Two quick questions as I can’t find a single media article that covers the issue.
How does this Shariah agreement defer from the one set up in 1994 and 1998/99? What are the changes that make this unacceptable but those past two agreements for implementation were acceptable?
Anybody seen a copy of this agreement? Which aspects of Shariah are actually being implemented? A text in english would be highly appreciated if someone knows a link.
Re: Sharia and Swat
Two quick questions as I can't find a single media article that covers the issue.
How does this Shariah agreement defer from the one set up in 1994 and 1998/99? What are the changes that make this unacceptable but those past two agreements for implementation were acceptable?
Anybody seen a copy of this agreement? Which aspects of Shariah are actually being implemented? A text in english would be highly appreciated if someone knows a link.
I have not read whatever sharia was implemented in 94 or 99 so can't say what the difference is. But obviously the super duper bestest and greatest muslims the taliban did not think it was as great as their version of the sharia. The main difference is this sharia was implemented through use of brutal force until the state decided to surrender, automatically legitimatizing any future use of violence against the state for taliban type goals.
It's available online, can't remember the link.
Re: Sharia and Swat
^ I agree, i'm not sure why they didn't just accept the one that was passed in 1999.
It would be nice if someone can get hold of a copy, so we can talk about it.
Re: Sharia and Swat
Thanks. From what I have read and the people I have spoken to, this is not the first time this issue has come up. Rather Fazullah is the son in law of the man who got the first request for the Shariah law implementation under way.
The 1994 agreement changed a lot of the administrative functions so that they were within Shariah. A lot of it was administrative. Federal Courts were called Qazi courts but no real laws were changed. Federal law still applied.
In 1998/1999 the same happened. After which I believe the old geezer was sent to jail some time in the early 2000s. This just looks like a repeat of earlier actions in the 90s.
Re: Sharia and Swat
Sufi the terrorist was sent to jail after he sent thousands of young pashtun men to fight the american invasion and majority of those men, who had no training or concept of modern war were killed by American B-52 bombs. Sufi was jailed partially to protect him from angry parents of the pakistanis who died in afghanistan
Re: Sharia and Swat
There we go. I knew I was forgetting the reason he was jailed. Mohammed Sufi (correct me on the name) started off the whole demand for shariah in Swat back in the late 80s and early 90s. It got accepted by the government of the time twice. But the problem right now is we can't move forward with the discussion without a copy of the agreement.
Re: Sharia and Swat
Full text of the regulation:
Associated Press Of Pakistan ( Pakistan’s Premier NEWS Agency )
Re: Sharia and Swat
CM, the ironic thing is that the first nizam-e-adal regulation of 1994 was passed only after lawyers from Malakand got the peshawar high court to strike down the PATA regulations as being unconstitutional. I believe that what they had in mind was that the area would then come under the Pakistan penal code. Instead, the PATA regulation was struck down and nothing was put in its place until Sufi Muhammad finally got the then CM Aftab Sherpao and the PPP government to give in to his Shariah demand after he and his TNSM thugs occupied the Malakand airport.
I think the main difference between then and now is that the supreme court and the peshawar high court (I think) had authority to strike down qazi court rulings but now they are only accountable to the federal shariah court.
Re: Sharia and Swat
I have read the text of the regulation and I can see no where, where it states that federal laws are being over-written, or that a new cadre of judges is being set up or that laws will now be inforced from the Taliban point of view.
Rather the federal appointees shall remaind in charge of the courts. The courts have been renamed like in 1994 to Qazi this and Qazi that. The rules are technical on the nature of the functioning of the courts and the like. It does state that the Qazi courts shall seek guidance from the Quran and the Hadis. However they can not be contrary to Pakistan Federal law. Additionally all cases that pertain to the Hudood Ordinance comes under the federal courts among many others.
So what exception do people have to this regulation?
Re: Sharia and Swat
^ I didn't read the text, now that you've read please help understand these:
Re: Sharia and Swat
CM,
Stop being naive.
What is being observed in practice is different from what is written on paper. The issue that sane and non-jihadi Pakistanis are taking with this "Nizam-e-Kalashnikov" deal is:
This was forced on the locals through violence and brutalities. When the threat of the gun was absent, locals voted for a secular party and the mullahs accomplished using force what they could not do with persuasion.
Whatever is in the "written agreement" is meaningless because the party with the danda has repeatedly gone back on its words. Case in point - Until the day before parliament approval of Nizam-e-Adl, Swat Taliban said they will disarm once govt approves the deal. But the moment the deal was approved, they say "No disarming, go pound sand"
The written agreement that Qazi Court jurisprudence cannot be "contrary to Pakistan Federal law" is once again being publicly repudiated by Sufi Mohammad himself, who just said on Thursday that there shall be no appeal in any Pakistani court to a Qazi Court decision. In other words, if the court hands out an atrocious decision like the beating of Chand Bibi, the defendants have absolutely no judicial recourse.
Taliban is setting the agenda for the courts. The day after the resolution was passed, TTP "spokesthug" Muslim Khan gave interview to Dunya TV saying that first order of priority of Qazi courts is to pass death sentences to people he had on a "list of traitors". They included government officials, FC officers and others who had opposed the Taliban. This clearly shows that "Nizam-e-Adl" is just Taliban jungle law.
Your arguments are all theoretical and show no concern for how they are actually being implemented in reality and how the locals were terrorized into submission.
At the end of the day, this is a "deal" where one party has the freedom to violate its terms at will and the people have no recourse from arbitrary violence or capricious decisions.
Even if judges remain the same as in 1994, they too will have to operate under the same climate of fear or beheadings and bombings before they dare issue any judgment that might offend the gunmen.
Re: Sharia and Swat
Re: Sharia and Swat
Why should we care about what Sharia they want to implement in their area? Let them adhere to their cave ideology and mentality. The only concern perhaps would be the impact on the local masses but then these people (whether Taliban or non-Taliban) by their very nature are ultra-conservative and backward-thinking and have held very rigid religious and cultural beliefs for centuries. As long as they do not try and impose their so-called sharia outside Swat and FATA etc. or invade our freedoms I could not care less about what they think.
We were wrong all along to send army into FATA and Swat. The grim consequences are there for everyone to see.
Sharia to these people equals violation of basic human rights. Let them enjoy this new found 'freedom'
Re: Sharia and Swat
The problem is that "they" are using their victories as basis to come into "our" area.
If we use your logic, we will give up FATA, then PATA, then settled areas of Sarhad then Punjab and soon, all of Pakistan.
TTP people like Muslim Khan are saying that after Swat, they want to implement this model to every Pashto speaking area of Pakistan. Then they will say every Pashtun majority areas including in Karachi and Lahore.
Where will the surrender end?
Re: Sharia and Swat
^ well in that case we will be left with no option but to confront this menace with full force. This (Taliban) cancer cannot be allowed to spead unchecked. At some point you have to say enough is enough
And the difference is people in urban Sind and Central Punjab atleast don't have such backward understanding of Islam or culture and while most of them are silent and apathetic at the moment (because they are largely unaffected by them; the problem is still very much confined to NWFP), I am sure they will resist it vehemently if their freedoms were ever invaded.....
Re: Sharia and Swat
JaanBaaz has got it spot on.
Re: Sharia and Swat
GoldenAsif,
For your information, Swatis too were as liberal or "roshan khyal" as Karchiites despite being in NWFP.
ANP used to win there regularly.
Now look at how long it took for them to welcome Taliban shariat?
Whether Karachi or DG Khan, the Taliban tactics are the same - first kill moderate leaders and then terrorize the locals using beheadings and suicide bombings and soon everyone will be willing for a "peace deal"
And BTW you are wrong, most people aren't apathetic - they are too scared to talk about it. Fear and dread are contagious.
Re: Sharia and Swat
Swatis were the most progressive of Pashutns and then their princely state joined Pakistan. Then we gave them Taliban. Then they died and they cried but to no avail. Then it was their end.
Re: Sharia and Swat
Swatis are no backwards people. They're silent because they're crap scared of being beheaded and their corpses hung with meat falling off their bones and rotting a town square, where their children are forced to watch it all.
Re: Sharia and Swat
if swatis supported the taliban, swatis would have voted for them in the last election. heart of taliban power base lies in urban punjab - the same area which also supported the judges movement. i also think that pathans get an unfair rap for being radicals. nwfp is controlled by anp which is not a religious party. urban punjab otoh is largely controlled by pml-n which is essentially jamaat-lite. same pml-n under the same leader has passed swat style shariat bill twice. same party is also the most powerful opponent of campaign against jehadis.