Tuesday, 8 October 2013

Rethinking the question: How Your Lordships at the Supreme Court can stop Fasad fil ard?


The post on “How Your Lordships at the Supreme Court can stop Fasad fil ard?” is a good article by the author.  I would also like to post some of my random thoughts on the subject. 

Unfortunately the focus of legal scholars in Pakistan is always on changing the existing laws and never considering other factors that could lead to the abuse of laws. In my humble view there is no problem in the current Qisas and Diyat laws. All the three cases referred to in the article are the outcome of state`s non- seriousness in the application of laws without any discrimination between stronger and weaker segments of the society. The judges are the real culprits in this scenario as the law on Qisas and Diyat has never said that if a Qisas punishment is compounded or waived it would plainly mean the acquittal of the accused rather S.338 of the Pakistan Penal Code clearly mentions that where an offence has been waived or compounded, the court may, in its discretion having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, acquit or award Tazir to the offender according to the nature of the offence. Thus, the judges, most of whom are corrupt, not being loyal abuse their discretionary powers and allow the acquittal of the offenders. Thus the problem is more in the persons applying the law rather than the law itself.

 With regard to the Islamic Ideological Council it has been constantly victimised by every regime as everyone brings his own brand of Islam when he/she comes in power. Due to this reason till this date there is no particular methodology defined for the Islamization of laws in Pakistan. Consistent policies are indispensable for any institution to achieve its ultimate goals. Unfortunately, there is no institutional link at all between Council Islamic Ideology, Federal Shariat Court, Shariat Appellate Bench at the Supreme Court of Pakistan and other organisation dealing with Islamic legal matters which causes inconsistencies in their actions and attitudes towards Islamic Law. This results in challenging many laws in the Federal Shariat Court which have been recommended by the council and passed by the Parliament. The Women Protection act may be one example of it.  The fate of Riba case is also unknown.


Therefore, in my view acting upon the recommendation of Dr Wasti that compromise should only be used as mitigating circumstance alone is not enough. It is also need of the hour to purify judiciary from all sorts of political influences and recruit judges who not only know about the laws but also understand their spirits. Plus the institutional reforms at national level and enabling institutional link among the relevant organs will insure clarity about all the laws including criminal laws. Then it would not be a big deal whosoever may the Chairman of the council be. 

No comments:

Post a Comment