Now Showing in Pakistan: Hudood Ordinances

   By Zofeen T Ebrahim

KARACHI, Pakistan, Jun 15 (AMF) -  Hasan Zaidi likes to look at the brighter side of life. Little wonder then that he views the most heated and animated debate going on on one of the many Pakistani private television on the Hudood Ordinances - a controversial set of laws based on Islamic decrees criticised as being anti-women -- as heralding good tidings.

   "It will change things," the young filmmaker predicts confidently, referring to the ordinances that cover a range of crimes, among the most controversial of which requires a woman to provide four witnesses to prove rape, or face a charge of adultery. The maximum punishment is stoning to death.

   The debate about these laws is underway in this Islamic country as part of the Zara Sochiye (Think!) of Geo Television Network, and this campaign is backed by one of the strongest media groups in this South Asian country - the Jang Group.

   "As far as we look at it, we've taken a good, big risk, worth taking. The responsibility is entirely our own, and we are very aware of that," says a Geo spokesperson.

   The network has taken pains to convince people the sole purpose behind the campaign is to provide "food for thought", "highlight some problems with the ordinances", "make the people think about it  -- again". Also, it stresses that "no backing" from any quarters, "no American hand, no government hand, and no NGO hand or any other hand" prodded the channel to take on this sensitive issue.

   Working on it for the last nine months, the Geo team emphatically says there was "no push" from any quarters to start this debate.

   It is but natural for many to look at the campaign with a certain degree of wariness because of the current political environment. The 2007 general elections are around the corner amid a backdrop of simmering internal conflicts, specially those within the provinces. Every now and then, these boil over, compounded by anti-U.S. sentiments that are at an all-time high. Across the border, the Taliban is slowly re-gaining a stronghold in some key areas in Afghanistan.

   Yet others have received it well, if for no other reason than for Geo having the courage to bell the cat.

   "I know some skeptics believe this campaign to have the backing of the government - so that an atmosphere can be created for rethinking these laws. But even if that is so, it is nevertheless an important precedent," is how Zaidi responds.

   Zulfiqar Shah, a labour activist, is one cynic who looks at it as an exercise in futility. "Most such campaigns are coming from outside (donor driven) and till something happens inside, till we have a sound political basis and people have a say in government policies, laws such as these will remain."

   "This is the first time that there is such an open and public debate on the laws, as previously, people and institutions other than a handful of rights-based organisation's and women rights activists, have shied away from even talking about such blatant discrimination and shameful law, fearing the religious extremists' outlash," says Bushra Gohar, a rights activist. Gohar hopes that if nothing else, the debate would "at least educate the people about how the ordinances have reduced women's status in the country and has legalised open and blatant discrimination against them in the name of religion."

   For 27 years, the five draconian laws have been a bone of contention between the rulers and political parties, rights organisations, women's groups and even the legal fraternity. Yet they stubbornly remain on the statute books as they are based on Islamic decrees.

   Enforced by the military dictator Zia ul Haq in 1979 as part of an Islamisation process, without any public or parliamentary debate, these are in tandem with the country's secular legal system. Subsequent governments tried to do away with them but eventually gave in to the arm-twisting by the religious right. Even Gen Pervez Musharraf did not want to face this wrath and has shied away from repealing the laws.

   However, in all this televised debate, the voices that have become raucous are those of the religious scholars, quelling the arguments made by women's groups against these laws as well as ignoring the recommendations made by some legal eagles for their repeal.

   By its own admission, says the production team, the network is viewing the issue from within Islamic lenses. Says the Geo representative: "Our tag line asks -- HudoodAllah par behas nahin! Kya Hudood Ordinances Islami hain?" (There is no debate on the decrees of God but are the Hudood Ordinances Islamic?")

   The decision not to give voice to women and rights organisations may be "strategic" as they claim. But the campaign, while quite vivacious, is conspicuous by the absence of  the voices of female religious scholars. "It seems as if we don't have any women religious scholars who may also have a point of view," responds Samita Ahmed, an architect, at a debate on the ordinances organised by Geo, where there were no Muslim women scholars on the floor, either in favour or against these laws.

   In its defence, a Geo spokesperson says: "We are not taking any sides and are clear on that. Our job is to start a dialogue. We realise that even within the Islamic scholars' community, there are various opinions. That's the debate we are entertaining. There is no tilt. It's a strategy. Just like ignoring Islamic scholars would be a strategy for some..."

   Speaking from the sidelines, one of the hosts during a programme did slip when he said: "Why is there a need to involve NGO-type women who come with their own agenda? What good have these feminists done? They have not been able to make even a mite of a difference. We're trying to tackle this in a different manner and won't stop till a solution is found," says Iftekhar Ahmed.

   One of the programme producers says half the battle has already been won. "Geo has brought the various religious scholars to, at
least, accept that the ordinances, as they are - are not comprehensive or reflective of the Hudood set by the Quran and Sunnah."

   Zaidi views it differently and that is perhaps what Geo is trying to show, subtly. "Geo has also done a good job of exposing the shallowness of the arguments of the Ordinances' proponents such as Mufti Muneebur Rehman. Hopefully people can see their merit, or lack of, for themselves."

   "I can completely understand the sensitivities involved in questioning widely misunderstood religious dogma but I hope it does not mean a fait accompli amendment as opposed to a repeal, which is what really should happen to the Hudood Ordinances," adds Zaidi, saying the content of some of the interviews covers this particular weakness well.

   The same is endorsed by Gohar. "The discussion with Mufti Munib ur Rehman really exposed these half-witted self proclaimed religious scholars."

   "It thus puts the ordinances under doubt," reflects the Geo representative. "We leave it to the people to carry the debate further in whatever way they choose to. Good or bad, it's a conscious decision we have taken, to keep it a debate as far as Islam is concerned."

   "Think of it this way: For 27 years people have been talking about this but nothing concrete has been done. We're trying a new strategy to see whether this takes the debate forward or not. It's an experiment for all of us, all Pakistanis. How everyone reacts to a question being put in front of them, (whether they react at all that is) is something that will tell all of us a lot about ourselves," she adds.

   "Obviously, an electronic media campaign of this sort is positive as people get to view and listen to both sides of the debate. However, in the present political set-up, with the support of the mullahs crucial to the government, it is difficult to say whether it will have an immediate impact on our legislators who are in a position to have the law repealed," says Ayesha Azfar, a journalist, with a hint of skepticism.

   "I support the campaign of Geo in as much as the campaign has started a dialogue and debate which was necessary," explains Justice
Nasir Aslam Zahid, who, in 1997, had recommended a repeal of the ordinances in his famous Report of the Commission of Inquiry for Women. "A large number of issues are taboo in our society for no valid reason. But with the great advances in the field of electronic media, it is not possible to keep the people ignorant about various so-called sacred issues and keep a ban on their discussion."

   The same is endorsed by Farah Moazzam, an Islamic scholar who, while not in favour of a repeal, agrees that they should at least be amended. "The power of the media can never be under-estimated. Politically, however, it may not serve much purpose unless there are hands behind this campaign or Pakistan miraculously becomes a true democracy and starts valuing the views of people," she says, skeptically.

   In the end, journalist Muna Khan says: "If this dialogue can be used to pressure the government to take action, then the battle is half won, although it has to be seen if this translates into repeal of these laws."  (END/AMF/IPSAP/AE/JS/150606)