Nobody can take blasphemy law into his hands: IHC

ISLAMABAD: Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) in a division bench hearing Mumtaz Qadri’s appeal against conviction has observed that in the presence of blasphemy law nobody could be allowed to take law into their hands and no excuse is either acceptable for the murder of a blasphemy accused.
The division also posed a question to the defence lawyers that whether a police constable could decide about the beliefs of person and execute him?The division bench comprising Justice Noorul Haq Qureshi and Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui continued with the proceedings here on Wednesday.
Legal counsel for Mumtaz Qadri, former Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court Khawaja Mohammad Sharif, while forwarding arguments in this case said that the people who killed the blasphemous magazine staff in France were there heroes. He paid homage to the assassins of Charlie Hebdo staff.
Advocate Sharif further argued that his client recorded his statement before magistrate under police pressure where he (Qadri) said that he asked Moherar to depute him in the security quad of former Punjab Governor Salman Taseer as he had intentions to murder him.
In cross-examination, Mumtaz Qadri had said that he was deputed for the security of former governor Punjab through a routine matter.
Khawaja Sharif said that while trial of this case no such document was exhibited before the court from where it could be established that the duty roaster was altered. His client Mumtaz Qadri was an honest policeman and had no enmity whatsoever with Salman Taseer or a personal grudge. Khawaja Sharif further argued that a common man because of his religious motivation cannot spare the blasphemer and I am sure Salman Rushdie will be killed if he would ever come here. His client Mumtaz Qadri murdered Taseer after Taseer pronounced the blasphemy law as black law and ridiculed the Islamic injunctions. Being provocative about the statements of Taseer, his client murdered the apostate (“Murtad”) as the penalty for blasphemy to the prophet Muhammad (SAW) is death, Khawaja Sharif advocate further said.
Justice Siddiqui, in the bench, observed that how come a constable could ascertain that who is apostate “Murtad”? Who authorized him in doing so? This country has a law and no individual could take law into his hands.
Legal counsel for Mumtaz Qadri Khawaja Sharif further argued that a son of Salman Taseer, Aatish Taseer, has written in his book that his father used to eat pork and drink liquor. At this IHC bench observed that there is a law for drinking of liquor and someone at the pretext that he eats pork and drink liquor could not be assassinated.
Another legal counsel for Mumtaz Qadri Justice (R) Mian Nazeer Akhtar argued that the ATC convicted his client under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA). He claimed that the prosecution did not produce any evidence which could connect the killing of Taseer with an act of terrorism. Mumtaz Qadri has not confessed his crime and he only confessed what he did. At this Justice Siddiqui said that the confession of killing a person if not the confession of a crime then what it is.
Justice Qureshi, in the bench, said that law should not be taken into hands and it has to be obeyed. If we concede to your arguments then everybody will get a licence to kill everybody. Everybody after killing another one will say that he killed him as he was committing blasphemy to the respect and reverence of Prophet Muhammad (SAW). Everybody will use this pretext as an excuse, Justice Qureshi further said. Justice Siddiqui observed that there were factories running in the name of religion in this country. Tomorrow one could be killed as he doesn’t pronounce particular words of Salat-o-Salam or doesn’t wear a green turban.
If Mumtaz Qadri thought someone committing blasphemy, did he ever file an application against him? At which, advocate Sharif said that an application was filed in this regard, but the court had dismissed the application. However, Mumtaz Qadri did not file the said application. Justice Siddiqui in the bench observed Islam has valued the price of human life more than Ka’aba. Justice Qureshi said that Islam has declared the killing of one innocent life equal to the killing of whole humanity. In the case of Rimsha Masih, the blasphemy law was also tried to be used in a twisted manner, he further observed. Last hearing the same IHC bench had observed that this case could not be sent to the military courts.
The IHC bench then put of in this case till February 06 when Advocate General for Islamabad Mian Abdur Rauf will argue in this matter.
Mumtaz Qadri is a former Punjab police security personal who, on a duty for the protection of former Governor Punjab Salman Taseer, had assassinated him on January 04, 2011, at Kohsar Market, Islamabad, due to his opposition to blasphemy law.
Separately in another case, a division bench comprising Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Aamir Farooq issued notices to the state seeking its reply after an accused Umar Abdullah Abbasi allegedly involved in the murder of a former federal minister for minorities Shehbaz Bhatti, has filed an acquittal plea before the court.