Home Monthly Newsreports Year 2004 Summary

 CONTENTS 

1. Foreword 2. Three stories a) Imprisonment for life to an Ahmadi on false charge of Blasphemy b) Joint electorate for all Pakistanis - except Ahmadis c) Case of the Rabwah Police Post mosque 3. Murder, Attempt to murder and Threats of murder - for faith only 4. Tyranny and Prosecution go on 5. Prisoners of Conscience 6. Hostile Administration 7. Mad Mullahs 8. Sermons at Rabwah 9. Miscellaneous 10. Rabwah - a town unlike any other in the whole world 11. Conclusion  Annexes  I. Particulars of cases registered on religious grounds against Ahmadis during 2004 II. The FIR of the Blasphemy case and its translation III. In the name of law - an essay by Mr. Ardeshir Cowasjee IV. Copy of a Machine Readable Passport stamped with holder’s religion V. A letter by a citizen of Rabwah VI. Persecution of Ahmadis in Pakistan. Some Statistics and Information for 2004

Thirty years ago, in 1974 Mr. Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto, the prime minister took the first major step to marginalize the Ahmadiyya Community in Pakistan. He superintended the passage of Second Amendment to the 1973 Constitution, whereby Ahmadis were declared Not-Muslims for the purpose of law and constitution. He was later deposed and then hanged by General Zia ul Haq. Ten years after the passage of the Second Amendment, General Zia, the President and Chief Martial Law Administrator promulgated Ordinance XX in 1984 whereby Ahmadis’ freedom of faith was severely curtailed and it became a criminal offence for them to profess, practice and propagate their religion. Three years prison term was prescribed by the General for violation of the Ordinance. The Ordinance also conveyed to all concerned that the state had adopted the persecution of Ahmadis as policy, and all branches of the government and the clerics were encouraged to follow up and implement the policy. This was done. Although the General perished in a plane crash four years after the promulgation of the Ordinance, his policy regarding Ahmadis remained in place, and successive governments took no steps whatsoever to reverse the evil of the Ordinance which was incorporated in the Constitution in 1985 as a part of the Eighth Amendment.

General Pervez Musharraf took over the country on October 12, 1999. He claimed to be a liberal, and supported Human Rights in public utterances. However, beyond verbal support to an enlightened image of Pakistan under the new regime, the General took no initiative to undo the wrongs imposed upon Ahmadis. In September 2003 the General floated the idea of ‘Enlightened Moderation’. However, his government has been very selective in the application of this presentable idea. Ahmadis have been deliberately and visibly kept outside the ambit of this policy. Recently, the UN General Assembly adopted on December 15, 2004 a Pakistan-sponsored resolution entitled ‘Promotion of Religious and Cultural Understanding, Harmony and Cooperation’. The resolution reaffirms the solemn commitment of all states to fulfill their obligations to promote universal respect for, and observance and protection of, all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all in accordance with the United Nations charter. It sounds good, but one can only hope that Pakistan takes its own words seriously and avoids recurrence of the happenings of the year 2004 mentioned in this Report.

It is pathetic to note that only two weeks before the passage of this Resolution in the UN General Assembly, an Ahmadi, Mr. Muhammad Iqbal, was sentenced to life imprisonment by a Faisalabad court on fabricated charge of blasphemy. The court believed the two false witnesses produced by a mullah against the Ahmadi accused who allegedly told them that their prophet was false. Again, only three months before this Resolution, the police in Sindh charged 15 Ahmadis under the Ahmadi-specific law as they were accused of writing Bismillah (In the name of God) and Assalamo Alaikum (Islamic greetings) etc. on wedding invitation cards. The police proceeded to arrest the bridegroom and his father. Besides that, earlier in February this year, the Election Commission was told by the government to maintain and reimpose the old policy of separate voters’ lists based on religion and inclusion of a religious declaration regarding End of Prophethood in voter’s application form. Also, it is after the passage of this Resolution at the UN that the government decided to stamp the machine readable passports with holder’s religion. Whither ‘enlightened moderation’ and ‘protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms’! However, it is never too late to make amends and start implementing good ideas.

The Annual Report for 2004 is not encouraging. It is as dismal as that of the preceding year — worse in some ways. But all concerned must know and face facts; only then steps can be taken to avoid all that is wrong, flagrant and evil by universal standards.

News format adopted in this report cannot do justice to the wholesome description of an event of persecution. It mentions only a few facts and figures, briefly; but persecution is mostly in human mind that feels acutely the hurt of discrimination, injustice, maltreatment, provocation, malice, deprivation, injury etc. Such a description is impossible in an annual report of small size, so only three cases are picked up here for description in some detail; still one has to admit one’s inadequacy in the art of description.

a. Imprisonment for life to Ahmadi on false charge of blasphemy

District Faisalabad; Sajjad Hussain Sindher, Additional Session Judge, Faisalabad sentenced Mr. Muhammad Iqbal, Ahmadi of Chak No. 227/GB Faisalabad, Punjab to imprisonment for life and Rs. 10,000 fine under the dreaded Blasphemy clause PPC 295C on November 29, 2004. The accused is required to serve additional six months in prison if he does not pay the fine. The accused is now serving the sentence in the Central Jail at Faisalabad.

This is an important case in the sense that in some ways it is typical, and its essential details expose the wrong of the Blasphemy laws in Pakistan and also it shows how the corrupt in the society use these laws to inflict great misery and harm on innocent people against whom they have personal vendetta to settle or other reasons that have no relevance to the alleged blasphemy.

Chak No. 227/GB is a typical village in the Central Punjab. Most of its residents are half-educated peasants, financially at the border-line. They are contended to be Muslims without having any in-depth knowledge of their faith, and while some of them perform the routine rituals, there are few who are aware of the higher values of Islam, and perhaps none who would risk his personal interest to uphold the great ideals and teachings of his professed faith.

Muhammad Iqbal son of a farmer Faquir Muhammad, approximately 20 years old in 1990, heard about Ahmadiyya understanding of Islam, got interested and made some serious inquiries. He was impressed. Exercising his birth-right of ‘freedom of faith’ he joined the Ahmadiyya Community. Soon he learnt that fundamental rights are highly controversial in the society here, and he faced great opposition from his own family and also the local mullah. He bore the brunt of opposition courageously for a while, but then, lone and without any meaningful support, he left the village and went to far-off Bahawalpur in the south of Punjab, and took up a petty job to support himself. After a while, he got married to his cousin, Tahira in March 2001 and stayed on in Bahawalpur. A few years later, the couple decided to go back to Iqbal’s village where they could share the hereditary house and the land, and Iqbal could perhaps look for a better job at the industrial city of Faisalabad. At Chak 227/GB they found that the prejudice and ill-feeling against his Ahmadiyyat had not dwindled, in fact increased due to the malign legacy of General Zia and the promotion of religious extremism. The local mullah, a fake man of piety, had become more intolerant and rabid. His family and the village folk had become more rigid in their religious outlook and more vocal in confessional passions.

Hafiz Zulfiquar Ali, the imam of the nearby mosque claims to be a Sunni. He is illiterate; he can hardly read, and write nothing. Still, as representative of the faith, he exercises undeserved influence over his flock. The mullah approached Iqbal’s father and brothers and told them that it was licit for them neither to share a meal with Iqbal nor to have social dealings with him of any kind, and they should expel him from home. This created a problem in the family. There were arguments and counter arguments. Adjustments within the family were made, and then broken. The argument that Iqbal’s creed, the Kalima, was no different than that of the rest, was rejected by the mullah, who insisted on more recent edicts of present-day ulema and demanded that Iqbal recant and revert to the way of the majority. Iqbal refused to do that. So there was great tension and stress in the family. His father turned against him, as also other relatives. They all demanded of him to divorce his wife and marry his aunt’s daughter. Life turned sour in the Chak.

On the afternoon of March 23, 2004 Mr. Iqbal proceeded out of home for some errand and came across the mullah at the village square. The mullah asked Iqbal to accompany him to his mosque for a word. In the mosque there was nobody else at the time. There, Zulfiquar Ali told him to discard ‘Mirzaiyat’ as it was ‘Kufr’ (infidelity), and revert to the Islam of the majority. Iqbal refused and there was an argument. The mullah was greatly annoyed at Iqbal’s refusal, felt personally insulted, and eventually told Iqbal to get out, and threatened him with appropriate action and harm (tumhara koi bandobast karta hun). Iqbal left the place. It seems that the mullah, soon afterwards met his acolytes and they all jointly conspired and agreed on a plan of vicious action. Someone, later on claimed to have advised the mullah, “Accuse him (of blasphemy) so that it would stick with him for ever” (Woh ilzam lagao, jis se uski jan hi na choote). So the mullah switched on the mosque sound amplifier and gave the rallying call to the neighborhood that the great crime of blasphemy against the Holy Prophet had been committed and all the faithful should immediately assemble at the mosque. He made the call repeatedly.

It did not take long for the crowd to assemble. The villagers were armed with sticks and sharp-edged weapons. They were fed with the false allegation to agitate them. Mushtaq, a non-Ahmadi, but a sympathetic brother of Iqbal realized the gravity of the developments and went to the mosque. There he offered unconditional apology for all that had happened, for what was said and also not-said. This calmed down most of the crowd, but some miscreants who had decided upon punishing Iqbal for his Ahmadiyyat put forward two conditions for Iqbal, 1) he should recite the Kalima to proclaim Islam, and 2) quit Jamaat Ahmadiyya. They were told that Iqbal would recite the Kalima but not forego Ahmadiyyat. The mullah and his supporters refused to accept that, and decided to go ahead with their plan.

It was sunset time that the fanatics proceeded to the police station. They were in sufficient numbers to impress the SHO who thought it convenient and exigent to proceed as the crazies wanted him. Rather than telling them frankly that justice would be done after due inquiry by him, he provided the mullah with office stationery to job down his complaint. The mullah stated in his complaint (and this was recorded in the FIR) that “(Iqbal) suddenly came over to me in the mosque courtyard, and asked me forthwith, ‘what is your faith’; I told him that I believe in Oneness of Allah and in Holy Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and also in saints (pirs aur faqirs). He also asked about Hadrat Isa (AS) and I told him ‘go to a religious scholar, if you have a problem of understanding, he will solve it for you’. At this the named Iqbal said, ‘your Prophet is false’. These words were heard, apart from me, by two others present in the mosque, Nazar Hussain and Ali Ahmad. We tried to grab him, but he succeeded in fleeing.” The illiterate mullah could not sign his own statement, so put his thumb impression on it. Having received this senseless and incoherent tale, the SHO proceeded to appoint one of his subordinates, an assistant sub-inspector (ASI), a petty official to investigate this case of great import. He did this despite the fact that some years ago the government had announced that in view of the gravity of the offence of blasphemy and its consequent penalty, only a District Magistrate would hold the inquiry into the incident. A couple hours later the police arrived in the village. Mr. Iqbal, on getting the news that an FIR had been registered under PPC 295C, for which the penalty is death, and the villagers having become a menacing bunch, went into hiding. The police willingly accepted the statement of the two false witnesses of the mullah, although not even one of them was present in the mosque at the time of the row. The case was registered in FIR 73/04 at Police Station Tarkhani, district Faisalabad on March 23, 2004, the Republic Day of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Copy of the FIR and its translation is available at Annex II.

A few days later, Mr. Iqbal approached an attorney in Faisalabad and arranged a ‘bail before arrest’. The judge granted it provisionally. At the time of confirmation of the bail, the accused submitted an affidavit that 1) the allegations contained in the FIR are absolutely incorrect, 2) he is a follower of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). The state prosecutor opposed the bail application. The judge wrote in his decision that as the accused was an Ahmadi, he found Iqbal’s affidavit (concerning his faith in the Holy Prophet) useless. This intellectual lightweight wrote piously and rather childishly, “No Muslim can involve another Muslim in the case of blasphemy falsely as the word written in the application cannot be written by a real Muslim regarding Holy Prophet with malafide”. Thus he refused to confirm the bail. Mr. Muhammad Iqbal was arrested and locked behind bars for an offense he would not even think of committing. At this stage and also in the following weeks Iqbal was offered by his opponents that if he withdrew from Ahmadiyyat, they would withdraw the case.

The Ahmadiyya Community assessed rightly that Mr. Iqbal was badly trapped in this fabricated case of blasphemy, so they hired a lawyer of high standing to defend him in the court. The trial went on for months while the accused remained in prison. His family deserted him; none visited him in the prison except one of his brothers. His pregnant wife left the village to be with her aunt for the delivery. Also, she was afraid that she might be harassed by the police, in case Iqbal decided to go into hiding. She delivered a son in the early days of their ordeal, and named him Aamir Iqbal. During the last nine months of his incarceration, Tahira has been able to see her husband in prison only once. The procedure to visit a prisoner is so cumbersome for a woman that it is more of a deterrent, and hardly worth the effort. Iqbal could get only a glimpse of his baby son across the wire-meshed window of the prison verandah. For no fault of the couple, she has become virtually a single-parent to the suckling who has been wrongfully deprived by the society of paternal love, care and support. Tahira, only 22 years old, looks much older on account of her agony, worry and stress of the past months. She talks fondly of her husband whom she describes as a good and truthful man and a caring husband. When asked about her difficulties subsequent to the incident of 23rd March, she started shedding tears and could control herself with difficulty. She was afraid that her statement might go to press and she may have to face more problems from her relations and the villagers. She has lost her bread-winner; the village has no salaried job for a woman, so she is now dependant on community support.

The trial lasted eight months. The trial judge, Mr. Sindher occasionally dropped hints that caused worry to the defense team. He mentioned more than once that the only penalty for the offense of blasphemy is death. He said so despite the reminder from the defense that life imprisonment was also available as alternative. There was an interesting development in the trial that Nazar Hussain, one of the only two witnesses claimed by the complainant to be present at the occasion, was not brought to the court to testify. It is learnt that on learning that he will have to make his statement after affirmation on the Holy Quran he decided not to support the fiction of blasphemy. He told the people, “I was not present there; and I am accountable to Allah for what I say. I am afraid to make a false statement.” So the prosecuting team decided to drop him. The other ‘eye-witness’ took the plea in the village that ‘although I was not present at the scene, whatever the Hafiz Sahib (Zulfiquar Ali) says must be right; after all he is our Maulvi’. So Ali Ahmad fired his shots from the shoulder of the mullah, and told the lie to the court. As far the mullah, he also thinks that he is on a safe wicket with his God because there are numerous edicts available to him that permit falsehood in support of a religious cause. We produce here just two of such concocted latter-day edicts that serve to add to the darkness of obscurants’ mind: 1) In answer to a question, Alhajj Al Hafiz Rashid Ahmad Gangohi replied, “Falsehood is permitted in support of the truth (Haq); however avoid it as far as possible; but if unavoidable, one may tell a plain lie (kizbe sareeh bole); or else abstain. Sincerely, Rashid Ahmad Ofeya Anhu”. (Ref: Fatawa Rashidia Kamel Mubawwah p.460; published by Muhammad Saeed and Sons. Quran Mahal, Muqabal Maulvi Musafar Khana, Karachi). Subsequently, the renowned Abul Ala Maudoodi, founder of Jamaat Islami supported the above edict in his own words thus: “Truthfulness and integrity are among the most important principles of Islam, and a lie is most despicable in its code; however, there are compulsions of practical life for which falsehood is not only permissible, even considered mandatory (wujub) under certain circumstances”. (Ref: Syed Abul Ala Maudoodi, p. 41 of Tarjuman ul Quran, May 1958). In plain language, these ‘divines’ have opened a vast green channel for one and all of their followers who want to support a religious cause with utter falsehood. Well, with such authorities’ support on his back, who can blame minions like Hafiz Zulfiquar Ali of Chak 227/GB? And where is the hope for innocent people like Muhammad Iqbal, who live under the Damocles sword of PPC 295C over their heads? No wonder Bishop John Joseph committed suicide in 1998 in front of the court of a Sessions Judge in Sahiwal to protest the situation in Pakistan regarding Blasphemy.

Mr. Sindher, the Additional Session Judge, Faisalabad, the trial judge gave himself the liberty to disregard all these factors. He went outside the parameters of judicial propriety when one day he decided to hear advocate Rab Nawaz who is a rabid anti-Ahmadiyya lawyer. It happened on September 28, 2004. When the defense team entered the court room that day, it was surprised to see Rab Nawaz giving some arguments to Judge Sindher in this very case. They had no prior knowledge of his involvement in this case. He was talking about the incident of Sir Zafrulla Khan (Ahmadi) not joining with the Janaza (funeral) prayer of the Quaid-e-Azam in 1948. The defense submitted to the court their objection to the presence in the court of this person who was neither a party to the case, nor a witness, nor an authorized attorney with ‘Wakalat Nama’ the Power of Attorney. In fact, this was the first time Rab Nawaz had come to the court, and the judge should have demanded from him the ‘power of attorney’. On hearing the objection, Rab Nawaz immediately borrowed a blank sheet from the judge and, there and then, hurriedly wrote in manuscript a memo to the judge to accept his presence in the court on behalf of the plaintiff who was away in Mianwali and had asked Rab Nawaz on phone to represent him. Rab Nawaz volunteered to bring up the Power of Attorney at the next hearing. He has not presented it ever since.

As the incident was in utter violation of court procedure and rules and the defense team became greatly suspicious of the impartiality of the judge, it requested the judge to stay the proceedings, as the defense was going to request the higher court to transfer the case to some other court under the circumstances. Rab Nawaz, at this stage, suggested to the judge that the defense had been guilty of ‘contempt of court’. Anyway the judge had to stop the proceedings.

Thereafter, the defense approached the High Court to transfer the case to some other judge. The High Court did not accept the request. So Judge Sindher held a few more hearings and announced his verdict. A description of the announcement of his decision and providing a copy of his judgment to the accused/his lawyer is also fit for mention in dispatches and record.

The judge announced his decision in the court at about 1445hr on November 29, 2004, in the absence of the accused. The accused was not called to the court on the excuse that his presence would have exposed him to risk, as a number of supporters of the prosecution were expected to be present at courts premises at the occasion. That makes some sense but it does not reflect well on the performance of authorities who are responsible to maintain law and order in the courts’ area. As per procedure and law, the judge is required to give a copy of the judgment to the accused. He did not do so, that day, nor the next day. In the meantime, Mr Iqbal was transferred to the Central Jail. The defense team thereafter presented itself in Mr Sindher’s court on December 4 and requested for a copy. The judge said that the ‘judgment’ was being edited; it would definitely be given on December 6. However the defense was not provided the document even on that day. So the team presented itself again before the judge on December 7; the judge told the advocates that, ‘the judgment still needs my signature, tomorrow you will get its copy’. The team went again to the judge on December 8 who told them that they were the first ones to ask for such a copy; however ‘apply for it and get it’. The team told him that they had already applied for it. The judge told them to bring an authorization. This time Mr Sindher told them that he would send the ‘judgment’ to the Superintendent of the prison for handing it over to the prisoner. To their protest the judge replied that only in serious cases, like death punishment, the judgment is supposed to be given to the accused at the time of announcement. (Mr Sindher was wrong, as per law.) Another six days passed and no copy of judgment was made available. Eventually it was on December 18 that a copy was provided by the Superintendent of the prison. This was 20 days after it was required to be given as per CCP 371. In fact, Judge Sajjad Hussain Sindher has sentenced an innocent man to imprisonment for life, by giving undue weightage to witnesses who merit nothing but contempt and rejection, and by neglecting credible and powerful arguments of the defense; this is the reason of his erratic behavior and commission of many blunders and muddles which will be brought forth at an appropriate occasion and place.

Mr Iqbal when told of the verdict took it with calm and dignity; he referred to the case of Hadrat Yusuf (Prophet Joseph) who had to suffer a prison sentence for years although he was innocent. The BBC mentioned his case and its outcome in some detail on its website bbc.com on 29 November 2004. Back in the village it is rather calm now, and villagers seem to have decided not to talk about the incident. Perhaps they feel a collective guilt that they have wronged an innocent man. The hostile relatives appear to feel sorry for their wicked and corrupt part in the incident. This, of course, is of little consolation to Muhammad Iqbal.

Mr. Iqbal’s case proves conclusively once again that:

The Blasphemy laws PPC 295C and 295B are like that subsystem of nature which is red in tooth and claw. These are convenient tools in the hands of religious bullies and bigots. These promote injustice; and injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. These are skeletons rattling in our national cupboards; they must be dumped without delay. The government is wrong in turning a Nelson’s eye to these cases. These laws have nothing to do with true Islam (they are not mentioned, not even hinted in the Quran); they only betray Pakistan’s unenviable tilt to medieval and extremist Islam. Petty amendments, like senior police officers doing the inquiry, are not the answer to this problem. The laws must be repealed entirely and summarily. They have brought no good to Pakistani society in the last eighteen years of their existence since the unlovely regime of General Zia. In fact they have done great harm already, and will continue to do so with every passing day that they remain in force.

b. Joint Electorate for all Pakistanis - except for Ahmadis

An important event happened early this year in the political field in Pakistan where the state reaffirmed its profound discrimination against its Ahmadi citizens. In fact the authorities reassured the mullah that Ahmadis will continue to be treated as political orphans and will remain disenfranchised.

At the turn of the year 2003/2004, the Election Commission, in pursuit of the government’s declared policy of Joint Electorate, decided to update its electoral lists. The Commission rightly excluded from Form IV (the application form for registration of new voters) the attestation concerning the finality of prophethood, as being no longer relevant in the context of joint electorate. The Oxford English Dictionary defines Electorate as ‘the whole body of electors’ and the meaning of ‘Joint’ are given as ‘put together, joined, combined, united’. Obviously the system of Joint Electorate has no room for discrimination on the basis of citizens’ faith in the dogma of end of prophethood. However, the darkness of mullah’s mind refuses to admit even a single ray of modern political thought. He decided to contest the new measure.

The mullah was angered at the possibility of Ahmadis availing some political rights in the new scheme. He went public and declared: “If Qadianis get enrolled on the same list as Muslims, it will result in dreadful consequences. In that situation the Khatme Nabuwwat Movement will give the call for a countrywide protest agitation.” (The daily Pakistan, Lahore; January 8, 2004). The yellow vernacular press always supports the mullah on such occasions. The daily Nawa-i-Waqt wrote an editorial on January 29 on this non-issue and offered the sly comment, “It is already agreed here that all minorities in the country will be given all their rights and they will suffer no injustice, however no mover or thought will be permitted that will efface the difference between the majority and the minority and the country is turned into a secular state from an Islamic welfare state”. Hafiz Hussain Ahmad, the Deputy Parliamentary Leader of the MMA reportedly met the Chief Election Commissioner and demanded that the certificate concerning the ‘end of prophethood’ be included again in Form IV and, despite the Joint Electorate, separate electoral lists be prepared for Muslims and Non-Muslims. The Commission informed him that his concern will be conveyed to the government who will eventually give its decision on the issue. (The daily Nawa-i-Waqt, Rawalpindi; January 28, 2004).

In the meantime, one Advocate Babar Awan rushed to the Lahore High Court with the novel and idiotic plea that the Election Commission be declared guilty of Blasphemy for doing away with the End of Prophethood certificate from the voter’s application form (The daily Nawa-i-Waqt; February 7, 2004). The plea shows the extent to which obscurants in Pakistan can stretch the meaning of blasphemy.

In the light of its past experience, the Ahmadiyya Community entertained no false hopes. In its monthly report for January 2004 on Human Rights the following comment was made:

One did not have to wait long for the above prophecy to come true. The newspapers of 31 January and 1 February splashed the news that the Election Commission had restored the Half Nama (affidavit) concerning the End of Prophethood in the electoral forms. It was also restated that all Muslim candidates for the posts of Nazim and Naib (Assistant) Nazim will have to declare on oath in writing that they have complete and unqualified faith in the end of prophethood of the Last Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). The candidates will also have to deny the veracity of any and all claimants to prophethood after him (The daily Nawa-i-Waqt; January 31, 2004). This is how they effectively deny Ahmadis go on the voters’ lists and compete for elective positions. The daily Din of February 1, 2004 reported that all the demands of the Khatme Nabuwwat Movement had been accepted and the Chief Election Commissioner had directed that in the face of any objection to a Muslim voter, the appellate officer will require the voter to appear before him and declare his faith in the end of prophethood. In case he fails to appear or refuses to sign the declaration, he will be deleted from the Muslim Voter List. Thus the curtain dropped on this drama. The authorities at Islamabad made sure that Election Commission’s desire to move closer to genuine Joint Electorate ended as a zero-sum game. The state had once again devoured its own children. No body clapped, except the mullah and the yellow press. The daily Jang, that never tires to pontificate, called this backtracking a ‘timely and praiseworthy step’. In its editorial of February 2, 2004 it concluded that: ‘Subsequent to this decision, it is essential that the directive issued by the Chief Election Commissioner be strictly implemented so that the impression to honor the constitutional provision be maintained.’ The government, the vernacular press and the mullah clearly and deliberately chose to neglect and set aside the verdict of one of their own kind, Mufti Ghulam Sarwar Qadri, the Punjab religious affairs minister who had stated two years earlier on this issue: ‘(the) deletion of the affidavit from the voter’s registration form did not amount to a violation of any basic Islamic provision’. The daily DAWN of May 30, 2002 had reported: “Commenting on the Khatam-i-Nabuwwat Conferences resolution to launch a movement unless the affidavit was restored, the minister said it was not a constitutional obligation. He said it had been introduced during General Zia ul Haq’s rule. He said no harm had been done to Islam before its introduction.”

It will not be out of place to give here the Affidavit that the voters, the candidates and the office-bearers are required to give: “ I……………… s/o, w/o…………… hereby solemnly declare that I believe in the absolute and unqualified finality of prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him) as the last of prophets, and I do not recognize any person who claims to be a prophet in any sense of the word or of any description whatsoever after Muhammad (peace be upon him) or recognize such a claimant as prophet or religious reformer, nor do I belong to the Qadiani Group or Lahori Group or call myself an Ahmadi.”; (translation)

One may also ask as to what is the link between this belief and the task of managing a town council tasked to provide roads, water, gas, sewerage, sanitation etc to its residents. Amazing is the absurdity to which the state has to submit to maintain its unholy rapport with the mullah.

The mullah is a restless vertebrate. Contentment is not in his nature. The hell of his desires demands ever more. Within 10 days of his latest success in routing the powerful champions of enlightened moderation, the mullah came up with fresh demands. The Ulema, according to press reports, held a big meeting in Jame Mosque Siddique Akbar, Alah Abad, Rawalpindi and demanded that all application forms for identity cards, passports, registration of marriage, NADRA etc must include the ‘end of prophethood’ declaration; also the dogma of ‘end of prophethood’ must be included as a compulsory subject in the education syllabus of schools. The ulema decided to launch a countrywide movement to attain these objects. In the meantime the meeting urged all the ulema and Khateebs to educate their flock on this sensitive issue in their Friday sermons. (The daily Ausaf and Nawa-i-Waqt; February 10, 2004).

A well-worded letter written by Mr Jamil Butt of Karachi summed up these developments in the daily DAWN of March 5, 2004 as:

The CEC, referring to a government decision, has also specifically confirmed that the status of Ahmadis shall remain unchanged. This affirms that for Ahmadis the electorate system continues to be separate, not joint, and as before they will remain out of the election process being unable to register themselves as voters against their belief.

This singling out of one community among the citizens of Pakistan is continuation of discrimination and ill-treatment in line with the state policy initiated in 1974 and strengthened in 1984 by civil and military rulers at the behest of a handful of extremist clergy.

Ahmadis have been kept away from all elections held in the country since 1985 and it seems they will remain so till the return of sanity. The fact is that the joint electorate system has not been fully enforced in the country.

c. Case of the Rabwah Police Post mosque

It happened on September 6. The daily Jang of September 7, 2004 reported that at the orders of Mr. Pervaiz Elahi the Chief Minister, the police post at Rabwah was shifted back to the old site; this old site is owned by Ahmadis and shifting was done forcibly against the wishes of Ahmadis. This was done in response to the demands of mullahs who, for their own ugly motives, wanted the post at the location owned by Ahmadis who needed the same to meet their community compulsions. The mullah, although not at all directly concerned with the issue was agitating for the preceding one month, and succeeded when least expected. The case of the police post and its little mosque is typical and shows the working of the mullah and the state at these important times in the turbulent history of Pakistan. One gazes mute before this ocean of darkest ignorance that has already engulfed the society. A narrative of this event must be placed on record in archives.

Briefly, the Police Post in Rabwah was located at a site loaned by the Ahmadiyya Community to the police at latter’s request, more than quarter of a century ago. The post was shifted in July 2004 to another location by mutual consent, and the premises were handed back to Ahmadis. Some years ago, the police constructed, first a platform then a small one-room mosque in the courtyard, without consent of the owners. On resuming the possession of the site Ahmadis left the mosque intact. Mischief-monger mullahs however fabricated the story of destruction of the mosque, and took up the issue to create a serious law and order situation in the country. Subsequently when everyone saw that the mosque was intact, the mullah started saying that the WCs and water taps had been rendered shaheed (martyrs). They concocted the argument that as a mosque is a house of Allah, it remains a mosque for ever and its status cannot be tampered with or changed under any circumstance — a debatable opinion. They, anyhow, demanded that the mosque be handed over to Muslims for perpetual possession, access and worship, otherwise they threatened to unleash a violent countrywide movement against Ahmadis.

Everyone who had some sense knew that the mullah was standing on legs of clay. There are numerous High Court decisions on record that mosques built without express permission of the owner of the land have no sanctity. The Shariah does not allow usurpation of land for any purpose, let alone for building a mosque. Eventually, perhaps the mullah also realized the weakness of his position, so he changed tack and started demanding that the police post be brought back to the old site. This demand was equally absurd as the police are not supposed to take orders from the mullah as to where they should locate their posts. Anyway, since long the mullah has rarely cared how irrational he appears to the rest of the world; he pushes his own agenda, regardless.

The mullah has learnt that threats of violence work in Pakistan, especially where the authorities’ interest is not directly involved. So the mullah gave the battle-cry and called Muslims to converge on Chenab Nagar (Rabwah) on Friday, 23 July 2004. He used loudspeakers on mosques and issued posters for the call. The administration made no move to deter him from this agitation that could have turned violent. As a result, hundreds of them armed with staffs etc came over. The press reported their number in thousands. According to the daily Nawa-i-Waqt of July 24:

Thousands of Muslims arrived in Chenab Nagar in intensely hot weather. All Qadiani businesses remained closed and roads presented a deserted look. Khatme Nabuwwat - Long Live slogans were shouted.

The situation was indeed very tense that Friday.

The mullah issued dangerous threats, and the Urdu press volunteered to splash these in big headlines. A few are quoted below:

1. If the government does not control the activities and mischief of Qadianis, no Qadiani and their places of worship will be safe in Pakistan. The moths of the lamp of Prophethood (Muslims) will completely destroy Mirzais (Ahmadis) (The Daily Pakistan; July 22, 2004) 2. If the government does not take due notice of this serious incident, an agitation like that of 1974 will commence.     Maulvi Ilyas Chinioti (The Daily Pakistan; July 24, 2004) 3. If the mosque is not recovered, the moths of Khatme Nabuwwat are prepared to sacrifice their lives. The situation can anytime slip out of control of Muslim leaders.     Maulvi Ata-ul-Muhaiman Bokhari (The Daily Jang; July 22, 2004)

The mullah is well aware of benefits of unity and co-operation. He decided to join hands with others in his unsupportable cause. The notorious Majlis Ahrar Islam and Majlis Tahaffuz Khatme Nabuwwat solicited support from politico-religious parties, and got it readily. Hafiz Idrees, the Deputy Amir of Jamaat Islami told the press that all efforts will be coordinated. He seemed to care little that the demands were against the provisions of Shariah that the Jamaat Islami had been campaigning for the last half a century in Pakistan. Hafiz Tahir Ashrafi, Advisor on Religious Affairs to Governor of the Punjab also came over to Rabwah. He did not meet any Ahmadi, remained huddled up with mullahs, and made highly improper and indiscreet statements while parading his official status. He appeared to be least bothered about the teaching of the great religion of Islam on such issues. During the visit, he volunteered to state that General Pervez Musharraf and Mr. Shaukat Aziz are both Sunni Muslims. “They are not Mirzais, and both have faith in Khatme Nabuwwat (the end of prophethood)”, he said. (The daily Din, July 24, 2004). This official Advisor to the Governor does not believe that Pakistan belongs to non-Sunnis also. Such is his understanding of the great concept of Enlightened Moderation, propounded by his overlord.

The police were apparently well aware of the essentials of the issue. They knew that the shifting of the post was not only mutually agreed, Ahmadis had co-operated beyond their duty to provide the new location and the building. The little mosque was intact. They also knew that they could not lawfully occupy a site without owner’s consent. The police asked Ahmadis to let their Inspector reside temporarily at the old location to tide over the present difficulties, and Ahmadis had agreed. What more could they ask or expect; so they, in consultation with their superiors, decided to be firm against any violence and agitation of the mullah. After three or four Fridays (these Islamic holy days, otherwise meant for worship, are used by the mullah now in propagating and implementing violence) the situation had been controlled sufficiently to pose no threat to law and order. The agitation had lost steam. It appeared that a reasonable solution had been found that should be acceptable, more and less, to all concerned.

All of a sudden, orders were issued on September 6, 2004 from the provincial capital that the police post was to be shifted to the old location, regardless of the Ahmadiyya ownership of the property. The orders were to be implemented immediately, meticulously, and apparently to the satisfaction of the mullah. So, high police officials contacted Ahmadis late on the same day, and told them to vacate the site. The police set up their signboard and pitched a tent as token of seizure. Having done so by the middle of the night, they reported the completion of the raid to their headquarters at Lahore who reportedly informed their political masters. To crown this inglorious and unnecessary retreat in the face of the mullah, police officials were told to invite mullahs to a briefing where they were to be told that their demands had been met in totality. This was done. According to the daily ‘Khabrain’ of September 8, 2004, the District Police Officer went himself to Chiniot where he met the clerics to convey them the great news; the police entertained the mullahs with sweets (mithai khilai); high officials like the DIG, the SSP and the SP City personally supervised the operation. To add insult to injury (if felt that way), the high police officials were made to report the accomplishment of the unworthy act to the third-line local mullahs namely, Allah Yar Arshad, Muhammad Hussain, Ghulam Mustafa, Yasin Gauhar, Ayub, Ilyas Chinioti etc, who are never heard of except when they indulge in mischief and break the law of the land. Some of these had been earlier charged and arrested for breach of law.

It is relevant to mention here that Chaudhri Shujaat Hussain, the President of the ruling PML (Q) is on record having said that his party and the MMA are natural allies. Mr. Shaukat Aziz, when ‘accused’ of being a Qadiani, had it announced that he was a Sunni and believed in the Khatme Nabuwwat. The Sunni PM was bending backward to prove it. Also relevant is the news that on September 7, 2004 President Musharraf had a 3½ hours long meeting with the Ulema, where according to press reports he sought their support and assured them that there will be no interference in the affairs of madrassahs (The daily Dawn September 8, 2004). Orders to meet mullahs’ demands concerning the police post at Rabwah had been issued and implemented a day earlier.

The design of the lately developed flower called ‘Enlightened Moderation’ looks beautiful but its foul smell and unpleasant reality can only be experienced by a visit to the police post at Rabwah. The incident showed how a mountain of mischief can be built by mullah out of a molehill, with the support from authorities. During these seven weeks Ahmadis of Rabwah were threatened with great risk to their security and human rights. Eventually the government took a decision that has no legal or moral base whatsoever. In fact, it violated all norms of civil society. Shakespeare, the English poet reputed to have a most comprehensive soul, wrote for such occasions: O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts, and men have lost their reason. (Julius Caesar, III)

Appendage. It would be of interest to bring up here and compare the case of Ahmadiyya mosque at Syedwala district Sheikhupura with the case of Police Post mosque. The Ahmadiyya mosque was destroyed by an attacking mob of extremists on August 26, 2001, in the presence of the police. The mob looted useful items like electric fans etc; and destroyed the mosque building. A few hours later, the Superintendent Police arrived from the district headquarters along with a contingent. He took all the Ahmadi men, 28 in number, in his custody and led them to the police station. No police case was registered against the attackers. Since then, the mosque lies in ruins. The government did not have the courtesy or the ‘enlightened moderation’ to rebuild the mosque for Ahmadis; after all, it is the duty of the government to protect places of worship of all its citizens. Ahmadis have asked the government to let them build the mosque at their own expense. The government has refused the permission. It is now more than three years that the ruins of the mosque stand as testimony to the enormity of the crime of the mullah and the utter disregard of authorities for fundamental rights of the Ahmadiyya Community in Pakistan.

Murder remains an option with the mullah in his anti-Ahmadiyya campaign. It appears that he is recently busy on some other front; however he has built up an impressive total over a period - 64 Ahmadis killed for faith only since the promulgation of Ordinance XX by General Zia. As Ahmadis do not undertake reprisals, and the authorities tend to look the other way when there is an Ahmadi casualty, the murderers have got away scot-free in over 95% of these assassinations.

Ahmadi murdered at Sargodha

Sargodha; August 21, 2004: Mr. Barkatullah Mangla, an Ahmadi advocate was shot dead here at about 21.30 at his residence by unknown assassins.

Mr. Mangla returned home at about 9 p.m. from the mosque after offering his night prayers. Approximately 10 minutes later, someone knocked at the door. His son went out in response. There were two men at the door who asked him to send his father out. The son went back in, and the two intruders entered the house. They found Barakatullah sitting in the courtyard. They shot him in the head and shoulder. He died on the spot. The assassins fled after the attack.

Mr. Mangla was a through gentleman who had no quarrel with anybody. He was a senior member in the community’s organization in early seventies; at the moment he was the president of the local Ahmadiyya community. Sargodha is infested with Ahmadi-bashers led by mullahs like Toofani (literally: Cyclone).

The police did the paper work, but have not been able to track the murderers.

A murder attempt in Lahore

Mughalpura, Lahore; July 30, 2004: Mr Shahid Ahmad Dar, an Ahmadi youth was tracked and fired at in the middle of the night while coming back home. Luckily he was not hit.

As per details, Shahid Dar was returning home after some local shopping. While still a street away from home, someone challenged him ‘Stop - O Mirzaia’. He did not, and turned the corner to head for home. He heard a motorcycle stop a few yards behind him and heard the sound of loading a fire arm. While he picked up his pace, he heard shots that missed him. By this time he was at his front door, and he entered the house. His mother was woken up by the sound of gun-shots. She asked him as to what happened. The neighbors also telephoned to inquire of his well-being. The next day, he reported the matter to the police.

Mr Dar has intimated that a week earlier he had received a threatening phone call.

A murder threat

Islamabad: The Amir Jamaat Ahmadiyya Islamabad received an anonymous letter on April 1, 2004. Its translation is given below:

Threats to Ahmadi leaders at Quetta

Quetta: Mr. Ehsan ul Haq, the Amir of the Quetta Ahmadiyya community received a letter addressed to him by name. Two other notables of the local Ahmadiyya community also received highly threatening letters.

The letter to Mr. Ehsan ul Haq contains:

Other Ahmadi notables received similar threats. A small Ahmadi delegation called on the police DIG (Special Branch) and showed him the letters and their concern. The DIG promised to investigate, and ordered a police guard at the Ahmadiyya mosque every Friday, from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m.

So long as the Anti-Ahmadiyya laws and other religious laws of dubious nature remain on the statute book, and the state does not openly and visibly show disregard for them, these will remain available to mullahs and anybody else as tools of persecution of Ahmadis. Neither the government, nor anyone else in Pakistan has even dropped a hint to do away with Ahmadi-specific laws. Ahmadis feel and remain hostage to these laws, and remain at risk at all times and at all locations within the territorial boundaries of Pakistan.

‘What mean ye that ye beat My people to pieces, and grind the faces of the poor’
(The Book of Isaiah (OT) 3:15)

Three Ahmadis arrested under the blasphemy clause PPC 295B on fabricated accusation of defiling the Holy Quran

Mangat Unche, District Hafizabad: Three Ahmadis, Messers Shahadat Ali, Mansur Hussain and Abdul Hafeez (actual name: Hafeez ur Rehman) were named in FIR 280/2004 at Police Station Kassoki, District Hafizabad on December 18, 2004 under PPC 295B in a complaint lodged by a mullah, Sanaullah, for allegedly burning copies of the Holy Quran. Under this law the accused can be awarded imprisonment for life. The police have arrested the accused.

No Holy Qurans were set on fire; the accusation is a blatant lie of Ahmadi-bashers. In fact, two Ahmadis had undertaken disposal of old copies of Alfazl (Ahmadiyya daily) and other papers no longer needed, by burning. Their opponents came to know about burning of some printed material, forced their way in, and created a scene. Mangat Unche has a history of opposition to Ahmadiyyat. The mullah threatened an agitation. The yellow Urdu press gave a helping hand. The local DSP Raja Riaz is the same inspector who made a mess in the notorious anti-Ahmadiyya riots at Chak Sikandar some years ago. The fabrication of the FIR is obvious from the fact that the accuser has named Mr. Hafeez as one of the accused whom they saw burning the Holy Quran. In fact, Mr. Hafeez was not even present in Mangat Unche on the day of the incident.

The three accused are at risk of imprisonment for life. Only four weeks ago an Ahmadi, Muhammad Iqbal was sentenced to life imprisonment in Faisalabad on fabricated charge of blasphemy. Production of two false witnesses for a religious cause is regrettably no problem in the prevailing culture here. (See case details above)

It is highly relevant to mention that Pakistan very recently sponsored a Resolution in the United Nations on December 15, 2004 entitled: “Promotion of Religious Understanding, Harmony and Cooperation” and had it adopted by consensus. This was three days before the registration of this FIR. Then on December 22, 2004, the federal cabinet approved a draft bill for setting up the Pakistan National Commission for Human Rights to oversee human rights situation and violations, if any, in the country. How does the government explain the conduct of its officials in the field in the context of its worthy proclamations at the apex?

A fabricated case under the Blasphemy Law

Chak 227/G.B; District Faisalabad: A case was registered by the police against Mr. Muhammad Iqbal, Ahmadi, under the dreaded and infamous PPC 295C, on March 23, 2004 (the Republic Day) at police station Tarkhani, Faisalabad, vide FIR No: 73/04 on behest of a mullah, Hafiz Zulfiquar Ali, the imam of the local mosque. The accused faced death punishment in this fabricated case of blasphemy.

The mullah’s accusation was fabricated and false. No Ahmadi can ever be blasphemous to his own prophet. Mr. Iqbal requested for bail, but was not granted. He was arrested and prosecuted for the next eight months. He was awarded life imprisonment on November 29, 2004. He is one of the more than 200 Ahmadis who have been exposed to the possible death penalty under this law in malicious and fabricated cases. Mr Ardeshir Cowasjee described well one such case, of a non Ahmadi, in his article in the daily DAWN of March 14, 2004. It is reproduced at Annex III of this Report.

A cruel case amounting to criminal registered - Ahmadis arrested

Kunri, district Mirpur (Sindh): September 23, 2004: A case was registered here by the police under the anti-Ahmadiyya PPC 298C against 13 Ahmadis, including 3 women. The case is greatly touching, even distressing.

Young Aamir Mahmud, Ahmadi, son of Mr. Abdul Haq was preparing to get married. The family had the wedding invitation cards printed. The cards bore the routine blessings and words like Bismillah (In the name of God) Inshallah (God willing) and Assalamu Alaikum. Mullahs managed to get hold of one of these cards and prevailed upon the authorities to register a criminal case against 15 Ahmadis including four women. The would-be bridegroom and his father were arrested and put behind bars. The daily Awaz, Lahore of October 9, 2004 reported the event in the following headlines:

Obscurantist mullah and the state that propagates Enlightened Moderation have joined hands to prosecute these Ahmadis so as to obtain sentences from the court that could be up to three years’ imprisonment.

How many tears one may shed over the plight of the distressed families? Is this the kind of Pakistan that the Quaid-i-Azam, Muhammad Ali Jinnah wanted for the Muslims of the Sub-Continent?

It is relevant to mention here the reaction of Maulvi Fazl ur Rehman, the Opposition Leader in the National Assembly, to the negative mention by the US State Department in its recently released Annual Report on the state of religious freedom in Pakistan. According to the daily Jang, Lahore of October 7, 2004, the Maulana said, “With reference to Qadianis, (Pakistani) laws are not discriminatory. American criticism is baseless”. No wonder, the Maulana remains a great admirer of the fallen Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

Hudood Ordinance invoked against Ahmadi’s marriage

Banglah Tando Adam, District Sanghar: Mr Zulfiquar Ali of District Gujranwala, Punjab joined the Ahmadiyya Community approximately two years ago. He got married to Ms Fatima of Banglah Tando Adam, District Sanghar, Sindh on December 15, 2003. The bride was even otherwise a relation of his. Mullahs, in league with his father-in-law agitated about an Ahmadi co-habiting with a ‘Muslim’ woman in wedlock. They termed it adultery. They pressed him to recant; he did not. So a case was registered at police station Tando Adam in FIR 82/2004 on March 28, 2004 under PPCs 298C, 420 and Zina Hudood Ordinance 10 (3). If the court upholds the frivolous charges, the newly married young man, charged with rape and adultery, could end up in prison for 25 years and get whipped with 30 lashes in public.

Freedom of faith denied; four Ahmadis booked maliciously

Jandu Sahi, District Sialkot; Sept/Oct 2004: Mr. Shahid Hameed of this village, a convert to Ahmadiyyat has faced great hardships and blatant persecution at the hands of the mullah and officialdom. He now faces a crisis. His Ahmadi friends have been booked under Ahmadi-specific law PPC 298C. His and his friends’ precarious situation is stated below briefly.

Shahid Hameed, a youth, subsequent to in-depth inquiry, joined the Ahmadiyya community approximately three years ago. Fearing hostile reaction from the society, he did not disclose his new denomination. Two months ago, a mullah, named Maqsud came over to the village from Multan, took up residence in the village and took over the mosque. He soon developed a wholesome following. Shahid, however, did not attend his religious service. Shahid’s father asked him the reason, and the son disclosed to him the fact of his Ahmadiyyat. The father subsequently consulted the mullah, and then told his son to have a word with the mullah and see if he still wanted to stay on course. So, one evening, Shahid accompanied his father to the mosque where hundreds of non-Ahmadis had gathered. There, Shahid was told to pose his questions to the mullah. Shahid posed him three questions. The mullah, rather than giving an answer, got furious, lost his temper and used bad language against Shahid and another Ahmadi, Mr. Shakil Ahmad who was named as the one who had ‘misguided’ Shahid. The mullah declared that both the Qadianis deserved to be killed as per Shariah. He urged the villagers to set fire to Ahmadis’ houses. He said that this was the only way to curb this fitna (mischief).

The next day Shahid’s parents expelled him from their home. He shifted to Shakil’s residence. The day after, an agitated crowd attacked Mr. Shakil’s house. All men and women at home shut themselves in a room and bolted the door. The crowd entered the house, tried to bang open the door but fortunately did not succeed. At this occasion both Shahid and Shakil were not in the house. They were later sent a message to stay away to avoid harm. The next day, Shahid decided to shift to another village Malianwala. This he undertook at about 2.00 a.m. after midnight, for fear of capture and harm. He had to walk through fields and wilderness to arrive at his new hideout.

The extremist elements reported the matter to the District Nazim who is a member of Jamaat Islami. The Nazim directed the police to pursue the matter. Based on the report of Shahid’s father, the police registered an FIR against four Ahmadis under Ahmadi-specific law PPC 298C. The police visited Shakil’s home and demanded his production. Shakil was not in, so they threatened to take away his 10 years old son in lieu. They supported the mullah and the villagers. They detained a 16 years old son of Mr. Abdul Razzaq, Ahmadi, thus forcing the father to present himself before the police. Shahid lost even his own family’s support, and fled to some distant city.

At present, four Ahmadis face charges under PPC 298C. They could be arrested, prosecuted and awarded three years imprisonment. As for the mullah, it is learnt that he took approximately 1½ kilo of gold ornaments from women-folk of the village by fraud, and has fled from there. Efforts by villagers to locate him at his given address have come to naught. The mullah had given them a fake name and address. However, that is no help to Ahmadis who face criminal religious charges and are at risk of losing their freedom.

The police register a case

Rabwah; August 9, 2004: The police registered a case under 16 MPO against Mr. Muhammad Ehsan, Ahmadi, under FIR 260/04 at Police Station Chenab Nagar. Mr. Ehsan was accused of climbing the roof of a Muslim Colony mosque armed with a knife and some Ahmadiyya literature.

In fact, the accused is mentally unstable; he occasionally indulges in irrational acts. The accusation that he was armed with a knife and Ahmadiyya literature is fabricated. The police were shown his medical history sheet, but they obliged the mullah by pressing charges against the psychotic, arrested him and sent him to jail.

Criminal case under Anti-Ahmadiyya law

Kunri, District Mirpur Khas; January 26, 2004: Some anti-Ahmadiyya activists conspired to get Mr Naseer Ahmad, a school teacher, implicated in a criminal case under Ahmadi-specific law. They persuaded the local police to charge him under PPC 298C on January 26, 2004. Under this clause, the teacher is exposed to imprisonment for three years.

Disinterment of a dead Ahmadi and the cruel follow-up

Kariala, District Hafizabad: Malik Feeroz ud Din, father of Malik Ejaz Ahmad president of the local Ahmadiyya community, died on July 22, 2003. He was buried in privately owned land of his nephew, Mr. Haroon Ahmad. The opponent party objected to the burial on flimsy ground and approached the police and then the court. Finally the Session Judge gave the verdict that the grave of the Ahmadi is not located in the Muslims’ graveyard but in the private land of Haroon Ahmad, while the Muslim graveyard is elsewhere; Muslims have unauthorizedly built graves at the present site which belongs in fact to the provincial government.

After this final decision by a senior court, the opposition dared to dig up the dead body at night and decamped with it. Ahmadis reported the matter to the police. They charged 18 individuals under PPC 297/201. However they were bailed out, and the police declared them ‘not-involved’.

The dead body has not been recovered by the police. The Ahmadiyya community is greatly distressed. However, as the Ahmadis got no relief from the authorities, nor were the remains of their deceased elder recovered, they have been taunted and insulted by the village folk. This resulted in tension and provocation, and at the complaint of a local cleric Hafiz Sajid, the police registered a case against 2 Ahmadis and two of their non-Ahmadi friends under PPC 337 AII and LII. Of the two Ahmadis, Mr. Tahir Ejaz was arrested and sent to the jail at Pindi Bhatian. Later he was released on bail. Mr. Shoaib Ahmad, aged 16 was left free to face the trial with bail before arrest that was subsequently confirmed.

Ahmadis are greatly disturbed and harassed on account of these developments. The authorities provided them no support, nor did their duty to locate the dead body. And now, two members of the bereaved family face criminal charges.

The case is registered as FIR 203 at Police Station Kassoki, district Hafizabad on September 8, 2004 under PPC 337 AII and LII also 34/109, against Messers Tahir Ejaz, Shoaib Ahmad and two others.

Police Partiality at Chak Sikandar

Chak Sikandar, District Gujrat; July 22, 2004: The village of Chak Sikandar has been a hot-bed of anti-Ahmadiyya activities since long, and Ahmadis have suffered there greatly in many ways. On July 22, non-Ahmadis organized a conference in the village, where the speakers made highly provocative speeches. The administration should not have allowed it. After the conference ended, the participants attacked an Ahmadi youth, Ghulam Ahmad Tahir who works in a store close to the opponents’ mosque. He had to flee to save himself. Later the crowd got him arrested by reporting to the police. They accused him of injuring one of them with a stone and firing a pistol shot. When Ahmadis approached the police, they told them to wait till morning when the medical report would be available. However, soon afterwards, the police registered a case against the young man under PPC 324.

The next-day, in another incident, the opposition detained two Ahmadis of Chak Sikandar, Mr Abdul Qayyum and Mr Tariq Mahmud and held them for many hours. They released them after a report was made to the police, who took them away to the police station. The police released them at 9.00 p.m. on condition that representatives of both the communities report to the police station at 10 a.m. The next day 30 Ahmadis reported to the police as arranged, but not even one of the non-Ahmadis arrived. Later on, the police heard both the parties and obtained lists of 20 persons from each community under the warning of PPC 107/105.

The permissive and sympathetic attitude of the police towards Ahmadi-bashers is visibly partial. Ahmadis of Chak Sikandar continue to suffer mainly because the administration treats Ahmadis as less then equal citizens of the state.

Unending prosecution of Ahmadis

Hundreds of Ahmadis continue to face prosecution in courts for years on religious and Ahmadi-specific charges. It costs vastly in terms of time, effort and money. Consequently, these cases generate a great deal of stress for the accused and their families. Here we mention only two such cases, as sample.

	The Kalima cases of Qasur

The Kalima (Islamic creed) is commonly shared by Ahmadis as well as non-Ahmadis. Under the constitutional guarantee of freedom of faith, Ahmadis exercise their right to own up their creed. But the mullah and authorities take him unnecessarily to the court, to contest what is already granted by the law of the land. If Ahmadis do not actively defend their right in the court, they would end up in prison. The prosecution loses nothing in the game; it only wastes public money and time.

Messers Muhammad Aslam, Mushtaq Ahmad, Muhammad Islam and Qureshi Nur Ahmad, Ahmadis of Qasur were charged under the Ahmadi-specific PPC 298C for writing the Kalima and Quranic verses on their buildings 17 years ago on August 27, 1987. The charges were pressed by a mullah Fazal Hussain of Majlis Khatme Nabuwwat. Later, Ahmadi-bashers approached the magistrate and had the Blasphemy clause PPC 295C added to the charge sheet. This was challenged in the court of the Additional Session Judge Qasur, who rightly ordered the blasphemy charge to be dropped. Rest of the case however remained active in the court of the civil judge. In the subsequent years, Mr. Nur Ahmad died while still under prosecution. Mr. Mushtaq Ahmad and Muhammad Islam fled the country fearing imprisonment; however Mr. Muhammad Aslam kept on defending himself. Thirteen years after the registration of the case, on October 11, 2000 the civil judge awarded the old man one year’s imprisonment and Rs. 5,000 as fine. The accused had to apply for bail for the duration of appeal against the sentence; this was granted by the Sessions Judge. The case was then contested for the next four years in the Sessions Court where the judge gave his decision on October 19, 2004 that the case be sent back to the lower trial court for reconsideration. So, the trial goes on in its 18th year for the septuagenarian father of the President of the District Ahmadiyya Community.

Another similar case was taken up by the Civil Judge, Qasur against Mr. Muhammad Hussain and his son Mr. Muhammad Sadiq, Ahmadis, on July 19, 1989. Both the accused had to run for cover and managed to arrange bail to avoid detention. Eleven years later, the court awarded one year’s imprisonment and Rs. 5,000 fine to both father and son, on October 11, 2000. Both had to seek fresh bail for the duration of appeal against their conviction. Eventually Mr. Hussain died while still under appeal. Mr. Sadiq continued to appear before the court. After further four years of court appearances, Mr. Sadiq’s conviction and penalty was maintained by the Sessions Judge. As the police was not present at the court’s premises, Mr. Sadiq escaped arrest. He will now have to approach the High Court for bail. All this happened because he happens to believe in this Islamic country that ‘None is worthy of worship except Allah; Muhammad is His prophet’ and wrote it on his house.

Ahmadis do not have to be criminals, in the normal sense of the word, to end up in prison in Pakistan. The system is designed that their daily routines, that for a non-Ahmadi are considered virtues by the society, can be readily adjudged as criminal acts by courts. Ahmadis are known to have been awarded prison terms for saying Salam, the Islamic greetings. The system allows the police to arrest an Ahmadi simply on the complaint of a mullah. Magistrates and judges are free to exercise their discretion in refusing bail to the victims. Ahmadis have stayed in prison for years while undergoing trial on religious charges, and eventually declared NOT GUILTY. To do justice to the description of prison life in Pakistan would require a Tolstoy. Ahmadi victims of the legal system normally have no prior experience of police stations, courts and prisons; their plight was partly described by Oscar Wilde in the Ballad of Reading Gaol:

I know not whether Laws be right,
Or whether Laws be wrong;
All that we know who lie in gaol
Is that the wall is strong;
And that each day is like a year,
A year whose days are long.

1. Life imprisonment awarded to Ahmadi on false charge of blasphemy

Faisalabad; November 29, 2004: Sajjad Hussain Sundhar, Additional Session Judge sentenced Mr. Muhammad Iqbal, Ahmadi of Chak 227/GB, district Faisalabad to imprisonment for life and Rs.10,000 fine under the dreaded blasphemy clause PPC 295C, on November 29, 2004. The accused will serve additional six months in prison if he does not pay the fine. The case was registered against Mr. Iqbal on 23 March 2004 (the Republic Day of Pakistan), at the report of a mullah Zulfiquar Ali, the imam of the local mosque. Muhammad Ashraf SI/SHO of police station Tarkhani registered the case in FIR No. 73/04 under PPC 295C. The police arrested the accused after the magistrate refused to confirm his provisional bail before arrest. Since then the accused faced the trial while in prison. This case is briefly stated here; a somewhat detailed description is available in chapter 2.

According to the FIR, the accuser stated that the accused told him that his Prophet was a false prophet. This statement was fabricated and falsely attributed to the victim. No such words were ever uttered by Mr. Iqbal. Just as no practicing Christian will be blasphemous to Jesus, no Ahmadi can ever be blasphemous to his own master and mentor, the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

In fact, the mullah had a religious axe to grind. Mr. Iqbal had joined the Ahmadiyya community some years ago. The villagers and the mullah held grudge against him on this account. Iqbal left the village and stayed away for years. For the love of his home, he had now returned to his village. The mullah got him implicated in this serious case under the blasphemy law that prescribes death as penalty. It would be useful to add here that an FIR can be registered with the police by a complainant simply by offering two witnesses. Getting hold of two false witnesses is no problem whatsoever in the prevailing culture here, especially on the plea of support to a religious cause. The mullah has promoted the hypothesis that a ‘lie’ to support religion is quite permissible. With such witnesses and their evidence the police can arrest the accused and courts can award heavy punishment.

Mr. Iqbal remained in prison for approximately eight months and suffered prosecution by the state for a crime he did not commit, nor can he ever think of committing. The judge also acted hostile and even arranged a rabid advocate, Mr. Rab Nawaz to support the prosecution with propagandist sectarian bias. The defense, fearing miscarriage of justice, applied to the High Court for transfer of the case to some other court. The High Court did not oblige. Eventually the Additional Session Judge handed over the sentence of life imprisonment. It could have been Death. The poor fellow who had dared come to his hometown and be with his relations, now faces a lifetime behind bars. After the incident, his wife delivered their first child. The plight of the young wife defies description. The few months old baby has been deprived of paternal love, care and vital support.

This is the third conviction and life imprisonment doled out in district Faisalabad during the past three months. The other two victims are Christians. This one is Ahmadi. Those who belong to marginalized sections of society are at great risk here. The mullah and the state lie in their ambush.

2. The eight innocent from Chak Sikandar

A rabid mullah, who had running feuds with many, including his relatives, was murdered in Chak Sikandar in September 2003. The anti-Ahmadiyya opposition found it very opportune to name Ahmadis in the murder. The police, rather than making an effort to find the real murderer, arrested the named 10 Ahmadis and put them behind bars. Since then, the police have come to know some facts of the case, and it is certain that the police know that the arrested Ahmadis are not involved in this crime. Still these innocent have not been released, nor the court has been assisted by the state to bail them out, except the two nominated for abetment. The police have no case against them, still these bread-winners of their families continue to suffer in prison because the authorities find it convenient to remain scared of the mullah. Following are behind bars for the last one year and three months for a crime committed by someone else:

	1.	Muhammad Idrees	2.	Basharat Ahmad
	3.	Nasir Ahmad	4.	Bashir Ahmad
	5.	Ejaz Ahmad	6.	Muhammad Akmal
	7.	Munir Ahmad	8.	Abdur Rehman

It is a strange system of justice where simply by producing two false witnesses a large number of innocent men can be imprisoned for years under trial. The police, having thoroughly investigated, have found no evidence of their involvement in the crime. Still the state is wasting its time, effort and money in incarcerating them and trying them in a court of law. The real culprits are at large, and the police are off their track. Imagine the hardship faced by them behind bars, the loss of livelihood, the deprivation of paternal care to their families and the expenses of a long and expensive trial. It is mind-boggling.

3. The unsuspecting son-in-law

Mr. Zulfiquar Ali of District Gujranwala, Punjab joined the Ahmadiyya Community approximately two years ago. He got married to Ms Fatima of Banglah Tando Adam, District Sanghar, Sindh on December 15, 2003. The bride was even otherwise a relation of his.

Four months later, his father-in-law invited the couple to visit him. On arrival, he questioned the groom about his faith. He then arranged for a large group of rabid mullahs to persuade forcefully and harass the poor fellow to change his beliefs. The young man refused to bend under the pressure, so they approached the police. The police, as they are, welcomed the opportunity to fall upon the victim, and booked him under some of the most serious clauses of the Penal Code. They registered the criminal case not only under the Ahmadi-specific law PPC 298C but also under the Hudood Ordinance 10(3). The police added PPC 420 as if with a vengeance and to further tighten the noose. If the court upholds the frivolous charges, the newly married young man, charged with rape and adultery, could end up in prison for 25 years and get whipped with 30 lashes in public. The mullah considers marriage between an Ahmadi and a non-Ahmadi ‘not valid’ according to his interpretation of Sharia, so he calls their marital relationship ‘adultery’.

The case was registered at police station Tando Adam in FIR 82/2004 on March 23, 2004 under PPCs 298C, 420 and Zina Hudood Ordinance 10 (3).

Mr. Zulfiquar applied for bail. The Sessions Court rejected his request. He applied to the Sindh High Court where numerous hearing dates were announced but the judge could not hear his plea. In the meantime he languishes in prison. This is his tenth month behind bars. And they claim that their Islam is a religion of tolerance, peace and justice!

4. Three Ahmadis arrested under the blasphemy clause PPC 295B. Face Life imprisonment.

Three Ahmadis, Messers Shahadat Ali, Mansur Hussain and Abdul Hafeez were named in FIR 280/2004 at Police Station Kassoki, District Hafizabad on December 18, 2004 under PPC 295B in a complaint lodged by a mullah, Sanaullah, for allegedly burning copies of the Holy Quran. The police have arrested the accused.

No Holy Qurans were set on fire; the accusation is a blatant lie of Ahmadi-bashers. The three accused are at risk of imprisonment for life. Only four weeks ago an Ahmadi, Muhammad Iqbal was sentenced to life imprisonment in Faisalabad on fabricated charge of blasphemy. Production of two false witnesses for a religious cause is regrettably no problem in the prevailing culture here.

5. Arrest of a bridegroom and his father

Mr. Aamir Mahmud, the bridegroom and Mr. Abdul Haq, his father were arrested by the police on charge of using Islamic epithets on wedding invitation cards. Details of this case are given at Chapter 4.

6. A septuagenarian president and his two sons