 | http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_21-1-2005_pg3_4
The Daily Times, Lahore, Pakistan
Friday, January 21, 2005
By Khaled Ahmed
In Pakistan, the passports had to carry an entry on religion only to
trap one community, the Qadianis or Ahmedis. There is some shame
attached to this collective act of savagery embedded in the 1973
Constitution as an amendment, proving once again that democracy in our
part of the world is not really democratic. Most laws made against the
Ahmedis have victimised Christians and Muslims, but who cares? The
shame is hidden behind a euphemism called Khatm-e-Nabuwwat, which in
our country means 'apostatise the Ahmedis and then hunt them down'.
But why put it in the passport meant for outside? .....
...... Chief of the ruling PML Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain called for the
restoration of the entry of religion in the passport first, followed by
the religion minister, Mr Ijaz ul Haq, whose father had put it in the
passport. He admits that there was no entry of religion in the
passports of other Islamic states, but in Pakistan Khatm-e-Nabuwwat
(apostatisation of the Ahmedis) was important, which necessitated the
entry. The oaths of prime minister and the president contained
reference to Khatm-e-Nabuwwat. The 'religion entry' was there in
the application form of the passport.
...... When the passports continued to be issued without the entry, the
MMA observed a Protest Day where no one turned up, showing that the
masses for whom the entry was sought did not care about it.
MMA claimed that the entry had been made mandatory because the
parliament had passed an amendment against the Qadianis. Did not the
Quran say that no non-Muslim should enter the city of Mecca? Therefore
Pakistan must point it out in the passport. The truth is that every
haji who goes to Mecca has to say on a Saudi form whether he is a
Muslim or not.
The MMA has claimed that the Americans have got Musharraf to remove the
religion entry, yet the ID card didn't carry it without American
pressure. The PPP had apostatised the Ahmedis but it did not put that
in the passports; General Zia did. Bhutto wanted to be popular; General
Zia wanted to be even more popular. Both died unnatural deaths and
today most of the people who love religion don't mourn them for
different reasons. .....
|
|
