"As Good as Dead": The Impact of the Blasphemy Laws in Pakistan

Summary

Amnesty International's report (index ASA 33/5136/2016) examines how Pakistan's blasphemy laws violate human rights, both in what they say and in how they are applied, by the state and by private individuals. It concludes that the laws are broadly worded and open to abuse, that the accused have few means to defend themselves, and that in practice people accused of blasphemy are often presumed guilty on the basis of little or no evidence.

The report opens with the cases that defined the debate: the killing of Punjab governor Salmaan Taseer by his own security guard, Mumtaz Qadri, in January 2011, after Taseer sought a pardon for Asia Bibi, a Christian farm worker who in November 2010 became the first Pakistani woman sentenced to death for blasphemy; and the killing two months later of Shahbaz Bhatti, the federal minister for minorities. Qadri was hanged in February 2016. (Asia Bibi was acquitted by the Supreme Court in October 2018, after this report was published.)

Amnesty traces how the laws grew. Offences relating to religion were introduced in British India in 1860, and section 295-A in 1927. Under General Zia-ul-Haq, laws specific to Islam were added, including sections 298-A (1980), 295-B (1982), 298-B and 298-C (1984), which target the Ahmadiyya community, and 295-C (1986). In 1990 the Federal Shariat Court ruled that death is the mandatory punishment under 295-C. Figures from the National Commission for Justice and Peace cited in the report show 633 Muslims, 494 Ahmadis, 187 Christians and 21 Hindus accused under these provisions since 1987.

The research found that accusations arose from verbal exchanges, text messages, content on social media and mass media, pamphlets, and the alleged desecration of religious texts, and that motives often included professional rivalry, personal or religious disputes, hostility toward minorities and the pursuit of money or land. People with mental disabilities were found to be at particular risk. The report quotes the Supreme Court's own observation in Qadri's case that most blasphemy cases are based on false accusations arising from property disputes or personal vendettas.

The report documents inadequate safeguards at every stage. A wide range of people, not only witnesses, can register a complaint; under most of the provisions police can arrest without a warrant; clerics and their supporters put pressure on police and prosecutors; and cases proceed on weak evidence. Once accused, people and their families face threats and violence, and lawyers, witnesses and judges involved in these cases have been threatened or attacked: the lawyer Rashid Rehman was killed in 2014 while defending a university lecturer accused of blasphemy.

Amnesty concludes that the blasphemy laws are incompatible with international human rights law and should be repealed, and that until then the government must introduce effective safeguards at the investigation, prosecution and trial stages to prevent abuse.

Summary written by a Silenced editor from the report itself (464 words). Quotes and figures are the report's; read the full report for its sources and context.