Ground Work Has to be Done First to Implement Shariah

Anwaar Hussain

Given a choice, the people of Pakistan have been historically displaying an acute sense of political wisdom. Since the creation of Pakistan, they have been continuously drubbing the "religious Right" at the ballot box elections after elections.

The people of Pakistan have categorically been rejecting a second conversion to Islam at the hands of people who recite Allah's name before slaughtering a chicken yet kill fellow Muslims, prostate in prayers to the same Allah, without a thought.

The bull-in-a-china-shop aka George W. Bush changed all that in a single stroke. His passion for oil and unquestioning loyalty to Jews alienated the Muslim world like never before. The emergence of the mainly pro-Taliban alliance of the Pakistani religious parties as the 'third force' in Pakistani politics is a direct outcome of George Bush's so called war on terror. Not in their wildest dreams could these political parties imagine themselves actually ruling the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Baluchistan, a huge over 60 percent of Pakistan's geographic land mass.

With the women-flogging Taliban smirking from surrounding hill tops, the ruling MMA (Mutahida Majlis-e-Amal) law makers began to unfold their political agenda in the NWFP less than a year back. For starters, all music on public transport has been banned, women have been barred from being treated by male doctors, men have been urged to grow beards, trousers have been abolished and shalwar kameez made the standard school uniform. Furthermore, male coaches have been barred for women athletes and male journalists from covering women's sports. Civil servants have been ordered to pray five times a day. Sale of music and videos has been curbed, the destruction of posters featuring women and advertising Western products having already been conducted.

On the agenda is segregation of women's universities and laws to persuade youngsters to obey their parents. The assembly is also considering another legislation called Hasba Bill to establish a new Department of Vice and Virtue to supervise implementation of the Islamic code. Simply put, a vice and virtue squad a la Taliban to "preach to people to adopt good things and give up bad things."

To enforce the same on the whole country was MMA's bargaining chip with President Musharraf. Enforce Shariah as interpreted by the leading stalwarts of MMA and continue to wear the Khaki.

Pakistan has always been a hot seat of this sometime vicious debate about the Shariah. One side of the argument says that if the majority of a country constitutes of Muslims, then the Muslims have a right to enact Shariah law. It is argued that if they believe in the Holy Quran then it is only a logical conclusion to endorse Shariah and make it the only law valid for the country.

The counter-argument points out the many difficulties that will be thrown up if Shariah is endorsed in its entirety on a Muslim country in the shrinking global village of today. Minority rights, economic, legislative and constitutional problems are just some of the very serious problems that will surface with the full enactment of Shariah. These arguments are fit for a dialogue between the specialists. But how about us ordinary Muslims whose lives are to be governed by the proposed Laws? Let us hear us too.

To begin with, most of us are far from being ideal Muslims as individuals, but are Muslims nonetheless. Ironically, in areas where we are free to practice Islam as we like e.g. the five daily prayers, we fall way short of the model. If we freely cannot exercise Islam, how could we be expected to do it by force and decree? And if we are somehow made to do it, would it be acceptable to the Almighty as His worship? Are these half-baked Ulema somehow privy to a divine secret that our will does not matter and the mere motions of going through the rituals are sufficient to get us into heavens en mass? Is it of no importance that Allah says in the Holy Quran?

"Let there be no compulsion in religion. Verily the right path has become distinct from the wrong path." (ch. 2 : 256)

"And say: the truth is from your lord: Then whosoever wills, let him believe; and whosoever wills, let him disbelieve."(ch. 18 : 29)

"Say O mankind! Now truth has come to you from your lord. So whosoever receives guidance, he does so for the good of his own self; and whosoever goes astray does so to his own loss. I am not set over you as a disposer of affairs to obligate you" (ch. 10 : 108)

Now let us examine some issues that are intrinsically attached to the subject. For instance, if a Muslim country has a right to dictate the laws of the religion of the majority then, by a natural corollary, every other country should have the same right. Imagine if the Hindutva enthusiasts are allowed to implement in India the laws of the Hindu religion as they see it. The fate of Indian Muslims and other minorities of India are sealed. Likewise, imagine Israel enacting the laws from Talmud? The non-Jews probably will be debarred from even entering the state of Israel. Moreover, if Muslim law is imposed in a country, all the rest of the people who are inhabitants of the same land would have no say in its legislation and have to be considered as second rate citizens.

Now let us come to the problem of many interpretations of Islam as forwarded by various Imams, scholars and leaders. A large number of these gentlemen have been using and twisting it to serve their own agendas. Islam has become an excuse for committing acts that have nothing to do with its spirit. The Islam that the West sees today is not the one that was intended for the whole world; a religion offering a message of love, peace, tolerance, equality and compassion to all without distinction. A religion that is anything but harsh and inhumane.

But that is not all. The entire problem is further complicated within Islam itself. Like other leading religions, there are countless sects, opinions, beliefs within the overall religious parameters of Islam. It's not just a question of Sunni Islam and Shia Islam and how they interpret the Shariah. There are at least 70 sects within these two main offshoots whose interpretation of Shariah differs with each other. Aren't we witness to leaders of one sect declaring the murder of the followers of another sect as not only religiously legal but also divinely rewarding?

To compound the problem further, the qualifications of the interpreters too have been routinely challenged by the progressive mindset over the years. In Pakistan's case, for example, the educational qualifications of MMA legislators already stand challenged in the Supreme Court. It has been alleged that a great majority of these gentlemen do not even possess requisite bachelor qualification to be even members of provincial parliament let alone to interpret the divine and legislate on fundamental laws impinging upon every sphere of ordinary Muslims' lives.

It has been prayed that the MMA members "were neither educated nor developed enough to understand Islam and the contemporary issues of the modern world and have narrow view of the religion." And that "they belong to a particular school of thought and sect as they are trained in orthodox and outdated system of Madrassas."

With that said, let us now go on to another fundamental question...How to define a Muslim? The Munir Inquiry Commission, when appointed to investigate into the reasons of the anti-Qadiani riots in Lahore in 1953, tried to tackle the issue. No less than twenty-two leading lights on Islam were invited to define a Muslim. Ironically, no two given definitions coincided with each other. Yet, all these leaders were vociferously adamant as to the validity of their definition of a Muslim and the imposition of their brand of Shariah given a chance.

Shariah interpretation of one sect, therefore, would not only strip the non-Muslims of their fundamental right to legislate in the country of their birth, but within Islam too there would be many sects who would stand divested of this entitlement.

What passed for Shariah Law as seen in some countries has trivialized the good things about it and given it an expression of a harsh and inflexible tenet. The ruling elites in these countries used, and still use it, to enslave women and to turn the death of, sometimes innocent individuals, into communal display. Public squares of Saudi Arabia and Kabul stadium have become legacies of horrendous treatments to ordinary criminals. The killing of people was turned into a patent pleasure for a people deprived of all other entertainment in the name of Shariah.

It seems that the Law has been manipulated, abused, and turned into an instrument of suppression for those who dare to speak out, an excuse to keep the status quo of women, stifle progressive thoughts and choke the sense of inquiry. It has been, more or less, turned into a whip of convenience with which to flog the dissenting views, political or modernistic, whenever required. Narrow mindedness, rigid thoughts, biased interpretations and bigotry is what gave Islam its present harsh outlook while taking away its marvelous values, instructions, and love for mankind and benevolence for the weak and defenseless. No wonder then that in the last couple of centuries we have produced hundreds of suicide bombers but not a single Newton or Einstein.

Shariah Law, as it is used in some Muslim countries or as is proposed by the MMA in Pakistan, contends as if only women are sinners. The whole religion has been laser beamed onto women. While men, with all their multi-marriages, infidelities and cruelty to women are given a clean break. Women cannot drive, cannot go out (without the presence of a male relative) cannot play or work freely, cannot be treated by male doctors even if they are dying, have to be covered from head to toe at all times regardless of weather. They are urged, instead, to live within the confines of their houses and continue to bear children conceived in the pleasure of their men. They are, therefore, made to look very powerless and dependent on the goodwill of their male relations.

There is a difference, a massive one, between Shariah Law as seen in the Holy Quran and Sunnah, and Shariah Law as forced on millions of Muslims by a heartless, brutal clergy-cum-ruling-elite combo. The ideal one is always promised and the adulterated one always imposed by these vested interests. Wherever it is imposed as the law of the land in the Muslim World, it is made to focus on its penal side. Flogging, amputations and jail-terms are made the central theme of the law. It boils down to one fact, there is a large gap between what Shariah stands for in theory and what it is made to look in practice.

Why a whopping majority of Pakistanis have always rejected being governed by the clergy...is a question that often titillates the mind. Is it because no one is sure how far this law can be changed into legislation for running a political government or is it because of the duplicitous conduct of its champions? We ordinary Muslims recall a few attributes of the Almighty every time we seek His guidance from the Holy Quran. These are;

1. Allah does not forget. If a subject has not been clearly dealt with in the Book, it could not be a divine oversight.

2. Allah is not shy of His creatures. He can, and He does, talk to them directly, openly and without giving twists and turns in His Ayahs.

3. Allah is the creator of all languages and, therefore, is not in want of words to say what He wants to say to His creations.

Therefore, would He leave His commandments on these vital matters ambiguous and open to the interpretation of some semi-literate Ulema? He does not forget nor is He ever in want of words to make clear His orders. Why then are their no clear injunctions on governance of an Islamic country? Was it difficult for Him to set out clear rules and regulations for the rulers how to legislate right down to the nth decimal? And for the Muslims how to elect their rulers? Would it then be wrong to surmise that He left it out on purpose because:

1. He wants the Muslims to be an integral part of a living, breathing, sprouting world.

2. He wants the Islamic Umma to be dynamic, progressive and ever-evolving; ultimately becoming an example for the rest of the world of the faith that they represent i.e. His faith.

3. He is a Seer of all times, He did not want to bind the Muslims to centuries old rules that were once valid but no more because of a fundamentally different world.

One does not require any law to say five times prayers, behave honestly, speak truthfully, treat others fairly and be morally upright. A society where there is turmoil, disarray, violation of others' rights, state injustice, where there is no decorum left in human behavior, what would one expect Shariah to do? Should we not first create the right climate by educating the citizenry? Every Prophet, as Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), first set an example of personal conduct then created that healthy climate for the divine laws to be imposed in. Only thus the society was readied for absorbing the law of religion willingly and without compulsion.

Shariah is supposed to be a general guide of how Muslim shall live their lives as a whole. It guides their private, public, societal, spiritual, matrimonial and mutual affairs. The people on whom Shariah will govern must be well informed, educated and enlightened about the Shariah and their responsibility under the Shariah. What information is available to a common man regarding Shariah laws other than amputation of limbs, stoning to death, flogging and jail terms for even minor offences? Other societal and economic factors such as illiteracy, poverty and discrimination that could lead to criminal inducement too must be eliminated first.

A climate conducive for the Shariah to flourish in has to be created. And please….it is not a chicken-first-or-egg-first impasse. Both the chicken and the egg will perish in burning fire or Arctic winter, conditions not being exactly favorable to their growth. After all the example of Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan nearer to home, are before us where Shariah was implemented without the necessary ground work.

Let the people observe for themselves the leaders who with dedication, resolve, honesty, foresight and personal example bring about these changes. Only then would the people have tangible faith in their leadership. Only then would they entrust such a leadership with the task of passing such profoundly impacting laws. Only then would the society be finally ready to hazard the interpretation of the divine by these leaders.

No one was ever made a good Muslim by mere diktat. Let there be no doubt about that.

The writer is a former Pakistan Air Force officer, now residing in UAE. E-Mail: eagleeye@emirates.net.ae