Time to disband the CII?

What has it achieved?

The CII has so far been unable to condemn the intolerance in society, which is a pressing issue and needs to be discussed at every relevant forum

 

The Council of Islamic Ideology comprises unelected clerics who are concerned about non-issues. While the council does not enjoy any legislative power and merely plays the role of a recommending body, its repeated anti-women pronouncements cannot be ignored anymore.

Just recently the council made headlines, for all the wrong reasons of course. It introduced its own ‘Women Protection Bill’ proposing husbands be allowed to ‘lightly’ beat defying wives. The recommendations were a response to Women Protection Act approved by the Punjab Assembly in February which the council had rejected calling it un-Islamic and contrary to Sharia. The irony is that the CII claimed their bill would actually ‘protect’ the rights of women, and named it Women Protection Bill.

CII’s ‘light beating’ proposal sparked outrage on social media and people reacted to it using memes and hashtags. Although the recommendations were not taken seriously by anyone including the government, the whole episode brought a bad name to the country as foreign media also reported the highly misogynistic content of the CII’s so-called women protection bill.

The Council chairman, Maulana Muhammad Sherani, does not have any academic credentials and is seen as an extremist voice.

This is not the first time the Council of Islamic Ideology has displayed an anti-women approach. Previously the Council said that rape victims should not report the crime unless they have ‘four male witnesses’, and opposed a bill against child marriage, among other things.

CII’s rulings and recommendations can be ignored considering parliament is not bound to follow them, but the fact is that the council members are paid to do what they do – with the taxpayers’ money. Not many know that the seemingly useless body has a separate allocation in the annual budget. In the budget 2016-17, the council’s funds were increased by 10 percent to Rs99.63 millions. All these funds for what purpose — for deciding what women should and should not do?

Does Pakistan really need a Council of Islamic Ideology when the constitution clearly says that parliament can make no law that goes against the Islamic teachings? Why is such an entity even needed when the parliament, courts and all other institutions follow the constitution that is in line with the Islamic laws? Is the constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan not Islamic enough? Why have unelected, extremist Mullahs been given the authority to decide the fate of Pakistan’s women? It’s important to note that the council, that loves passing decrees on women-related issues, only has one female member.

If the performance of the CII was to be assessed, one will find out that the members of the council have never felt the need to discuss the issues like growing intolerance and extremism that Pakistan has been facing for several years. There have been no clear statements or decrees against suicide bombings, attacks on minorities and the current wave of religious intolerance in the country. It seems that the members of the CII are obsessed with all things women.

The purpose of the council, as described in the constitution, is to ensure that the lawmaking enables and allows people to live their lives in accordance with Islamic teachings, but the CII in no way has been able to ensure that.

There have been demands to disband the council as it is hardly of any use. The latest outburst came from Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Senator Farhatullah Babar who said that CII should be abolished. Babar said the task assigned to the CII under the 1973 constitution had been completed and that submission of annual reports was no longer a constitutional requirement.

The PPP senator said the CII in its report had itself admitted that after the submission of its final report in December 1996, it was no longer constitutionally required to continue submitting reports to the parliament. However, he said, the council unilaterally decided to keep submitting annual reports. He requested the senate chairman to refer the matter to the law and justice committee.

Babar said the Federal Shariat Court was tasked to examine and could even strike down any law on the touchstone of whether it was Islamic or not. What was the need for CII and its reports, he asked while speaking in the parliament.

He said the council had made some controversial pronouncements like rejecting a bill for establishing homes for the elderly terming the idea against the norms and traditions of society and the Women Protection Bill and declaring DNA test unacceptable as primary evidence in rape cases.

The Council chairman, Maulana Muhammad Sherani, does not have any academic credentials and is seen as an extremist voice

 

Some time ago, he said, the council first approved the draft of a resolution recommending amendment to the blasphemy law to discourage its misuse but soon the hardliners joined hands and struck down the proposed resolution.

Babar further said that back in 1978, the CII had recommended that words ‘Allah-o-Akbar’ should be inscribed on the national flag to inspire people for Jehad. “Not surprisingly, the flag of Taliban bears these symbols and they have been carrying out what they call Jehad,” he added. “Recommendations such as these demonstrate how dangerously conservative and out of touch with the times the CII is,” he said.

While Seantor Babar’s observation was on point and correct, one cannot help but question what stopped the PPP government from taking the decision to disband the women-hating council during its five-year rule. In fact, it was the PPP government that appointed Maulana Sherani as the council’s head. When Sherani’s name was being considered for the post of CII’s chairman back in 2010, civil society activists expressed their reservations and asked the government to appoint a non-extremist, moderate person as the council’s head. But since the ‘secular’ PPP was in alliance with Jamiat Ulma-e-Islam (JUI) and could not afford to lose its support, the then prime minister gladly accepted JUI’s demand of giving the CII chairmanship to Maulana Sherani.

Pakistan Ulema Council Chairman Hafiz Tahir Ashrafi, who is also a member of the CII, says that the demands of shutting down the body are unjustified. When DNA asked him for his comments on the ‘light beating’ proposal of the council and whether it should be abolished, the cleric said: “Have you not seen the language elected parliamentarians in national and provincial assemblies use while arguing with each other?” He said that the MPs receive development funds for doing absolutely nothing. If the council is to be abolished then shut down these assemblies as well, he said, while talking to DNA.

In response to a question, he said that the council needs to have more female members and that it is up to the prime minister and president to take a decision in this regard.

Human rights activist and former Supreme Court Bar Association president Asma Jahangir said CII should not have the authority to issue dictations to an elected parliament. The members of the council are hardliners and extremists who cannot be considered as religious scholars. Whatever they say is illogical and completely out of touch with today’s world, she said.

Asma said that the council’s rulings do have an influence on the society’s mindset and that its recent anti-women pronouncements can be termed as a reason for increasing violent attacks on women.

The CII has so far been unable to condemn the intolerance in society, which is a pressing issue and needs to be discussed at every relevant forum, she said. In response to a question, Asma said that the council needs to be disbanded as there is no need to have a separate body to oversee legislation in the presence of an elected parliament.