IT would be regrettable under any circumstances but in the case of Pakistan, a deeply religious society, it is especially so: behind many of the most serious fissures and conflicts threatening the country lies either religion or contested versions of it. From the violence visited on members of minority beliefs to the scourge of sectarianism that relentlessly draws more and more lives into its gaping maw, to the outlawed TTP whose fight with the state is bound up inextricably with the militant group’s own version of Sharia, matters of faith have led Pakistan into dangerous waters. Areas as basic and as essential to a society’s health as the vaccination of children against polio and the need for girls’ education have become contested issues. The mere allegation of blasphemy has become enough to provoke a lynch mob; even providing legal assistance in such a case has proved a death sentence. No target has been considered too sacred: mosques, churches, shrines and other places of worship, funeral and mourning processions, emergency wards and school assemblies. Never has it been clearer that if the country is ever to lead itself into the light, urgent efforts need to be made to counter the hate spread in the name of religion.
The Council of Islamic Ideology is meant to advise on matters of religion. The natural expectation would be that these would be the issues — of life and death — that would be exercising the minds of the forum’s members. Yet, sweeping aside all these and more, the CII in its wisdom gave on Wednesday its opinion on an issue it clearly considers much more pressing: that underage marriage is permissible for young girls, and that most of the clauses of the Muslim Marriage Law, 1961, are un-Islamic.
Leave aside for the moment the awful repercussions this has for children’s rights, women’s rights and indeed for the basic norms of civilisation in a country where child marriages and forced unions have proved to be an indelible stain. Leave aside the signals such a pronouncement gives of being determined to drag the country towards obscurantism. Consider, instead, how it reflects on the relevance of the CII itself, which exposes itself — yet again — as a hopelessly out-of-touch forum, either unaware or uncaring of the horrifying realities that the people of this country face. Given that this is apparently the best it can do, is it not better to save the government’s resources and divert them to other, more fruitful avenues? Why is there even the need for such a council when an elected parliament is in place, which is in itself perfectly capable of deciding what the law should be? In March, the Sindh Assembly passed a resolution demanding the dissolution of the CII. It was not off the mark.
Friday, May 23, 2014
Pakistan's Irrelevant CII
IT would be regrettable under any circumstances but in the case of Pakistan, a deeply religious society, it is especially so: behind many of the most serious fissures and conflicts threatening the country lies either religion or contested versions of it. From the violence visited on members of minority beliefs to the scourge of sectarianism that relentlessly draws more and more lives into its gaping maw, to the outlawed TTP whose fight with the state is bound up inextricably with the militant group’s own version of Sharia, matters of faith have led Pakistan into dangerous waters. Areas as basic and as essential to a society’s health as the vaccination of children against polio and the need for girls’ education have become contested issues. The mere allegation of blasphemy has become enough to provoke a lynch mob; even providing legal assistance in such a case has proved a death sentence. No target has been considered too sacred: mosques, churches, shrines and other places of worship, funeral and mourning processions, emergency wards and school assemblies. Never has it been clearer that if the country is ever to lead itself into the light, urgent efforts need to be made to counter the hate spread in the name of religion.
The Council of Islamic Ideology is meant to advise on matters of religion. The natural expectation would be that these would be the issues — of life and death — that would be exercising the minds of the forum’s members. Yet, sweeping aside all these and more, the CII in its wisdom gave on Wednesday its opinion on an issue it clearly considers much more pressing: that underage marriage is permissible for young girls, and that most of the clauses of the Muslim Marriage Law, 1961, are un-Islamic.
Leave aside for the moment the awful repercussions this has for children’s rights, women’s rights and indeed for the basic norms of civilisation in a country where child marriages and forced unions have proved to be an indelible stain. Leave aside the signals such a pronouncement gives of being determined to drag the country towards obscurantism. Consider, instead, how it reflects on the relevance of the CII itself, which exposes itself — yet again — as a hopelessly out-of-touch forum, either unaware or uncaring of the horrifying realities that the people of this country face. Given that this is apparently the best it can do, is it not better to save the government’s resources and divert them to other, more fruitful avenues? Why is there even the need for such a council when an elected parliament is in place, which is in itself perfectly capable of deciding what the law should be? In March, the Sindh Assembly passed a resolution demanding the dissolution of the CII. It was not off the mark.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment