Region 
 

Region

Suppressed Voices

The minorities in Pakistan continue to feel discriminated against and their sense of insecurity is increasing. Their deprivations are legal, political, religious and social.

By Hooriya Mujtaba | March 2021

Suppressed-Voices

Pakistan is a conglomerate of many ethnic communities with different beliefs and religions. It is a land rich in diversity. Yet, when we refer to Pakistan, we intentionally exclude a large section of Pakistanis. The irony is ever so evident as Pakistan is ranked foremost as a country where minorities are treated in contradiction to their secured rights laid bare in the Constitution under Article 36 protection of minorities and Article 14 right to dignity. According to the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, conditions related to religious freedom in Pakistan continue to trend negatively. There is systematic enforcement of blasphemy, persecution and forced conversion of other religious minorities. The authorities fail to address these issues which severely restricts freedom of religion or belief.

The tragic plight of the Hazara community in Balochistan is one of many such incidents where it has been made clear that if you do not fall within the ambit of the accepted stronghold of representatives, you are marginalized. It’s a signal that they are not Pakistani because to be a minority is to be overlooked, unheard and unimportant.

Article 1 of the Constitution of Pakistan declares the State is to be known as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Article 2 reiterates Islam as the state religion. As the country was made in the name of Islam, though created as a secular sovereign state influenced by a parliamentary form of government, Pakistan was placed in the precarious situation of addressing the role of religion within the state. The multiple attempts at reforms aiming to create a democratic state based on western ideologies but to retain fundamental Islamic principles have been ambiguous and intensely criticized. History has shown that we have slowly, but surely, slipped into a spiral of attempting to reassert our religious stance over all else. The result of this has been a source of vehement conflict for religious minorities.

The censorship laws and regulations in Pakistan are one such source of oppression. Though guised as a democracy, such laws elude to a façade which practically tantamounts to authoritarian rule.“Censorship reflects a society’s lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime . . . .” — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, Ginzberg v. the United States, 383 U.S. 463 (1966). Censorship can be formally defined as the “suppression of ideas and information that certain persons – individuals, groups, or government officials – find objectionable or dangerous.”

The laws on censorship often employ terms or language which are malleable to individual subjectivities and are non-exhaustive. The law is therefore susceptible to manipulation at the whim of the callous due to the ambiguous nature of the linguistic devices used by legislators.

The passing of the Tahaffuze-Bunyad-e-Islam Bill 2020 is one such example which prevented the printing or publication of ‘objectionable’ materials in books in Punjab. The term ‘objectionable’ is a great example of how vague terms can be exploited. What may be objectionable to some may not be to others, based on different belief systems. The Bill continues in the footsteps of the blasphemy laws found in Chapter XV of the Pakistan Penal Code.

Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees privacy, which includes the right to online privacy and data protection. This right is curtailed by Article 19 which allows for “reasonable restrictions” on freedom of speech. The term “reasonable”, in a legal context, is a hypothetical legal fiction crafted by the courts to represent a composite of a relevant community’s judgment as to how a typical member should behave in the said situation. In a country where the majority of the people are Sunni Muslims, the legal analysis embarked upon tends to uphold one-sided views. Thus, to protect the religious sensitives of one sect over others, results in criminalizing sectarian differences and the marginalization of religious minorities.

The Citizens Protection (Against Online Harm) Rules 2020 permit the regulation of “active opposition to the fundamental values of Pakistan” and content that “violates or affects the religious, cultural, ethnic, or national security sensitivities”. With such vague terms, the rules have the inadvertent effect of politicizing theological divisions and providing the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) with immense discretionary powers. The Authority may contravene constitutional rights by exploiting Article 19 in their favour. By granting these powers, the Authority has time and again restrained the media, muted journalists as well as withheld news headlines highlighting sectarian clashes or human rights violations against minorities. Increasingly, in recent years, internet laws have been used to target journalists and activists who have expressed dissent against the government. Such steps have been described by activist groups as an attempt to muzzle free speech, whether it is about religion, faith, dissent against government policies or the military.

As a result, we often find that the fear of the authorities and of public intimidation leads to instilling a culture of self-censorship which compromises democratic values. As the rights of minorities are continuously violated, it is difficult to evaluate how Article 36 shall protect minorities from prosecution when the enacted laws on censorship only seek to muzzle their voices. This necessitates a review and calls for an amendment to Article 19.

Read More