98 years later…

Shame!

Three to four thousand students reportedly approached the hostel of Abdul Wali Khan University, Mardan, and lynched a 23-year-old student for allegedly “publishing blasphemous content online”

13 April 1919. Over 15,000 people, gathered at Jallianwala Bagh to celebrate the traditional festival of Baisakhi, were shot at on the orders of the then acting military commander for Amritsar, Colonel Reginald Dyer, making it a dark chapter in our history books by the name of Jallianwala Bagh Massacre.

Thousands of Muslims, Hindus and Christians were gunned down as punishment for “disobedience”. Main exits of the fortified premises were blocked, the surrounding streets were too narrow to accommodate the headlong common rush of people on a common impulse of shooting that resulted in a stampede, and the firing ceased around ten minutes after spending approximately 1,650 rounds and exhausting almost all the ammunition supplies. Barbaric, is it not? There is more to it. The plaque placed at the site after 1947 Independence states that 120 bodies were removed from the solitary well in which people had jumped to escape the shooting and many more died during the night as the injured could not be moved from where they had fallen owing to the imposition of curfew. The official figure of the fatal casualties as given by the British inquiry was 379 but the Congress quoted 1,000 deaths.

In the House of Commons debate of 8 July 1920, the Secretary of State for War Winston Churchill condemned the attack by saying, “The crowd was unarmed… It was not attacking anybody or anything. When fire had been opened upon it to disperse it, it tried to run away. Pinned up in a narrow place considerably smaller than Trafalgar Square, with hardly any exits, and packed together so that one bullet would drive through three or four bodies, the people ran madly this way and the other. When the fire was directed upon the centre, they ran to the sides. The fire was then directed to the sides. Many threw themselves on the ground, the fire was then directed down on the ground. This was continued to 8-10 minutes, and it stopped only when the ammunition had reached the point of exhaustion.”

The members of Parliament had enough sound gumption to realise whose fault it was and voted 247 to 37 against Colonel Dyer, who was then forcibly retired. The British Lieutenant-Governor of Punjab at the time of the Amritsar Massacre Michael O’Dwyer, who is believed to be the main planner of Dyer’s action, was assassinated at London’s Caxton Hall in 1940 by Udham Singh, an Indian independence activist who was himself wounded in the massacre. This action of Singh was condemned as “senseless” but also venerated as “courageous” by Jawaharlal Nehru, Mahatma Gandhi and many others.

13 April 2017. Three to four thousand students reportedly approached the hostel of Abdul Wali Khan University, Mardan, and lynched a 23-year-old student for allegedly “publishing blasphemous content online”. This incident has indeed lengthened the list of people who have been accused and killed by enraged mobs comprising Islamist extremists on charges of blasphemy.

Prophet (PBUH), on the occasion of conquest of Makkah, demonstrated a peaceful and bloodless conquering. “Even he who enters the house of Abu Sufyan will be safe; he who lays down arms will be safe, and he who locks his door will be safe,”

The incident happed within the university premises where students gathered in broad daylight after having been incited by rumours circulating among the student body and attacked two Mass Communication students on reportedly “promoting the Ahmadi faith on Facebook”, a form of disobedience in the eyes of the local masses. They first surrounded Abdullah and forced him to recite verses from the Holy Quran (as that would have definitely testified to his belief). Despite repeated denial of the accusation and recitation of the verses, he was beaten ruthlessly until the police reached the site and intervened. Savage, is it not? There is more to it. Several individuals coalesced with the central mob which then marched towards the hostel where the other student, Mashal Khan, was at that time. The police ignominiously preferred to not interfere and stated the presence of “too many people” as the reason. Mashal Khan was walloped and lashed before being shot in the head and chest that gave him the injuries to which he later succumbed. A video footage of the incident showed his lifeless, bruised body being kicked and beaten with wooden planks and eventually being pulled from his clothes by an unidentified man.

The walls of bastion, in this case, comprised people instead of bricks and who circumscribed the boundary beyond which Mashal could not find any narrow street to escape. He was unarmed. He was attacked by everyone and every thing. When people started beating him, he tried to run away. He was confined to the centre of the mob, an extremely small space where he received several punches simultaneously, and was not provided any exit. He reached the centre, ran to the sides and later resorted to taking up supine position in order to save himself from excessively violent blows which stopped only when the crowd had reached the point of exhaustion. The official as well as the reported fatal casualty is one because today, 98 years after the Amritsar Massacre, there were thousands of Colonel Dyers and only one victim.

No public or political figure issued any statement of condemnation within one day of the brutal incident and the only people who objurgated this act of atrocity were those who are labelled as ‘liberals’ by our society. We, the nation and its representatives, did not have as enough fortitude as the members of the House of Commons had back in 1920.

Just as Colonel Dyer labelled, in Winston Churchill’s words, his “monstrous attack” as castigation for disobedience, the lawlessness on this independent land was once again tagged with blasphemy allegations. Yes, Mashal Khan was killed on the basis of mere accusations because Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Inspector General Salahuddin Mehsud stated on Thursday, “Blasphemy is yet to be confirmed”.

The two students were subjected to savagery in order to preserve and revive the essence of Islam and love of the Prophet (PBUH). Allow me to ask a few questions from all those who have kept their mouths shut and have preferred to remain silent on this and many other similar issues.

Prophet (PBUH), on the occasion of conquest of Makkah, demonstrated a peaceful and bloodless conquering. “Even he who enters the house of Abu Sufyan will be safe; he who lays down arms will be safe, and he who locks his door will be safe,” Prophet (PBUH) had said. Yet, nonetheless, he instructed to execute nine such people, including Abu Jahl’s son Ikrimah, who were systematic and open blasphemers and on whom charges of blasphemy had been proven. Prophet (PBUH) ordered the execution in the capacity of a ruler who, in state’s definition, has all rights to ordain as well as dismiss recommendations. We all know about the conquest till this point. But how many of us know that five of these nine, including Ikrimah ibn Abi Jahl, were pardoned by the Prophet (PBUH) himself when they approached him seeking forgiveness? Here, in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, a land full of Ashiqan-e-Rasool, we do not even give a single chance to the accused to prove his innocence. The punishment is inflicted and implemented before the trial.

The last question does not need circumlocutory structure as its answer has been explicitly mentioned in the very Scripture the ‘enraged’ mob proclaims to follow.

“O you who believed, when you go forth [to fight] in the cause of Allah, investigate; and do not say to one who gives you [a greeting of] peace “You are not a believer,” aspiring for the goods of worldly life; for with Allah are many acquisitions. You [yourselves] were like that before; then Allah conferred His favour upon you, so investigate. Indeed Allah is ever, with what you do, Acquainted.” (Surah An-Nissa, verse 94)

Although this verse must be understood in its true context and with reference to the time of its revelation, i.e. when Muslims of Madinah were enjoined by Allah to save the Muslims in Makkah being persecuted by the intentional disbelievers, and in no context whatsoever serves to order Muslims to obliterate all non-Muslims in the name of Jihad, it makes us ask a few questions about our intra-religious dealings. Did you investigate? Did Mashal Khan and Abdullah not testify their faith before you? How could you then assert firmly that they were blasphemers? Were the charges confirmed? Were they formally booked? Who are common people to punish their fellow countrymen without any command given by the ruler? Once again, did you investigate (I have to emphasise on this because the verse itself has twice mentioned the importance of probing into the matter)?

Perhaps the lapse of 1,400 years has made us forget what the actual injunctions were, but that of 98 years could not change the mindset that prevails and dominates on this land to date. Mashal Khan could have been found guilty of the charges he was accused of, but what if he is now acquitted after his death? Who is to be blamed in the latter situation? The answer must be found from the Book which the majority, including the mob, follows. And it has been given in the same chapter (4), verse 93: “But whoever kills a believer intentionally – his recompense is Hell, wherein he will abide eternally, and Allah has become angry with him and has cursed him and has prepared for him a great punishment.”

Jazak Allah!