IN case after case of murder and severe bodily harm to innocent people, the perpetrators are often given a clean chit by Pakistan’s courts. The accused, even more emboldened, returns to society with no remorse. Many are legislators — elected by the very same people they harmed.

Families of victims, often poor or just ordinary citizens, have supposedly compromised with them and may have received financial compensation. Some years ago, Raymond Davis killed two men in broad daylight and was freed soon after payment; in the Shahzeb case, the arrogant murderer was acquitted; Qandeel Baloch’s brother was forgiven by their mother; Majeed Achakzai was acquitted after running over a traffic policeman; Nazim Jokhio was kidnapped, tortured and killed by a Sindh MPA and his goons and the latter were acquitted after an ‘out-of-court settlement’.

More recently, a Balochistan Assembly member, accused of keeping a woman and her children in bonded labour and sexually abusing the daughter, was given bail. A related triple murder remains unsolved. There is little doubt that the perpetrator will go unpunished and unrepentant.

There are many other examples of men in powerful positions who easily escape punishment; their wealth and status, the lacunae in our laws and the manner in which they are interpreted by an untrained judiciary earns them the ‘right’ to play havoc with the lives and honour of the poor. It is easy to threaten remaining family members and harass and hound relatives, to the extent that they give in. No blemish remains on the acquitted killers.

Powerful men often escape punishment.

Most of the laws in Pakistan are said to be based on the Sharia, following the Quran and Sunnah. These include the blasphemy, qisas (equal retaliation) and diyat (compensation) and the laws of evidence and inheritance. The interpretation, weakness of design, implementation and inability of judges to understand the Islamic principles underlying these laws have contributed to taking the country far from the goals of a truly Islamic society.

The Quran was revealed to the Prophet (PBUH) over 23 years, each verse in a certain context, following the religious, social and economic changes in societies of first Makkah and then Madina. It responded to problems and suggested solutions according to the norms and customs of the tribal culture of the Arabs, while also establishing overarching guidelines for an ethical, just and compassionate society.

Tribal feuds were common. After one person had been harmed, the tit-for-tat process ensued for hundreds of years. Verses 178 and 179 of Surah Baqarah aimed to put a stop to the endless killings and called upon believers first to place the killer at the mercy of the victim’s heirs; second, to ensure that the latter, if they so wished, could inflict the same harm upon the perpetrator, and third, if the heirs wished to be merciful, they could forgive, come to a mutually agreed settlement, or the court could determine the diyat to be paid.

Crimes on earth fall under three categories: crimes against humans, the state and God. Crimes against humans must be forgiven by the victim/their heirs and society as well as by God. Consider the nature of deliberate murder. Although it can be considered a crime against one individual, in which case the pure form of qisas and diyat could apply, it is, in reality, also against God and the state.

The Quran says: “If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide therein (Forever): And the wrath and the curse of God are upon him” (4:93). A Muslim, by the very nature of reciting the Kalimah, has agreed to abide by the rules of submission to God. Hence, he is answerable to his Creator for all sins committed, regardless of any punishment he may receive on earth.

Second, the crime is against the victim and by extension, against his heirs. While the heirs may show mercy and either forgive him or take some payment (this is in reality part penalty and not blood money), verses 178 and 179 (Surah Baqarah) address Muslim society and not the heirs. Thus, the state and the courts are supposed to ensure that qisas is administered, even if the heirs appear to have forgiven the accused.

The court can also try the killer against fasadh fil ardh. It is ironic and tragic that in almost all cases, it has been known that the heirs were coerced, yet the court acquitted the killer. In each of these crimes, and many others, the court did not consider the fact that they were all against society and not one individual. A further travesty of justice is that the killer has no blame attached to him.

None of these laws serve a purpose except to give a free hand to the powerful. Someone, somewhere, somehow needs to revise them and overhaul the judicial system before we all become voiceless.

The writer is an individual contributor with an interest in religion.
nikhat_sattar@yahoo.com

Published in Dawn, May 5th, 2023