her in the cross-hairs of those threatened by the changes that are occur as people become more aware of their rights. The forces of status quo began intensifying their use of age-old weapons like “blasphemy” allegations to suppress different religious communities, and “tradition” and “religion” to keep women in their place.

In 1993, Asma took on the defence of Salamat Masih, an illiterate 11-year old Christian boy accused of writing ‘blasphemous’ words on the wall of a mosque. He and his father Rehmat and uncle Manzoor, co-accused with him, were threatened while under trial. On 12 April 1994 armed assailants opened fire as they left the district court. The hail of bullets killed Manzoor and injured Salamat, Rehmat and several others.

The attack on Salamat Masih was not an isolated incident. Asma was also under severe threat. Glossy colour stickers and posters cropped up all over Lahore, terming Asma a ‘blasphemer’ and urging ‘believers’ to find and kill her. On at least one occasion, such stickers were mysteriously distributed with the morning edition of English language daily Dawn.

One handwritten anonymous letter threatened to hunt her down and kill her, the writer’s stated mission in life. But there was another letter — from a slightly built, clean-shaven Afridi tribesman, Zarteef Afridi who was also Coordinator for HRCP in Khyber Agency. He volunteered to come down to Lahore with an armed ‘lashkar’ (posse) to protect her. Asma politely declined.

In that atmosphere of threats and intimidation, Afridi’s letter of support was a message of hope, particularly coming as it did from an area known for its religious conservatism. The HRCP provided a platform for those willing to counter retrogressive trends even in traditionally conservative areas. (Sadly, he himself was killed in 2011).

On 9 February 1995, the court sentenced Salamat and Rehmat to death. Salamat told Asma, “I am in God’s hands. I am sure that God will give us justice”.

“He seemed shocked yet calm, but when I put my arm around him, he was trembling,” Asma told British writer Danny Smith (Shouting Into the Silence: One Man’s Fight for the World’s Forgotten; Lion Hudson, 2013; pp 114-117).

When it became clear that Asma would file an appeal against the verdict in the Lahore High Court, a violent mob on 16 February called for her to be included among the accused. Frenzied men attacked her car, smashing the windows. Luckily, she was not in the vehicle. “We saved your driver but couldn’t save your car,” her friends told her.

Accompanied by the personal bodyguard she had recently hired, Asma left the court under police escort. Undaunted, she went ahead with the appeal. On 23 February, the case against Salamat and Rehmat was dismissed on the grounds that being illiterate they could not have written the blasphemous words. Asma did not see the acquittal as a victory.

“Don’t start celebrating,” she said.  “It’s not over. The extremists will want revenge and I am sure that there will be other similar cases. The blasphemy law should be changed.” She was right on both counts.

This stand made her more enemies. In October, eight armed intruders broke into her family house and beat up her brother and his wife. Asma who lived next door at her in-laws’, was out at the time. As the security guards opened fire and police arrived, the men fled. They left behind a stolen vehicle containing ropes, cotton wool, knives and arms. An ID card copy in it led to their arrest.

Asma went to see them in the police station because, she said, “I wanted to be sure myself, they had only heard of me… They had been told it would be rewarding for them to kill me.” As she talked to them, she realised “they were pawns in the hands of powerful people, leaders of sectarian groups who actually sowed the seeds of hatred in young minds… The perception they had of me was some kind of a demon, but to see me humanly there, they wondered whether the perception given to them was correct or not.” (Martin Ennals Award, Youtube, 1995).

She sent her children to boarding schools abroad for their safety. She missed them terribly but never considered changing her path. And, incredibly, she forgave the attackers, withdrawing the case against them.

The social changes taking place meant that young people from various backgrounds were also increasingly breaking traditions. Asma stuck to her principled position based on fundamental rights. The conservative lobby was further enraged when she took on the “Saima Waheed Love Marriage Case” in 1997.

Saima Waheed Ropri, a 22-year old business administration graduate and daughter of a well-known religious leader, had secretly married her brother’s tutor. She lived on at her father’s house, hoping to tell her family and bring them round. When she found they had arranged her marriage elsewhere, she donned a burqa and fled in a taxi to AGHS. This was Pakistan’s first all-women law firm founded in 1980, named for the initials of its founders: Asma Jahangir, her friends Gul Rukh and Shehla Zia, and younger sister Hina Jilani.

Asma took on the case as she would for anyone attempting to exercise their fundamental rights. AGHS also ran Dastak, a shelter house for women. Saima was housed there like many other clients of the firm.

The propaganda machine against Asma went into full swing once more. Her detractors accused her of having corrupted Saima. The “evidence” they cited for this included Saima’s new haircut, a bob, and jeans that she wore to court with her kurta rather than the traditional shalwar.

“I used to wear jeans at home too,” Saima told me, explaining that her father didn’t know because he didn’t come to the women’s part of the house. As for the hair, another woman at Dastak had done that.

The case sparked a frenzied debate about the right of an adult Muslim woman to marry of her own choice. It exposed the clash of cultures in a traditional society in the throes of change, especially in urban areas. Saima’s father argued that in his family’s religious sect a woman could not marry without her guardian’s permission “even if she is 60 years old”. This of course has more to do with tradition than religion.

The court upheld Saima’s marriage. But as with Salamat Masih’s case, this was not an unequivocal victory. The couple fearing for their lives, fled abroad.

“Women may have won the battle, but the war is not yet won,” said Asma, prescient as ever.

The case continued to hear the plea against women’s right to marry of their choice. The final judgement some time later called for basic amendments to family laws to enforce parental authority and discourage courtships, extra marital relationships and “secret” friendships and marriages. (It wasn’t until December 2003 that the Supreme Court struck down these opinions and upheld the right of adult women to marry of their free will).

The propaganda against Asma as “westernised”, “anti-religion” and “anti-Pakistan” was far from reality. She proudly represented Pakistan at international fora dressed typically in a kurta shalwar with a dupatta. Although she herself had married for love, she was family-oriented and negotiated a complex joint family system with determination and finesse, as a wife, daughter-in-law, mother, aunt, and grandmother. She fought courageously and consistently for the rights of the most downtrodden in society. Far from being against religion, she was against the misuse of religion or any other institution to exploit people.

At her very core she was someone who believed in equal rights for all regardless of class, ethnicity, or religion. And this is precisely what her detractors, bound for obscurity except in the viciousness of their attacks, found so threatening.

Asma, meanwhile, lives on, her example and legacy lighting the way for future generations of human rights defenders.

As reports emerge that Geo News has been taken off air in various areas across the country, State Minister for Information and Broadcasting Marriyum Aurangzeb has categorically denied that her ministry has issued any directives for the suspension of the channel’s transmission.

Talking to Daily Times on Sunday, she said, “the government hasn’t shut down or suspended any channel. Why would we?” She said that the government could only take such a decision if a TV channel violated PEMRA law or the code of conduct. Even when such a violation took place, the PEMRA needed to follow the due process, she added.

Aurangzeb said Geo News’ suspension was in violation of PEMRA rules. She said the government had already initiated action against cable networks and cable operators found involved in the matter. “If they don’t address the issue, all of their cable services can be suspended,” she said.

The case of partial suspension of Geo TV in many areas across the country since last few days is turning out to be quite curious. No one from among the relevant authorities appears to know who is interrupting Geo News’ broadcast.

Interior Minister Ahsan Iqbal tweeted about the matter on Sunday, “It is a shame & we will take notice. If it was wrong for a political party to do so in Karachi some time back, how can it be right for anyone else. [sic] Only PEMRA has the legal sanction to do so. Pakistan can’t be a pariah state for freedom of expression.”

Distributors, i.e. cable operators, have a huge stake in the electronic media. Speaking to Daily Times, Imran Nadeem, former general secretary of the currently inactive Cable Operators Association (CAP), said he had no knowledge of suspension of Geo News’ transmission, ‘except the one in DHA Karachi, which is mainly due to an ongoing conflict between Geo management and the local cable operators’. Nadeem, however, explained that digital cable distributors in Pakistan could offer no more than 70 channels to the public, while there were more than 150 channels in the country. “This means that some channels are inadvertently pushed off air,” he said.

When senior staffers at Geo News were approached, they denied having any ongoing conflict with cable operators in DHA Karachi. A journalist speaking on condition of anonymity said that cable operators in DHA Karachi were not showing Geo News since 2014. Another journalist said there had never been any such problem in the area before 2014. A senior reporter from Islamabad held that the distribution of Jang Group newspapers was stopped in DHAs for no reason in 2014.

In April 2014, Geo News was shut down illegally and arbitrarily hours after its senior staffer and veteran journalist Hamid Mir survived an assassination attempt in Karachi. After the attack, Geo News directly accused the then head of the military’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency for having a role in the attack. Subsequently, not only that Geo transmission was abruptly discontinued in many parts of Pakistan especially DHAs. This was followed by a slander campaign against the owner of the media house who was accused of blasphemy in hundreds of FIRs registered against him in different cities.

More recently, a top security official had reportedly told around 40 leading journalists in an off-the-record meet-the-press session that some channels, especially Geo News, were crossing red lines. While the official quoted the constitutional guarantee that no one would be allowed to malign state institutions, the provision concerning rule of law and due process were ignored, as per reports of the meeting in the media. The precise nature of the red lines was also not identified.

Looking at Geo News’ recent on-air behaviour, two aspects stand out. Firstly, many of its journalists and analysts have held strong views in favour of the 18th constitutional amendment and its edicts on provincial autonomy [another subject discussed in the off-the-record meeting]. Secondly, despite having many programmes and anchorpersons critical of ruling PML-N’s politics, the channel’s news bulletins have shown a sympathetic tilt towards the party, especially its emerging woman leader Maryam Nawaz Sharif.

source: https://dailytimes.com.pk

In what may prove a decisive blow to Nawaz Sharif’s political career, the Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled on Wednesday to bar him from heading his political party for being disqualified from the membership of the Parliament. The judgement left many concerned about the promotion and protection of fundamental rights baffled for being in direct conflict with the spirit of the Constitution.

Fundamental Rights: In the operative part of the five-page judgement, the Court ruled that the provisions of Sections 203 (membership of political parties) and 232 (disqualification on account of offences) were liable to be read with infamous Articles 62, 63 and 63-A of the Constitution. Whereas the two sections of the Election Act 2017 do not conflict with fundamental rights provisions as such, Wednesday’s judgement has read them subject to the constitution’s articles dealing with qualifications for membership of the Parliament.

The problem with this approach is that it prevents those disqualified under Articles 62/63/63-A from exercising their fundamental rights as citizens of the republic, enshrined in and protected by the constitution of Pakistan for ‘detailed reasons to be recorded later’.

In the judgement, the three-member bench – comprising Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, Justice Umar Atta Bandial and Justice Ijazul Ahsan – makes a reference to the Article 17 of the constitution, which clearly provides that ‘every citizen, not being in the service of Pakistan, shall have the right to form or be a member of a political party.’

The article further adds, “… subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of the sovereignty or integrity of Pakistan…” Explaining the requirements of such a law, the article says that such a law should empower the federal government to make a declaration to that effect [that certain political party was working against the interests of country’s sovereignty and integrity]. Within 15 days of making such a declaration, the federal government shall refer the matter to the Supreme Court whose decision on such reference shall be final, according to the article.

This clearly means that disqualification under Article 17 would be of a political party as an entity, not of a citizen from being a member of or holding an office of a political party. In order to get the disbandment of a political party on account of acting in a manner prejudicial to the integrity and sovereignty of Pakistan, a two-stage process must follow as per Article 17, i.e., the federal government must make a declaration; and a reference to the Supreme Court.

Thus, the only restriction is on political parties, not on citizens for being part of any political party. It was seen in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan vs Abdul Wali Khan case (PLD 1976 SC 57) whereby National Awami Party (NAP) was disbanded following a similar process. Within days, the leaders of NAP established a new party with another name.

The fundamental rights are protected under the constitution even if someone is declared felon, a convict or disqualified from holding parliament’s membership. The judgement in question bases it’s ruling on the reasoning that a person heading a political party ‘has a central role in the performance of duties by the Members of the Parliament’, s/he therefore, must fulfill the criteria set by the Article 62 and 63.

If this logic is applied on the judiciary that is mandated to interpret the work of the members of the Parliament, every member of the bench will have to fulfill the same criteria as of a member of Parliament. There would be no end to the application of moral turpitude to the holders of all offices in all the organs of the state.

The critical part: The critical, and in a sense most unnecessary, part of the judgement is in its section 9, whereby the honourable court has declared that ‘all steps taken, orders passed, directions given and documents issued [by Nawaz Sharif] as Party Head after his disqualification on 28.07.2017 are also declared to have never been taken, passed, given or issued in the eyes of the law’.

It is, again, inexplicable as to why the esteemed court deemed it fit to give Mr. Sharif the worst of both the worlds. The court is applying on him the restrictions that apply on public office holders i.e., the member of the Parliament – that is to say, for disqualifying him they are treating him as public office holder subject to restrictions that apply on members of Parliament – but when it comes to his actions/decisions, they are denying him the status of a public office holder and nullifying all his decisions that he took as party head after his disqualification on July 28, 2017. It is inconsistent to the extent that restrictions of public office holder have been applied without giving protections to his decisions that were provided vide earlier judgement.

It is interesting because the main decisions taken by him as party head (considered by the court as public office like the member of Parliament) were nominations for all by elections in past six months as well as for the upcoming Senate election. While the main decisions he took as a public office holder, i.e., Prime Minister (which the court had protected under the doctrine of avoidable consequences) included making key appointments including those of the chiefs of armed forces, navy, air force, the National Accountability Bureau, and other important institutions, let alone the key decisions made for development projects, foreign and national security policies as well as the finance bills of past four years.

Implications on Senate Elections: Declaring the decisions of the head of the biggest political party null and void means that his letters of nomination of party members for Senate candidates might also become null and void, creating a vacuum following which the Election Commission of Pakistan might decide to postpone the elections altogether. The most important point to bear in mind is that the Senate’s permanency is enshrined in the Constitution. There cannot be a time when Senate of Pakistan is suspended. For that reason, the ECP is not empowered to postpone the election.

Even if all the nominations made by the PMLN are held null and void, the elections shall still proceed. The precedent of partial elections is already there when in 2015 the elections on FATA seats were postponed but the rest of elections could not be stopped.

The Way Forward: The appropriate way forward for the ECP would be to carry on with the elections without cancelling the nomination papers of PML-N candidates even if their party nominations are held null and void after the judgement in question. In such a case, the PML-N nominees would be considered independent candidates instead of carrying party’s label. The ECP is empowered to decide the matter accordingly and allot different election symbols to all these candidates.

Another option can be, the PMLN appoints an interim president of the party, who can then submit fresh letters of nomination for all its party candidates post-haste.

In these two situations, Senate elections would not be affected. But in case the former option is not followed by the ECP, it would be clear that some wheels are in motion to create a ripple effect for preventing the Senate elections or inhibiting a certain party from seeking majority in the upper house.

Published in Daily Times, February 22^nd 2018.

By Marvi Sirmed

If death is defined as the end of life, Asma Jahangir hasn’t really died. The larger than life, iconic defender of human rights and the most daring challenger of the status quo, Asma Jahangir breathed her last at her home in Lahore on Tuesday. With her, we lost the most towering hero of our age, the tallest of Pakistani, rather South Asian, citizen.

My mother broke this news to me calling on the phone from her home in Lahore. With her voice quivering and her words jumbling, she wanted me to tell her that it was a fake news. Something that I kept hoping for several hours to prove true – may this be a fake news. We were not that lucky though.

My friends Asma Shirazi, Ayesha Tanzeem, and Beenish Saleem called one after the other, all shell shocked and unable to speak. Mehmal Sarfraz wrote on WhatsApp and that’s when it slowly sunk in my system that something terrible had happened.

The first time that I heard of her was from my mother when I was a toddler. Eventually, her name became a part of regular conversations at our dinner table – of Ammi’s talks with her friends and of her heated arguments with Abbu on something that Ammi used to call ‘dark days’. I could barely understand whatever was happening. Those were the years following Ziaul Haq’s martial law. Then in early 1980s, my mother took me with her to a demonstration where a lot of people were raising slogans (I later learned that it was a women’s protest demonstration against Ziaul Haq’s Qanun-e-Shahadat). Raising slogans at the top of her orotund and penetrating voice, that five-feet-something woman caught my attention. That was my first introduction to the gutsy and courageous woman that Asma Jehangir was.

In 1989, when I was running for student union elections after Benazir Bhutto’s first government reinstated unions for a year, I met Asma Ji – the way I always called her – as an aspiring volunteer. After Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto, she was the one who inspired a teenager me so strongly that it became my goal of life to be like both of them in every possible way. Especially, Asma Ji’s perseverance, her clarity of purpose, her strength of character, her unprecedented courage, her commitment to human rights, her itch to question the powers of the time, and her passion to fearlessly fight for the oppressed and for whatever she considered right, come what may.

Then in 1990-91 when I was running a campaign as the president of Pre-Medical Students Association for the rights of girl students seeking admissions to medical colleges, I was stunned to receive her call. She told me to remain steadfast and offered her help. We were disgruntled girls with pre-medical certificates of high achievement in our hands but denied admissions in medical colleges as boys with half our achievements were given admissions.

Mian Nawaz Sharif’s provincial cabinet was hell bent to brand us ‘miscreants supported by Benazir Bhutto’ and brush away every argument that we had for open merit as opposed to maintaining 1:2 girl-to-boy ratio in medical colleges. Asma Ji supported us by highlighting our struggle and guiding us for running a successful campaign. By the end of 1991, we had won our case from Supreme Court. I could not thank Asma Ji enough.

From there onwards, there was no point of return for me personally. Ammi was very excited to see that I was following Asma Ji – something that she herself couldn’t do because of family pressures. Since then, Asma Ji was there whenever I needed guidance and strength. She pushed me to become a member of the HRCP – the institution of its own kind that she founded as part of her struggle for human rights in Pakistan. Her contribution to my life is just a tiny part of what she has done for this country. Every marginalised and oppressed segment of our society, be it religious or ethnic communities, or issues like rights of children, women, labourers, and farmers, or citizens’ right to govern themselves through a democratic system – Asma Ji left her indelible mark in all these struggles, a mark that is impossible to ignore or forget.

Her detractors would call her anti-Pakistan and anti-Islam because of her strong voice against state-sponsored militancy, oppression, extremism, and against usurpers of power. Vile and venomous campaigns would be sponsored against her to demonise and otherise her in bid to discredit her work. Few years ago, a picture of her with Bal Thackeray, India’s firebrand nationalist considered strongly anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan, became viral. Little did her detractors realise that Asma Jahangir was meeting Thackeray as part of a fact-finding mission about anti-Muslim riots.

The self-proclaimed ‘Pakistani nationalists’ would criticise her for what they understood as her silence on some of the issues that they wanted to propagate disproportionately e.g., Indian atrocities on the Kashmiris. She remained focussed on the rights of Pakistani people but was hardly silent on human rights violations elsewhere in the world. Last year, the demonstration in solidarity with Kashmiris organised by her and her strong statements in 2017 as UN’s Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Iran against rights violations of religious minorities and against persecution of Rohingyas in Myanmar are most recent examples.

What has inspired me most strongly was her unflinching commitment to basic principles of social justice, human rights and democracy. She would not hesitate to help even the harshest of her critics when they needed support in standing up for their rights. She was probably the only one from the ‘civil society’ of Pakistan who had such a clear idea of the complex nature of Pakistan’s politics and civil-military equation. The anti-politician rhetoric, mainly propagated by the undemocratic forces, never swayed her commitment to democracy unlike the rest of our comrades.

She braved most despicable, mephitic and malicious attacks on her integrity, mostly with her signature smile. She would always tell me to never give a slightest hoot to these attacks on social media, which had affected me badly a couple of years ago. Many people would ask me why she was so angry always. She was angry because she cared, because she was strong enough to be angry and to channel her anger into the amazing work that she did at AGHS Legal Aid Cell, HRCP, and through scores of other platforms – international, regional and national. She was the first of the only three Pakistani women appointed as UN’s rapporteurs. Just so the readers may know, she was not all that angry all the time. I have seen in her a very bubbly and fun-loving connoisseur of arts and music.

The last time we spoke a few days ago, she was talking about a national dialogue that she wanted to initiate on the concept of ‘national interest’. “What exactly it is, have you ever wondered?” she asked, knowing that her question carried the answer. We discussed the matter on a long phone call and ended the conversation with her promise to have a detailed meeting when she comes to Islamabad next. This is just one of the scores of other unfinished agenda items that she has left to us.

Her last public address was at the Pakhtun sit-in in Islamabad. That was her – a woman with resolve to stand up for the oppressed. Her ethnic, religious or national identities hardly mattered for the people she stood for. She transcended these mundane boundaries. So now, she must be seen as an icon of humanism, and a symbol of social justice and equality.

Pakistan was blessed to have Asma Jahangir, who was truly the conscience of this country. She symbolised the best of human qualities. A hero of this stature cannot just pass away or die with the end of breathing. She is survived by hundreds and thousands of little lamps that she had lit in the form of human rights defenders and activists for democracy and justice. Long live Asma Jahangir, rest in power.

source: https://dailytimes.com.pk

On September 30, 2007, over 500 lawyers clashed with police outside the Pakistan Supreme Court in Islamabad over the election commission accepting General Pervez Musharraf as a presidential poll candidate despite serious questions over his eligibility. Right in the middle of it all, was Asma Jahangir.

As the police burst tear-gas shells and swung their batons, barely 100m from the poll panel’s office, a lawyer fell on her. With blood from his face and head on her clothes, she stood up, screaming in anger and contempt — for Musharraf and what the police had done on his behalf.

That’s the image I will carry always of Asma, feisty fighter at the barricades that Pakistan’s rulers frequently put up against their own people — women, children, people accused of blasphemy, victims of religious intolerance, Baloch, Pashtun, pro-democracy activists, and those who wanted peace with India. She battled for each cause, and as a lawyer, went far beyond turning up at processions and candle-light vigils.

On Sunday, the 66-year-old died of a cardiac arrest in Lahore. “I am devastated @ loss of my mother Asma Jahangir. We shall B announcing date of funeral soon. We R waiting 4 our relatives 2 return 2 Lahore,” her daughter Munizae Jahangir posted on Twitter.

Asma fought the system in the country’s law courts, even though justice was far from assured. But foremost, she stood against the military usurping the role of main arbiter. She was fearless in her criticism and spoke her mind freely. In one television programme, she famously described the military generals as “duffers”, saying Pakistan would be doomed if it continued to be led by them.

Her earliest fight against the military is now part of Pakistan’s legal history — as Jilani vs. Govt of Punjab. The case dates back to 1972, when the young Asma Jilani appealed to the Supreme Court against her father’s detention under Yahya Khan’s martial law. The martial law was held to be illegal.

Khan had stepped down by the time of the judgment in the wake of the crushing defeat at India’s hands in 1971, and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had become president and the first civilian administrator of martial law. The judgment paved the way for the removal of martial law and the framing of Pakistan’s 1972 Constitution, in which Article 6 makes usurping the Constitution a treasonable offence.

Though that did not deter Zia-ul-Haq and Musharraf, it is a constant reference point in Pakistan’s history, and was quoted liberally by Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhary in his own battle for restoration in 2007 — and subsequently, as he held as illegal Musharraf’s “second coup” in October 2007.

Asma fought Zia’s military dictatorship, her lawyer’s office in Lahore becoming a shelter of sorts for those persecuted by the regime. She was also at the forefront of the battle, along with other members of the Women’s Action Forum, against the anti-women Hudood laws that Zia introduced.

In the 1980s, Asma’s sister Hina Jilani and two other friends established the country’s first all-woman lawyers’ firm that provided legal aid to women in distress and took up constitutional matters. In 1999, it was at this firm’s office that the family of a woman who wanted to divorce her violent husband shot her dead in front of her lawyers.

For being an outspoken critic of the military, Asma had as many opponents in Pakistan as fans and supporters. She was once arrested during Zia’s time, survived an assassination attempt, and routinely got death threats. There were fatwas against her for speaking up against Pakistan’s draconian blasphemy laws. She was even accused of being an agent of several foreign spy agencies, including India’s R&AW.

But Asma never let that deter her from taking up causes that were unpopular or considered “unpatriotic” — for instance, of the scores who had gone missing in Pakistan’s Balochistan province, suspected to have been “disappeared” by the military.

In 2006, Iftikhar Chaudhary, who had started to come into his own as chief justice, took suo-motu notice of several instances of men gone missing, mainly from Punjab, during Pakistan’s “war on terror” under Musharraf. He pulled up the ISI at every court hearing, and wanted the chiefs of the spy agency and Military Intelligence to present themselves in court or face contempt charges.

When I asked Asma then if Pakistan was witnessing a new kind of judicial activism, she said the true test of how far the court was willing to go would come if it pursued the case of the missing in Balochistan as vigorously.
When Chaudhary was fighting his battle against Musharraf, she threw herself into the lawyers’ movement. But when the same lawyers applauded the assassination of Punjab Governor Salman Taseer, and showered flower petals on his assassin when he was produced in court, she took them on for their regressive views. Months earlier, in November 2010, she had won a bitterly contested election to become the first woman president of the Supreme Court Bar Association. She would also speak out against Chaudhary, as some of the cases he took up after his restoration threatened to upset the country’s fragile democracy.

Asma was one of the founding members of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, whose detailed reports documented atrocities across the country. Among the most controversial of these reports were on Balochistan and “Azad Jammu & Kashmir”, the part of Kashmir that is under Pakistan’s control.

Asma was well known in India, and a source of inspiration to human rights and women’s rights activists in this country, and for the positions she often took against her country’s leadership. She had many friends in this country. In collaboration with journalist Kuldip Nayar, she led a candle-lighting ceremony at the Wagah border every August 14-15.

But those Indians who often pounced on her remarks to validate their own views on Pakistan were left confused and disappointed when she came out equally hard against India for alleged human rights excesses, especially in Kashmir. Tellingly, for her critics in Pakistan she was not enough of a Pakistani, and not anti-Pakistan enough in India — some dismissed her as “one of those mombatti-wallahs” for wanting India-Pakistan dialogue and peace.

In 2009, months after the 26/11 Mumbai attack, Asma and another well known Pakistani human rights activist, I A Rehman, visited Delhi on the invitation of an NGO. Their hotel rooms were raided by Delhi Police, prompting then prime minister Manmohan Singh to personally apologise to them. The two later laughed it off as treatment they had gotten used to in Pakistan, and of the region’s bureaucratic disease of the left hand not knowing what the right was doing.

In recent months, she had criticised both the Army and judiciary for Nawaz Sharif’s dismissal by the Supreme Court, and held Imran Khan to be a proxy of the military. Asma Jahangir’s untimely death robs South Asia of a bold and fearless public intellectual. Pakistan and India need more people like her.

source: http://indianexpress.com

LAHORE: Renowned  lawyer and  human rights activist Asma Jahangir has passed away, according to a private TV channel. She was  66.

 According to Geo TV, the former president  of Supreme Court Bar Association  was shifted to a private  hospital last night after suffering a cardiac arrest.

Chief Justice of Pakistan Mian Saqib Nisar paid rich tributes to the rights icon. In a statement the CJP expressed deep sorrow and pain on her sad demise.

President of Pakistan, politicians, lawyers and journalists have expressed grief over the  death of Asma Jahangir .

People took to social media to express shock over the sudden demise of the outspoken lawyer.

Balochistan National Party leader mourned her death on Twitter saying  people of his province adored her strength and bravery .

Punjab Chief Minister Shehbaz Sharfi  said “Pakistan has lost a passionate champion of human rights and a staunch supporter of democracy.

Speaking to Geo News, senior journalist Hamid Mir said he still can’t believe that Asma Jahangir is no more.

Bakthawar Bhutto Zardari, daughter of former prime  minister Benazir Bhutto,   said demise of  Asma Jahangir was a huge  loss for Pakistan.

Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz leader Maryam Nawaz called her death as  “everyone’s lose” in her Twitter post.

Born in 1952 and raised in Lahore, Jahangir  studied at the Convent of Jesus and Mary before receiving her B.A from Kinnaird and LLB from the Punjab University in 1978.

In 1987 she co-founded the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and became its Secretary General until 1993 when she was elevated as commission’s chairperson.

Ms. Jahangir was also co-chair of South Asians for Human Rights. She was appointed United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Arbitrary or summary executions and later as the United Nations Rapporteur of Freedom of religion or belief.

She was put under house arrest and later imprisoned in 1983 for participating in the movement for the restoration of political and fundamental rights during the military regime.

She was again put under house arrest in November 2007 after the imposition of emergency rule in Pakistan.

 She has represented several clients who were denied their fundamental rights.

 Asma Jahangir defended cases of minorities, women and children in prisons.

She penned two books: Divine Sanction? The Hadood Ordinance (1988) and Children of a Lesser God: Child Prisoners of Pakistan (1992).

She was recipient of several national awards, including Sitara-I-Imtiaz in 1995. In recognition of her services in the field of human rights, she was awarded the American Bar Association International Human Rights Award in 1992, the Martin Ennals Award and the Ramon Magsaysay Award in 1995.

source: https://www.thenews.com.pk