The government was strongly criticised for not amending the Hudood Ordinance despite majority in the Assembly. "The government is not sincere in implementing the Hudood Ordinance Bill and Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA) is its B-team."
The settlement of Hudood Ordinance, outside the parliament, in the presence of Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) is an extra-judicial and extra-constitutional act and is clear indication of government's non-serious attitude towards the Bill. Government is merely using the Bill to divert the attention of the masses from various issues of national importance such as Bugti's death in which they claimed MMA is partner.
These were the views of eminent panelists during the seminar on 'Repeal of the Hudood Ordinance Vs Protection of Women Bill 2006', held under Aurat Foundation here on Wednesday.
The panelists from different walks of life were Justice Nasira Javaid Iqbal, Chairman National Commission on Women Status Dr Arifa Syeda Zahra, Syed Nayyar Hussain Bokhari (PPP), Senior Vice President National Awami Party Haji M. Adeel, Co-ordinator Pakistan Labour Party Farooq Tariq and Begum Yaqoot Jameel of PML (Q). Naeem Irfan Mirza from Aurat Foundation conducted the session.
The speakers said that Zia-ul-Haq introduced many Ordinances on his own, bypassing consultative process. They said that he went to such an extent that Hudood Allah seemed to be his property and termed it as Hudood Haq (Zia-ul-Haq).
They also believed that if this ordinance had affected the rich class or Maulvis, which is not the case, it would never have been implemented. Unfortunately, its sufferers are only the poor and minorities, they added.
Nayyar Bokhari doubted that if ever Hudood Ordinance would be repealed or amended with the involvement of MMA bypassing CII, Select Committee and parliament clearly show the malign intentions of government, which is making the issue more complex. Now taking the case of Nazia, a 13-year old girl in the Supreme Court would further defer the Bill till the decision on the case.
Farooq Tariq said that government uses sophisticated terms to many anti-societal reforms such as right-sizing to reduce employees from the industry, and now they are using the term, 'women protection bill', which in itself shows that women are not protected. He said Hudood Ordinance is near to cultural and societal terrorism against women. He stressed that all discriminatory ordinances should be abolished.
Haji Adeel said that political parties other than the government also have not taken the matter seriously and were protecting their own vested interests. He opined that parties should have gone for resignations on various matters of national interests and human rights. He also showed his grave concern that why PPP has been siding with MMA if they also consider it the B-team of the government.
Nayyar Bokhari said that this Ordinance was passed to strengthen and prolong the tenure of General Zia. He said that MMA did not threaten to resign in the past on many sensitive issues of National interests, but on this Bill they have taken a stand, which indicates it's B-team of the government and helping them to bail out.
Dr Zahra also criticised the government and said that settling of this Bill outside the parliament is insult of parliament and its members. She also blamed the society, which is not participating seriously on discriminatory issues and human rights violations, which are affecting the masses. Any serious action demands sacrifice for which the society is not ready, she added.
Justice Nasira Javed said that Zia-ul-Haq did not take advice from anyone and took his own decisions. Members of Council of Islamic Ideology said that Zia did not attend to their suggestions and advice. She termed Hudood Ordinances as Zia Ordinances and justice is not provided through his ordinances whereas Quran does not support these ideas.
She said that there are no punishments for Rijm, quoting Soora Noor. Zina bil Jabar is not included in Quran. She said with this Bill the number of cases increased stating that in 1980 there were only 70 cases, which reached to 1700 in 1983 and 4500 in 1990.
However, Yaqoot Jameel on behalf of Mushahid Hussain who could not attend owing to his other obligations tried to defend the government by taking plea that the government has been courageous to take up this issue, which was hurting the marginalised group of the society. She said none of the governments in the past could talk about the issue despite having majority. She argued that government wants to settle this issue permanently and thus taking time to resolve it amicably taking into confidence all stakeholders. She hoped that the Bill might be passed in the Assembly Session starting after Eid.
Comments
Comments are closed.