No more courts and judges in NW Pakistan

[HinduWoman]

Now that SWAT is in the hands of devout muslims and shariah is to be implemented here all pesky things like courts and law and judges are no longer needed:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=RSSFeed-World&id=b4e60908-c953-4ad1-8477-0cc0d9b5af77&Headline=Swat+hardline+leader+asks+lawyers%2c+judg es+not+to+attend+courts

A religious hardliner, engaged in peace talks with the Taliban in Pakistan's northwestern Swat valley, has warned lawyers and judges to stay away from courts, saying they have no role under the new system of Islamic law in the restive region.

The warning was issued by Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariah Muhammadi (TNSM) leader Sufi Muhammad on Monday following which only one judge attended court in the region while 16 others, including a district and sessions judge, had left the area, reports from Swat said.

Muhammad said there was no role for lawyers or judges in the Qazi or Islamic courts in Swat. He warned all judges to vacate their offices for the Qazis.
...
He said the lawyers did not know whether the writ of the local administration or the TNSM was applicable in Swat, and this was creating problems for the legal community. Muhammad told a news conference on Monday that all verdicts given by civil courts after February 16, when Islamic law was implemented in Swat, would be "null and void". Only the Qazi courts would function now, he said.

He also warned the Qazis that they would be replaced if they failed to decide cases in accordance with Shariah or Islamic law. The verdicts of Qazi courts could only be challenged in Darul Qaza or the apex forum under Shariah. Muhammad also claimed the Shariah system in Swat did not need to be ratified by President as it "was already in place."

So goodbye to any hope of the modern age.

Hi, 7th century tribal mores.

:bang:

[Lisa0315]

Thanks for the info!

[Hex]

Now that SWAT is in the hands of devout muslims and shariah is to be implemented here all pesky things like courts and law and judges are no longer needed:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=RSSFeed-World&id=b4e60908-c953-4ad1-8477-0cc0d9b5af77&Headline=Swat+hardline+leader+asks+lawyers%2c+judg es+not+to+attend+courts



So goodbye to any hope of the modern age.

Hi, 7th century tribal mores.

:bang:

:eek:

[Garnet]

That is terrible!!!

I can't even begin to imagine what it must be like to live there. Particularly for women.

[David B]

It is very terrible.

David

[Garnet]

What can people do who are living in that environment? Is everyone bound by Sharia law there now, even if they aren't Muslim?

What little I understand about Sharia law horrifies me.

[DMB]

Normally Sharia law applies to non-muslims and they are treated as second-class citizens (at best). Pakistan already has a bad record of charging hundreds of christians with blasphemy on trumped-up charges. The penalty for blasphemy is death.

The effect on women is awful. First of all they closed the girls' schools. They did re-open them under pressure, but most parents are now terrified to send their daughters to school and are keeping them at home. Of course, considerable numbers have fled the area.

[Ray Moscow]

And lots of Muslims want the same everywhere, including the UK -- or think they do, until it's their families that get persecuted.

Did I mention lately how much I hate this shit?

[Uthgar the Brazen]

Did I mention lately how much I hate this shit?

If you're like me on the subject, it's impossible to overstate this sentiment.

[HinduWoman]

It is this same taliban who had torched about 200 girls school in SWAT. And of course things like stoning, veiling, no going out without a male relative all applies.

The few Hindu and Sikh families in SWAT are apparently applying to Indian govt to emigrate to India.

[Anne]

I wish them the best of luck.

I wish everyone who wanted to could leave.

Times like this I feel so lucky my ancestors sacrificed so much to come here...

[Loren Pechtel]

I wish them the best of luck.

I wish everyone who wanted to could leave.

Times like this I feel so lucky my ancestors sacrificed so much to come here...

Let anyone who wants out to leave and then use it as a military training ground--any adult male is a bad guy.

[DMB]

Having that lot in control there makes any idea of success in Afghanistan a pipe dream.

[HinduWoman]

And lots of Muslims want the same everywhere, including the UK -- or think they do, until it's their families that get persecuted.

Did I mention lately how much I hate this shit?

I think muslims who want this in UK dislike their family members, sp. uppity girls!

[Loren Pechtel]

Having that lot in control there makes any idea of success in Afghanistan a pipe dream.

Yeah. We chased them out of Afghanistan so they had to find a new place.

[DMB]

Yeah. We chased them out of Afghanistan so they had to find a new place.

Some of them. But plenty of them are indigenous. And don't forget that the original Afghan Taleban came out of Pakistan.

Pakistan is the breeding ground of Al Qaeda.

[Loren Pechtel]

Some of them. But plenty of them are indigenous. And don't forget that the original Afghan Taleban came out of Pakistan.

Pakistan is the breeding ground of Al Qaeda.

You're not contradicting me.

Originally they expanded into Afghanistan because it was an easier target than Pakistan. Now it's not.

[premjan]

They didn't have properly functioning courts anyway.

[tjakey]

Yet if I say that Islam is a degenerate ideology with no redeeming value, has nothing if value to offer the world, and is a plague on human society...somehow I'm the bad guy.

But you know what? I'll say it anyway.

And premjan has a good point. That poor area of the world was functioning at about a Fifth century tribal society anyway. I'm not sure what you do (if anything) about people who will either want to live in such a society or will not fight hard enough to keep others from forcing such a society onto them. In any case, Islam is a degenerate ideology with no redeeming value.

[dancer_rnb]

They might not have all that much to offer now, but it was nice my Jewish ancestors had somewhere to go when the Christians threw them out of Spain.

[premjan]

Yet if I say that Islam is a degenerate ideology with no redeeming value, has nothing if value to offer the world, and is a plague on human society...somehow I'm the bad guy.

But you know what? I'll say it anyway.

And premjan has a good point. That poor area of the world was functioning at about a Fifth century tribal society anyway. I'm not sure what you do (if anything) about people who will either want to live in such a society or will not fight hard enough to keep others from forcing such a society onto them. In any case, Islam is a degenerate ideology with no redeeming value.
You have it backwards, I think that part of the world has gone downhill due to various environmental abuses and climate change, and therefore Islam has a strong grip on it.

And the sharia courts are likely to be more efficient than western-style courts which are an absolute horror throughout south asia.

[DMB]

It surely depends how you measure "efficiency". Sharia courts in Pakistan have perpetrated some truly horrible human rights abuses.

[premjan]

Yes, they are swift and barbaric as opposed to dilatory and clogged.

[Ronin]

Hey, I thought we have to respect all religious views and the wonderful human ability to have matters of faith and special unquestionable beliefs in possibilities.

Yes, we shouldn't ever cast aspersions on this beautiful expression of the will and wonder of God.

...or, I don't know, maybe we really should.

[DMB]

The single thing about the proponents of Sharia that irritates me the most is their claim that theirs is a superior law because it is god-given, not man-made.

What a load of stinking horse-turds!

[tjakey]

Yes, they are swift and barbaric as opposed to dilatory and clogged.

You prefer swift and barbaric? The "law of the jungle" is swift and barbaric as well. Getting away from that level of existence forms the foundations of being a civilized society.

Islam is barbaric, brutal, backwards, anti-education / women / free thought / art / music...the list is nearly endless. I think an argument can be made that Islam has now surpassed the Nazis in the total numbers of people that have been oppressed and/or killed, societies deconstructed, personal lives abused, and total costs to the civilized world.

[Uthgar the Brazen]

You prefer swift and barbaric? The "law of the jungle" is swift and barbaric as well. Getting away from that level of existence forms the foundations of being a civilized society.

Islam is barbaric, brutal, backwards, anti-education / women / free thought / art / music...the list is nearly endless. I think an argument can be made that Islam has now surpassed the Nazis in the total numbers of people that have been oppressed and/or killed, societies deconstructed, personal lives abused, and total costs to the civilized world.

But I think they've not beaten christianity for the record, just yet.

[dancer_rnb]

Better the turks than the latins.........
(old saying in orthodox christian lands)

[tjakey]

True enough Uthgar, christian history is at least as ugly and perhaps more so than other religions, and they do have a 1000 year head start on the Muslims. But so far as current and / or recent history, it would be hard to make the argument that Christians are as much a threat as Islam.

[premjan]

You prefer swift and barbaric? The "law of the jungle" is swift and barbaric as well. Getting away from that level of existence forms the foundations of being a civilized society.We'll have to see exactly how barbaric as there is a wide latitude of stuff that is considered Sharia, there is some sort of compromise between the Taliban, the locals and the Pakistan government. The reason the fighting stopped was because the locals were getting caught in the crossfire and getting slaughtered.

As for the rest, swift is better than ineffective, as long as the pronouncements are moderate.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7959100.stm

[tjakey]

mmm..."Taliban" and "moderate" in the same sentence? Good luck with that.

[dancer_rnb]

True enough Uthgar, christian history is at least as ugly and perhaps more so than other religions, and they do have a 1000 year head start on the Muslims. But so far as current and / or recent history, it would be hard to make the argument that Christians are as much a threat as Islam.

What do you define as recent history? WWII ended 10 years before I was born.

[premjan]

Moderate sharia, not moderate Taliban. The Taliban are the rulers but they do not control the judiciary.

[DMB]

When the former dictator Zia brought in islamic law in Pakistan, it was hardly moderate.

[premjan]

It isn't being brought in by an external authority, these are the locals who have acceded to appoint their own sharia courts because the secular courts are such a boondoggle and waste of time (besides not being present for the most part) and to prevent being caught in the sandwich between the Taliban and the Pakistan army. Now for the Taliban to oppose them, they would have to declare the locals' sharia courts unislamic. I don't think they are quite prepared to do that yet.

[DMB]

The Taleban are all for sharia law, as you well know. But what grounds do you have for characterising it as "moderate"?

[premjan]

It isn't the Taliban's sharia law. The Taliban and the Pakistan government have come to the agreement that sharia law will be implemented in Swat. But the Taliban isn't in charge of implementing it, it has been requested and implemented by the local inhabitants of Swat. The Pakistan government suspended the fight against the Taliban in order to prevent further deaths.

[DMB]

Why do you think it is "moderate"?

[premjan]

What, the actual law being implemented in Swat, or Sharia? The former is not demonstrated to be extreme at any rate, and the Taliban are also subject to it, even to their detriment.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7959100.stm

[Ronin]

I think a few things need to be clarified for me in this thread.

What is the common working definition of "moderate" regarding Sharia law?

and...

Premjan, are you endorsing any form of Sharia law over continuing efforts to improve secular courts?

Which do you personally prefer?

I ask this because if a Christian theocracy took over the courts and begin to legislate from "Biblical" law here in the American south, I would hope that regardless of how ineffectual secular courts had become, it would be better to seek to improve them than to submit to the evangelicals on issues regarding personal human liberty and social services.

In my view, the secular legislative process has been so badly infiltrated by the religious right (aka conservative evangelicals) in both parties here in MS that it is reflected in the high level of poverty and just about every other last place finish there can be regarding social services, education and liberty.

That it is important to be diligent and effective in rejecting any further slide into that dogma, even if an argument could be made that it was "moderate", is apparent.

I just see similarities and am not endorsing the notion that things are quite as bad here.

I look forward to your opinion and clarifications regarding these matters.

[tjakey]

True enough Uthgar, christian history is at least as ugly and perhaps more so than other religions, and they do have a 1000 year head start on the Muslims. But so far as current and / or recent history, it would be hard to make the argument that Christians are as much a threat as Islam.

What do you define as recent history? WWII ended 10 years before I was born.

I'm thinking more in the lines of 25 years or so, since my memory doesn't work too well much beyond that anyway. WWII doesn't strike me as being a particularly religious war, though the Nazis were supported by the Catholic church to some degree, other Catholics and lots of Protestants fought on the other side as well. Maybe is was a religious civil war?

[premjan]

Premjan, are you endorsing any form of Sharia law over continuing efforts to improve secular courts?

Which do you personally prefer?
I know how ineffectual conventional courts can be in India and I presume Pakistan isn't all that much better. I think secular courts are important to preserve but are not necessarily expedient (for instance there are no lawyers needed in sharia, a judge is adequate). A sharia that doesn't involve draconian punishments and doesn't practically speaking, hurt the interests of e.g. women and kafirs is acceptable if it reduces friction between the historically independent tribals and the government, and also provides some worthwhile legal services. Like any other scripture or legal system, there is wide latitude available within sharia. Just as Sufis and Taliban are both Muslims. Pakistan has historically not practiced draconian Islam, so I am optimistic.

[DMB]

Premjan, are you endorsing any form of Sharia law over continuing efforts to improve secular courts?

Which do you personally prefer?
I know how ineffectual conventional courts can be in India and I presume Pakistan isn't all that much better. I think secular courts are important to preserve but are not necessarily expedient (for instance there are no lawyers needed in sharia, a judge is adequate). A sharia that doesn't involve draconian punishments and doesn't practically speaking, hurt the interests of e.g. women and kafirs is acceptable if it reduces friction between the historically independent tribals and the government, and also provides some worthwhile legal services. Like any other scripture or legal system, there is wide latitude available within sharia. Just as Sufis and Taliban are both Muslims. Pakistan has historically not practiced draconian Islam, so I am optimistic.

Over what period in history are you making this judgement? What about the horrible hudood law? What about the hundreds of people sentenced for blasphemy?

[HinduWoman]

Premjan the solution is to make the secular courts better or ensure that the traditional village courts become more responsible, NOT to rush off to make judgements on basis of what a non-existent deity wants.

[premjan]

Islamization of Pakistan (hudood, blasphemy etc.) as far as I know is a consequence of their political separation from India which makes Islam into the basis for their nationalism. This is based on the same misconception that US conservatives or Hindu fundamentalists have that following some set of arcane beliefs and rituals will somehow bring prosperity to their lives. As for improving the secular courts, I will believe it when I see it. The regular court system in India as well as Pakistan is a horror in most respects and does not deliver justice to most people though possibly it makes some degree of effort. This is of course not unlike the government in general which exists mainly to feed itself fat bribes. Democracy in India has turned into a sort of quasi-colonialism instead of something decentralized and efficient which was the intent of Gandhi (who was admittedly not an experienced politician per se).

[DMB]

But despite being founded as a state for Muslims, pre-Zia Pakistan was more secular.

[premjan]

You're right, Zia was the one who really used it for political purposes. This is one of the curses of demagoguery, in order to get popular you have to stir people up for or against some sort of real or imagined cause or adversary. India is the pinata for Pakistan and Bangladesh. Nowadays it has started working in the reverse to an extent too.

[DMB]

Latest example of Taleban justice in Swat:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6022878.ece

A local Taleban commander in the militant stronghold of Matta, 25 miles from the regional capital, Mingora, ordered the girl to be flogged a week ago after accusing her of adultery, according to local reporters.

But some residents of Matta have accused the commander of ordering the beating to get revenge after the girl refused to accept his proposal of marriage, the reporters told The Times.

[epepke]

The single thing about the proponents of Sharia that irritates me the most is their claim that theirs is a superior law because it is god-given, not man-made.

What a load of stinking horse-turds!

(i) You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator. You flee from the embarrassing question posed to you: How is it possible for Allah the Almighty to create His creation, grant them power over all the creatures and land, grant them all the amenities of life, and then deny them that which they are most in need of: knowledge of the laws which govern their lives?

.

[premjan]

I wonder if it is legal under sharia for a non-judge to order a flogging. I hope someone declares this un-Islamic.

[Loren Pechtel]

Latest example of Taleban justice in Swat:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6022878.ece

A local Taleban commander in the militant stronghold of Matta, 25 miles from the regional capital, Mingora, ordered the girl to be flogged a week ago after accusing her of adultery, according to local reporters.

But some residents of Matta have accused the commander of ordering the beating to get revenge after the girl refused to accept his proposal of marriage, the reporters told The Times.

Yup. The same sort of thing happened in Afghanistan. Those in power could take any girl that caught their fancy as a wife.

[premjan]

In this case he hasn't taken the girl for a wife but as he was upset because she refused him he had her flogged.

[dancer_rnb]

Looks an awful lot like abuse of authority.

[HinduWoman]

The Islamic problem I see here is that the reason under which she is flogged is legal.

Abuse of authority takes place everyhwere.
But under the shariat it is legal for her to be flogged since she had been seen with a man not her relative. And that is the problem.

P.S -- I think lots of muslims will say that this is not true shariat, but in practice there would be no demonstrations against this as there was against the cartoons.
Because this is authentic shariat and 'moderates' cannot refute it without ceasing to be muslims.

[HinduWoman]

There are snide comments on TV channels here on Obama wanting to cut a deal with this 'liberal' Taliban.

I think that video would make many Hindu women promptly sign up to the Hindutva movement.

[DMB]

Why can't they just be secular?

[DMB]

Part of a report I just got from Pakistan:

Swat, generally known as Switzerland of Pakistan, where local people are mostly non-tribal and used to live in a civilized way, was a calm place, but all changed when the Taliban established here in August 2007. Now by imposing Shariah through government’s blessing the Taliban are doing the same as they did to the people of Afghanistan.

...Due to the conflict, common people are forced to live under constant fear and poverty because 80 percent of area’s income comes from tourism which has destroyed totally. All other businesses are also closed or running under very low key. The Taliban are controlling everything. People are forced to donate funds for their activities. Just days ago, they took over Swat’s emerald mines. The question is -- how did over a million people accept the inhuman dictates of a bunch of jihadi thugs who do not fit into any Islamic school of thought? Well, they have not. They voted liberal parties to power in the last election. But these parties did not have either the political muscle, or the will, to protect them from the evil of the Taliban.

...Many are of the view that the present ‘peace deal’ shows the weakness of the government. It is awful that the government is making deals with those who have been involved in barbaric activities e.g. bombing schools, barber shops, CD and video markets, destroying government offices, forcing women to stay at home and to wear veil, kidnapping people, raping women, beheading people in public and looting banks. They patrol the roads and man their own checkpoints. Although the provincial government says that the Taliban will stop their violent activities, there is no mechanism framed to check militants’ activities for future. These militants have been committing many crimes, after the ‘peace deal’ they have got a clean-chit for their crimes and will get more authority. On the other hand, every other day Sufi Mohammad has been putting more demands to the government.

[JamesBannon]

I find it hard to get animated with this shit any more, unless it's happening on my doorstep. Everyone knows what the Taliban are like, but don't have the balls to tell them to get stuffed. Too much religion, not enough hard-nosed political decision-making.

[premjan]

Ideology is part of the problem - being a Muslim at all means you are attached by an umbilical cord to the bad stuff. The other part here is that the militants hijack the proceedings and it is less trouble just to let them have their way unless you want to scorch the earth.

[HinduWoman]

Why can't they just be secular?

Some probably would be. But secularism in India has been a tremendous failure because real secularism is not practised here.

So most wouyd turn to their own religion for assurance, to a group equally willing to be violent in defense of their ideology.