Ahmadis in Pakistan: Update December 1991 to October 1993

 

1.   INTRODUCTION

This paper updates the January 1992 IRBDC Question and Answer Series Paper, Pakistan: Treatment of Ahmadis Who Return.

Ideally, the two papers should be read together.

In late 1992 and 1993, a number of judicial and legislative decisions were made in Pakistan, apparently portending a more tolerant attitude towards religious minorities, particularly the Ahmadis. However, these decisions do not seem to have resulted in any practical improvement in conditions for the Ahmadi community. Discriminatory laws, notably sections 298(b) and (c) (Ordinance XX) and 295(c) (blasphemy) of the Pakistani Penal Code are still in force and Ahmadis continue to be affected by them. Under sections 298(b) and (c), Ahmadis are forbidden to use epithets reserved for the saints of Islam or to use the word Azan for their call to prayer or the word Masjid for their places of worship; section 295(c) prescribes the death penalty for any person convicted of blasphemy against the prophet Muhammad. (For more information on the above-mentioned legal provisions and the situation of Ahmadis in Pakistan from independence up to 1991, please refer to IRBDC, January 1992, Pakistan: Treatment of Ahmadis Who Return, and Asia Watch, 19 September 1993, Persecuted Minorities and Writers in Pakistan). Copies of these sections of the law are provided in the appendix.

These laws appear to nourish a climate of religious sectarianism under which the Ahmadi community and other religious minorities reportedly continue to suffer intimidation, discrimination and harassment. Pakistani authorities reportedly remain passive and sometimes appear to be implicated in the ill- treatment of Ahmadis.

2.        LEGISLATIVE CHANGES

In August 1991, the Pakistani Parliament passed an amendment to section 295(c) of the Penal Code making the death penalty the only sentence for blasphemy against the prophet Muhammad. Many Ahmadis have been and continue to be charged and imprisoned under sections 298(b) and (c) and 295(c). Moreover, charges of blasphemy were laid against Christians and even Muslims in 1992. By August 1993, a Christian and a Muslim had been sentenced to death under the provisions of section 295(c); the two cases are still under appeal (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1160; Amnesty International 1992, 229; HRCP 1993, 46; News from Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 1, 11, 21).

In November 1992, Pakistan's Supreme Court overturned a decision of the Punjabi High Court in the case of Nasir Ahmad, an Ahmadi charged with blasphemy for having written Islamic expressions on wedding invitations in May 1992. The Supreme Court granted bail, which the High Court had denied on the grounds that bail cannot be granted to an accused charged with an offence under section 295(c). In handing down its decision in November 1992, the Supreme Court ruled that the use of some Islamic expressions by Ahmadis was not necessarily blasphemous and that the act in question had to be considered in a wider context, taking into account the accused's intentions and religious background (Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Newsletter Jan. 1993, 4; News from Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 20-21; Dawn 1 Dec. 1992).

In February 1993, taking advantage of this apparently favourable decision, defenders of the Ahmadi cause launched a Supreme Court challenge to the constitutionality of Ordinance XX, arguing that it violated section 20 of the Pakistani constitution, which guarantees freedom of worship to all Pakistani citizens (Tale of Persecution July 1993, 1-3; The News 4 Feb. 1993; Dawn 2 Feb. 1993; Devamithran 1989, 17). In the same month, the National Assembly passed a resolution on the protection of the places of worship of religious minorities (BBC Summary 17 Feb. 1993; PTV Television Network 9 Feb. 1993). It also appeared that the government had put off plans to mark religious denomination on identity cards; that decision, made in October 1992, had raised an outcry at the time (The Washington Post 21 Oct. 1992). According to human rights groups and observers of the Pakistani social and political scene, however, these legal changes have not improved conditions for the Ahmadi minority (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1160; Amnesty International 1992, 229; HRCP 1993, 46; Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Newsletter Jan. 1993, 4; ibid. Oct. 1992, 10; Tale of Persecution July 1993, 3-6; ibid. Apr. 1993, 2; News From Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 1, 11, 21; Ali 26 Aug. 1993; Taylor 26 Aug. 1993).

Nasir Ahmad has been free on bail since November 1992 and is still awaiting trial (Amnesty International 25 Aug. 1993). The January 1993 Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Newsletter states that when Nasir Ahmad's case-and other blasphemy cases-are heard, the attitude of Pakistani judges in general may be different from the approach taken by the Supreme Court in November 1992 (Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Newsletter Jan. 1993, 4). Indeed, according to the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam (AMI), a few weeks after the Supreme Court's statement on the use of Islamic expressions, a municipal court judge in Rawalpindi in the Punjab rejected the Supreme Court's conclusion on the grounds that it did not apply to the case he was hearing, and stated that it would be wiser to await the outcome of Nasir Ahmad's trial before citing it as a precedent. This judge sentenced the accused, Munawwar Ahmad Qureshi, to three years in prison and a fine of 15,000 rupees (approximately CDN$713) for having drawn the kalima, (According to an Ottawa representative of the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam, some Muslims write the Islamic profession of faith, "There is no God but God and Muhammad is his prophet" on calendars, jewellery, etc., just as some Christians wear the cross as a symbol of their Christian faith (AMI 24 Sept. 1993)). a Muslim symbol of faith, on a calendar (Tale of Persecution July 1993, 5). In July 1993 the Supreme Court ruled that Ordinance XX was "well-founded", thereby rejecting the appeals of a number of Ahmadis whose cases had been cited in the debate on the constitutionality of this statute that followed the February 1993 court challenge (Dawn 4 July 1993). As for the resolution on the protection of the places of worship of religious minorities, it would appear that any action is still at the planning stage (Embassy of Pakistan 22 Sept. 1993). Finally, information on the planned addition of religious adherence to identity cards is not consistent (see section 3.5).

3.     SITUATION OF AHMADIS IN 1992 AND 1993

According to human rights groups and observers of the Pakistani situation, Ahmadis and other religious minorities continue to suffer discrimination, intimidation and harassment, often for political or personal motives, and the Pakistani authorities continue to turn a blind eye and confirm laws which sustain a climate of injustice (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1160; Amnesty International 1992, 229; HRCP 1993, 46; Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Newsletter Jan. 1993, 4; ibid. Oct. 1992, 10; Tale of Persecution July 1993, 3-6; ibid. Apr. 1993, 2; News From Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 1, 11, 21). The HRCP also reports some forty cases of assault and murder of members of the Ahmadi community in 1992 (HRCP 1993, 46).

3.1  Lahoris and Ahmadis (Qadianis)

Following the death in 1908 of their founder, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the Ahmadiyya movement split into two groups: the majority Ahmadi (Qadiani) group, and the Lahoris, who are relatively few and less organized. According to the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam there is currently no antagonism between the two groups, and outside their own communities members of both groups are treated the same (AMI 24 Sept. 1993). The split arose as a result of differences over the choice of a caliph to succeed Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as the leader of the movement. The Lahoris moved to Lahore, while the Ahmadis stayed in Qadian, now a town in the Indian Punjab (Encyclopaedia of Islam 1986, 301). Influenced by the wave of anti-imperialism and Islamic nationalism that swept across the Indian subcontinent in 1910, the Lahoris fell relatively silent about their religious differences with the Pakistani Muslim community (ibid.; AMI 24 Sept. 1993). The Lahoris do not refer to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a prophet but rather as a reformer, and they contend that he himself never claimed to be a prophet (Encyclopaedia of Islam 1986, 302).

3.2        Sections 298(b) and (c) (Ordinance XX) and 295(c) (blasphemy) of the Penal Code

Most charges against Ahmadis in 1992 and 1993 were laid under sections 298(b) and (c) and 295(c) of the Pakistani Penal Code (Tale of Persecution Apr. 1993, 2; HRCP 1993, 46). According to the HRCP's 1992 annual report, over 150 complaints against members of the Ahmadi community were lodged under these sections in 1992. The related jail sentences handed down by Pakistani courts have ranged from a few months to two years or more (HRCP 1993, 46). For instance, on 25 February 1992 in Sargodha, four Ahmadis were sentenced to eight years' imprisonment and fines equivalent to US$32 for having built an Ahmadi house of worship on their own land. The plaintiffs declared that the "non-Muslim" place of worship had injured their religious feelings (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1168). Amatullah Saleem fared better. On 4 February 1993 a case was registered against Saleem, a woman teacher in the village of Dunyapur in Punjab, under section 295(c) for having recited the Koran in the morning assembly at the local school (Tale of Persecution July 1993, 5). According to Amnesty International, Saleem had been acquitted by August 1993 (25 Aug. 1993, 1).

There was a considerable increase in 1992 and 1993 in prosecutions for offences against section 295(c) (News From Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 10). In November 1992, a Pakistani court pronounced the first death sentence for blasphemy since the law was amended in August 1991 (ibid., 13-14; The Ottawa Citizen 9 Jan. 1993; Country Reports 1992 1993, 1165). The defendant, a Christian who was accused of having made blasphemous remarks about the Prophet (News from Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 12), has since been held in solitary confinement "due to the nature of his crime." He lodged an appeal in January 1993 and reportedly the case was immediately postponed (ISHR 5 Feb. 1993; Amnesty International 1992, 229). According to Asia Watch, a Muslim was also sentenced to death in 1992 for an offence against section 295(c). As of August 1993, the two cases were still under appeal and eight other blasphemy cases were before the courts. Asia Watch does not specify the religion of the defendants in the latter cases (News From Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 11).

In addition, charges were laid against a number of Ahmadi publishers and printers in 1992 and publications were confiscated (HRCP 1993, 32, 46). The Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam reports cases of Ahmadis charged under section 298(c) in early 1993 and states that in every case the charges were laid on the instructions of the district magistrates (Tale of Persecution July 1993, 5).

3.3      Discrimination in Employment and Access to Higher Education

The U.S. State Department reiterates in its 1992 report that Ahmadis have little chance of attaining positions of responsibility in the civil service (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1171). In fact, according to the HRCP, some thirty Ahmadi civil servants were fired in 1992 (HRCP 1993, 46). Similarly, young Ahmadis are encountering increasing difficulty in gaining admission to recognized institutions of higher education, forcing many of them to continue their studies abroad (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1171). The U.S. State Department also reports that in March 1992, an educational institution in Lahore in the Punjab issued a public notice requiring all applicants to a nursing program to attest in writing that they were not Ahmadis (ibid., 1168). The Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam's quarterly bulletins also report incidents of harassment of two Ahmadi teachers in Islamabad and one incident of assault against an Ahmadi student in Abbotabad in North-West Frontier Province in May 1993 (Tale of Persecution July 1993, 5-6).

3.4          Freedom of Worship

In 1992, the police continued to close down Ahmadi places of worship (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1167). Some mosques were attacked; others under construction were subjected to prohibitions and have remained unfinished; in some cases graves were desecrated and cemeteries were prohibited by the authorities (HRCP 1993, 46). The Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam reports an incident which occurred in June 1993 in the Toba Takesingh district in the Punjab: a police squad accompanied by a municipal court judge categorically refused to allow Ahmadis to bury the remains of a member of their community in a cemetery where a number of their ancestors were buried (Tale of Persecution July 1993, 6). In addition, Ahmadis were arrested, sometimes charged and even imprisoned for practising their faith (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1167; Amnesty International 1992, 229). The U.S. State Department reports that in early 1992, during a religious event in Kotri in Sindh Province, Ahmadis were arrested while saying their prayers and taken to the police station, where some of them were allegedly beaten (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1167). Two weeks later, they were released on bail to await trial on charges of blasphemy (Amnesty International 1992, 229-30).

In February 1993, Pakistan's National Assembly passed a resolution on the protection of the places of worship of religious minorities in Pakistan (BBC Summary 17 Feb. 1993; PTV Television 9 Feb. 1993). According to an official of the Pakistani Embassy in Washington, however, action on this resolution is still at the planning stage (22 Sept. 1993). On 10 July 1993, an Ahmadi mosque in Karachi, the Masjid Noor, was attacked by approximately fifteen people. An Ahmadi employee was seriously injured during the incident. According to the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam, the attack was planned in the offices of Khatme Nubuwwat (Committee to Secure the Finality of Prophethood), housed in a mosque located not far from the Masjid Noor (Tale of Persecution July 1993, 3). The U.S. State Department's report for 1992 also mentions the forced conversion of Ahmadi women (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1167). However, the DIRB has been unable to corroborate this information.

3.5           Identity Cards

On 13 October 1992 the Pakistani government decided, through a resolution, to mark religious denomination on Pakistani identity cards (IPS 23 Dec. 1992; Keesing's Oct. 1992, 39146). According to the authorities, this measure was necessary because the electorate is divided on the basis of religious adherence (IPS 23 Dec. 1992; HRCP 1993, 43) and the identity cards must be shown when voting (National Democratic Institute 1989, 36; Embassy of Pakistan 22 Sept. 1993).

The adoption of the resolution caused a nationwide outcry, especially from the Christian minority, in the fall of 1992 (The Washington Post 21 Oct. 1992; UPI 9 Nov. 1992; Reuters 16 Nov. 1992; IPS 23 Dec. 1992). Religious minorities contend that marking religious adherence on identity cards is a discriminatory measure in a country where the constitution does not define citizens on the basis of their religion (UPI 9 Nov. 1992). Pakistanis must show their identity cards in many circumstances, including in court, when applying for a job, when applying for admission to a college, and during police checks (IPS 23 Dec. 1992). According to opponents of the measure, the new identity cards will encourage discrimination, particularly in employment and education (The Washington Post 21 Oct. 1992; UPI 9 Nov. 1992; Los Angeles Times 6 Apr. 1993). Hamid Khan, president of the Lahore High Court Association, contends that many members of religious minorities who have taken Muslim-sounding names in recent years in order to evade discrimination will have no escape if their religion is marked on the identity cards (IPS 23 Dec. 1992). The same source reports that according to observers of the Pakistani scene, this measure is aimed at barring non-Muslim citizens, notably Ahmadis, from the civil service (ibid.). Indeed, according to UPI, Islamic authorities told Christian demonstrators in November 1992 that the targets of the regulation were not Christians but rather the members of the Ahmadi community (UPI 9 Nov. 1992).

In November 1992, ten members of the National Assembly from various religious minorities threatened to resign if the resolution on identity cards passed, and close to twenty members of provincial assemblies openly opposed the measure. The Sindh assembly voted unanimously against it (Reuters 23 Nov. 1992; HRCP 1993, 43).

According to Amnesty International, the Pakistani government has proceeded with the new identity cards throughout Pakistan except in Sindh Province (25 Aug. 1993). However, according to an official of the Embassy of Pakistan in Ottawa, the resolution on identity cards was voted down by the National Assembly in the fall of 1992 (Embassy of Pakistan 22 Sept. 1993). The HRCP reports that approximately two million of the new cards were issued in 1992 before the process was interrupted in November 1992 (HRCP 1993, 43). An article published in Asia Link indicates that the Pakistani government has reconsidered the matter due to the protests (Jan.-Feb. 1993, 20).

3.6  Khatme Nubuwwat

Majlis Tahaffuz Khatme Nubuwwat (Committee to Secure the Finality of Prophethood) (Kumar 1977, 93) was founded during the period of British rule in India under the name Majlis-e-Ahrar (AMI 24 Sept. 1993). It was then a small Muslim political party opposed to the creation of an independent Islamic state (Syed 1982, 80; Rehman 1993, 5). The group reportedly changed its name in the 1970s to attract orthodox Muslims (Rehman 1993, 7; AMI 24 Sept. 1993). Today it is commonly known as Khatme Nubuwwat.

The mullahs in the organization exert pressure to ban the use of Koranic expressions in Ahmadi places of worship and have, in the past, reportedly collaborated with Pakistani authorities, most notably in the destruction of Ahmadi mosques (Petrén et al. 1987, 108, 112; AMI 1987, 94). According to the HRCP, the Pakistani government encouraged Khatme Nubuwwat's activities during the events leading up to the Nankana Sahib riots, notably by entrusting the organization with maintaining order in what was supposed to be simply a demonstration (HRCP 1989, 9-12). In January 1990, in North-West Frontier Province, members of the fundamentalist organization's youth wing reported a group of young Ahmadis who had congregated to pray. Five of the Ahmadi youths were arrested and then held in custody for over three months before being released (Amnesty International Sept. 1991, 6). Asia Watch also reports that the Amir of the Khatme Nubuwwat mosque in Dera Ghazi Khan filed charges with the district magistrate against two Ahmadi professors who had published, in London, a translation of the Koran in seraiki, a regional language (News from Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 19; HRCP 1993, 46). The two men were accused of having blasphemed the Koran and the Prophet and were brought to trial for having breached sections 295(a), 295(b) and 295(c) (ibid.). At present the DIRB has no additional information on this case.

According to the HRCP, Khatme Nubuwwat is among the organizations which supported the resolution on identity cards (ibid., 120). The HRCP also reports the case of an Ahmadi in Abbotabad who is said to have been kidnapped and tortured by members of the extremist group's youth wing in November 1992, and then jailed on false charges (Slogan Jan. 1993, 29).

In its April 1993 bulletin, Tale of Persecution, the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam reports on a Khatme Nubuwwat conference in Rabwah, where speakers are said to have called on participants to pressure the government to ban the Ahmadi movement and have the Ahmadis, whom they referred to as "traitors," put to death (Tale of Persecution Apr. 1993, 2-3). It has also been reported that members of the organization assaulted an Ahmadi student in Abbotabad in May 1993. Although the incident was reported to the police, the assailants were still at large in July 1993 (ibid. July 1993, 5-6). According to the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam, members of the radical group plotted an attack on an Ahmadi mosque in Karachi in July 1993 (ibid., 3). The Ahmadi organization adds that Khatme Nubuwwat is supported by Saudi Arabia and has expanded its activities beyond Pakistan's borders, notably to England (AMI 24 Sept. 1993).

3.7    Geographic Distribution of Incidents Against Ahmadis in Pakistan

According to an HRCP spokesperson in Lahore, being part of a large Ahmadi community can provide a feeling of security, but significant numbers can also draw attention and can be more "bothersome" for the religious authorities. It is easier for an Ahmadi who does not live in one of the major concentrations of Ahmadis to pass unnoticed (HRCP 27 Sept. 1993). According to Mujeeb-ur Rehman, senior advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the level of harassment of Ahmadis depends primarily on the local population and administration. Rehman reports that the Ahmadi community of Rabwah has been the worst hit of all Ahmadi communities in Pakistan (Rehman 26 Sept. 1993, 2; also see map on p. iii showing major concentrations of Ahmadis in Pakistan).

The majority of cases documented by the HRCP, the U.S. State Department and human rights groups in 1992 occurred in the towns of Sargodha, Rabwah, Nankana Sahib and Vehari in the Punjab, and in the town of Kotri in Sindh Province; in 1993, cases were documented primarily in the towns of Rabwah, Rawalpindi, Faisalabad and Londhran in the Punjab, and Abbotabad in North-West Frontier Province (Amnesty International 1992, 229; Country Reports 1992 1993, 1161, 1167-68; Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Newsletter Jan. 1993, 4; ibid. Oct. 1992, 10; AMI 19 Apr. 1993; (Tale of Persecution July 1993, 3-5; ibid. Apr. 1993, 2; News From Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 11-21). ( For more information on legal proceedings against Ahmadis and members of other religious minorities in Pakistan, please see the above-mentioned documents, which are available at the DIRB Resource Centre in Ottawa.)

4.   LEGAL RECOURSE

The constitutional amendments passed during the 1970s and 1980s under the regimes of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and his successor Zia Ul-Haq opened the door to government interference with the Pakistani courts (Petrén et al 1987, 44-45; Asia Watch and the WRP 1992, 99-102). Today the courts remain generally subordinated to the executive branch; this is especially true of the lower courts (News From Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 5; Asia Watch and the WRP 1992, 101-102; Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Newsletter Jan. 1993, 9). Moreover, since 1980, there have been two parallel legal systems in Pakistan, one inherited from the British colonial regime and the other based on Koranic tradition. The introduction of the Sharia (Islamic law) into the Pakistani legal system has further curtailed the authority of Pakistani courts of all levels of jurisdiction (Asia Watch and the WRP 1992, 99).

Offences against sections 298(b) and (c) of the Pakistan Penal Code are heard and tried by the magistrate of the first class of courts (the lowest courts), and offences against section 295(c) by the sessions courts (third- level courts) (Jilani 23 Dec. 1991, 1; Syed 16 Sept. 1993; Rehman 26 Sept. 1993, 1). Verdicts can be appealed to the lower courts, the High Courts and the Supreme Court (HRCP 27 Sept. 1993).

Provincial governments have the power to appoint and remove lower court judges. High Court judges are appointed by the President of Pakistan on the advice of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the governor of the province in which the High Court is located. The president may at any time transfer a High Court judge from one district to another for a maximum period of two years. A judge cannot refuse a transfer except by resigning. While the High Courts enjoy a degree of independence, the lower courts are heavily influenced by provincial authorities and the police (Asia Watch and the WRP 1992, 102; Country Reports 1992 1993, 1163).

The influence of religious authorities has further compromised the independence of the Pakistani legal system. The Federal Shariat Court (FSC), created in May 1980, is charged with ensuring that all legislative and legal proceedings and decisions are in keeping with the Sharia. The FSC has the authority to require revisions to national legislation at any time and its decisions take precedence over lower court and High Court rulings. The members of the FSC, who are not always judges, are appointed by the government and can be removed by the government at any time. Moreover, under the terms of a 1991 act promulgated by Nawaz Sharif, Sharia takes precedence over the constitution (News From Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 5; Keesing's Apr. 1991, 38152; ibid. May 1991, 38193).

According to Hina Jilani, a High Court lawyer and member of AGHS Associates Legal Aid Cell in Lahore, the legal authorities tend to side with the "aggressors" when the injury has been committed in the name of the principles upheld by the religious fundamentalists (6 Dec. 1991). An HRCP official acknowledges that it is quite possible that a judge's impartiality may be undermined by the presence of religious authorities in the court (HRCP 27 Sept. 1993). Moreover, according to Rehman, senior advocate of the Pakistani Supreme Court, judges may be influenced not only by Muslim fundamentalist clerics in the audience but also by the clerics' activities outside of court. Addressing crowds they themselves have assembled, and sometimes in front of journalists, the clerics accuse judges of being too tolerant of "anti-Islamism," "heresy" or "pro-Qadianism." Rehman reports that a judge of the Peshawar High Court bowed to pressure from clerics in the audience and expedited a trial of Ahmadis, pronouncing prison sentences

without complying with the requirements of law and...even left some blanks in his judgment. The high court summoned the magistrate to appear in person and explain the serious default. The only answer the magistrate could give was that there was a mob outside and clerics inside the court and he wanted to dispose off [sic] the case quickly [translation] (Rehman 26 Sept. 1993, 2).

According to Rehman, the Supreme Court is increasingly feeling the influence of fundamentalist religious authorities (ibid.).

Asia Watch states that judges who rule on "blasphemy" cases must be Muslims (News From Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 10). Moreover, as section 295(c) does not clearly define the term "derogatory remarks," the determination of guilt or innocence depends on an arbitrary interpretation of the act with which the accused is charged. There is no recourse under Pakistani law against political bias and the arbitrary nature of legal decisions (ibid., 3, 10).

Slow proceedings compound the difficulties faced by Ahmadis in Pakistani courts. Defendants are sometimes held for long periods of time without the knowledge of the courts (Asia Watch and the WRP 1992, 74). Bail is more readily granted in cases of offences against sections 298(b) and (c) than for offences against section 295(c); in the latter case, bail is generally denied. The length of detention before trial-in the police station or in prison-varies from case to case (Rehman 26 Sept. 1993, 2). Moreover, due to outdated legal proceedings, frequent postponements and understaffed courts, cases can remain before the courts for years (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1163; HRCP 1993, 6). Asma Jahangir, an advocate of the Lahore High Court, chairperson of the HRCP and a member of the editorial board of the monthly Slogan, in an article published in the publication indicates that criminal trials generally extend over two years and appeals to the High Court can be pending for over four years before they are heard (Slogan Apr. 1992, 4-5). According to Amnesty International, none of the blasphemy cases brought before the courts in 1992 had been heard by the end of the year (Amnesty International 1992, 229). Asia Watch states that under this system, accusations of blasphemy motivated by political scores or personal grudges can lead to arrest, even when these accusations are not corroborated or supported by evidence. An accused person can therefore be held for years awaiting trial on the strength of an allegation of blasphemy from a single witness (News From Asia Watch 19 Sept. 1993, 11).

5.             INTERNAL FLIGHT ALTERNATIVES

According to Rehman and the U.S. State Department, Pakistanis can move freely within the country (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1168; Rehman 26 Sept. 1993). However, it is generally impossible to evade the Pakistani justice system (HRCP 27 Sept. 1993) except by going underground (Syed 16 Sept. 1993) or taking refuge in tribal areas, where the power of Pakistani justice to intervene is lessened (HRCP 27 Sept. 1993). However, according to an Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam spokesperson, while the government's reach is indeed limited in these regions of the country, the tribal areas are not places of refuge for Ahmadis due to the prevailing hostility there towards members of the Ahmadi community (AMI 12 Oct. 1993). The police have their own information-sharing systems; for example, the district commissioner usually maintains regular contact with local stations (Syed 16 Sept. 1993). Moreover, police departments are legally bound to provide support to their counterparts in other provinces; arrest warrants are thus valid outside the province in which they were issued (ibid.; HRCP 27 Sept. 1993; Rehman 26 Sept. 1993).

6.        RIGHT OF EXIT AND RETURN

Any Pakistani citizen who leaves Pakistan without a passport, or who omits or falsifies information in order to obtain a passport, is subject to the penalties prescribed by the Passport Act (1974) (Jilani 23 Dec. 1991). A copy of the relevant provisions of this act is provided in the appendix.

During a recent telephone interview, a spokesperson with the HRCP in Lahore indicated that while Ahmadis can expect reprisals from the Pakistani authorities for omitting or falsifying information on a passport application, their fellow Ahmadis are more understanding: the Ahmadi community is well aware of the pressures on Ahmadis in Pakistan and will not ostracize Ahmadis who declare themselves "non-Muslims" to obtain a passport (HRCP 27 Sept. 1993). According to Rehman, the declaration of faith which appears on the passport is so phrased that Ahmadis cannot sign it (see the appendices for a copy of the passport application). Ahmadis are therefore issued a passport in which the religious column indicates "Ahmadi," and although it is an important tenet of Ahmadi faith that they are Muslims, the use of such passports in this circumstance does not offend the other members of their community (Rehman 26 Sept. 1993, 2). For more information on passports, see the January 1992 IRBDC Question and Answer Series paper, Pakistan: Treatment of Ahmadis Who Return.

Under the terms of Exit From Pakistan (Control) Ordinance No. XLVI (1981), the Pakistani government reserves the right to deny, without going through the courts, any application to leave the country, even if the applicant has all of the required travel documents (Hannum 1987, 81). Moreover, the Pakistani authorities have an exit control list which they use to conduct checks on certain individuals. According to Country Reports 1992, this list has been broadly used by previous governments to control foreign travel, but reportedly was used by the Sharif government only against serious criminals (Country Reports 1992 1993, 1168). In this way drug traffickers were prevented from leaving the country in 1993 (HRCP 27 Sept. 1993). Because of border conflicts with India and Afghanistan, it is difficult if not impossible to leave Pakistan without passing through a border post; as there is an extradition treaty between Pakistan and Iran, the Iranian border is heavily guarded (Iran 5 June 1991). (According to Rehman (26 Sept. 1993), both pieces of legislation are probably still in force. The DIRB is awaiting official confirmation from Rehman and the Pakistani embassy in Ottawa on this point.)

According to Rehman and an HRCP official, Pakistani law does not provide penalties for citizens who apply for asylum while abroad. On the other hand, they may suffer political or religious harassment at the hands of the Pakistani authorities if the situation becomes embarrassing for the government (HRCP 27 Sept. 1993; Rehman 26 Sept. 1993, 2). However, the HRCP official contends that there are no grounds for stating that a Pakistani citizen who returns to Pakistan after having applied for refugee status in another country will be arrested by the authorities upon his or her return (27 Sept. 1993). In May 1993, the Urdu- language daily Dawat-E-Amal reported the case of an Ahmadi deported to Pakistan and arrested after having been refused refugee status in Canada, but the article states that the person in question was arrested for preaching his religion (10 May 1993; Calgary Herald 20 Apr. 1993).

The Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam contends however that an Ahmadi who applies for asylum in another country does indeed risk arrest by the authorities upon his or her return to Pakistan, notably for breaching Ordinance XX-i.e., for having declared himself to be a Muslim (AMI 24 Sept. 1993)-and will likely be harassed by radical elements of the Muslim clergy and other groups such as Khatme Nubuwwat and Jamaat-e-islami (AMI 7 Dec. 1993).

7. FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS

According to observers of Pakistani politics and society, the human rights situation may improve with Benazir Bhutto's return to power, especially for religious minorities (Taylor 26 Aug. 1993; Ali 26 Aug. 1993; Syed 30 Aug. 1993). While Bhutto did emerge the victor from the 6 October 1993 national election, she will have to manoeuvre to hold the support of the small parties and independents who enabled her to become prime minister (The Ottawa Citizen 20 Oct. 1993, A8). Moreover, like other Pakistani political leaders, Bhutto can ill afford, in the current situation, to amend or rescind the laws relating to the Ahmadi minority (Ali 26 Aug. 1993; Syed 30 Aug. 1993), even though returning to a unified electorate was part of the PPP platform (The Pakistan Observer 2 Sept. 1993). According to Salamat Ali, Islamabad correspondent for the Far Eastern Economic Review, any improvement which does occur will be felt in everyday life but is unlikely to be reflected in the law (Ali 26 Aug. 1993).

8.               APPENDICES

8.1            Text of Section 295(c) of the Pakistani Penal Code (PPC)

As adopted in 1986:

As amended in April 1991:

Source: Jilani 23 Dec. 1991.

8.2 Text of Sections 298(b) and (c) of the Pakistan Penal Code, as Amended in 1984

Source: Gualtieri 1989.

8.3          Pakistan Passport Application Form

Declaration (to be signed by Muslims only).

Source: Gualtieri 1989.

8.4          Text of Sections 1 to 6 of the Passport Act of 1974

Source: Jilani 23 Dec. 1991.

Source: Jilani 23 Dec. 1991.

Source: Jilani 23 Dec. 1991.

REFERENCES

Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam (AMI). Ottawa. 7 December 1993. Telephone interview with spokesperson.

Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam (AMI). Ottawa. 12 October 1993. Telephone interview with spokesperson.

Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam (AMI). Ottawa. 24 September 1993. Telephone interview with spokesperson.

Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam (AMI). Ottawa. 15 September 1993. Telephone interview with spokesperson.

Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam (AMI). 19 April 1993. List of Cases Against "Ahmadis of Pakistan" Under Section 295C (Pakistan Penal Code).

Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam (AMI). 1987. Persecution of Ahmadi Muslims and Their Response. London: Ahmadiyya Muslim Association.

Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam (AMI). 21 March 1991. Letter from an official to the IRB in Montréal in response to a request for information.

Ali, Salamat. Islamabad correspondent for Far Eastern Economic Review. 26 August 1993. Telephone interview.

Amnesty International. 1992. Amnesty International Report 1992. New York: Amnesty International USA.

Amnesty International. September 1991. Pakistan: Violations of Human Rights of Ahmadis. (AI Index: ASA/33/15/91). London: Amnesty International Publications.

Amnesty International. London. 25 August 1993. Fax to the DIRB, Ottawa.

Asia Link [Hong Kong]. January-February 1993. Vol. 15, No. 1. "Repeal Discriminatory Law." (HL/ACPP 921028 (24) Nov.-Dec. 1992)

Asia Watch and the Women Rights Group (WRP). 1992. Double Jeopardy: Abuse of Women in Pakistan. New York: Human Rights Watch.

BBC Summary of World Broadcasts. 17 February 1993. "Pakistan National Assembly Adopts Resolution on Minority Protection." (NEXIS)

Calgary Herald. 20 April 1993. Kim Lunman. "Muslim Church Fights Deportation."

Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1992. 1993. United States Department of State. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.

Dawat-E-Amal [Sargodha, Pakistan]. 10 May 1993. "Arrest on the Preaching of Qadianiat," translation from Urdu provided by the Translation Bureau of the Government of Canada.

Dawn [Karachi]. 4 July 1993. Ahmad Hasan Alvi. "Qadianis Petitions Dismissed By SC."

Dawn [Karachi]. 2 February 1993. "Qadianis Do Not Have Faith in Holy Prophet Like Muslims."

Dawn [Karachi]. 1 December 1992. "Supreme Court Confirms Interim Bail."

Devamithran, Joseph. 1989. "Pakistan," Constitutions of the Countries of the World. Edited by Albert P. Blaustein and Gisbert H. Flanz. Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana Publications Inc.

Embassy of Pakistan, Ottawa. 22 September 1993. Telephone interview with official.

Embassy of Pakistan, Washington. 22 September 1993. Telephone interview with official.

The Encyclopaedia of Islam. 1986. Vol. 1. Edited by A.R. Gibb et al. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

Hannum, Hurst. 1987. The Right to Leave and Return in International Law and Practice. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), Islamabad. 27 September 1993. Telephone interview with spokesperson.

Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), Islamabad. 1993. State of Human Rights in Pakistan-1992. Lahore: Human Rights Commission of Pakistan.

Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), Islamabad. 1989. Riot and Arson: Nankana Sahib. Lahore: Human Rights Commission of Pakistan.

Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Newsletter [Lahore]. January 1993. Vol. 4, No. 1. "Reprieve for Ahmadis."

Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Newsletter [Lahore]. October 1992. Vol. 3, No. 4. "More Cases Against Ahmadis."

Immigration and Refugee Board Documentation Centre (IRBDC), Ottawa. January 1992. Pakistan: Treatment of Ahmadis Who Return.

India Today [New Delhi]. 15 October 1993. Shekar Gupta. "Playing By The Rules."

International Society for Human Rights (ISHR), Frankfurt. 5 February 1993. "Pakistan: New Case of 'Blasphemy' Registered." (press release)

Inter Press Service (IPS). 23 December 1992. "Pakistan: Non-Muslim Minorities Up in Arms." (NEXIS)

Iran. 5 June 1991. "Iran-Pakistan Agreement on the Extradition of the Fugitives."

Jilani, Hina. Lawyer of the Lahore High Court. 23 December 1991. Fax to the IRBDC, Ottawa.

Jilani, Hina. Lawyer of the Lahore High Court. 6 December 1991. Telephone interview.

Keesing's Record of World Events [Cambridge]. October 1992. Vol. 38, No. 10. "Pakistan: Controversy Over Identity Card Requirements."

Keesing's Record of World Events [Cambridge]. May 1991. Vol. 37, No. 5. "Pakistan: Passing of Sharia Bill."

Keesing's Record of World Events [Cambridge]. April 1991. Vol. 37, No. 4. "Pakistan: Introduction of Sharia Bill."

Kumar, Satish. 1977. The New Pakistan. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing Ltd.

Los Angeles Times. 6 April 1993. "Islam Rising." (NEXIS)

National Democratic Institute for International Affairs. 1989. Pakistan Elections: Foundation for Democracy. Washington, DC: National Democratic Institute for International Affairs.

The News [Karachi]. 4 February 1993. "SC Reserves Judgement On Petitions Against Prohibition of Qadianiat Ordinance."

News From Asia Watch [New York]. 19 September 1993. Vol. 5, No. 13. "Persecuted Minorities and Writers in Pakistan."

The Ottawa Citizen. 20 October 1993. Tim McGirk. "Bhutto Wins Second Try as PM of Pakistan."

The Ottawa Citizen. 9 January 1993. Bob Harvey. "Free Speech, Islamic Faith Meet Head-on in Pakistan."

The Pakistan Observer [Islamabad, in English]. 2 September 1993. "Benazir Bhutto Announces PPP Manifesto." (FBIS-NES-93-172 8 Sept. 1993, p. 38)

Petrén, Gustaf et al. 1987. Pakistan: Human Rights After Martial Law. Geneva: International Commission of Jurists.

PTV Television Network [Islamabad, in English]. 9 February 1993. "Resolution Passed to Protect Minority Worship Areas." (FBIS- NES-93-026 10 Feb. 1993, p. 59)

Rehman, Mujeeb-ur. Senior advocate of the Pakistani Supreme Court. 26 September 1993. Fax to the DIRB, Ottawa.

Rehman, Mujeeb-ur. Senior advocate of the Pakistani Supreme Court. 1993. Persecution of Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Objective Study. Maple, Ont.: Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam.

Reuters. 23 November 1992. "Pakistan MPs Threaten to Resign Over Religion." (NEXIS)

Reuters. 16 November 1992. "Pakistan Arrests 14 Christians After Riot." (NEXIS)

Slogan [Lahore]. January 1993. Vol. 4, No. 4. "Appeal From Abbotabad's Ill Fated Ahmadis."

Slogan [Lahore]. April 1992. Vol. 3, No. 7. Asma Jahangir. "Provisions For Speedy Justice."

Syed, Anwar H. Professor of political science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. 16 September 1993. Telephone interview.

Syed, Anwar H. Professor of political science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. 30 August 1993. Telephone interview.

Syed, Anwar H. Professor of political science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. 1982. "Sociological Analysis of an Islamic Sect: The Ahmadiyya Movement." (M.A. thesis, University of Windsor)

Tale of Persecution [Toronto]. July 1993. Vol. 1, No. 7. (Newsletter of the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam Canada)

Tale of Persecution [Toronto]. April 1993. Vol. 1, No. 6.

Taylor, David. Professor, School of Oriental and African Studies, London. 26 August 1993. Fax to the DIRB, Ottawa.

Time [New York]. 18 October 1993. Jefferson Penberty. "Second Time Lucky?"

The United Press International (UPI). 9 November 1992. Anwar Iqual. "Pakistani Christians Protest New Religion Law." (NEXIS)

The Washington Post. 21 October 1992. Molly Moore and John W. Anderson. "Islamic Law-and Zeal-Rise to Challenge Secular Politics in Pakistan." (NEXIS)