Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by littletimmy 3337 days ago
Here's some perspective from a Pakistani agnostic who supports blasphemy laws.

This article is an example of how people in the West really don't get how religious countries in the third world work. Because rule of law is absolute in Western countries, articles like this make it sound like the problem is the unjust law. That is absolutely false.

There are two major problems with blasphemy reform. The first problem is that the PEOPLE want blasphemy punished. There is a significant minority in Pakistan who is OK with a blasphemer being killed. It is not an unjust law imposed on people - the people WANT it. The second problem is that the rule of law in most third world countries is very weak. Which means that if people want something punished, and the law isn't there to punish it, they will take the law into their own hands. We saw this very recently when a huge mob lynched a university student who was accused of blasphemy. So... the people want blasphemy punished, and you cannot stop them from taking the law into their own hands. What do you do in this case?

Consider the options in front of a Pakistani politician who is personally against punishment for blasphemy. He can either revoke the law (at risk to his own life) and then watch as people form huge mobs who lynch people accused of blasphemy at random. He will be unable to control this because the police might empathize with the killers. OR he can impose blasphemy law, and then weaken implementation. When the blasphemy law is imposed, then people are discouraged from taking the law into their own hands. At the same time, he can weaken implementation to the point that no one Really gets punished for blasphemy (as in the case in Pakistan - the state does not execute people for blasphemy). With a blasphemy law, the religious nuts are appeased, and at the same time, with weak implementation, a semblance of freedom is maintained.

That means, the blasphemy law keeps the lid on the monster that is public opinion until it can be reformed. And that comes through education, where the Pakistani government is trying to make strides. (Unsuccessfully, I might add, since it is a poor country.) In any case, THAT is the logic behind blasphemy law - it prevents the country from descending into anarchy. It is easy to sit in a country with great rule of law to say that why are these people in third world countries making stupid laws, but the lawmakers in these countries aren't stupid. The obviously see that their people are backward, and there needs to be imperfect stopgap solutions until the country can implement better rule of law.

3 comments

In the case of the university student who was lynched, did the crowd even try to report him to the police and provide their evidence, or did they just go ahead with the lynching?
Apparently they reported to the university administration which failed to take action and may even have tacitly accepted the decision of the mob (presumably because of fear of reprisal themselves). But the good thing is now the police can take action against the killers because they took the law into their hands.
The police (local, not university) were on the scene egging the crowd on, according to some reports from those university staff on the scene who weren't involved. The university security chief started it all with a threat to kill him at a staff meeting called to discuss his case.
You may want to read Arafat Mazhar's excellent series of articles in DAWN on how exactly 295C came to carry only the death penalty. This is now way beyond some trophy to dull the masses into compliance. (The article is technically incorrect, by the way, the option of life imprisonment which existed under Zia was removed in 1990 during Nawaz' first term, entirely democratically)
Did Pakistan have its blasphemy law in its current state since founding, or was it significantly broadened under Zia-ul-Haq?