Emotional, senseless, pragmatic, reactionary and lethal
“Kehta hay Mumtaz saaroon ko salam”, the ending words from Mumtaz Qadri’s Last naat which he sang before being hanged to death. After the swift and unexpected hanging, there was a burst of unrest amongst religious and Islamist circles and protests erupted in all major parts of the country. Since mainstream media seemed to consider it an unpopular story and did not cover the massive protests going across the country, social media was a platform which reflected the real popular sentiments. State control on mainstream electronic media can be witnessed by comparing it with social media where several Twitter hashtags and thousands of supportive posts on Facebook reflected a completely different mood. Schools were called off and major protest locations were filled with people mourning the hanging of Qadri and displaying their hatred for the Raheel-Nawaz regime.
Critically reviewing social media and some random discussions with religious and non-religious friends, I tried to understand the reasons of overwhelming support that Mumtaz Qadri harnessed.
Firstly, there are fans that are generally religiously biased. They look at a person with beard, his religious inclination, his singing of naats and praising the prophet SAW, they would be biased towards him even though that person might have done something extremely wrong. Mumtaz Qadri had all those qualities to cater support from this lot and his continuous videos of naats coming from jail from time to time were a major contributing factor in enhancing such image and sympathy. Salmaan Taseer, on the other hand, was a known liberal secular, no beard, love of alcohol, no naats, no Islamic outlook etc and therefore demanded innate hatred from such fans.
Secondly, the vast majority of fans in this issue think “Salmaan Taseer was a blasphemer and rightfully killed by Mumtaz Qadri”. They not only consider it justified to kill the blasphemer in an extra-judicial manner but have vowed to repeat the same to any other person considered blasphemer during the funeral prayers with slogans “Gustakh rasool ki aik hi saza, sar tan say juda, sar tan say juda”. This argument is carried by the emotional ones which are in abundance in Pakistan and they are not ready to discuss on any scholarly grounds.
Thirdly, there are those fans that are ready to endorse scholarly explanation but still are in support of Qadri. They agree that Islam does not generally allow punishing a person on extra-judicial grounds. For instance, if a person has stolen something from me and I arrest him, am I entitled to cut off his hands? Ask any sane scholar of Islam and he will answer in negative. But then, there are some instances where the Prophet SAW did approve extra-judicial killing for a very specific crime i.e., direct blasphemy of the Prophet SAW. But even in such cases, it is extremely emphasised by the scholars that the killer needs to have direct, clear and explicit evidence of the crime. If such direct, clear and explicit evidence is not present, then the killer would be held accountable and the family has the right to demand any one of the three things as Qisas: either the killer be hanged or payment as compensation to the family or pardon by the family. Now, when we look into the case of Salmaan Taseer, such direct, clear and explicit evidence is missing. Terming a law of blasphemy as “kala qanoon” does not mean a person has committed direct and explicit blasphemy on any scholarly grounds. Hence, Salmaan Taseer can be clearly considered not guilty for blasphemy and since it is not allowed to take law into our own hands in Islam, therefore the blame lies on Mumtaaz Qadri.
Then why do they still support him? Their argument is pragmatic. It starts off with claiming that Salmaan Taseer was trying to protect a blasphemer Asia Bibi who was convicted by the court of law. He was going against the court decision and termed it “zulm”. He started “abusing” the law on blasphemy and was trying to create public opinion to repeal the law which protects the honour of the Prophet SAW and punishes a blasphemer. He had full media support, western support and all the elite liberals and major politicians were with him. Since he was Governor Punjab and a highly powerful figure, if people would have filed a case to Stop Salmaan Taseer’s evil mission, the current judicial system would have never served justice. Mumtaz Qadri had no other option but to take law in his own hands and silence all such voices. So his cause was just even though the method he followed was wrong. Since the ‘end justifies the means’, so Mumtaz Qadri is justified in his actions to courageously destroy the onslaught against this law and have their support.
Then there is another Islamist mindset, which might not be termed as direct fans but are inclined towards Mumtaz Qadri. They endorse the notion that “Mumtaz Qadri is a killer and Salmaan taseer was not a blasphemer and justice is served to the family of Salmaan Taseer”. But they term it selective and biased justice by the regime. They say that Asia Bibi is not hanged even though convicted by the court of law. Raymond Davis was not hanged even though he killed two Pakistanis while the families were pressurised to pardon him and were denied justice. Shahrukh Jatoi was not hanged while the family of Shahzeb was pressurised and denied justice. Pervez Musharraf is not hanged for allowing drone strikes which killed hundreds of innocent people in Bajaur madarrasah and the likes and he is being cleared slowly of all the cases because of strong backing by the establishment. It shows the hypocrisy of the state in matters of justice.
To narrow it down, it shows that as per the current National Action Plan, the state would surely give justice when the matter is somehow linked with Islam and a high profile family, but the state would be rather careless and ensure that justice is denied to those who do not have state backing them up or do not follow Islam. This selective and biased justice by the regime and the Islamist mindset causes a group of people to be close to the mourners than the actions of the regime.
Mumtaz Qadri is hanged and his fans have given the state and the secular liberals a serious message with a funeral that was attended by thousands and many more who did not attend but mourn with them. The message is that they are “emotional, senseless, pragmatic, reactionary and lethal” when it comes to the matter of honour of the Prophet SAW. Therefore, the state representatives need to find other ways of addressing the issue of misapplication of the law of blasphemy, rather than getting killed on such a sensitive issue.
[…] Source link to Read more […]
please mention one incident where prophet Muhammad PBUH has held someone punishable to death for his blasphemy. by saha e satah. six authentic books of hadith
Plz read the history u would get number of those. Read the history of fateh makah when one gustak asked mercy on behalf kabatullah. Prophet peace be up on him order his death sentence
This analysis about "us" 80% of Pakistani masses is not based on realities. Sorry to say, our columnist, newspapers and other "media sources" are not so 'free' as they claim and/or they wish to be. They are biased, having lack of knowledge & information, greedy, coward and Ruthless. So, justify the killing of three people yesterday in Karachi by Rangers, two more a few days ago (protesters of PIA) is right, because they are law enforcement personnel. Similarly Mumtaz Qadri was one of the Soldiers of the Police Department, he saw an illegal action by a Governor of the province and he shot him. What was wrong in it that a soldier killed a man who was taking the law in his hands?
with due respect dont interpret the law in your own words , there is complet judicial system works behind . ofcourse you can compare the stories with eachother but cant introduce or change the laws because of it . lets start analise your argument , your point is that at karachi security persons killed PPA protesters and no one have been punished so why Mr Mumtaz have been executed . firstly no one have evidence that Rangers did that secondly there is no evidence about any security person indiviually to killed workers thirdly a security person isnt allow to shoot anyone without duty incharge officer .So now look at the other hand Mr Mumtaz killed a governer and there are lot of witness to proof , secondly he accept the responsibility and thirdly it was his personal desicion to kill Governer . i would say just open the barriers of mind and think about stories deeply before comment .
[…] Also read: Understanding Mumtaz Qadri’s fans […]
There is just one very serious and strong question from me to the author, its written in the 5th line of 5th para as "But then, there are some instances where the Prophet SAW did approve extra-judicial killing for a very specific crime i.e., direct blasphemy of the Prophet SAW.". I with many others need a strong citation and reference on this quotation, on this granting of permission by Holy Prophet on specific extra judicial killing over direct Blasphemy of Holy Prophet. Yes its mentioned in Hadith that a person have the right to kill if somebody attacks on him by intruding into his/her house but personally i have never read a permission of extra judicial killing on direct blasphemy. Like many others i on many occasions don't have complete knowledge so whenever an author mentions such islamic law it must be make sure that proper credible citation should also be provided with it.
Well written article. Only problem is that it describes problems and not solution.
Ibn Abbas (ra) narrated that a blind man had a freed-slave who used to insult the Prophet (saw) and disparage him. He told her not to do that but she did not stop, and he rebuked her but she did not take heed. One night, when she started to slander the Prophet (saw) and insult him, he took a dagger, put it on her belly, pressed it and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. The following morning this incident was mentioned to the Messenger of Allah (saw). He assembled the people and said: “I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up”. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the blind man stood up. He sat before the Prophet (saw) and said: “O Messenger of Allah, I am the one who did it; she used to insult and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did take heed. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was kind to me. Last night she began to insult and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.” Thereupon the Prophet (saw) said: “Bear witness, her blood is in vain, there is no blood money due for her.” Narrated by Abu Dawud, al-Nasa’I, and used as evidence by Ahmad.
Comments are closed.