Daily Times

The government of Pakistan, headed by a military ruler General Zia-ul-Haq, passed the “Ehtram –e-Ramadhan ordinance” in 1981. The most fundamental purpose of this ordinance was to ensure that the sanctity of the month of Ramazan is preserved.

According to the article 3 of this ordinance:

1) “No person who, accord­ing to the tenets of Islam, is under an obligation to fast shall eat, drink or smoke in a public place during fasting hours in the month of Ramazan.”

(2) “Whoever contravenes the provisions of sub-section (1) shall be punishable with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.”

The law also defines “public place” as “any hotel, restaurant, canteen, house room, tent, enclosures, road lane, bridge or other place to which the public have access”. It also obligates that all such hotels, canteens and restaurants must remain closed during the fasting hours.

There has been a latest amendment in this law and the Senate has agreed to hike the monetary penalty from Rs.500 to Rs.25000 for hotel owners who would violate the Law. Media outlets and Cinema houses would pay a minimum fine of Rs. 500,000 if found violating the law.

The act states that it intends to protect the holiness of Ramazan but while doing so it clearly violates the principles of fundamental freedoms. It forces all Muslims and non-Muslims not to eat in any public platform, an act that could lead to a fine and in some cases, even imprisonment. Although the law applies no such limit on the non-Muslims, by closing down all the hotels, restaurants and even common food stores, it still affects them. Moreover, it also coerces those Muslims not to eat in any “public place” who do not wish to fast.

Public place or not, one’s religious sentiments should not be so delicate as to get hurt or provoked on someone merely filling his/her stomach. Our faith must not be this fragile. Don’t Muslims living in countries where they are a minority observe fasts while where no such laws force people not to eat in public sphere? Does this suggest that their faith is stronger than ours?

I wonder how could we possibly protect the sanctity of such a blessed month by adopting such harsh, coercive and tyrannical measures. Respect is gained, not imposed.

How would Pakistanis react if any of the Western countries also started legislating on religious grounds and declared it obligatory for everyone, including the Muslims, to celebrate Christmas or Easter against their will, only to protect the sanctity of these holidays? We would be shouting on top of our lungs if any country passed such a legislation but we seem to be doing the exact same thing in our country by passing laws like Ehtram-e- Ramazan ordinance which are discriminatory and affect lives of religious minorities.

If you are fine with Ehtram-e-Ramazan ordinance then you have no moral right to be critical of the beef ban in India. After all, the rightwing Hindus in India also believe that their religious sentiments are provoked if someone slaughters a cow or eats beef. How can one be fine with this ordinance and be against the beef ban? Are the two laws not of the same league, both forcing and dictating others what to do and what to refrain from?

If you believe just because Pakistan is a Muslim-majority country, non-Muslim minorities must respect the majority then you have no right to criticise if any of the Western countries bans Hijab. You also lose the right to criticise the Burkini ban in France. You should then be balanced in your approach and accept all such decisions. Ironically, most people justifying the ordinance are basically against the beef ban in India and believe that it violates freedom of choice. But such people do not realise that this ordinance in Pakistan is also a blatant violation of freedom of choice. It only highlights our staggering hypocrisy. No state in the 21^st century should be dictating others on what to eat and where to eat. It goes against the idea of individual liberties. Any law that breaches the idea of liberty, anywhere in the world, must be questioned.

When a state starts legislating on religious grounds, it automatically promotes an environment of intolerance towards the minorities in the country. The government of Pakistan has done a similar thing by passing Ehtram-e-Ramadhan ordinance. It is evident by the fact that only last year, an old man from the Hindu community was severely beaten up, and that too by a policeman, for eating in the month of Ramazan. This law has created an atmosphere of fanaticism in the society.

This ordinance is a violation of the Article 20 of the constitution of Pakistan, which states that

a) Every citizen shall have the right to profess, practice and propagate his religion; and

(b) Every religious denomination and every sect thereof shall have the right to establish, maintain and manage its religious institutions”.

It is also a clear violation of what was envisioned by the founder of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Jinnah in his address to the constituent assembly on August 11, 1947, explicitly said “you are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State”.

Furthermore, there is nothing in Islam that could be cited in favor of this ordinance. In fact the ordinance only goes against the Quran’s stand that “there is no compulsion in religion” (2:256).

In order to create an environment of freedom and equality, the Ehtram-e-Ramazan ordinance must be abolished. Otherwise, this law would continue to perpetuate an environment of intolerance.

The writer is a freelance journalist and a human rights activist based in Islamabad