The Shari'a Problem: Yet another twist

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Tiassa, Mar 24, 2009.

  1. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,514
    It would seem that Shari'a law is proving something of a headache for the Taliban in Pakistan, as Swat residents are overwhelming the newly-established Islamic courts. Furthermore, it seems that some Taliban members are unwilling to acknowledge the authority of the very judiciary they fought for:

    Human rights activists are horrified at the possibility of punishments such as the amputation of limbs, whipping and stoning to death being implemented.

    Moreover, legal experts are worried over the challenges posed by setting up a parallel legal system.

    But the common people in Swat have welcomed the establishment of the courts and have thronged to them.

    "We believe we will get quick and impartial justice from the Sharia courts," says Umar Hayat, a local man waiting to file his petition.

    "In the past, cases used to drag on for years, but now they are settled in days. More importantly, everybody is equal in front of the law."

    The "Taleban case" before the court vividly illustrates this.

    It pertains to the creation of a dirt track through the fields of a local farmer at the behest of the Taleban.

    The farmer filed a case in the Sharia courts and the matter was adjudicated by Maulana Rahman.

    The ruling was in the farmer's favour.

    "But the members of the Taleban present refused to accept the verdict and said they would take up the matter with senior Taleban commanders," an eyewitness says.

    "They also twisted the judge's words and brought in the commander after telling him that Maulana Rahman had said that he did not care if Maulana Fazlullah himself had demanded a repeal."

    Maulana Fazlullah is head of the Taleban in the Swat region. His power is said to be absolute.

    The clearly incensed Taleban commander demanded an explanation from Maulana Rahman.

    The qazi made it clear he had not made any such comments.

    But he also reiterated the fact that the ruling was final.


    (BBC News)

    Backed into a corner by a number of local qazi, the Taliban finally agreed to honor the ruling. The qazi stated that they would personally investigate the issue if the Taliban failed to abide by the ruling.

    And already the system is showing signs of strain:

    Under previous Sharia regulations, courts came to their decisions by taking both the law and consensus into account.

    Most analysts believe this is unlikely to change and that it may lead to trouble from the Taleban.

    "The Taleban have always said they want the implementation of their version of Sharia law here," explains a local legal expert.

    But the Nizam-e-Adl, or Order of Justice, for Swat talks of interpreting Sharia according to the demands of the relevant sects involved.

    "This is a sure recipe for disaster," the legal expert says.


    (ibid)

    Obviously, the old adage "Be careful what you wish for" comes to mind. The Taliban might well find itself in a difficult position: On one side, the demands of Shari'a that they are unwilling to accept, and on the other the spectre of the entire system falling apart because of their stubborn outlook.
    _____________________

    Notes:

    "Swat Taleban find Sharia a challenge". BBC News. March 24, 2009. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7959100.stm
     
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2009
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    let me remind you that these "human right activists" and "legal experts" are acting on behalf of a US agenda, defer the Taliban in any way possible, including their law.

    So does Pentagon need to have Shariat Law painted evil? evil it shall be painted.
    Of course during the 1970's when Taliban was painted as good and millions of dollars worth of arms were given by Pentagon, no one squeeked about evil evil Shariat Law.

    Politically correct law, so to speak.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    dwaggy, they were not the Taliban in the 1970s.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    oh really?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    obviously.
     
  9. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    The Swat has always been under Sharia. Be hard for the Taleban to hoodwink them. Interesting to see them hung out to dry with their own demands.
     
  10. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    SAM, tell me more about Swat please.
     
  11. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
  12. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    21,945
    Amusing really. When the court found in the farmer's favour, they attempted to lie about what the qazi had said in his ruling when they rushed to report their defeat to their commander.

    I suspect they thought that while everyone is equal in the eyes of the law, they should somehow be above said law.

    I particularly liked this:

    *Chortle*

    Their petard was well and truly hoisted.
     
  13. DiamondHearts Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,557
    Many of the refugees from Afghanistan, being pushed out of their homes have settled in Swat valley. There was an increase in militancy for a few years, but the Pakistani army has pacified the Afghani militants, and so the compromise reached by the government is tho establish Shariah. This article is severely biased, and dragon has the right idea, its basically propaganda to restart tensions in the Swat valley. Maulana Fazlullah used to have absolute power, but ever since his defeat and normalization of Swat, he has lost much of his support. The Swat people are Pukhtoons, cousins of the people of Afghanistan, this is why they have been trying to force Pakistan to stop aiding the US in murdering their relatives, even willing to pick up weapons. However, after an unsuccessful revolt and consequence of losing sympathy with the people of Swat, they have become basically ineffectual.

    No one should worry about Shariah being implemented in Swat, because it has had shariah for nearly 60 years, though its laws are more enlightened that those Afghanistan. There is not one monolithic sharia, sharia means the 'path,' and it differs significantly from local practices. The Afghani ideal has no support in Pakistan and never will, but that does not mean we support the invasion of Afghanistan. The invasion and destruction of Afghanistan is the major problem, this leads to violence in the region. These activists should stop the slaughter of Pukhtoons in Afghanistan, only then can there be peace in Afghanistan and a return to normalcy in the Pukhtoon areas of Pakistan.
     
  14. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    21,945
    On the contrary. It is down right funny.

    It shows that the locals are not going to allow themselves to be overrun by the Taliban and will stand up against them in court and win. It shows that the court will not allow them to do what they want and that in their militancy, in their demands for an implementation of a legal system they support and demanded, it can and will go against them sometimes, as it has in this instance. What is funnier is that when the court found against their favour, they lied and attempted to force the court to overturn the decision and the qazi refused to back down, and cited religious text and pointed out that the militants had lied.

    In short, it shows that the locals and the legal system they wanted implemented will not bow down to their pressure and applied the law fairly and equally. In this instance, it was obviously found that the farmer had a right and held in his favour.
     
  15. Arsalan Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,432
    Implementing Sharia law is not simple. It requires a body of judges from various schools who need to be able to discuss and debate. Thats not what the Taliban are interested in.
     
  16. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    21,945
    Of course it's not. They wanted it their way and they got it. Of course, in getting it their way, they also got a legal system that applied the law religiously (pun intended). And in this instance, they lost the case and obviously aren't happy about it. They can now sleep well at night knowing that the system they demanded will apply the law fairly and not just how they wanted it (ie. always in their favour).

    I had a very big chuckle when I first read that article this morning. And it is night time now and I am still chuckling.
     
  17. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Yeah, which is why you need Qadis who know the law. It is also why many people in such situations clamor for a return to sharia.
     
  18. DiamondHearts Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,557
    You should re-read my post and then comment again. You misinterpreted my point entirely.
     
  19. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    21,945
    You mean where you view the article as biased due to the concerns raised by human rights groups about some of the punishments handed down in countries and areas where Sharia Law is in place?


    I was pointing out that the article is not biased against Sharia Law. On the contrary, it is quite glowing that the system is not letting itself be bogged down by an organisation that is known to have committed horrendous human rights abuses in Afghanistan. It shows there is some hope and that the judiciary will do the right thing by the people instead of kowtowing to the Taliban and their demands.
     
  20. DiamondHearts Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,557
    I wrote:

    No one should worry about Shariah being implemented in Swat, because it has had shariah for nearly 60 years, though its laws are more enlightened that those Afghanistan. There is not one monolithic sharia, sharia means the 'path,' and it differs significantly from local practices. The Afghani ideal has no support in Pakistan and never will, but that does not mean we support the invasion of Afghanistan. The invasion and destruction of Afghanistan is the major problem, this leads to violence in the region. These activists should stop the slaughter of Pukhtoons in Afghanistan, only then can there be peace in Afghanistan and a return to normalcy in the Pukhtoon areas of Pakistan.

    Simply ASK if you want to know my view. Misrepresenting my view does not help anyone.
     
  21. madanthonywayne Morning in America Staff Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    I agree. To me, this demonstrates why right wing dictatorships are rarely as bad as left wing dictatorships (of course, both are bad). Since the right seeks to maintain the established order which includes multiple sources of authority such as the church, they are often undermined by sources of authority outside of themselves.

    Left wing dictatorships, on the other hand, seek to completely remake society and outright ban any source of authority but themselves.
     
  22. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,514
    A lesson in how not to govern

    I'm not sure this really needs a new thread of its own. Oh, and here we go:

    "It's a US tool to cut the population of the Muslims. It is against Islam that you take a medicine before the disease", said, Muslim Khan, Swat’s Taliban spokesman, speaking by telephone.

    (Wilkinson and Yusufzai)

    Yeah. Something like that. Anyway, apparently polio vaccination is unholy, or pisses God off, or something like that. But, what do we expect? People like that are bound to turn up everywhere. We even have them in the U.S. And some of them write for Rolling Stone. So, yeah, it's not like I'm surprised. I mean, they're the fucking Taliban.

    Still, 'round these parts, we call those people morons.

    • • •​

    And in related news, the Daily Times of Pakistan reports:

    LAHORE: Tehreek-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat Muhammadi chief Maulana Sufi Muhammad met Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan chief Maulana Fazlullah in Matta tehsil of Swat on Thursday, a private TV channel reported. It said the meeting was in connection with the establishment of peace in the valley. The channel quoted its sources as saying that important matters including the establishment of peace in Swat, the Nizam-e-Adl Regulation, the ongoing talks with the NWFP government and the disarmament of the Taliban were discussed in the meeting.
    ____________________

    Notes:

    Wilkinson, Isambard and Ashfaq Yusufzai. "Taliban blocks UN polio treatment in Pakistan". Telegraph.co.uk. March 26, 2009. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...an-blocks-UN-polio-treatment-in-Pakistan.html

    "Sufi discusses Swat peace with Fazlullah". Daily Times. March 27, 2009. http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\03\27\story_27-3-2009_pg1_10
     
  23. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,850
    The Taliban are trying to maintain the established order?

    More likely, somebody thinks "right wing" and "conservative" are interchangeable on Mondays (On Tuesdays, it's "right wing" and "libertarian"). Too much Fox News and American talk radio, is my guess.
     

Share This Page