Featured The missing links in Pakistan's policies to counter extremism by Tariq Khosa

[Abu Zarrar]

THE government’s decision to establish a commission “for implementation of national narrative and development of structures against violent extremism and radicalisation” is a significant move towards countering violent extremism (CVE) and terrorism (CT) in the long term. In a meeting last month, the cabinet approved the proposal submitted by the interior ministry and the draft legal framework is currently under consideration by its sub-committee on legislation headed by the law minister. This initiative requires debate and ownership by state and society.


The primary objectives of the proposed commission include: (i) providing a legal mechanism to curb violent extremism; (ii) enforcing national narratives and policies in line with the National Action Plan (NAP); (iii) establishing a policy review board under the commission to coordinate with ministries, government departments and academia; (iv) establishing a centre of excellence to conduct degree and diploma courses in CVE and CT; (v) establishing a national facility to design and implement strategies in deradicalisation, rehabilitation, and psychological and religious counselling of prisoners and detainees involved in terrorism; (vi) prohibiting offences related to VE and sectarianism; (vii) preparing deradicalisation modules, strategies and vocational training programmes for suspected terrorists and extremists; and (viii) promoting awareness through print and electronic media, publications, seminars, conferences, etc.


Extremism must be addressed through policies that include strategies and action plans, clarity on CVE laws, and national consensus on narratives. The first-ever National Internal Security Policy (NISP 2014-18) suggested “constructing a robust national narrative on extremism, sectarianism, terrorism, and militancy as the cornerstone of an ideological response to non-traditional threats”. Mere words, no action. An under-resourced Nacta could not achieve this.


Also so far on paper alone, the NISP 2018-23 was nonetheless an improved version adopted after extensive consultation with all political parties, and contained an effective institutional mechanism designed in consultation with all provinces. What is the use of making policies if they are not to be implemented? Intriguingly, we still do not have a comprehensive national security policy despite having established a national security division a few years ago. A military doctrine has limited scope. An all-encompassing security policy must prioritise socioeconomic and human development, supported by all elements of national power.


Nacta drafted detailed CVE policy guidelines in January 2018 after extensive stakeholder deliberations. These identified the drivers of extremism and covered areas such as the rule of law, service delivery, media engagement, education policy, promotion of culture and the four ‘R’s: reformation, rehabilitation, reintegration and renunciation strategies. Extremism was broadly defined as “having absolute belief in one’s truth with an ingrained sense of self-righteousness”. Such a mindset was then “likely to be accompanied with violence” to impose one’s belief system. The CVE guidelines should have been adopted to reduce intolerance and violence in our society. Similarly, Nacta’s policy review of NAP in 2019 found that actions were required in nine out of 20 points. The government should pay attention to the guidelines and policy review.


The 22-point, 120-page Paigham-i-Pakistan, was launched in January 2018 through the joint efforts of the Council of Islamic Ideology and Higher Education Commission. Currently, it has more than 5,000 signatories. It can be the basis of a national narrative against religious extremism. Reportedly, the CII is toying with the idea of converting it into law, thus criminalising any violations of the decree. This would be a dangerous path to tread, as witnessed recently with the Tahaffuz Bunyad-i-Islam bill in Punjab. The role of the state is that of an enabler and facilitator, not an enforcer, in matters of faith and belief of individual citizens.


Another recent development deserves attention. Extremism has been defined in the Citizens’ Protection Rules (Against Online Harm), 2020, as “the violent, vocal or active opposition to fundamental values of the State of Pakistan including the security, integrity or defence of Pakistan, public order, decency or morality, the rule of law, individual liberty and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs”. This definition is problematic, ambiguous and likely to promote internal discord. It calls for serious review. It took more than two decades to restrict and rationalise the definitional aspect of terrorism in the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, when in 2019 a Supreme Court bench restricted its scope by delinking acts of terror from personal enmity or private vendetta. Similarly, defining extremism requires thorough deliberation.


In its report in 2013, the UK’s Prime Minister’s Task Force on Tackling Radicalisation and Extremism quotes from the 2011 Prevent strategy in which extremism is defined as “vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs”. The similarities between the UK’s and Pakistan’s definitions may be a coincidence, but it is worth noting that the British government has abandoned plans to define extremism in law after being told it would criminalise legitimate political and religious activities.


Lord Anderson, former independent reviewer of UK’s terrorism legislation, recently said, “The notion [of extremism] is far too broad to be suitable for legislation. Coercive state powers should not be applied to ‘extremism’, but only to specific types of violent, abusive and anti-social conduct that there is a sufficiently strong reason to prohibit.” According to Sara Khan, appointed to head the UK Counter-Extremism Commission in 2017, “Government cannot tackle extremism alone. Extremism is complex and new laws may not result in a reduction. Civil society and communities are vital partners,” and “Extremism is a threat to our rich diversity and fundamental freedoms, and it requires a whole society response.”


Setting up a CVE commission is a good idea. However, I urge policymakers to pay heed to the words of Edith Wharton: “True originality consists not in a new manner but in a new vision.”


The writer is director of the National Initiative against Organised Crime and author of The Faltering State and Inconvenient Truths.


Source: https://www.dawn.com/news/1596792/countering-extremism

 

[Zarvan]

THE government’s decision to establish a commission “for implementation of national narrative and development of structures against violent extremism and radicalisation” is a significant move towards countering violent extremism (CVE) and terrorism (CT) in the long term. In a meeting last month, the cabinet approved the proposal submitted by the interior ministry and the draft legal framework is currently under consideration by its sub-committee on legislation headed by the law minister. This initiative requires debate and ownership by state and society.


The primary objectives of the proposed commission include: (i) providing a legal mechanism to curb violent extremism; (ii) enforcing national narratives and policies in line with the National Action Plan (NAP); (iii) establishing a policy review board under the commission to coordinate with ministries, government departments and academia; (iv) establishing a centre of excellence to conduct degree and diploma courses in CVE and CT; (v) establishing a national facility to design and implement strategies in deradicalisation, rehabilitation, and psychological and religious counselling of prisoners and detainees involved in terrorism; (vi) prohibiting offences related to VE and sectarianism; (vii) preparing deradicalisation modules, strategies and vocational training programmes for suspected terrorists and extremists; and (viii) promoting awareness through print and electronic media, publications, seminars, conferences, etc.


Extremism must be addressed through policies that include strategies and action plans, clarity on CVE laws, and national consensus on narratives. The first-ever National Internal Security Policy (NISP 2014-18) suggested “constructing a robust national narrative on extremism, sectarianism, terrorism, and militancy as the cornerstone of an ideological response to non-traditional threats”. Mere words, no action. An under-resourced Nacta could not achieve this.


Also so far on paper alone, the NISP 2018-23 was nonetheless an improved version adopted after extensive consultation with all political parties, and contained an effective institutional mechanism designed in consultation with all provinces. What is the use of making policies if they are not to be implemented? Intriguingly, we still do not have a comprehensive national security policy despite having established a national security division a few years ago. A military doctrine has limited scope. An all-encompassing security policy must prioritise socioeconomic and human development, supported by all elements of national power.


Nacta drafted detailed CVE policy guidelines in January 2018 after extensive stakeholder deliberations. These identified the drivers of extremism and covered areas such as the rule of law, service delivery, media engagement, education policy, promotion of culture and the four ‘R’s: reformation, rehabilitation, reintegration and renunciation strategies. Extremism was broadly defined as “having absolute belief in one’s truth with an ingrained sense of self-righteousness”. Such a mindset was then “likely to be accompanied with violence” to impose one’s belief system. The CVE guidelines should have been adopted to reduce intolerance and violence in our society. Similarly, Nacta’s policy review of NAP in 2019 found that actions were required in nine out of 20 points. The government should pay attention to the guidelines and policy review.


The 22-point, 120-page Paigham-i-Pakistan, was launched in January 2018 through the joint efforts of the Council of Islamic Ideology and Higher Education Commission. Currently, it has more than 5,000 signatories. It can be the basis of a national narrative against religious extremism. Reportedly, the CII is toying with the idea of converting it into law, thus criminalising any violations of the decree. This would be a dangerous path to tread, as witnessed recently with the Tahaffuz Bunyad-i-Islam bill in Punjab. The role of the state is that of an enabler and facilitator, not an enforcer, in matters of faith and belief of individual citizens.


Another recent development deserves attention. Extremism has been defined in the Citizens’ Protection Rules (Against Online Harm), 2020, as “the violent, vocal or active opposition to fundamental values of the State of Pakistan including the security, integrity or defence of Pakistan, public order, decency or morality, the rule of law, individual liberty and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs”. This definition is problematic, ambiguous and likely to promote internal discord. It calls for serious review. It took more than two decades to restrict and rationalise the definitional aspect of terrorism in the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, when in 2019 a Supreme Court bench restricted its scope by delinking acts of terror from personal enmity or private vendetta. Similarly, defining extremism requires thorough deliberation.


In its report in 2013, the UK’s Prime Minister’s Task Force on Tackling Radicalisation and Extremism quotes from the 2011 Prevent strategy in which extremism is defined as “vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs”. The similarities between the UK’s and Pakistan’s definitions may be a coincidence, but it is worth noting that the British government has abandoned plans to define extremism in law after being told it would criminalise legitimate political and religious activities.


Lord Anderson, former independent reviewer of UK’s terrorism legislation, recently said, “The notion [of extremism] is far too broad to be suitable for legislation. Coercive state powers should not be applied to ‘extremism’, but only to specific types of violent, abusive and anti-social conduct that there is a sufficiently strong reason to prohibit.” According to Sara Khan, appointed to head the UK Counter-Extremism Commission in 2017, “Government cannot tackle extremism alone. Extremism is complex and new laws may not result in a reduction. Civil society and communities are vital partners,” and “Extremism is a threat to our rich diversity and fundamental freedoms, and it requires a whole society response.”


Setting up a CVE commission is a good idea. However, I urge policymakers to pay heed to the words of Edith Wharton: “True originality consists not in a new manner but in a new vision.”


The writer is director of the National Initiative against Organised Crime and author of The Faltering State and Inconvenient Truths.


Source: https://www.dawn.com/news/1596792/countering-extremism

You can't beat extremists by spreading and using means which are forbidden in Islam. Their entire narrative is build on the fact that they successfully portray you westernized people who are not following orders of Islam. Your entire economic system is based on kufr and interest plus your media is full of Haraam stuff. And our genius leadership even Imran Khan comes in this wants to beat this narrative by promoting and giving medals to women like Mehwish Hayat. ISPR is also playing the game TTP wants them to play that is use actors and actresses to build their narrative and that is exactly what TTP wants so they can portray you unislamic. And sadly there is not serious will to do something about it. So yes we may manage to beat and eventually eliminate TTP, but I can guarantee you, and I am not happy about it, but soon you may face a bigger monster.

Only thing which would give you victory is strict enforcement of Islamic laws. Ban and stop those things which are forbidden in Islam. And portray yourself as true followers of Islam by following Islam not doing the opposite.

 

[jamahir]

You can't beat extremists by spreading and using means which are forbidden in Islam. Their entire narrative is build on the fact that they successfully portray you westernized people who are not following orders of Islam. Your entire economic system is based on kufr and interest plus your media is full of Haraam stuff. And our genius leadership even Imran Khan comes in this wants to beat this narrative by promoting and giving medals to women like Mehwish Hayat. ISPR is also playing the game TTP wants them to play that is use actors and actresses to build their narrative and that is exactly what TTP wants so they can portray you unislamic. And sadly there is not serious will to do something about it. So yes we may manage to beat and eventually eliminate TTP, but I can guarantee you, and I am not happy about it, but soon you may face a bigger monster.

Only thing which would give you victory is strict enforcement of Islamic laws. Ban and stop those things which are forbidden in Islam. And portray yourself as true followers of Islam by following Islam not doing the opposite.

I asked you to give me a nuanced reply about TTP's ideology in the other TTP thread but you never replied. And here too you are acting as the spokesperson of the TTP and the Afghan Taliban. So you want Pakistan to attain victory over TTP by adopting what TTP wants ? What logic is that ?

Do you want Pakistan to again have things like Malala's shooting, assassination of Salman Taseer and the lynching of Mashal Khan ?

 

[Abu Zarrar]

You can't beat extremists by spreading and using means which are forbidden in Islam. Their entire narrative is build on the fact that they successfully portray you westernized people who are not following orders of Islam. Your entire economic system is based on kufr and interest plus your media is full of Haraam stuff. And our genius leadership even Imran Khan comes in this wants to beat this narrative by promoting and giving medals to women like Mehwish Hayat. ISPR is also playing the game TTP wants them to play that is use actors and actresses to build their narrative and that is exactly what TTP wants so they can portray you unislamic. And sadly there is not serious will to do something about it. So yes we may manage to beat and eventually eliminate TTP, but I can guarantee you, and I am not happy about it, but soon you may face a bigger monster.

Only thing which would give you victory is strict enforcement of Islamic laws. Ban and stop those things which are forbidden in Islam. And portray yourself as true followers of Islam by following Islam not doing the opposite.

Oh so you think extremists give a damn about your religion and by implementing shariah Law these fkers will leave go back to their normal lives?

 

[Zarvan]

Oh so you think extremists give a damn about your religion and by implementing shariah Law these fkers will leave go back to their normal lives?

TTP do so does Al Qaeda we may not agree with their interoperation but most of them think they are fighting for Islam. Even where RAW is involved it's some senior leadership who know the reality not commanders and foot soldiers. They believe they are fighting for Islam. You have to beat them in their narrative. The best way to do that is by implementing orders of Islam. The more you do the less foot soldiers and the less new recruits organizations like TTP will get. The less you do it the more recruits they would find.

 

[jamahir]

They believe they are fighting for Islam. You have to beat them in their narrative. The best way to do that is by implementing orders of Islam.

Can you list some of those "orders" ?

 

[Abu Zarrar]

TTP do so does Al Qaeda we may not agree with their interoperation but most of them think they are fighting for Islam. Even where RAW is involved it's some senior leadership who know the reality not commanders and foot soldiers. They believe they are fighting for Islam. You have to beat them in their narrative. The best way to do that is by implementing orders of Islam. The more you do the less foot soldiers and the less new recruits organizations like TTP will get. The less you do it the more recruits they would find.

Remember the two agreements KP government did with fazlu and TNSM? They never stopped attacking security forces even after implementing Nizam-e-Adl Regulation.
It’s not a religious, social reformist or political movement , we should deal it what it is a terrorist organization .

 

[Zarvan]

Remember the two agreements KP government did with fazlu and TNSM? They never stopped attacking security forces even after implementing Nizam-e-Adl Regulation.
It’s not a religious, social reformist or political movement , we should deal it what it is a terrorist organization .

You can't beat an ideology specially a religious one with just weapons. Eventually you have to counter the ideology. For GOD sake. We are fighting TTP for past 17 years. Yes we have degraded them and are close to beating them. Even if we manage to eliminate TTP, I am guaranteeing you we soon could face much bigger monster if we don't counter the ideology. Are you interested in having another war with a new group soon which also lasts for 20 years and then another group and then another group. Because I am not. So counter their ideology. You are right now facing TTP I am afraid if you continue on this path then you even may face Barelvi insurgency. Khadim Rizvi funeral should work as eye opener but after talking to you it seem people have chosen to remain blind to the most obvious changes coming our way.

 

[Abu Zarrar]

banging your head in emojis is as useless as your argument about shariah ; )

 

[crankthatskunk]

I don't have time to read Tariq Khosa. Even more so if it is published by Dawn. Enuf said.

Pakistan will never go forward when people like Tariq Khosa would formulate or participate in formulation of its policy.

 

[Death Professor]

Can you list some of those "orders" ?

Can you list any other person who survived a bullet through the head other than Malala? Maybe you don't understand target killing, maybe you don't understand point blank head shot. This isn't a movie its real life. You bought a narrative it doesn't mean everyone else has to too. Target killer never fires once, he always does multiple times e.g; This is Islamabad, the killers are afraid of getting caught so they hurry, you think that target killer in Swat would take less time and bullets than this? Like do you even think? And then you have the audacity to use this.

Sorry mods, for linking explicit video. But some people are too dumb that words don't portray any meaning to them. So one has to objectively and indefinitely prove them with out a doubt that what they are saying is illogical and absurd.

Do you want Pakistan to again have things like Malala's shooting, assassination of Salman Taseer and the lynching of Mashal Khan ?

Teray liye Marxism/communism sahi hai na india me, tou chat marxcism ko, bhi hamien tou Sharia law chahiye. Proper Sharia law, which ensures every ones rights, which forbids interest, which promotes wealth equality and not the extremist level of marxcist mindset.

 

[jamahir]

Teray liye Marxism/communism sahi hai na india me, tou chat marxcism ko

Talk with decency please. There is no need to get aggressive and foul mouthed.

hamien tou Sharia law chahiye. Proper Sharia law, which ensures every ones rights, which forbids interest, which promotes wealth equality

Noble desires. I want them too and so did this Indian Muslim Socialist / Communist of before 1947 :

During the same period (1920s-30s), another (though lesser known) Islamic scholar in undivided India got smitten by the 1917 Russian revolution and Marxism.

Hafiz Rahman Sihwarwl saw Islam and Marxism sharing five elements in common: (1) prohibition of the accumulation of wealth in the hands of the privileged classes (2) organisation of the economic structure of the state to ensure social welfare (3) equality of opportunity for all human beings (4) priority of collective social interest over individual privilege and (5) prevention of the permanentising of class structure through social revolution.

Please read the rest of that thread. You will come to the conclusion that Islamic socio-economic thought is essentially Socialist in spirit and Islam was one among many progressive ideas coming down history and which can be continued by Muslims being Muslims but taking further advancements even if generated by non-Muslims such as Marx.

Can you list any other person who survived a bullet through the head other than Malala? Maybe you don't understand target killing, maybe you don't understand point blank head shot. This isn't a movie its real life. You bought a narrative it doesn't mean everyone else has to too. Target killer never fires once, he always does multiple times e.g; This is Islamabad, the killers are afraid of getting caught so they hurry, you think that target killer in Swat would take less time and bullets than this? Like do you even think? And then you have the audacity to use this.


Sorry mods, for linking explicit video. But some people are too dumb that words don't portray any meaning to them. So one has to objectively and indefinitely prove them with out a doubt that what they are saying is illogical and absurd.

I suppose that target killer in Swat did not feel unsafe as in the one in the vid you posted. And come on, even the Lal Masjid fools feel unthreatened sitting right inside the national capital.

Malala's survival is a result of chance and good treatment. IIRC the government lifted her by helicopter.

Are you saying that the Malala shooting was a drama ?

 

[Death Professor]

Talk with decency please. There is no need to get aggressive and foul mouthed.

I reflect, I am decent with decent people and aggressive to whoever shows any aggression, be it passive or active. Foul mouthed nopes, I only said you can lick Marxism and communism in India all you want. Similarly your comment, "Can you list some "orders"". The guy was talking in a holistic sense that Islamic law should be implemented and you were trying to antagonize him.

Are you saying that the Malala shooting was a drama ?

Yes most probably. I would rather believe that, than her miraculous saving and recovery. Next you will say, so you think establishment(certain elements) was also in that lie? Sure, they might be. 2010 to 2013, we were in a mess, things were shitty for us, don't know what we had to give or how much we had to bend. Hussain Haqqani(memo gate), OBL Abbottabad operation, Raymond Davis and many more. As I said that era was a complete fk up on our end. It was literally the worst. Traitors were in our midst and extremely active in that era.

And come on, even the Lal Masjid fools feel unthreatened sitting right inside the national capital.

Have you ever been to Islamabad? Are you equating 2007 lal masjid incident to right now? I literally presented you a video of now a days. If you have a bounty on your head you gone. And than to compare that to a 2012 situation in swat that a terrorist would feel so un-safe that he hesitantly miss a kill point blank range on a target. Thats not just absurd but also comical, the leap of faith you are taking just because of a narrative, just wow.

A target killer can miss once twice, thrice. But he would always fire until he is sure he got a couple of clean hits against an unarmed civilian, thats how target killing works. Now if the civilian is guarded and there is counter firing thats a separate case.

Noble desires. I want them too and so did this Indian Muslim Socialist / Communist of before 1947 :

Islam has its own economic system and though there might be some commonalties in them they are totally different. And no, no matter how much equitable you make things, there would still be injustice and this can only be resolved through Islamic economic system, where interest is thrown in the bin.

 

[jamahir]

Similarly your comment, "Can you list some "orders"". The guy was talking in a holistic sense that Islamic law should be implemented and you were trying to antagonize him.

I was just trying to get an honest answer about his deeper feelings. He was been contradictory and is being evasive. He says he is against TTP ( it is RAW-supported, he says in another thread ) yet he wants Pakistan to adopt TTP's beliefs ? What holistic approach is that ? Please explain.

Yes most probably. I would rather believe that, than her miraculous saving and recovery.

So you think below photo is as a sham one as of some Syrians grouped together under "grave health concerns" by the NATO-supported White Helmets who say that these civilians were attacked with chemicals by Assad's forces ?

And what explains the current deformation on her face ? Fake ?

And no, no matter how much equitable you make things, there would still be injustice

How ?

You should read this thread of mine where I propose a new economic system where there will be no economic classes ( rich, poor, middle ). Read through the thread. It is an ongoing work.

and this can only be resolved through Islamic economic system, where interest is thrown in the bin.

As first step you should demand online and off-line that the stock exchanges in Karachi and Islamabad be shut down.

About "only be resolved" consider this : There are more than 30 million pending court cases in India at different court levels and many of them are about land / estate. Some of these petitioners will be Muslim who have come to civil court because they were dissatisfied with judgement by a qazi or Sharia committee. Some of these land / estate cases will be pending for years, some even decades. And some of them lead to violence, including murder. Why ? Now if land is made not a privately-held element but a commune-held resource ( via communism ), something socially owned, a Commons, there will not arise a dispute in the first place. My simple point is this : we have to adapt to changed times. But you tell me, how will you resolve these land / estate disputes Islamically ?

 

[Death Professor]

He says he is against TTP ( it is RAW-supported, he says in another thread ) yet he wants Pakistan to adopt TTP's beliefs ? What holistic approach is that ? Please explain.

His simple approach was. TTP(who are funded by India) are SUPPOSEDLY fighting under the name of Islam, they get new recruits because its easier to fight for Islam. Now in reality they are fighting for power but the lower end fighters/suiciders get brainwashed into thinking that they are fighting for Islam/their-land but the high level leaders are always and most probably foreign funded and are only concerned with power. I mean how hard is it to understand this simple concept? His solution was that since this battle is of ideology and the war will just keep on continuing since there are foreign players involved who will keep on providing arms and funds. So, we should clean our own house make a just Islamic society so that TTP doesn't get any kind of support when they see Islam being actually practiced in Pakistan. TTP will lose any type of ground, be it moral or whatever and they will seize to exist.

So you think below photo is as a sham one as of some Syrians grouped together under "grave health concerns" by the NATO-supported White Helmets who say that these civilians were attacked with chemicals by Assad's forces ?

And what explains the current deformation on her face ? Fake ?

Are you a cave man or are you trying to portray yourself as this naïve? You think this can't be done? Did she lose her limbs? People here lose limbs for money, have you ever fkin walked outside of your house? There are literally children without limbs working as beggars. Some of them might be genuine cases, a lot of them are made disabled by the family and community just to earn money. Like how stupid one has to be who thinks the world is black and white? In reality it has all the colors each with different shade. I am not here to convince you, you keep one eating that medias cow-dung narrative, you wanna be summun bukmun good for you but please stop arguing with me. I gave you valid logical reasoning and all you are responding me with is either emotional bs or the western narrative. If you can't take it, say you disagree and move on. I presented enough, that a sane/logical mind would think and have some doubts but if you wanna take western narrative as divine word then good for you. All I can do is pray for you, no logic, no reasoning would satisfy you.

How ?

You should read this thread of mine where I propose a new economic system where there will be no economic classes ( rich, poor, middle ). Read through the thread. It is an ongoing work.

It's not practical, if you mildly like China you should move there. Grass is always greener on the other side. You can't artificially induce no economic classes, its just plain disaster. This world isn't meant to be 100% just, this world is meant to be partially fair, its a journey to the here after.

As first step you should demand online and off-line that the stock exchanges in Karachi and Islamabad be shut down.

??? Interest is the issue, stock exchange is just a listing of collection of shares of the companies. How is that even remotely related to Islamic prohibition? You can have a company and sell its shares to any buyers under islamic law (afaik) if majority of its operations are under the guiding principles of Islam.

About "only be resolved" consider this : There are more than 30 million pending court cases in India at different court levels and many of them are about land / estate. Some of these petitioners will be Muslim who have come to civil court because they were dissatisfied with judgement by a qazi or Sharia committee. Some of these land / estate cases will be pending for years, some even decades. And some of them lead to violence, including murder. Why ? Now if land is made not a privately-held element but a commune-held resource ( via communism ), something socially owned, a Commons, there will not arise a dispute in the first place. My simple point is this : we have to adapt to changed times. But you tell me, how will you resolve these land / estate disputes Islamically ?

Yeh tou keeray nikalnay wali baat ho gye. I am not an expert in Islamic economics neither have I done a Ph. D in that subject, if majority already believes that this religion is from God than he will show the way, there might already be an islamic solution. Again you are going into the minute things which don't matter right now, first comes the system than comes every single minute problem that could ever exist.