Let God be the Judge

Bariza Umar
In August 2002 the US and Pakistan began allowing dual citizenship. I was thrilled. I had been born in the US to Pakistani parents, but moved to Pakistan when I was seven. Having lived in Pakistan since 1990 and undergoing all of my schooling prior to college here, this was my country and I could finally have a document connecting me to my home. I could also serve in the Government, something I desperately wanted to do as I felt change from within the government was a needed supplement to all the wonderful work NGO's do.

I got the form, read it, and put it away. Never could I sign something that asked me to pass judgment upon another group, Ahmedis, declaring them to be non-Muslim. I immediately began on research, a legal petition and a letter to President Musharraf about the issue. I consulted with a lawyer. I spoke to my Islam professors at college. I knew something could be done if I was well prepared, and that it would take time for that to happen. Then, in October 2004, this Government removed the religion column from the passport altogether, and I could not have been prouder.

My parents got their passports when the religion column had been removed, and they assured me I would have to sign no such declaration if I applied for a passport now. Being bedridden because of an illness at the time, I was unable to go till this past week. The religion column had been reinstated by then, after five months of outcries from religious groups. My experience at the passport office, although it took five long hours, was largely good. The policemen, clerks, finger-printer, photographer, were all very nice and were doing the best they could to maintain order and keep things going. I got to data entry and gave my information, corrected spellings, and was finally handed the paper copy to check for any spelling mistakes and "sign here and here." I read it over, signed in the first blank, and then my hand started shaking. Once again I was confronted by the bigoted hate-mongering declaration.

The "Declaration for Muslims Only" has three clauses:
(i) I am a Muslim and believe in the absolute and unqualified finality of the prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him) the last of the prophets.
(ii) I do not recognize any person who claims to be a prophet in any sense of the word or of any description whatsoever after Muhammad (peace be upon him) or recognize such a claimant as a prophet or a religious reformer as a Muslim.
(iii) I consider Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani to be an imposter nabi [prophet] and also consider his followers whether belonging to the Lahori or Qadiani group, to be non-Muslim.

It is a relic of a 1974 amendment to the1973 constitution put forth by a President who proclaimed himself to be, and in many ways was, a progressive and liberal, in order to appease the religious right. Zia-ul Haq, infamous for his many other policies in an effort to create an "ideal Islamic state," added it to the passport in 1980.

The Ahmedis are a small group that has been persecuted in Pakistan for many years. The difference that makes them susceptible to cries of "Kaafir," or unbeliever, is that they believe the Messiah or Mahdi has already arrived in the form of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani. It is not my concern whether or not Ahmedis are in fact Muslim. My only concern is being forced to declare a group one way or another when I believe that right belongs only to Allah. The Government of Pakistan is therefore being blasphemous and equating itself with the power of God when it passes judgment on this issue. Where is it said in the Qur'an that what defines you as Muslim is condemnation and judgment of another group? Fear of the other, and persecution of minorities, is a sad reality. In Pakistan, we take it to extremes. It is ironic that Pakistan was founded to shelter Muslims from persecution in a united India, and yet our own minorities are made to feel the same fear. Religious minorities ought to have the same rights as others in a country that was founded to protect them.

I had no choice. I could not sign it. I could feel the data collecting gentleman's eyes boring into me, and before I lifted my head he harshly said “Why aren't you signing it. You don't have to read it; if you're Muslim you sign it.”

I looked up and said “I'm sorry, I can't sign this.” His eyes narrowed and he asked me if I was Muslim. I said yes. Then he asked if I was Qadiani, and I responded that I was not. He told me in that case to sign it, eyes narrowed, voice threatening. I said I would sign the first two parts. That I am Muslim, and that I believe that Muhammad was the last prophet, but Allah is the only one who can judge people to be non-Muslim, and I cannot claim that right. I would not sign beneath the third clause. I was louder now, and people were looking. My mother was at the other end and I called her at that point, the man was scaring me as he said again harshly if you're a Muslim you will sign it.

She came and told him I would not sign it, and he asked her if I was Muslim. She said yes, but I would not sign it, and if being Muslim means I have to sign that then he should put me down as non-Muslim. Grinding his teeth, voice raised, he said go to the first desk. We went. I handed my form to the gentleman there who looked at it and asked me to sign the declaration. Once again I refused. My hands were still shaking in anger, and I was close to tears. I explained to him that I did not have the right to declare another group to be non-Muslim, only Allah has that right. I couldn't stand it any longer. The anger at my impotence to explain myself, and the inability of people to understand how wrong this is released the tears. The tears were the key to a "don't worry, you don't have to sign it," and a stamp. My arguments had meant nothing; the tears I had promised myself I would not shed made the difference.

The fault was not theirs though; it was of the President I once adored. The one I wanted to meet just once so I could sit before him and gaze adoringly at the man who I was convinced would bring Progressive Islam, tolerance and co-existence into this torn country. He could get rid of feudalism and honor killings, reform education, change laws that others had tried and failed at. I could see in his face the passion to do so. Over the past few years however, that man I so honored and loved has become a politician. His face has hardened. He has backed down before an ugly force ripping this country apart, and lost credibility with those who would have at one point died for him. While his efforts to improve relations with India have gone further than many expected, internally he has succumbed to bartering some reforms in exchange for more power. I never thought that would happen. Our President and Prime Minister pledge almost daily to make progress on the path of "Enlightened Moderation. In keeping with this sentiment, Ambassador Karamat assured an audience at the Brookings Institution last year in Washington that ""From a policy of appeasement and political expediency with extremist religious elements Pakistan has moved to confronting them to end their negative influence and activities." It seems that too was a political platitude.

Why must the government take a stand on this issue? It demands no such unequivocal allegiance to the two-nation theory, the flag, ethnicity or even the constitution of Pakistan. The government is simply seeking to appease the religious politicians. If even Saudi Arabia and Malaysia, two "Islamic" countries, do not feel the need to have religion on their passports, why is it that our own "Religious Right" feels compelled to make it a matter of life and death? A passport is a right of Citizenship, not a declaration of faith.

Arguments posed to the "Religious Right" are answered by shifting rationales. Sometimes, it is access to alcohol, sometimes it's the ability to perform Hajj, but its always something. If the consumption of alcohol is the problem, there are enough ways to get the alcohol in Pakistan if you want it, and abroad if you are above the age limit, regardless of religion, if you want it you get it. As for Hajj and Umra, the Saudi visa requirements are all that need to be worried about. Muslims are all over the world, of all ethnicities and nationalities, with different passports, largely not declaring religion. Pakistan has no control over them. Is the fear that suddenly Pakistani Christians, Hindus and Zoroastrians will go running in groups to Makkah to perform a pilgrimage alien to them? There is a lack of cohesiveness in these rationales. Often, the only thing that binds the arguments for the conditional clause against Ahmedis and religion column in general is their anti-minority sentiment, which is hardly a basis for good law.

What of those who are not English literate and cannot read what they are asked to sign? It is not read out to them, you are just told where to sign. What of those like my brother who was exhausted after five hours there and just wanted to leave, and so signed without reading to be done with the ordeal? What of those who are not young women with the power of tears or years of research behind their convictions? My application will be going through an inquiry in Islamabad before it can be issued as is customary for dual citizenship. I don't know whether or not I'll receive one because I did not sign the declaration. If I do, I don't know whether I'll be put down as a Muslim. However, if being a Muslim in this country means that I have to demean another group and take on the role of Allah in knowing people's hearts and minds, I will not be that kind of Muslim. I believe in the Qur'an, and it tells me time and again that Allah is the Judge, Al-Hakam, and that only He has that right. I do not. I will never commit the sin that asks me to pretend so.

Bariza Umar
Islamic Studies
M.T.S. Harvard '07