Zia-ul-Haq's Islamization

On December 2, 1978, on the occasion of the first day of the Hijra calendar to enforce the Islamic system in Pakistan in a nationwide address, General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq accused politicians of exploiting the name of Islam saying:

Hudood Ordinance

Under Offenses Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood Ordinance 1979), the punishment of imprisonment or fine, or both, as provided in the existing Pakistan Penal Code for theft, was substituted by the amputation of the right hand of the offender from the joint of the wrist by a surgeon. For robbery, the right hand of the offender from the wrist and his left foot from the ankle should be amputated by a surgeon. Hudood ( Arabic حدود, also transliterated Hadud, Hudud; plural for Hadh, حد, limit, or restriction) is the word often used in Islamic social and legal literature for the bounds of acceptable behaviour.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In legal terms (Islamic law being usually referred to as Sharia, شريعة) the term is used to describe laws that define a level of crime classification. Crimes classified under Hudud are the most severe of crimes, such as murder, theft, and adultery. There are minor differences in views between the four major Sunni madhhabs about sentencing and specifications for these laws. It is often argued that, since Sharia is God's law and states certain punishments for each crime, they are immutable. However, with liberal movements in Islam expressing concerns about hadith validity, a major component of how Islamic law is created, questions have arisen about administering certain punishments. Incompatibilities with human rights in the way Islamic law is practised in many countries has led many to call for an international moratorium on the punishments of Hudud laws until greater scholarly consensus can be reached. It has also been argued by some,that the Hudud portion of Sharia is incompatible with humanism or human rights.

Related Topics:
Islamic law - Murder - Theft - Adultery - Sunni - Madhhab - Sharia - Liberal movements in Islam - Hadith - Human rights - Hudud - Humanism

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Prohibition Order

Drinking of wine (i.e. all alcoholic drinks) was not a crime at all under the Pakistan Penal Code. In 1977, however, the drinking and selling of wine by Muslims was banned in Pakistan and the sentence of imprisonment of six months or a fine of Rs. 5000/-, or both, was provided in that law. Under the Prohibition Order, these provisions of law were replaced by the punishment of eighty stripes for which an ijma of the companions of the Holy Prophet ever since the period of the Second Caliph Umar, was cited. However,the law does not apply to Non-Muslims who can possess a license to drink and/or manufacture alcoholic beverages from the government. Most famous of these is the "Murree Brewery".

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Zina (Adultery) Ordinance

Under the Zina Ordinance the provisions relating to adultery were replaced as that the women and the man guilty will be flogged, each of them, with a hundred stripes, if unmarried. And if they are married they shall be stoned to death. It was argued that the section 497 of the Pakistan Penal Code dealing with the offence of adultery provided certain safeguards to the offender in as much as if the adultery is with the consent or connivance of the husband, no offence of adultery was deemed to have been committed in the eye of law. The wife, under the prevailing law, was also not to be punished as abettor. Islamic law knows no such exception.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The women became the special victims of Zia's so called Islamization and its inconsistencies. The Zina Ordinance carried grave injustices and untold miseries on women in Pakistan and prompted bitter international criticism. Women's rights groups helped in the production of a film titled "Who will cast the first stone?" to highlight the oppression and sufferings of women under the Hudood Ordinances. In September 1981, the first conviction and sentence under the Zina Ordinance, of stoning to death for Fehmida and Allah Bakhsh were set aside under national and international pressure.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In many cases, under the Zina Ordinance, a woman who made an allegation of rape was convicted for adultery whilst the rapist was acquitted. This led to a growing demand by jurists and women activists for repealing the Ordinance. In 1983, Safia Bibi, a 13-year-old blind girl, who alleged rape by her employer and his son was convicted for adultery under the Zina Ordinance whilst, the rapists were acquitted. The decision attracted so much publicity and condemnation from the public and the press that the Federal Shariah Court of its own motion, called for the records of the case and ordered that she should be released from prison on her own bond. Subsequently, on appeal, the finding of the trial court was reversed and the conviction was set aside.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In early 1988, another conviction for stoning to death of Shahida Parveen and Muhammad Sarwar sparked bitter public criticism that led to their retrial and acquittal by the Federal Shariah Court. In this case the trial court took the view that notice of divorce by Shahida's former husband, Khushi Muhammad should have been given to the Chairman of the local council, as stipulated under Section-7(3) of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961. This section states that any man who divorces his wife must register it with the Union Council. Otherwise, the court concluded that the divorce stood invalidated and the couple became liable to conviction under the Zina ordinance.

Related Topics:
1988 - 1961

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The International Commission of Jurists mission to Pakistan in December 1986 called for repealing of certain sections of the Hudood Ordinances relating to crimes and "Islamic" punishments which discriminate against women and non-Muslims. The commission cited an example that a Muslim woman can be convicted on the evidence of a man, and a non-Muslim can be convicted on the evidence of a Muslim, but not vice versa.

Related Topics:
Pakistan - December - 1986

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Blasphemy Laws

The Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) and the Criminal Procedure Code were amended, through ordinances in 1980, 1982 and 1986 to declare anything implying disrespect to the Holy Prophet, Ahle Bait (family of the prophet), Sahaba (companions of the prophet) and Sha'ar-i-Islam (Islamic symbols), a cognizable offence, punishable with imprisonment or fine, or with both.

Related Topics:
1980 - 1982 - 1986

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Religious Offences and Punishments

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

PPC

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Description

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Penalty

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

298A

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Use of derogatory remarks etc., in respect of holy personages

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

3 years imprisonment, or with fine, or with both

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

298B

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Misuse of epithets, descriptions and titles etc., reserved for certain holy personages or places, by Ahmadis

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

3 years imprisonment and fine

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

298C

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

An Ahmadi, calling himself a Muslim, or preaching or propagating his faith, or outraging the religious feelings of Muslims, or posing himself as a Muslim

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

3 years imprisonment and fine

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

295

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Injuring or defiling places of worship, with intent to insult the religion of any class

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Up to 2 years imprisonment or with fine, or with both

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

295A

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Upto 10 years imprisonment, or with fine, or with both

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

295B

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Defiling, etc., of Holy Quran

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Imprisonment for life

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

295C

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Use of derogatory remarks, etc; in respect of the Holy Prophet

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Death and fine

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~