Appointment of female Qazi in India and how it hurts patriarchal ego

(Photo by Yawar Nazir/Getty Images)

Qazi, also known as a judge or magistrate, is an important role in Islam. They are appointed to judge all disputes on the basis of justice in a timely manner without prejudice, to maintain the smooth functioning of a society. Not only that, a Qazi acts as a judge in both weddings and divorces. In short, a Qazi in a Muslim society does more than just dispensation of justice.

Traditionally only men have been appointed as Qazis in Islamic courts and the appointment of women as a Qazi has been frowned upon. Many even consider the idea of a woman Qazi as being strictly forbidden in Islam. However, with the passage of time, things have slowly changed in this regard.

Recently, 16 women completed their training as a Qazi from Darul Uloom Niswan, a centre for Islamic learning and theology in India. The move has drawn strict criticism from conservative Muslim community in India who believe a woman is not fit to work as a Qazi.

The Muslim community in India seems to have bifurcated into two extremes with one side completely rejecting the idea of having a woman Qazi while the other half embraces it saying there was nothing unequivocal in Islam against having one.

The proponents of a woman Qazi believe that being a woman herself, a female-Qazi can best understand the sentiments of females who endure domestic violence. They say, a male Qazi most often shows insensitive attitude towards female victims of domestic violence and advises them to quietly “bear the pain”.

This issue took centre stage back in 2008, when a famous Muslim activist named Naish Hasan asked a female Muslim scholar named Syeda Hameed to conduct her wedding rituals. Traditionally, this duty is performed by a male Muslim Mullah.

At the time, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board rejected the idea on the ground that there was no such thing as a female Qazi in Islam. While the world-renowned Islamic school, Darul Uloom Deoband, insisted there was no unequivocal statement in Islam against having a female Qazi.

However, in 2016, the All India Muslim Women’s Personal Law Board appointed two women as Qazi on the condition that they would only handle counseling related issues.

The Malaysian government also appointed two women as Qazi in 2010, but again with limited powers to only take cases related to property and children’s well being. They were not allowed to solemnize marriages and or to take other such important cases related to women’s lives.

The 16 newly-graduated women Qazis in India too will not enjoy as much power and acceptability in Muslim society as their male counterparts, however, they sure will be remembered as catalyst of change by the future generations of Islamic historians.

Pakistan: A People’s Republic or An Islamic Republic?

Yesterday, on Saturday, July 30th 2016, I got an opportunity to become part of a thought-provoking conference in Hyderabad, the second largest city in Sindh.  The conference was titled as Interfaith Youth Dialogue and Festival, arranged by a young social activist and past Pak-US exchange alumni, Dr. Rajesh Kumar. The session was led by some of the prominent personalities in the Sindh covering intellectuals, mystic poets, human right activists and academia.

The conference put lights on many important issues of religious intolerance and religious supremacy prevailing in the Sindh and Pakistan, in general.

During the conference, by listening to the panelists and with my own thought pattern, I summarized some of my thoughts on the issues and what I think we can do to curb them.

Here is a conflict now. If you pick a currency coin or any bill in Pakistan, it says the name of our country as “Islamic Republic of Pakistan”. This causes an inherent flaw in our so called democratic form of the government. The constitution of Pakistan which regards Islam as an official religion of the state portrays an inherent religious supremacy of one religion over all affairs of the state and other religions. The truth is that, a state has no religion. If I say it more clearly then I would say, the state is not run by any belief system.

It must be neutral from any particular belief system. The state can’t even be an atheist because that would still be treated as a belief system in where actually you don’t believe, actually. So a true democratic state would keep religion and the state affairs as two separate things. The problem in Pakistan and the reason why we are lacking behind in our collective social and moral uplift is that we have often seen state affairs with the lens of religious affairs. How can a country where people from other faiths are living and contributing their part since centuries can make sure that they own the state and buy into the decisions it imposes on them?

In Pakistan, a Hindu, a Christian, a Buddhist or any other faith in minority can’t run for the high level public offices like Presidency, Prime Ministership or Chief of Army Staff. How can we regard Pakistan as a democratic state where one faith is regarded as only doctrine by which everything will be measured?  The same constitution also proclaims to provide equal rights to the every citizen of Pakistan. This shows the double standards or ignorance of the public policy makers. Some of the people take pride while quoting that Pakistan is the only country in the world which was created on the name of Islam.

Are you trying to say, that all other religious groups are like unattended sheep in a jungle. Let it be clear that I am not against any religion of the world. I respect and in fact I follow every religion. Because, I see every religion as a teaching guide to live a prosperous and successful life. What I don’t like is narrow-mindedness of people in power who fail to understand that other faiths who are in minorities also regard themselves as Pakistanis. I am a Pakistani. FULL STOP. That should suffice for the state to get me qualified for the basic rights.


Every successful society has always been an interdependent society where people from different faiths are interdependent on each others’ skills and talents. I am dependent on a superstore to buy my groceries and the store is dependent on me to earn its business. So in the same way, every citizen of a society carries different identities with him/her self. Some are businessmen, doctors or engineers and some are artists or musicians.

The idea is to channelize these various identities and talents each participant of society has to offer to do collective good for the society and not to materialize the differences of individual religions or backgrounds and create an environment of a jungle where might is always right and everybody else is just there to exist on its own.

The term “minority” itself gives a fall sense of state. Where there is a minority, there also has to exist a majority. Like I said earlier, in a true democratic form of government, there is not such a term of minority or majority as everybody has equal rights and equally accountable before rule of law. In a state’s dictionary, these both terms should be deleted permanently as it will always create a division of rights and responsibilities.

The term “Secularism” is often misinterpreted in Pakistan as something which creates a perception of a religion-less society where people don’t follow their faiths. It is a very wrong interpretation. Secularism is the concept of the same principle I have been saying in upper part of this write-up which is simply to keep the government and its institutions separate from any religion and religious institutions. In my view, religion is a very personal dogma. It should always be between me and my Creator. Let it not become a public affair and let it always be a private thing.

So where are we heading now? It has been almost 70 years since we got free from British colonialism. 70 years was so enough and too much time for us to make Pakistan a prosperous and a true democratic society.  But due to many political and religious conflicts we have been put into by various political leaders in the past, this is very unfortunate that we are still talking about the issues of education, health, poverty, infrastructure and religious intolerance. There are many examples of countries in front of us who took the different path and turned around their economies and social fabric of their societies in a few decades.

In summary, what I learned from my observations in yesterday’s conference and especially after spending a wonderful time in the United States and seeing the level of religious intolerance there, I can say that as a society we have to fight with our own moral corruption first before fighting with the corruption in the government institutions.  Our collective level of morality has become so low that we can’t tolerate people from other faiths and still we are fine with the economic corruption. It is a need of the hour that we start becoming responsible for our own blunders.

I can tell you that this is much harder to fight with than any other type of corruption. It is like, we who have to change before changing our politics. The crime and corruption is inside us. Don’t find them inside political dorms. It is the time we revive the beautiful history of Sindh which was famous for its high caliber of hospitality and religious tolerance.

Let’s imagine and work towards for a Pakistan where we all live together with peace and harmony, where people don’t take religion as a point of fight but a point to think, understand and respect. Where our children are not educated to fight with other religions or to make them feel like all other religions are wrong and have no right to live. Instead, we should teach them to respect and understand every religion and to capitalize on the points which are similar to their own religion while still respecting the differences.

Pakistan Zindabad!

Mumtaz Qadri: Prophet’s (PBUH) Lover or Stabber?

File photo of slain governor of Punjab Salman Taseer.

On 4th January 2011, the highly influential former governor Punjab Salman Taseer was killed by his own security guard, Mumtaz Qadri. The killer took a plea that he killed Taseer out of love of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Mr. Qadri alleged that Taseer had dishonoured the Prophet and that is why it was his religious obligation to kill him.

In a country like Pakistan, the reaction to this murder was not unexpected. All the liberal and secular groups condemned Mumtaz Qadri while the Mullahs, majority of whom consider Muhammad Ali Jinnah an infidel and Bait-u-llah Mahsood a martyr, declared Mumtaz qadri the biggest lover of the Prophet.

They came on roads in his favour and broke not only the laws of the country but also the laws of Islam. It looked like the religion was completely hijacked by these fanatic Mullahs, which is not true. Pakistan has immensely talented religious scholars such as Dr. Tahir ul Qadri, Tariq Jameel, Javeed Ahmed Ghamdi to name a few. Unfortunately however, all of these venerated scholars kept quiet and didn’t do much to handle this controversial matter by letting the people know about the true teachings of Islam.

The case of Taseer’s murder was registered and Mumtaz Qadri confessed before the court that he had killed Taseer. He took the plea that he killed him out of pure love for Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and had no remorse by doing this act. This statement made him a hero overnight for all the religious political parties who used this issue for their political purposes.

Former justice High Court, Mian Nazir Akhtar, announced to represent Mumtaz Qadri in this case which gave more hype to the issue. However, the question is, did the former justice consider the teachings of Islam before announcing to represent this self-made lover of Prophet, or he too just listened to his emotions and put justice on the back burner?

Media anchors raised many queries regarding Mumtaz Qadri’s case to Mian Nazir. All his answers were reflective of the typical religious mindset. Nobody dared to ask him how many similar cases had he presided over while he was still justice of the high court? Did he still consider those people innocent who arbitrarily killed people in the so-called love of the Prophet? No body asked him this.

Mian Nazir simply tried to get a relief for his client by using religious sentiments. When the court rejected the baseless grounds and sentenced Qadri with a death penalty, all of his followers including his famous lawyer raised finger on the character of the court. They argued that why Raymond Davis and Sharukh Jatoi was released and raised question on the court’s silence on corruption cases.

Their plea was that if Davis and Jatoi could be released then why should they face execution. When infact in both Raymond Davis and Sharukh Jatoi’s cases the family of the deceased had pardoned the killers while Qadri’s case it was not the case.

They also argued that since Article 248 protected Salman Taseer from criminal proceedings that is why Mumtaz qadri resorted to taking the law in his own hands instead of filing a complaint against the governor. However, all of these arguments didn’t hold ground before the court of law. The court decided that there was no evidence to suggest that Mr. Salman Taseer disrespected Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and so any argument to justify his killing does not hold ground.

Alas! These fanatics are ready to kill anyone even on a false allegation of dishonouring Prophet (PBUH). Taseer and Qadri both have passed away but the law of Blasphemy is still trapped in the hands of some politically motivated Mullahs who use it for their personal interests. The basis of Islam is justice while the basis of Islam for these fanatics seems to be only emotions.