FOR long, religiously motivated bigotry has assumed a dangerous form in Pakistan, and countering it has never been a genuine priority for the state despite its hollow claims to the contrary. Society is gradually losing its strength to stand up against this strand of extremism. Any news of resistance against it now comes as a surprise.

The recent courage shown by civil society in Sindh when they took to the streets in protest against the killing of Dr Shahnawaz Kunbhar — a blasphemy suspect who died in a police ‘encounter’ — offers a glimmer of hope that there is still some life left in society.

A similar spark of optimism had erupted back in April 2017 following the brutal lynching of Mashal Khan, who was murdered on campus by fellow students in Mardan. Back then, civil society in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa showed some resistance, but the perpetrators had the backing of powerful religious parties. The culprits were glorified and eventually released by the courts.

Unfortunately, there is little hope that the suspects in Dr Kunbhar’s case will face any real consequences. Religious extremists embedded in the legal community, particularly within the lower judiciary and lawyers’ circles, often provide full support to the accused, aligning themselves with hardline religious groups and local business leaders. It is a tragic reality that the police, in the quest of cheap publicity and a cover for their corrupt practices, often take the lead in the extrajudicial killings of blasphemy suspects. These officers are celebrated by religious zealots and ‘rewarded’ with cash and land. Investigations are not common as police rarely bother to hear the accused, who are often innocent. Instead, these cases are seen as opportunities for personal gain.

When civil society cannot influence the public discourse, it should review its approach.

It is not only law enforcement that sides with religious bigots in times of crisis; the state itself consistently chooses to align with them when faced with challenging situations. There is no need to delve into extensive detail, as history has repeatedly shown that every government, along with the country’s highest institutions, tends to ‘pacify’ these situations rather than confront the radical elements. In exchange, these state institutions often leverage religious extremism for political gain.

When the state collectively stands with religious extremists, how can a weakened civil society hope to challenge them? Law enforcement and other state agencies show little sympathy for voices raised against religious bigotry, often stigmatising and labelling such individuals in ways that border on allegations of religious offences. For instance, Azaz Syed, a renowned journalist, is currently facing severe threats from religiously motivated extremists. Local and international human rights organisations have expressed concern for his safety, but the state has remained silent on the issue.

The strength of religious extremists lies in their ability to interpret religious texts in ways that suit their agenda, while civil society often relies on broader religious, social, and cultural values. This dynamic was evident in the case of Mashal Khan, where civil society argued that his lynching violated fundamental human values, and more specifically, Pakhtun culture and tradition, which is inherently tolerant. Similarly, in Sindh, civil society is drawing strength from the region’s Sufi tradition in its protests against the killing of Dr Kunbhar.

However, extremists, particularly those bel­o­nging to the Barelvi sect and represented by groups like Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan, also claim a connection to Sufi traditions, interpreting their teachings in ways that justify their actions.

Civil society in Pakistan tends to take a rational approach, often relying on evidence to support its views. Many reports, both national and international, highlight that militants and extremists usually lack substantial knowledge of their own religion. For example, a UNDP study found that 57 per cent of former militants had little understanding of Islamic texts, challenging the idea that religious education fosters militancy. A study by the Counter Terrorism Department in Sindh reached comparable conclusions.

Interestingly, when the state wants to mock civil society, it sometimes uses the same argument regarding the lack of proper religious knowledge. However, the general public often sides with the clergy, believing that while the state may lie, the mullahs speak the truth. This leaves civil society in a difficult position. Despite their rational arguments, they are perceived as lacking religious authority, which weakens their credibility in the eyes of many.

To counter this, civil society tries to partner with relatively moderate religious scholars, but the traditional clergy challenges the latter’s scholarship by linking it to support from Western or modern tradition. These religious scholars cannot help civil society in its fight against religious bigotry, as they lack legitimacy within their own community and make civil society credentials doubtful in the eyes of the public.

When civil society cannot gain the support of the state and influence the public discourse, it should critically review its approach. It may need to devise a different strategy, one that is more effective in challenging religious bigotry. This could involve a more strategic use of the Constitution and the rule of law, or a more concerted effort to develop new sources of inspiration that resonate with the common people.

One potential solution for civil society to counter religious bigotry is to focus on upholding the Constitution and equal citizenship. Religious extremists are increasingly encroaching on constitutional and rule of law space, which is often seen as influencing both lawmaking and decisions by the superior courts. Civil society must ensure that the Constitution is neither abrogated nor manipulated by any segment of the power elites, including the religious leaders.

For meaningful societal change, civil society needs to develop new sources of inspiration — heroes and symbols that resonate with the common people. Civil society needs to craft its own story, one that ordinary citizens can easily connect with.

The writer is a security analyst.

Published in Dawn, October 6th, 2024