Blasphemers are terrorists, says IHC judge

[The Eagle]

mate who can we accept the interpretation of law of pakistan by a person who has a soft corner for a killer.his judgement and interpretation is bound to be biased.

My friend, I am sure he is not alone to decide the Law as there is upper house, Courts as well. There is no need to feel like this is the end.

 

[Hell hound]

My friend, I am sure he is not alone to decide the Law as there is upper house, Courts as well. There is no need to feel like this is the end.

as the transparency and conflict of interest dictates shouldn't he stay away from it in the first place.

There is no need to feel like this is the end.

i still think we need to apply the chinese wall here to keep the interpenetration free from his bias

 

[The Eagle]

as the transparency and conflict of interest dictates shouldn't he stay away from it in the first place.

I am sure you are aware about the norms of Justice and language of law so he was dictating a ruling in the Court hence, those remarks that I don't think any senior judge will strikeout his/her predecessor like this. There was a ruling/citation in discussion.

And I wouldn't call it biased without knowing the details as article does not mention anything as such.

 

[Hell hound]

And I wouldn't call it biased without knowing the details as article does not mention anything as such.

mate my reason for calling him biased in this matter is this pic of his

 

[YeBeWarned]

What an utterly absurd statement, God help Pakistan when we have judges like this.

Blasphemy laws are in Pakistan constitution .. Call Blasphemers terrorist is little far but let me remind you in case you forget that Pakistan was Created for Muslims of South Asia to live peacefully to practice their RELIGION FREELY .. now in both our Constitution and religion there are laws to deal with Blasphemers , so do we have to act as per our Constitution or we should listen to every TOM DICK and HARRY ?
if a Pakistani say that we don't like the Holocaust denial Law in some European countries and they are doomed, so do you really think they will give a flying F to what we think ? NO ...

So far, they haven't killed anyone. I agree we should get rid of them.

USA and almost every western Nation put those ( Preachers and Imams ) who incite violence against others as Terrorism , so why can't we put these blasphemers into the same category as those terrorists ? Provocation or incitement of Violence must be stopped right ? that is very Important Factor on Western Society today ..@Syed.Ali.Haider

 

[Jungibaaz]

Blasphemy laws are in Pakistan constitution .. Call Blasphemers terrorist is little far but let me remind you in case you forget that Pakistan was Created for Muslims of South Asia to live peacefully to practice their RELIGION FREELY .. now in both our Constitution and religion there are laws to deal with Blasphemers , so do we have to act as per our Constitution or we should listen to every TOM DICK and HARRY ?
if a Pakistani say that we don't like the Holocaust denial Law in some European countries and they are doomed, so do you really think they will give a flying F to what we think ? NO ...

The constitution and laws were amended to include blasphemy, they can be amended to remove it. From what I can tell, little to no inspiration did any of the founding fathers of Pakistan give to adopting this as a responsibility of the state. I'm not aware of any constitutional explicit basis of blasphemy laws, you can cite inspiration, but the real substance is in the penal code which Zia reformed in 1986 to include articles like 295-C (as well as the other offences listed 295, 295 A-C, and 298 A-C).

And it's interesting you mention the holocaust, most countries don't have specific punishments on holocaust denial even if they have laws against it, even in Europe apart from a few countries with a certain history, only very few deniers have been imprisoned and even there debate has opened up to removing such laws. But you're right, it's a case of hypocrisy, there should be no laws against holocaust denial. However, here's where your comparison fails, most holocaust deniers don't even get prison (apart form a few), whereas in Pakistan blasphemy is a lethal offence, and sometimes lethal even before it reaches a court of law.

Really, all that aside, I don't see how blasphemy can be rightly described as terrorism, that is my main concern here, movement against blasphemy laws and for free speech are an argument for another day.

 

[VCheng]

USA and almost every western Nation put those ( Preachers and Imams ) who incite violence against others as Terrorism , so why can't we put these blasphemers into the same category as those terrorists ? Provocation or incitement of Violence must be stopped right ?

Provocation vs freedom of speech is a difficult balance to get right, and every society decides for itself. Closed societies tend to favor the former while open societies tend to favor the latter.

Of course Pakistan can decide to treat blasphemers as terrorists and pass a law to this effect. Even now, if a charge of blasphemy is proven by due process in a court of law, I would support any penalty decided as a result. But nobody should just disappear, and nobody should be subject to mob justice.

 

[YeBeWarned]

The constitution and laws were amended to include blasphemy, they can be amended to remove it. From what I can tell, little to no inspiration did any of the founding fathers of Pakistan give to adopting this as a responsibility of the state. I'm not aware of any constitutional explicit basis of blasphemy laws, you can cite inspiration, but the real substance is in the penal code which Zia reformed in 1986 to include articles like 295-C (as well as the other offences listed 295, 295 A-C, and 298 A-C).

That is my Point , Why should we even consider to amend or remove a LAW which is not wrong in both Constitutional or religious way .. Take this as example, if US changes it law under trump Presidency than who are we " Pakistani " to say that US should amend it ? ? having a LAW to prevent people to insult Prophet is far more better than having no LAW and let people Abuse the Prophet openly .. you can do the maths when People start taking matters in their own hands .. if Pakistani courts abide by the constitution to prevent such action than whats wrong in it ??

And it's interesting you mention the holocaust, most countries don't have specific punishments on holocaust denial even if they have laws against it, even in Europe apart from a few countries with a certain history, only very few deniers have been imprisoned and even there debate has opened up to removing such laws. But you're right, it's a case of hypocrisy, there should be no laws against holocaust denial. However, here's where your comparison fails, most holocaust deniers don't even get prison (apart form a few), whereas in Pakistan blasphemy is a lethal offence, and sometimes lethal even before it reaches a court of law.

Double standard or Hypocrisy from west is not my intention , its their land their rules we are no one to tell or change their laws .. the law of Blasphemy was misused , NO debate there .. but what my point is its better to have proper mechanism to put those culprits at least inside the courts and if proved than behind the bars ...thing is I as a Pakistani Dont want to hear anyone speaking ill against my Prophet , its my right as i am legal citizen of this land.. now if someone keep poking me to or the society to provoke people for violence than it is wrong , Law's are there to hold up societies to take matters in their hands , and sometimes you have to take hard measures to keep people doing so in future ..

Really, all that aside, I don't see how blasphemy can be rightly described as terrorism, that is my main concern here, movement against blasphemy laws and for free speech are an argument for another day.

as i say, In USA imam's is been put into custody for incitement of Violence .. there must be similar laws in EU as well ... these bloggers or people like Bhensa they are provoking a certain faith followers , directly attacking their Holy personality and somehow they know that will bring some reaction and protest so they can make some bucks with this publicity , of course its hard to stop 90% of Muslim population to react over the abuse of their Prophet than its farely easy to stop few scum bags to insult our Prophet and avoid a catastrophic events that usually follows ..

 

[VCheng]

In USA imam's is been put into custody for incitement of Violence

More information on this, if you please.

 

[YeBeWarned]

Provocation vs freedom of speech is a difficult balance to get right, and every society decides for itself. Closed societies tend to favor the former while open societies tend to favor the latter.

Of course Pakistan can decide to treat blasphemers as terrorists and pass a law to this effect. Even now, if a charge of blasphemy is proven by due process in a court of law, I would support any penalty decided as a result. But nobody should just disappear, and nobody should be subject to mob justice.

never thought i will say this, but I agree with you here 100% ...
as i mentioned to Jungibaaz, that US is taking heavy measures to prevent their Muslim population been radicalized by certain imam , so incitement of hate, violence should be dealt strictly and they are doing so..
for the bloggers yeah there is no way i will say that picking someone and making them disappear will be a good decision , the better way to do so is that they should be picked and presented in a court and let the court decide their fate .. as per the law of land ..
mob take justice in their hands when they see courts failed to do so, now here as you and i can see, if Court speak in favor of bloggers than its a problem and if they talk against them than its also a problem ..

More information on this, if you please.

if my memory is correct , i read somewhere .. i am looking for that link will post as soon as i find it ..
http://freespeechdebate.com/en/case/the-brandenburg-test-for-incitement-to-violence/
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2102
its not the same link but somewhat similar to what my point was ..
@Syed.Ali.Haider rest you know better about US laws than me

 

[VCheng]

if my memory is correct , i read somewhere .. i am looking for that link will post as soon as i find it ..
http://freespeechdebate.com/en/case/the-brandenburg-test-for-incitement-to-violence/
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2102
its not the same link but somewhat similar to what my point was ..
@Syed.Ali.Haider rest you know better about US laws than me

AFAIK, there has been no such case where an imam has been imprisoned for expressing religious views in USA.

never thought i will say this, but I agree with you here 100% ...

If people make the effort to think about what I say, I really mean well.

 

[Nilgiri]

Religion and Comedy generally do not mix well, Sir.

That's the best sort of comedy, what you talking about

I hope to live to see the day when Monty Python and the Holy Grail type stuff can be done for all the religions out there heh.....but I guess its a vain hope

 

[YeBeWarned]

AFAIK, there has been no such case where an imam has been imprisoned for expressing religious views in USA.

Ok .. maybe i misread or mixed up with any other country ..

 

[VCheng]

Ok .. maybe i misread or mixed up with any other country ..

It could have happened elsewhere, more likely.

That's the best sort of comedy, what you talking about

I hope to live to see the day when Monty Python and the Holy Grail type stuff can be done for all the religions out there heh.....but I guess its a vain hope

My reply was deleted and I was given a warning, so I will respect that, and bow out here.

 

[The Eagle]

mate my reason for calling him biased in this matter is this pic of his
View attachment 382394

So what do you think that he is still a Judge that too of High Court? After this, someone from the authority should have taken the action but seems like he kissed him on personal grounds, outside the Court, No?

My reply was deleted and I was given a warning, so I will respect that, and bow out here.

As we were discussing the bias thing etc and seen your this post, I informed you couple of pages ago to avoid as such and interestingly, you were again informed through a pre-warning/soft reminder to say, to avoid Flame-baiting etc so that was not a warning. See, how the choice of words makes someone bias in statement even that is not intentional, Yes?

A pre-warning/soft reminder was given privately as another courtesy call.