This article appears in the Witness section of the Spring 2019 issue of the New Humanist. Subscribe today.
Aasia Bibi is a Christian farm labourer who has spent eight years on death row in Pakistan for blasphemy. Even by the blasphemy law’s own incredibly low standards, the case against her fell apart and in October, the Supreme Court overturned her conviction. Despite this, Bibi was not freed. Violent protests led by extremist groups erupted around the country. Prime minister Imran Khan struck a deal to end the disruption, allowing extremist leaders to seek an appeal against the Supreme Court’s judgment. In February, the court upheld its decision, and Bibi is now expected to leave Pakistan and seek asylum overseas.
Bibi has become the face of Pakistan’s blasphemy law. The mother of five had been accused of insulting the Prophet Muhammad after an argument with her neighbours. The case illustrated everything wrong with the law, beyond the absurdity of making blasphemy a crime in the first place: the low burden of proof, the extraordinarily harsh sentences, the way in which it is often used to target minorities, and the inflammatory reaction it prompts. Since 1990, more than 60 people have been killed by mobs after blasphemy accusations, while lower court judges – such as those who condemned Bibi to eight years on death row – are often afraid to acquit.
To outsiders, as well as to liberals and secularists in Pakistan, this law is brutal, disproportionate and inhumane. To Islamists and conservatives, however, it is a symbol of Pakistan’s status as a Muslim state, a statute that must be defended at all costs. While the blasphemy law has been a political flashpoint for years, a specific movement coalesced around it in the years after Bibi’s arrest. As is often the case in Pakistan, these extreme elements have been pandered to by mainstream politicians, which provides the space for them to flourish and grow. When Khan agreed to allow those leading the street protests to appeal the Supreme Court’s verdict, it was another example of Pakistan’s leaders making concessions to those who undermine the rule of law.
While it is a victory that, despite pressure, the Supreme Court has held steady in its decision to free Bibi, the injustice of the law itself remains. There are no serious attempts to reform it. In 2011, two politicians who advocated Bibi’s release and sought to reform the blasphemy law were assassinated. In our Summer 2018 issue, Rahila Gupta interviewed Bibi’s lawyer, Saif ul-Malook. Even he stopped short of criticising the law itself, saying only: “It is not the law but its application that is abhorrent and unjust.”
The Islamist groups baying for Bibi’s execution were protesting about more than the blasphemy law: they are defending an intolerant, inward-looking iteration of Pakistan that rejects secularism and rides roughshod over the rights of religious minorities. Sadly, successive governments have failed to take decisive action. Despite Bibi’s freedom, the injustice lives on.
