In a move that has ignited a firestorm of controversy across Pakistan, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court’s decision to acquit a blasphemy accused has prompted widespread condemnation and raised serious questions about the administration of justice in the country.
The decision, which was rendered on February 6th, has drawn the ire of the Islamic community nationwide, with protests erupting in various parts of the country and a flurry of inquiries demanding answers from the judiciary.
Among the voices of dissent is Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani, a prominent Islamic scholar, who penned a letter expressing grave concerns about the decision. In his letter, Mufti Usmani highlighted the two-fold nature of the decision, focusing on both the determination of guilt and the application of Islamic principles derived from the Quran and Sunnah.
Mufti Usmani pointed out discrepancies in the legal process, noting that the accused was arrested under three different sections, including provisions from the Punjab Holy Quran Act and the Pakistan Penal Code. However, the acquittal was granted on the grounds of a technical error, as certain sections were not explicitly mentioned in the FIR and Challan.
Furthermore, Mufti Usmani argued that while the Supreme Court ruled that the offense fell under an amendment to the Punjab Holy Quran Act enacted after the alleged blasphemy occurred, it failed to acknowledge that the original act from 2011 still provided grounds for punishment. This, he contended, rendered the application of the 2021 amendment retrospective and inappropriate.
Of particular concern to Mufti Usmani and many others is the implication that the accused, by being granted bail, is being treated as if they were a Muslim, a notion that runs counter to fundamental Islamic principles. He emphasized that such an interpretation is unacceptable and undermines the sanctity of Islamic law.
The controversy surrounding the Supreme Court’s decision continues to reverberate throughout Pakistan, highlighting deep-seated tensions between legal interpretations, religious principles, and societal expectations. As protests persist and inquiries mount, the nation awaits further clarification and resolution from the highest judicial authorities.
