Religious Persecution – The Driver for Forced Migration
electoral lists are prepared for different religious groups. Those who claim to be Muslim must sign a certificate of faith in ‘the end of prophethood’ and deny the veracity of the founder of Ahmadi Muslim Community. •
President Pervez Musharraf, pressed by the West, brought about some changes in the system; however, he stopped short of ending the system of a separate electorate. In response to pressure from Muslim leaders, on 17 June 2002 General Musharaf issued Chief Executive Order No. 15, ‘Conduct of General Elections (Second Amendment) Order’, which created a separate ‘supplementary list of voters’ in which Ahmadi voters were placed as ‘non-Muslim’. The Order also provided a procedure in Article 7C whereby Muslim voters were required to sign a declaration accepting the absolute and unqualified finality of the Prophethood of Muhammad, whereby those who refused to sign the certificate were to be deleted from the joint electoral rolls and added to a supplementary list of voters in the same electoral area as non-Muslims. These discriminatory provisions are contained as Articles 7B and 7C in the Chief Executive Order No. 7 of 2002 (as amended by Chief Executive Order No. 15). By 2017, a parliamentary committee undertook some revision of the main Electorate Rolls Act 1974 and had the new Election Act 2017 approved by the Parliament. Again, this Act requires every candidate who claims to be Muslim to make a declaration of belief on oath. A similar declaration is required from all individuals who claim to be Muslim and who apply for an Identity Card from NADRA, the authority that prepares voters lists from its records. The declaration is reproduced below: I believe in the absolute and unqualified finality of the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him), the last of the prophets and that I am not the follower of anyone who claims to be a prophet in any sense of the word or of any description whatsoever after Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and that I do not recognize such a claimant to be prophet or a religious reformer, nor do I belong to the Qadiani group or the Lahori group, or call myself an Ahmadi.
•
As a result of this discriminatory legal provision, for decades now no Ahmadi has been represented in any assembly, be it national, provincial, district or even local. Furthermore, Ahmadis have no representation in the town council of Rabwah, their own town and centre, where 95% of residents are Ahmadis.
•
The Constitution and application of these specific laws provide little, if any, recourse for nonMuslims in general, and Ahmadis in particular, to domestic or international law. The contestation over which authority ultimately defines what constitutes a Muslim is in direct contravention to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. For example, mainstream Islamic leaders object to the Ahmadi sect referring to themselves as Muslims. Ahmadis view themselves as Muslim and act accordingly, using Muslim greetings and naming their children Muhammad. These practices violate penal codes 298A, 298B, 298C and, employing a wide interpretation of the words ‘deliberate, derogatory, and outrage’, 295A and 295C. As such, Islamic interest groups may legally discriminate against anyone they decide is a non-Muslim.
•
For too long, the practice of religious persecution (whether defined as genocide or not) has been attributed to ‘unique’ and ‘distinctive’ moments of gross human misbehaviour in history. In fact, AMAR research into the subject matter, which covers over 500 years, two continents and over half a dozen religions, shows that persecution is a permanent feature of our nature and should be recognised as such. With that knowledge, early warning detections systems could be easily set in place and timely interventions and curative actions deployed sooner. The international
22
CHHJ6424-Religious-Persecution-report-180912.indd 22
12/09/2018 15:03