Freedom of Religion in Pakistan - Legal and Personal Freedom For Non-Muslims

Legal and Personal Freedom For Non-Muslims

The judicial system encompasses several different court systems with overlapping and sometimes competing jurisdiction, reflecting differences in civil, criminal, and Islamic jurisprudence. The federal sharia court and the sharia bench of the Supreme Court serve as appellate courts for certain convictions in criminal court under the Hudood Ordinances, and judges and attorneys in these courts must be Muslims. The federal sharia court also may overturn any legislation judged to be inconsistent with the tenets of Islam.

The Hudood Ordinances criminalize non-marital rape, extramarital sex, and various gambling, alcohol, and property offences. The Hudood Ordinances are applied to Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Some Hudood Ordinance cases are subject to Hadd, or Koranic, punishment; others are subject to Tazir, or secular punishment.

Although both types of cases are tried in ordinary criminal courts, special rules of evidence apply in Hadd cases, which discriminate against non-Muslims. For example, a non-Muslim may testify only if the victim also is non-Muslim. Likewise, the testimony of women, Muslim or non-Muslim, is not admissible in cases involving Hadd punishments. Therefore, if a Muslim man rapes a Muslim woman in the presence of women or non-Muslim men, he cannot be convicted under the Hudood Ordinances.

Christian Church leaders argue that the government needs to go beyond the rhetoric of “minorities are enjoying all rights in the country” when they are not, and take practical steps to ensure that this is done.

According to the survey in 2010 by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, 76% of Pakistanis polled supported the death penalty for those who leave the Muslim religion.

Read more about this topic:  Freedom Of Religion In Pakistan

Famous quotes containing the words legal, personal and/or freedom:

    Hawkins: The will is not exactly in proper legal phraseology. Richard: No: my father died without the consolations of the law.
    George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950)

    It has no share in the leadership of thought: it does not even reflect its current. It does not create beauty: it apes fashion. It does not produce personal skill: our actors and actresses, with the exception of a few persons with natural gifts and graces, mostly miscultivated or half-cultivated, are simply the middle-class section of the residuum.
    George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950)

    Here we have the beautiful British compromise: a man can say anything, he mustn’t do anything; a man can listen to anything, but he musn’t be roused to do anything. By freedom of speech is meant freedom to talk about; speech is not saying-as-an-action.
    Paul Goodman (1911–1972)