What is HRW up to in Pakistan?
Ahmad NooraniSunday, January 01, 2012
================================================ISLAMABAD: Human Rights Watch (HRW), an American-based international human rights organisation operating across the world, is against the Islamic provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan, the Toheen-e-Risalat Act, and is working to bring about a change in them.
Ali Dayan Hasan, the director of HRW’s Pakistan chapter, while talking to The News, said that his organisation is against the some constitutional clauses and laws which are against basic human rights like Islamic provisions of the Pakistan’s Constitution and some Islamic laws which, according to him, were inserted/made during the regime of third military dictator General Ziaul Haq. Dayan said that his organisation has shown its severe reservations when the Chief Justice of Pakistan had observed that the Supreme Court can set aside any legislation made by the Parliament if it would be found against Islamic provision enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan.
“See, how the Supreme Court could declare a legislation made by the Parliament as null and void only terming it in contradiction to some Islamic provisions,” Dayan said during an extensive interview with The News on Friday evening.
The HRW is one of the world’s large and effective human rights organisations and its agenda as declared by its Pakistan’s chief seems to be extremely dangerous and shows as if the organisation was functioning against the Constitution of Pakistan on its lands.
Asked that even in developed and advanced political cultures the principle of judicial review exists and superior judiciary exercises its powers to set aside any law made by the Parliament if it is found against the basic structure of the constitution of the concerned country, Dayan replied, “But, any such practice could be carried out only in accordance with democratic-political process which is part of the international law and generally accepted principles of human rights.”
Dayan said that Aasia Bibi was innocent in a case blasphemy of Holy Prophet (PBUH) but the Lahore High Court (LHC) issued pre-emptive preventive order that president couldn’t grant her pardon despite the fact the Constitution gave the Office of President powers to pardon any sentence. “See, the law (Toheen-e-Risalat Act) under which Aasia Bibi was sentenced has lacunas and need gross changes,” Dayan said, adding, “Asia Bibi was innocent and LHC decision was a clear case of judicial over-reach and that was why our organisation highlighted this issue.” Dayan said his organisation has comprehensive studies on the Blasphemy law and has its own drafts to get the law amended.
When Dayan was asked that a court of law has convicted Aasia Bibi in a case, how, he, as an educated person and a human rights activist, could declare her ‘innocent’ until unless a court of law acquitted her of charges, Dayan replied, “We have a difference of opinion here.”
Asked despite his severe criticism on the blasphemy law, not a single person has been executed under this law in the whole history of Pakistan because of severe requirements of proof and evidences, and any lower court sentences were overturned by superior courts, so in a way the blasphemy law was acting as a protective shield for the minorities in Pakistan, Dayan said, “We have a difference of opinion here.”
Dayan also didn’t comment when he was asked that people, killed in incidents related to blasphemy, were not killed because of the law because of some un-guided emotions of people, which is a separate subject and needed to be addressed separately.
Regarding president’s power to grant pardon, when Dayan was asked whether he knew that despite the relevant constitution article, there is always law and rules of business to execute any powers conferred with any office in the constitution or in any law, Dayan showed his ignorance of the system and practices. Dayan repeatedly insisted that his organisation wants that democracy should sustain in the country without any kind of unconstitutional intervention and want rule of law “as per the democratic-political values which are integral part of the international” practices with all the institutions functioning within their domains by honouring accepted principles of human rights.
He said that courts should instead see any laws or the constitutional clauses which are “against the basic human rights and the generally accepted principles” and make all decision in accordance with these accepted principles explained in the international law. Dayan claimed that his organisation was independent and professional and was not acting upon any body or any country’s agenda.
When Dayan was asked about the parameters or methods being adopted by his organisation to bring about these changes in Islamic provision and some Islamic laws and whether the HRW has given some formal recommendations to Raza Rabbani committee which has held year-long deliberations to bring about changes/amendments in the Constitution and repeatedly and constantly announced publicly seeking recommendations from general public and organisation, Dayan replied in negative. Dayan said that view of his organisation and its recommendations on these issues and regarding some Islamic laws are very clear and “available publicly”, so anyone could consult them.
Ahmad NooraniSunday, January 01, 2012
================================================ISLAMABAD: Human Rights Watch (HRW), an American-based international human rights organisation operating across the world, is against the Islamic provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan, the Toheen-e-Risalat Act, and is working to bring about a change in them.
Ali Dayan Hasan, the director of HRW’s Pakistan chapter, while talking to The News, said that his organisation is against the some constitutional clauses and laws which are against basic human rights like Islamic provisions of the Pakistan’s Constitution and some Islamic laws which, according to him, were inserted/made during the regime of third military dictator General Ziaul Haq. Dayan said that his organisation has shown its severe reservations when the Chief Justice of Pakistan had observed that the Supreme Court can set aside any legislation made by the Parliament if it would be found against Islamic provision enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan.
“See, how the Supreme Court could declare a legislation made by the Parliament as null and void only terming it in contradiction to some Islamic provisions,” Dayan said during an extensive interview with The News on Friday evening.
The HRW is one of the world’s large and effective human rights organisations and its agenda as declared by its Pakistan’s chief seems to be extremely dangerous and shows as if the organisation was functioning against the Constitution of Pakistan on its lands.
Asked that even in developed and advanced political cultures the principle of judicial review exists and superior judiciary exercises its powers to set aside any law made by the Parliament if it is found against the basic structure of the constitution of the concerned country, Dayan replied, “But, any such practice could be carried out only in accordance with democratic-political process which is part of the international law and generally accepted principles of human rights.”
Dayan said that Aasia Bibi was innocent in a case blasphemy of Holy Prophet (PBUH) but the Lahore High Court (LHC) issued pre-emptive preventive order that president couldn’t grant her pardon despite the fact the Constitution gave the Office of President powers to pardon any sentence. “See, the law (Toheen-e-Risalat Act) under which Aasia Bibi was sentenced has lacunas and need gross changes,” Dayan said, adding, “Asia Bibi was innocent and LHC decision was a clear case of judicial over-reach and that was why our organisation highlighted this issue.” Dayan said his organisation has comprehensive studies on the Blasphemy law and has its own drafts to get the law amended.
When Dayan was asked that a court of law has convicted Aasia Bibi in a case, how, he, as an educated person and a human rights activist, could declare her ‘innocent’ until unless a court of law acquitted her of charges, Dayan replied, “We have a difference of opinion here.”
Asked despite his severe criticism on the blasphemy law, not a single person has been executed under this law in the whole history of Pakistan because of severe requirements of proof and evidences, and any lower court sentences were overturned by superior courts, so in a way the blasphemy law was acting as a protective shield for the minorities in Pakistan, Dayan said, “We have a difference of opinion here.”
Dayan also didn’t comment when he was asked that people, killed in incidents related to blasphemy, were not killed because of the law because of some un-guided emotions of people, which is a separate subject and needed to be addressed separately.
Regarding president’s power to grant pardon, when Dayan was asked whether he knew that despite the relevant constitution article, there is always law and rules of business to execute any powers conferred with any office in the constitution or in any law, Dayan showed his ignorance of the system and practices. Dayan repeatedly insisted that his organisation wants that democracy should sustain in the country without any kind of unconstitutional intervention and want rule of law “as per the democratic-political values which are integral part of the international” practices with all the institutions functioning within their domains by honouring accepted principles of human rights.
He said that courts should instead see any laws or the constitutional clauses which are “against the basic human rights and the generally accepted principles” and make all decision in accordance with these accepted principles explained in the international law. Dayan claimed that his organisation was independent and professional and was not acting upon any body or any country’s agenda.
When Dayan was asked about the parameters or methods being adopted by his organisation to bring about these changes in Islamic provision and some Islamic laws and whether the HRW has given some formal recommendations to Raza Rabbani committee which has held year-long deliberations to bring about changes/amendments in the Constitution and repeatedly and constantly announced publicly seeking recommendations from general public and organisation, Dayan replied in negative. Dayan said that view of his organisation and its recommendations on these issues and regarding some Islamic laws are very clear and “available publicly”, so anyone could consult them.
=================================================
No comments:
Post a Comment