On May 11th, the world’s second most populous Muslim country, Pakistan, will mark a historic election. The country’s 66-year history is marred by the presence of martial laws and never before has one elected government replaced another. As Pakistanis rush to the polling stations to cast their vote, over 4 million people will sit home, separated and disenfranchised.
They are the members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, a peaceful sect within Islam, who are the victims of this “separate but equal” electorate in Pakistan; a system rooted in religious discrimination.

Since the inception of Pakistan in 1947 to up until 1984, all Pakistanis voted on a joint electorate. Then Ahmadis were separated from the mainstream in 1974 when Z. A. Bhutto appeased the clerics by constitutionally declaring them “not Muslims.”  A decade later, Zia-ul-Haq, Pakistan’s military dictator, issued Ordinance XX,  further silencing the Ahmadis who could then be imprisoned for up to three years for simply using Islamic terminology like “Assalamu alaikum” meaning “peace be upon you.”

In 1985, as a step towards pseudo-Islamization of the nation, Zia imposed a separate electorate for all religious minorities, including the Ahmadis, who were required to declare themselves non-Muslims in order to gain the limited right to vote for only the 5 percent minority seats of National Assembly.

Ahmadis saw such a self-declaration as a dissociation with Prophet Muhammad. “That’s too high a price to pay for our fundamental right to vote” – they said and sat out during the next election.

In the upcoming May 11th elections, all Pakistani voters are required to check off their religion on Form 2 (Annex IV). Christians, Hindus, and other minorities can simply check their respective box and vote. But Muslim voters are also made to sign a declaration on the reverse side of the form, rejecting the founder of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community as a false prophet. Ahmadis are left with only one option: self declare themselves non-Muslims by using the supplemental voting sheet.

That’s a no-go scenario for a community that calls itself the renaissance of Islam.

Ahmadis are fully aware of the facts and the consequences. During the 2008 elections, the victory margin in 88 out of the 272 national constituencies was less than 10,000 votes. The Ahmadi voting bloc could be decisive in such races. By protesting against this “separate but equal” system Ahmadis brace for a further squeeze by politicians who see no electoral incentive in protecting their human rights.

Yet, some do stand up for justice as a moral imperative. In April 2013, 33 members of the  U.S. Congress signed a joint letter to the Secretary of State John Kerry regarding the denial of Ahmadi voting rights in Pakistan. They indicated that if Pakistani Ahmadis are not included in the joint electorate they will not be able to endorse the results of May 11th elections.

Many of those of Pakistani descent who live in the United States maintain their Pakistani citizenship and have the right to vote in May 11th elections as oversees citizens. I call upon their conscience to renounce Pakistan’s “separate but equal” electorate by demanding a new presidential order. Unless that happens, the claims of a fair or historic election is a sham.

Dr. Faheem Younus is the founder of Muslimerican.com. He can be reached at talk@Muslimerican.com. Follow him on Twitter @FaheemYounus
 

During a match in the 1989 India-Pakistan cricket series, K Srikanth started protesting after he was declared out leg-before-the-wicket. Imran Khan, a tiger in the making, gave him a second chance and called him back to play. But Srikanth was caught behind on the very next ball. Then came the World Cup of 1992, where Imran flaunted a T-shirt with an image of a tiger and announced, “I want my team to play like a cornered tiger.” Over the next two decades, the word ‘tiger’ latched onto Imran so tightly that now even his supporters are called tigers.

Alas, on 1 May 2013, the tiger was spotted bleating like a sheep.

The pattern of events is straight out of the anti-Ahmadiyya playbook. A decent Pakistani forgets to treat Ahmadis with contempt, the religious hyenas attack that person’s loyalty to Pakistan and then a tiger – and in this case ‘The Tiger’ – sheepishly offers an apology while throwing an already beleaguered community under the bus.

On 23 March 2013, Pakistani journalists in UK had an audience with the worldwide leader of the Ahmadiyya community, Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad. Forty-two minutes into the conversation, a woman by the name of Nadia Ramzan Chaudhry made the political mistake of acknowledging the peaceful values of the Ahmadiyya community and urged Ahmad to support Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) in the upcoming elections. As the video surfaced on social media outlets, Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman accused Imran of receiving financial assistance from the Ahmadis.

Understandably, Imran had to clarify his position. But to release a statement using derogatory language about the already aggrieved community and their leadership is not befitting of a leader whose party’s website projects “Justice, Humanity and Self-Esteem” as its core values.

Where is the tiger whose party constitution’s first objective is to make Pakistan a “country in which all citizens regardless of gender, cast, creed or religion, can live in peace, harmony and happiness?” Obviously, Khan has not spoken to an Ahmadi lately or he would know that they barely have any hope of living in peace under his Pakistan.

Where is the tiger who in this video defined justice as “protecting the weak from the powerful” and espoused that “in Tehrik-e-Insaf there will never ever be injustice to anyone.” Is calling millions of Ahmadis by the derogatory term of “Qadianis” his way of protecting the weak?

Where is the tiger who believed that “any law which discriminates among human beings in unjust” but then goes on to affirm in his press release that it is not part of the PTI agenda to seek amendment to anti-Ahmadiyya laws in Pakistan’s constitution?

Where is the tiger who is reminding all Pakistanis that “your vote can bring a change” and yet sees no injustice in the “separate but equal” voting apartheid against Pakistan’s Ahmadiyya community which keeps them on a separate supplemental list? And the country Ambassador has the audacity to lie to the United Nations in Geneva about the myth of a joint electorate in Pakistan.

The language of PTI’s press release makes it clear: no one is a tiger when it comes to Pakistani politics. Whether it was the roaring ZA Bhutto or the conniving Zia-ul-Haq, whether it was the territorial Pervez Musharaff or the social Nawaz Sharif, all became helpless the minute Pakistani mullahs played the Ahmadi card.

As you go to PTI’s rallies, you may still see a roaring tiger selling you a “Naya Pakistan” but all I see is a sheep, trying to control the helm of the old Pakistan. You may see Imran Khan hitting a six on the stage but I can visualise him protesting and posturing for a second chance.

Don’t worry Mr Khan. Please take the crease. You have your second chance on 11 May. We Ahmadis know what happens next.

And neither did the brothers, as they allegedly planted those bombs at the finish line of the Boston Marathonlast week.

Or at least, that’s what my experience as an immigrant tells me. What the Tsarnaev brothers very likely had was a jumbled-up mass of conflicted identities, making them vulnerable to militant religious ideology. You can wait for the FBI to release their complete psychological profiles to believe that they had a conflicted identity, but I won’t.

Because I had one.

Almost two decades ago, I, too, landed in America with components of a conflicted identity. Let’s see. Where should I start? Immigrant? Check. Muslim? Check. Young male? Check. Anti-war? Check. Socially isolated? Check.

But there was a key difference: I was taught from childhood that jihad in these times means a personal struggle, not a holy war. I belong to an organized and educated worldwide Muslim community that professes, “Love for all. Hatred for none.”

Read the complete article here.

Our hospital’s chapel is typically empty. I offer my afternoon prayers there. Yesterday, as I was hopping from one patient room to another, I saw the dreadful slide of “Breaking News” of the Boston Bombings across TV screens. And even before I knew the death count, my Twitter feed was abuzz with various forms of prayer requests and #PrayforBoston was already trending.

Now that’s a technological marvel, because uniting at tragic times is a good thing; but reducing the arduous task of praying for someone to a mere buzzword or a tweet is not. Just notice. Whenever tragedy strikes, a social media bandwagon of prayers starts gearing up. But in addition to tweeting about it, do people actually pray?

I have my doubts. Prayer is like digging a well at a time when you are dying of thirst. It’s hard and it requires intense action. Who prays via tweets or Facebook updates at such a moment?

Apparently all the celebrities. From the Political right of Sarah Palin to the liberal bite of Ellen DeGeneres, from reality TV stars like Kourtney Kardashian to cheating czars like Lance Armstrong, everyone tweets their “prayers.” Space constraints stop me, otherwise the list is long. But you get the point.

I am not judging the sincerity of someone’s prayers, but such fleeting tweets of “prayers” come across hollow — if not manipulative — when a majority of these hashtagers like the Kardashians will typically move on to the same old “Do-ants-have-dicks?” tweets even before the victim’s wounds have scabbed off.

I believe such casual use of “I-am-praying-for-the victims-of-xyz” cheapens the more intense practice of prayer performed with zeal. It’s true for most religions. According to Islam, prayer is like melting your soul. You focus. You persevere. You cry. You believe. This concept is aptly described by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, who said:

“Blessed are the prisoners who never tire of supplication, for they shall one day be freed. Blessed are the blind who are not listless in their prayers, for they shall one day see. Blessed are those lying in graves who supplicate to God for help and succor, for one day they shall be taken out of their graves. Blessed are you who never tire of supplication, your soul melts in prayer, your eyes shed tears, and a fire kindles in your breast which takes you to dark closets and wildernesses so that you may taste solitude and drives you to restlessness and near madness, for you shall finally receive Divine bounties.”

When I entered the chapel after evaluating my last patient, I encountered a blessed soul. She was sitting in the corner, holding a cross in her trembling hands, and bending forward, with tears rolling down her eyes. As I spread out my prayer rug she whispered and reminded me to pray for the victims of the Boston Bombings. She was not tweeting. She was praying.

Prayer services for the victims are being held at over 100 diverse houses of worship in Boston. Go ahead, support the #PrayForBoston trend but also attend one of these services (or pray for the victims in solitude). Imagine if the practice of regular prayer was also “trending” in our society?

Dr. Faheem Younus is a clinical associate professor at the University of Maryland. He is the founder of Muslimerican.com. Follow him on Twitter @FaheemYounus.

Follow Dr. Faheem Younus on Twitter: www.twitter.com/FaheemYounus