Recent Resources for Feminists
Asma Jahangir: Pakistan's fearless life-long advocate for Human Rights Jan 27 1952–February 11 2018 Print E-mail

 

Pakistan - Sunday February 11 2018

Leading human rights lawyer Asma Jahangir passes away in Lahore (SCROLL DOWN FOR A SMALL SELECTION OF MULTIBLE TRIBUTES)

Renowned senior lawyer and human rights activist Asma Jahangir passed away in Lahore on Sunday, DawnNews reported. She is survived by a son and two daughters.

The family told DawnNews that she suffered from cardiac arrest and was shifted to a hospital, where she passed. She was 66.

Details regarding her funeral have not been made public as yet.

Known for her outspoken nature and unrelenting pursuit for human rights ­ as well as for remaining undaunted in the face of extreme pressure and opposition ­ Jahangir will be remembered as a champion for the disenfranchised and for her services towards building a democratic and more inclusive Pakistan.

A towering figure
Jahangir was born in Lahore in January 1952.

She received a Bachelors' degree from Kinnaird College and an LLB from Punjab University. She was called to the Lahore High Court in 1980 and to the Supreme Court in 1982. She later went on to become the first woman to serve as president of the Supreme Court Bar Association.

She became a pro-democracy activist and was jailed in 1983 for participating in the Movement for the Restoration of Democracy, which agitated against military dictator Ziaul Haq's regime.

She was also active in the 2007 Lawyers' Movement, for which she was put under house arrest.

She co-founded the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, and the Women's Action Forum.

She received several awards, including a Hilal-i-Imtiaz in 2010 and a Sitara-i-Imtiaz. She was also awarded a UNESCO/Bilbao Prize for the Promotion of a Culture of Human Rights and an Officier de la Légion d'honneur by France.

She received the 2014 Right Livelihood Award and the 2010 Freedom Award.

Nation in shock
Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar arrives at Asma Jahangir's residence to condole with her family.

The Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, and other Supreme Court judges expressed deep sorrow and grief on her demise in a statement. They extended their heartfelt condolences and sincere sympathies to members of the grieved family while praising her services for the independence of the judiciary, rule of law and supremacy of the Constitution.

"She was an outspoken and courageous lady, and had risen to prominence by sheer dint of hard work, diligence and commitment to the legal profession," the judges of the apex court said.

Condolences and tributes also poured in on Twitter as Pakistanis reacted to the shock of Jahangir's sudden demise. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pakistan ~ Monday February 12, 2018

Asma the fearless


Editorial
THE shock at the sudden loss is palpable, but so is the intense pride that she lived among us.

Asma Jahangir was a citizen that all of Pakistan could be proud of and whom most can only hope to emulate.

Principled and courageous, Asma’s willingness and determination to confront evil, defend the vulnerable, and insist on Pakistan living up to the ideals of its democratic, constitutional and secular foundations made her truly iconic.

A woman who lived the majority of her adult life in the public eye, Asma eschewed self-promotion for a steadfast and remarkable focus on the issues that ought to be of concern to every right-thinking and sensible citizen.

Asma was a formidable lawyer and a person of remarkable intellect, but always spoke in a universal language of the rights of the vulnerable and accountability of the powerful.

Her eloquent yet forceful defence of victims and the vulnerable everywhere will be greatly missed.

While Asma Jahangir tirelessly travelled the country and the globe to promote humans rights and other admirable causes, it is her lifelong struggle against dictatorship and authoritarianism that is perhaps defining.

Her father, Malik Ghulam Jilani, bravely denounced military atrocities in what was then East Pakistan, and before long, Asma was fighting the dictatorship of Ziaul Haq in the streets.

Jailed by Gen Zia and placed under house arrest by another military dictator Pervez Musharraf, she never ceased to speak out against the harms of dictatorship and authoritarianism.

While her criticisms would have surely stung, most authoritarians and praetorians appeared to be afraid of Asma.

They needed to be.

Asma’s principled positions made her a formidable opponent. In recent years, the depth of those principles has been on display when it comes to the MQM.

Long detested by Altaf Hussain for her vociferous denunciations of MQM militancy and violence in Karachi and other parts of urban Sindh, Asma was also emphatic in her criticism of vicious state action against the party and vigorously defended the right of voters to elect their chosen representatives unimpeded.

Losing an iconic champion of human rights, a lion of democracy and the rule of law would be difficult for any society.

For Pakistan, the loss of Asma Jahangir has come at yet another brittle historical moment, with uncertainty plaguing the democratic project in the country.

Democracy may find a path to continuity, but the challenges to the democratic project, both from anti-democratic forces and from within the political class, are significant.

The institutions of democracy are weak and the already attenuated systems for protecting fundamental rights are under further attack.

Till her last days, Asma Jahangir fought the good fight. Her work is now over, but Pakistan’s is not as darkness continues to sweep across the country.

May new champions of democracy, rights and human goodness arise ­ and soon.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
  Monday February 12, 2018

Pakistan

Long Live Asma Jahangir

By Marvi Sirmed
 
If death is defined as the end of life, Asma Jahangir hasn't really died. The larger than life, iconic defender of human rights and the most daring challenger of the status quo, Asma Jahangir breathed her last at her home in Lahore on Tuesday. With her, we lost the most towering hero of our age, the tallest of Pakistani, rather South Asian, citizen.

My mother broke this news to me calling on the phone from her home in Lahore. With her voice quivering and her words jumbling, she wanted me to tell her that it was a fake news. Something that I kept hoping for several hours to prove true - may this be a fake news. We were not that lucky though.

My friends Asma Shirazi, Ayesha Tanzeem, and Beenish Saleem called one after the other, all shell shocked and unable to speak. Mehmal Sarfraz wrote on WhatsApp and that's when it slowly sunk in my system that something terrible had happened.

The first time that I heard of her was from my mother when I was a toddler. Eventually, her name became a part of regular conversations at our dinner table - of Ammi's talks with her friends and of her heated arguments with Abbu on something that Ammi used to call 'dark days'. I could barely understand whatever was happening. Those were the years following Ziaul Haq's martial law. Then in early 1980s, my mother took me with her to a demonstration where a lot of people were raising slogans (I later learned that it was a women's protest demonstration against Ziaul Haq's Qanun-e-Shahadat). Raising slogans at the top of her orotund and penetrating voice, that five-feet-something woman caught my attention. That was my first introduction to the gutsy and courageous woman that Asma Jehangir was.

In 1989, when I was running for student union elections after Benazir Bhutto's first government reinstated unions for a year, I met Asma Ji - the way I always called her - as an aspiring volunteer. After Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto, she was the one who inspired a teenager me so strongly that it became my goal of life to be like both of them in every possible way. Especially, Asma Ji's perseverance, her clarity of purpose, her strength of character, her unprecedented courage, her commitment to human rights, her itch to question the powers of the time, and her passion to fearlessly fight for the oppressed and for whatever she considered right, come what may.

Then in 1990-91 when I was running a campaign as the president of Pre-Medical Students Association for the rights of girl students seeking admissions to medical colleges, I was stunned to receive her call. She told me to remain steadfast and offered her help. We were disgruntled girls with pre-medical certificates of high achievement in our hands but denied admissions in medical colleges as boys with half our achievements were given admissions.

Mian Nawaz Sharif's provincial cabinet was hell bent to brand us 'miscreants supported by Benazir Bhutto' and brush away every argument that we had for open merit as opposed to maintaining 1:2 girl-to-boy ratio in medical colleges. Asma Ji supported us by highlighting our struggle and guiding us for running a successful campaign. By the end of 1991, we had won our case from Supreme Court. I could not thank Asma Ji enough.

From there onwards, there was no point of return for me personally. Ammi was very excited to see that I was following Asma Ji - something that she herself couldn't do because of family pressures. Since then, Asma Ji was there whenever I needed guidance and strength. She pushed me to become a member of the HRCP - the institution of its own kind that she founded as part of her struggle for human rights in Pakistan. Her contribution to my life is just a tiny part of what she has done for this country. Every marginalised and oppressed segment of our society, be it religious or ethnic communities, or issues like rights of children, women, labourers, and farmers, or citizens' right to govern themselves through a democratic system - Asma Ji left her indelible mark in all these struggles, a mark that is impossible to ignore or forget.

Her detractors would call her anti-Pakistan and anti-Islam because of her strong voice against state-sponsored militancy, oppression, extremism, and against usurpers of power. Vile and venomous campaigns would be sponsored against her to demonise and otherise her in bid to discredit her work. Few years ago, a picture of her with Bal Thackeray, India's firebrand nationalist considered strongly anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan, became viral. Little did her detractors realise that Asma Jahangir was meeting Thackeray as part of a fact-finding mission about anti-Muslim riots.

The self-proclaimed 'Pakistani nationalists' would criticise her for what they understood as her silence on some of the issues that they wanted to propagate disproportionately e.g., Indian atrocities on the Kashmiris. She remained focussed on the rights of Pakistani people but was hardly silent on human rights violations elsewhere in the world. Last year, the demonstration in solidarity with Kashmiris organised by her and her strong statements in 2017 as UN's Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Iran against rights violations of religious minorities and against persecution of Rohingyas in Myanmar are most recent examples.

What has inspired me most strongly was her unflinching commitment to basic principles of social justice, human rights and democracy. She would not hesitate to help even the harshest of her critics when they needed support in standing up for their rights. She was probably the only one from the 'civil society' of Pakistan who had such a clear idea of the complex nature of Pakistan's politics and civil-military equation. The anti-politician rhetoric, mainly propagated by the undemocratic forces, never swayed her commitment to democracy unlike the rest of our comrades.

She braved most despicable, mephitic and malicious attacks on her integrity, mostly with her signature smile. She would always tell me to never give a slightest hoot to these attacks on social media, which had affected me badly a couple of years ago. Many people would ask me why she was so angry always. She was angry because she cared, because she was strong enough to be angry and to channel her anger into the amazing work that she did at AGHS Legal Aid Cell, HRCP, and through scores of other platforms - international, regional and national. She was the first of the only three Pakistani women appointed as UN's rapporteurs. Just so the readers may know, she was not all that angry all the time. I have seen in her a very bubbly and fun-loving connoisseur of arts and music.

The last time we spoke a few days ago, she was talking about a national dialogue that she wanted to initiate on the concept of 'national interest'. "What exactly it is, have you ever wondered?" she asked, knowing that her question carried the answer. We discussed the matter on a long phone call and ended the conversation with her promise to have a detailed meeting when she comes to Islamabad next. This is just one of the scores of other unfinished agenda items that she has left to us.

Her last public address was at the Pakhtun sit-in in Islamabad. That was her - a woman with resolve to stand up for the oppressed. Her ethnic, religious or national identities hardly mattered for the people she stood for. She transcended these mundane boundaries. So now, she must be seen as an icon of humanism, and a symbol of social justice and equality.

Pakistan was blessed to have Asma Jahangir, who was truly the conscience of this country. She  symbolised the best of human qualities. A hero of this stature cannot just pass away or die with the end of breathing. She is survived by hundreds and thousands of little lamps that she had lit in the form of human rights defenders and activists for democracy and justice. Long live Asma Jahangir, rest in power.
~~~~~~~~~~~
 Pakistan ~ Monday February 12, 2018

Asma Jahangir: A great voice for rule of law, constitutionalism


ISLAMABAD: A great defiant and effective voice vanished from this world as renowned human rights activist and senior lawyer Asma Jahangir passed away, leaving her family and innumerable people to mourn her demise.

She was an eminent lover of democracy and staunch opponent of role of undemocratic forces in politics, inequality and injustice. She fought for this cause throughout her life. She always stood for democracy, rule of law and constitutionalism as she has the conviction that Pakistan's survival and salvation lies in adhering to these principles.

A woman of immense characteristics, Asma Jahangir was a matchless brave fighter, who could not be coerced by the mightiest, well-entrenched bullies. Even bold people dread to loudly differ with and take them on, apprehending instant reprisals.

She was blessed with the guts to speak without any reservations or fear on topics that even senior politicians, lawyers and commentators wouldn't for expediency. She would never mince her words in ventilating her opinion.

At all times, Asma Jehangir championed and campaigned that all premier state institutions must remain within their constitutionally defined parameters and must not encroach upon others' domain because this spells chaos only. A set of people was never fond of this stand.

She was the unique personality of Pakistan, who received countless life threats and despicable titles like traitor and anti-Pakistan, which were hurled by a peculiar class, having a tunnel view. All this was done simply because of her views and to stifle her voice. But she was undeterred and was never cowed down by baseless allegations.

In several TV programmes, she locked horns and stuck to her opinion when she was attacked by participants belonging to a special section of the society in pursuance of an agenda and script. She was always a decent, down-to-earth and soft-spoken analyst, but would not relent when she would be harangued for her belief and estimation.

Myriad efforts were made to get her standpoint changed on key issues for decades, but to no avail. After every rude attack, she emerged stronger. She sturdily opposed all military rules. She had challenged the detention of her father, Malik Jilani, by the General Yayha Khan regime in the Supreme Court. The famous judgment is known after her name.

Asma Jehangir was not only an illustrious human rights activist, but was also very popular in her own community of lawyers. There have been two groups, one led by her and the other by Hamid Khan.

Recently, her group won the Supreme Court Bar Association election for the second consecutive term as well as the Lahore District Bar Association polls.

Pakistan has no distinguished woman after the death of Asma Jehangir, who can do such straight-talking, having no fear from any side. She will be long remembered for her nerve and poise. She has many international laurels to her credit and figured among the most legendary women of Pakistan at the world level.

Asma Jehangir always valiantly spoke for the downtrodden, the oppressed and the persecuted, and suffered attacks from those having blocked minds. She had firm, consistent views on national and international matters, which were liked or disliked by the same people at different times.

This was a strange phenomenon. People kept changing sides, but she wouldn't. Asma Jehangir always abhorred innuendos, allegations, accusations and mud-slinging in politics and used to counsel the politicians to mend fences to obviate interventions from other institutions. She was of the firm opinion that it was politicians' fault to provide an opportunity to others to come in and then repent. A huge loss. May her soul rest in peace.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~   
  Pakistan ~ Sunday February 11 2018 (Originally published in the Herald's September 2016 issue under the headline "The street fighter")

Asma Jahangir: The street fighter

By Saroop Ijaz

 : Asma Jahangir admonishes police personnel at a protest against the Election Commission of Pakistan in October 2007 (Tanveer Shahzad, White Star )

Immediately after the horrific Quetta terror attack on August 8, 2016, Dr Danish, a television anchorperson, tweeted pictures of Asma Jahangir with a caption in Urdu which translates as: "When lawyers were being killed in Quetta, the so-called leader of the lawyers was enjoying herself in the northern areas." The post was enthusiastically retweeted, shared on Facebook and distributed through WhatsApp groups.

Asma Jahangir was not "enjoying herself in the northern areas". She was in Gilgit-Baltistan on a human rights fact-finding mission when the attack happened. There was no way she could travel to Quetta the same day. She took to Twitter and responded to the anchorperson: "Shame on you for exploiting facts even when people [are] in grief ... Ask [your] spy friends not to stoop to the lowest levels of viciousness."

A picture of her from a March 2008 meeting with Bal Thackeray, the now deceased leader of Mumbai's Hindu chauvinist Shiv Sena party, created a similar furore. Nationalist websites and media persons wrote thousands of words to denounce her for sharing the same space with one of Pakistan's most vicious detractors. It did not matter that she had met Thackeray in her capacity as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion, investigating violence against Muslims in India.

Indeed, many people go ballistic every time her name is mentioned. Haroon Rashid, an Urdu-language columnist with a large fan following, wrote in 2013, "warning" that he would lead a march on to Islamabad if Asma Jahangir was appointed caretaker prime minister. She had said earlier that she had no intention to accept the post.

If anything, these examples suggest a pattern: often wild, unsubstantiated allegations are levelled against her. Often she, too, responds to her detractors in a no-holds-barred manner. In 2012, in typical Asma Jahangir style, she accused intelligence and security agencies of trying to eliminate her. National and international concern and outrage poured in with such vehemence that the plan, if there was any, had to be dropped.

It seems Asma Jahangir seeks controversy ­ her critics attribute it to a search for glory. The Lebanese-American writer Nassim Nicholas Taleb has a word for it: "antifragile" ­ that is, things and people that benefit from volatility, shock, disorder, risk and uncertainty.

Asma Jahangir does not agree. She argues that she does whatever she does in order to adhere to her core principles ­ not to seek glory, not to benefit from adversity.

In September 2015, the Lahore High Court ordered the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) to black out the coverage of Altaf Hussain, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement's (MQM) supremo. Very few, if any, lawyers in Lahore were willing to represent him due to his alleged involvement in acts of violence in Karachi and his volatile speeches and media statements. Asma Jahangir was perhaps the unlikeliest lawyer he would get: the two had never found themselves on the same side of the political divide. In May 2007, MQM had called Asma Jahangir a "chauvinist lady" who should form her own "chauvinist party". An MQM statement had also accused her of having a secret affiliation with the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP).

But she agreed to represent him.

Her opponents took to the streets. A small group of lawyers in Lahore brought out a demonstration, demanding the cancellation of her licence to practice law. Her supporters in bar rooms were also uncomfortable with the idea but they knew she could not be swayed against fighting for someone's freedom of speech ­ no matter if the person concerned was a serial abuser of that freedom. "Well, that is how she is," says one of her supporters, shrugging their shoulders.

When Asma Jahangir decided to contest the election for the Supreme Court Bar Association's president in 2009-2010, she faced stiff opposition from many sections of the society, including newspapers and television channels. The media campaign against her was led by the Jang Group's senior reporter Ansar Abbasi and it focused on projecting her as anti-Pakistan and anti-Islam. Six years later, the same media group engaged her as a counsel to represent it before the Supreme Court.

Asma Jahangir's earliest recollections of activism are from her time in school at the Convent of Jesus and Mary, a church-run school in Lahore. The head girl there was always selected by nuns but Asma Jahangir, as an O level student there in the late 1960s, arranged a protest demanding that there should be "at least a semblance of an election". The school administration reluctantly agreed to an election process while retaining a veto power. That method for finding a head girl still continues at the school.

Asma Jahangir's exposure to public life happened at a very young age. On December 22, 1971, the military government of Yahya Khan detained Asma Jahangir's father, Malik Ghulam Jilani, under martial law regulations. Malik Ghulam Jilani, a former civil servant and politician, was sent to jail in Multan after his detention. He sent his family a letter through a jail employee, listing possible grounds on which a petition could be filed for his release. Then only 18 years old, Asma Jahangir filed the petition at the Lahore High Court.

"Courts were not new to me. Even before his detention, my father was fighting many cases. He remained in jail in Bannu. He remained in jail in Multan. But we were not allowed to go see him there. He did not want us to go there and see him. We always saw him in courts. So, for me, the court was a place where you dressed up to meet your father. It had a very nice feeling to it," Asma Jahangir reminisces, lightheartedly.

Mian Mahmud Ali Kasuri, a lawyer that her family generally consulted on legal issues, was federal law minister then and, therefore, could not be her counsel. The second choice, Barrister Manzur Qadir, a former foreign minister and a retired chief justice of the Lahore High Court, was not eligible to appear in the court that he had once headed. Qadir referred Asma Jahangir to M Anwar, considered one of the finest lawyers of the Lahore High Court at the time. Anwar thought it was a strong case because the governor of Punjab had signed the detention order before taking oath of office. (The detention order was changed later, Asma Jahangir says, to remove that anomaly). The Lahore High Court, however, dismissed her petition.

Asma Jahangir went to the Supreme Court. Qadir then decided to be her lawyer in what became known as Asma Jilani versus the Government of Punjab case. "The courtroom used to be full," she recalls. "Since I was a petitioner, I got a special seat and felt very important." She remembers Qadir with awe and admiration. The arguments he made were absolutely fabulous, she says. "I have never heard those kinds of arguments again. He was not just a lawyer, he was a philosopher."

Asma Jahangir also credits the proceedings at the Supreme Court for initiating her into the cynical, realpolitik world of courts. "What I saw was the manipulation behind the scenes ­ how cases are won and lost."

In 1972, after Yahya Khan's government had ended, the Supreme Court decided Asma Jahangir's petition in her favour. In a first for Pakistan's apex court, the judges declared the military government illegal and Yahya Khan to be a "usurper". History had been created and a young girl found herself at the centre of it.

(M.Arif, White Star)

Malik Ghulam Jilani waged a somewhat lonely political struggle ­ particularly at the tail end of Ayub Khan's government and during Yahya Khan's regime. He was on the wrong side of the consensus in West Pakistan on the 1971 military operation in what was then East Pakistan and when that region declared itself as the independent state of Bangladesh, he advocated against official Pakistani recognition instantly.

That period in her father's life has had a deep impact on Asma Jahangir. "When we were children, he always talked about fundamental rights and adult franchise and, believe me, I did not know for a long time what adult franchise meant except that he was fighting for it."

Asma Jahangir remembers her mother exhibiting a different sort of character. She was not in any way politically active and was almost nonchalant about the frequent imprisonment of her husband. "Whenever my father got arrested, she would sell her car and would move around on a tonga, believing that everything will work out or she would rent out our house and go to her father's house and put us in his dressing room."

Asma Jahangir comes from a well-off family ­ the spacious house her parents built is located in one of the priciest parts of Lahore's Gulberg area. But she does not see money having played any part in her upbringing. "We never felt that we were privileged or non-privileged," she says.

In July 2016, a division bench of the Lahore High Court was hearing a public interest petition against the construction of the Orange Line Metro Train. The petition contended that the project was damaging Lahore's architectural heritage. A star team of lawyers was representing the Punjab government. There was Shahid Hamid, a legal wizard and a former governor of Punjab. There was the advocate general. There were many assistant advocate generals and deputy attorney generals. The packed courtroom was unusually abuzz with the chatter of minions and acolytes of the government's lawyers.

Everyone was waiting for Asma Jahangir to argue in favour of the petition. When she stepped forward to the rostrum and began her arguments, one of her co-counsels tried to whisper a legal point in her ear ­ a relatively common practice in courts. Before he could even start, Asma Jahangir dismissed him with a wave of her hand and almost sternly said, "Stay where you are. If I want your assistance, I will ask for it."

Her aggression had a direct impact on the opposite side and murmurs immediately died down in the courtroom. The only reaction from the government's lawyers during her arguments was a slight shaking of the head by Hamid. She spoke briefly, vociferously and authoritatively. As she left the rostrum, she paused, turned around and took one step back. She turned towards the judges and Hamid, and said, "You know what the entire problem here is Shahid Sahib? Your chief minister needs training in aesthetics. We would be glad to arrange tutoring." Hamid smiled weakly and continued to shake his head.

This is Asma Jahangir's style ­ mixing the legal with the polemical. She knows how to make her presence felt, using calculated aggression, wit and sharp one-liners. For a woman in her 60s, just over five feet in height, she is acutely aware that she cannot afford the other side to dominate. "She is a performer," says Neelum Hussain, her long-time friend and fellow activist.

Asma Jahangir's entry into law did not automatically follow her victory in Asma Jilani versus the Government of Punjab case. She received her law degree from Punjab University in 1978 after she fell in love with and got married to Tahir Jahangir, a Chinioti businessman and her next-door neighbour. "The principal stopped me from attending the [law] college because I was a married woman. It was a college policy," she says. Gulrukh, a friend of Asma Jahangir's, was also married but the principal did not know. "Gulrukh used to take classes and then she would teach me." Asma Jahangir secured a first division in her law exam ­ a major achievement for someone who has always been a "second divisioner".

She did not start her law practice immediately after graduating.

When she had her second child, she started to feel that she was suffering from bouts of depression because of feeling "useless". The depression was "showing on me because I had started to put on weight". She had puffy eyes. She looked unhappy. "Whether I was just imagining things or it was otherwise, I think the respect my husband - or for that matter, my in-laws - have had later for me was not there at the time," Asma Jahangir says. "Everybody thought they could bully me because I was not seen as an entity. I was just a little, out-of-shape mummy." She decided that she had to do something with her life or she "will just be a sidekick for everyone".

Asma Jahangir invited some of her friends over lunch to discuss the possibility of starting a law firm. Late Shahid Rahman, who was the son of a former chief justice of Pakistan, S A Rahman, and an excellent lawyer himself, told her to talk to Shehla Zia, another young lawyer at the time. Asma Jahangir's equally well-known sister, Hina Jilani, was already working as a junior lawyer with Ijaz Batalvi. The three then roped in Gulrukh ­ thus, AGHS was formed on February 12, 1980, taking its name from the first letters of the names of its founders. It was Pakistan's first all-women law firm.

It was the darkest of times. The Hudood Ordinance was already in force. The law of evidence was about to be changed to the disadvantage of women and non-Muslims. It was also the best of times. The Women's Action Forum (WAF) was formed smack in those years.

On February 12, 1983, WAF decided to hold a public demonstration on Mall Road in Lahore against the provisions of the Hudood Ordinance that discriminate against women. Asma Jahangir and Hina Jilani both joined the protest as members of the Punjab Women Lawyers Forum. It was the first open denunciation of attempts by General Ziaul Haq's military regime to mix religion and law ­ and it made WAF, Asma Jahangir and Hina Jilani the most recognised faces of the movement for women's rights in Pakistan.

(M Arif, White Star )
A simultaneous lawyers' movement was also underway in those days against Zia. Protesting lawyers began using Asma Jahangir's office as a place of hiding because the authorities would not consider "coming into a woman lawyer's office looking for male lawyers hiding there". The misogyny of Zia's regime in this case worked in favour of his opponents.

In the 1980s, a woman lawyer arguing human rights cases was largely uncharted territory. In the beginning it had some novelty value. Courts were patronising, even when they were not sympathetic, to a woman practising law and would usually grant Asma Jahangir relief. She started off with family law cases - divorce, child custody and maintenance payment etc - but she was quick to realise that what was required was not temporary relief but fundamental change, and not just for women.

Soon, she started taking up blasphemy and bonded labour cases. "In bonded labour cases, judges would ask me why I had brought those people to the courts who stank. You are here precisely for them, I would respond." Her fierce arguments in favour of those "stinking" brick-kiln workers made people realise how those "labourers with hardly any clothes on their bodies owed debts of hundreds of thousands of rupees." It was then that lawyers and judges started taking her seriously ­ that she was not just a female lawyer or another practitioner of family law.

In the mid-1980s, the Zia-appointed Majlis-e-Shoora passed a resolution, saying that Asma Jahangir had blasphemed and she should be sentenced to death. The basis of the accusation was an alleged comment she had made in a WAF meeting. Zia set up a commission to investigate the allegation.

Section 295 C of the Pakistan Penal Code that provides for death penalty in blasphemy cases was not enacted yet. "Maybe they enacted it after finding out that they could not put me to death without it," Asma Jahangir says, only half in jest.

Asma Jahangir boycotted the commission and instead lobbied lawyers to gather support. Fortunately, Tahira Abdullah, a renowned human rights activist and a WAF member, had taped the entire proceedings of the meeting where the alleged comments were made. When that tape came out, it was obvious that Asma Jahangir had not made any blasphemous remarks.

In 1993, an 11-year-old Christian boy, Salamat Masih, and his uncles, Manzoor Masih and Rehmat Masih, were accused of writing blasphemous words on the wall of a mosque in a small town near Lahore. Later, Manzoor Masih was killed outside district courts in Gujranwala where the case was initially being heard. Asma Jahangir represented Salamat Masih and Rehmat Masih when they appealed before the Lahore High Court against their conviction by a trial court. Lawyer Mehboob Khan, who represents the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) and assisted Asma Jahangir in the case, remembers the hostile atmosphere during the proceedings. He also remembers how she remained unfazed through it.

In an unprecedented decision, the Lahore High Court acquitted Salamat Masih and Rehmat Masih on February 23, 1995. Arif Iqbal Bhatti, one of the judges who had acquitted the two, was assassinated in 1997. When his killer was arrested a year later, he confessed to have killed the judge for deciding the case in the favour of the accused.

There was an attempted attack on Asma Jahangir's house as well. The assailants mistakenly entered her mother's house who lives next door. Everyone in the house was held at gunpoint, including Asma Jahangir's brother and his wife and their two little children. Frustrated at not being able to find Asma Jahangir, they attempted to kill her sister-in-law but their gun did not work, giving the family enough time to escape and call in security guards to engage the attackers.

Munizae, the eldest of Asma Jahangir's three children, remembers being sent to a boarding school to protect her from possible abduction. Munizae understood from a very young age that her mother was different from most people around her. Still, she was confused when Asma Jahangir was first arrested in 1983. She remembers how her schoolfellows asked her the next day if her mother had "stolen something".

When Asma Jahangir came back home from prison, she was very animated and made her "jail time sound like it was an adventure, a thrilling journey". An intrigued Munizae asked her mother to take her along when she went to jail again.

Back in the early 1980s, Asma Jahangir and her father decided to set up a trust to support political prisoners. The two pooled in their own money to put together the trust, named after her father and headed by Nisar Osmani, a senior journalist and human rights activist. Prominent lawyers such as Khursheed Kasuri, Aitzaz Ahsan and Khalid Ranjha were among its trustees and Asma Jahangir was its first secretary.

The trust made lists of political prisoners and then approached their families to give money. This was not sustainable ­ the lists were never exhaustive and the trust's funds had never looked enough to survive long. In late 1986, Asma Jahangir and Osmani decided to hold a seminar titled 'Dimensions of Human Rights', at the Pearl Continental Hotel, in Lahore. They wanted to test the viability of the idea that there could be a membership-based human rights organisation in the country.

They were pleasantly surprised to find an overwhelmingly positive response to their invitation for the seminar. People from all across Pakistan converged in Lahore to participate and endorse the decision to form HRCP. When the commission was set up in 1987, Justice (retd) Dorab Patel, a former chief justice of the Sindh High Court who had refused to take a fresh oath as a judge of the Supreme Court under Zia's diktat, was appointed its first chairperson.

The most outstanding feature of the newly created HRCP was its overtly secular mandate. The participants of its founding seminar had passed two resolutions, among others, on the protection of the rights of religious minorities in Pakistan.

Asma Jahangir fondly remembers how Habib Jalib, the legendary revolutionary poet, bantered with her on the occasion. Earlier that year, she had dragged him to a women's demonstration outside the Lahore High Court where he was beaten up by police. "I am very happy that at least from The Mall you have been able to come to Pearl Continental," was his way of differentiating between street protests and institutionalised civic action.

The shift was neither easy nor smooth. Allegations of foreign funding have dogged HRCP from the start. Even Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chief Imran Khan, who has the experience of arranging money for his cancer hospital, has questioned the sources of HRCP's finances. Incensed when HRCP stated that his 2014 sit-ins diverted attention from human rights abuses in the country, he thundered in October that year: "You don't need to tell us what is right and what is wrong. Just tell me first what the sources of HRCP's funding are."

("HRCP took a decision early on that it would accept no aid that may be interpreted as compromising its independence. So superpower sources were foreclosed from the start and HRCP had to thankfully decline such offers," reads a post on the HRCP website. The members and the donors of the organisation are encouraged to check its audit reports to know the source of its funding that mostly comes from the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Canada.)

Over the years, HRCP in general and Asma Jahangir in particular have also been branded as "traitors" and "American agents", trying to malign Pakistan and destroy the country's social and political fabric in the name of women's rights and the rights of non-Muslims. The commission is also condemned for highlighting human rights abuses in places such as Balochistan and the tribal areas - as if to embarrass Pakistan - rather than talking about similar abuses in Kashmir and Palestine.

A senior lawyer from Lahore, who does not wish to be named, declares: "Asma Jahangir is working on a specifically anti-Islam agenda and she is getting foreign funding to do that." The same lawyer contested the Lahore High Court Bar Association election as Asma Jahangir's nominee but he could not win. "The liberal lawyers did not vote for me because I have a beard and the religious, conservative ones did not support me because I was backed by Asma Jahangir," he says as he explains how she divides the bar along ideological lines. "She is part of the Illumanti, a secret organisation controlling the world," he then proclaims.

Asma Jahangir is not apologetic about the focus that HRCP has on Pakistan. "Yes, I am very unhappy, extremely anguished at human rights violations against Kashmiris in India, or against Rohingyas in Burma, or, for that matter, Christians in Orissa; but obviously I am going to be more concerned of violations taking place in my own house because I am closer to the people who I live with. I have more passion for them," she says. "And I think it sounds very hollow if I keep talking about the rights of Kashmiris but do not talk about the rights of a woman in Lahore who is butchered to death."

Asma Jahangir has been the longest-serving United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights and is one of three Pakistanis appointed to the position (the other two being her sister Hina Jilani and Lahore-based feminist activist and sociologist Farida Shaheed). Yet her entry into lawyer politics is of recent origin; it essentially came under the limelight with - and after - her election as the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association in 2010.

Before her entry, the bar's politics dominated the two groups ­ one led by senior lawyer Hamid Khan (who is also a senior member of PTI) and the other led by Malik Karim (who passed away a few years ago). She has now taken over the leadership of the latter group.

When Hamid Khan talks about Asma Jahangir, there are serious hints that he respects her for being a "formidable opponent" and an internationally acclaimed human rights campaigner. He, however, does not regard her as a competent lawyer. She only had some family law cases to her credit before she fought the bar election, he claims, and then accuses her of using her position in bar politics to bolster her law practice.

Hamid Khan also alleges that Asma Jahangir was "planted" in the bar politics by PPP co-chairperson Asif Ali Zardari to counter the then Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. He cites her frequent criticism of the judiciary as evidence and says she has taken this criticism to a dangerous level where it appears like an attempt to "blackmail the judges".

Asma Jahangir, indeed, has had a number of run-ins with the judiciary, more specifically since the reinstatement of Chaudhry as Chief Justice of Pakistan in 2009. Her opposition to the judicial "activism" of Chaudhry's court over the PPP government's inaction on many political, economic and administrative subjects led many to believe that she was being an "apologist" for Zardari who was then the president of the country.

One of the biggest allegations against her is that she represented Hussain Haqqani, then serving as Pakistan's ambassador in Washington, in the so-called Memogate case. The case revolved around an alleged memorandum written by Haqqani in 2011 to Admiral Mike Mullen, a top American military commander, seeking help from the United States administration for Pakistan's civilian government against the military establishment. The whole controversy was predicated exclusively on the testimony of one Mansoor Ijaz, a Pakistani-American with dubious credentials. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, then the most important opposition leader, went to the Supreme Court demanding an inquiry and the Supreme Court obliged him by constituting a highly powered judicial commission consisting of three judges.

Asma Jahangir is unequivocal ­ she believes that the judiciary was swayed both by populism and the establishment. The Memogate case is an illustrative example of what is wrong with the judiciary, she contends. "Can anybody justify it today? I do not think even the petitioners can."

The July 31, 2009, judgment of the Supreme Court that summarily dismissed scores of judges across Pakistan on the grounds that they had taken oath under Pervez Musharraf's Provisional Constitution Order (PCO) in 2007 was the precise point when she decided to take the Supreme Court head on. Asma Jahangir's point of view was simple ­ almost all the judges on the bench which had issued that verdict were themselves beneficiaries of a previous PCO. Their outrage against those who did the same later appeared to her misplaced and hypocritical.

Until then, the bar was presented as a monolith and the dissenting voices in the lawyers' movement came from the fringes that did not matter much. Asma Jahangir was the first of the key leaders of the movement to express her dissatisfaction publicly and disassociate herself from Chaudhry.

Initially, it was an individual decision. She remembers being cautioned by friends to refrain from visiting the Lahore High Court bar room a day after she wrote an article in daily Dawn, criticising Chaudhry. His loyalists had the reputation to be rude and rowdy towards his critics. She went to the bar room anyway. Nobody was rude or rowdy towards her; on the contrary, people came up to her and said, "Well done".

"The judges were playing politics," she says when asked about the reason for her criticism. She also views the confrontation in the context of a fight between democracy and authoritarianism.

Hamid Khan claims Asma Jahangir is disconnected from bar politics at the grass-roots level. He attributes her success merely to a "consolidation" of all the small groups of lawyers opposed to his professional group.

Asma Jahangir certainly was an "outsider" in bar politics, as Hamid Khan puts it, before the Chaudhry era. It was, indeed, the movement for the restoration of Justice Chaudhry between 2007 and 2009 that allowed her to interact with a cross section of lawyers. Those interactions allowed lawyers in different parts of Pakistan to get first-hand knowledge of her as a person and a lawyer ­ beyond what they knew through her public image of an elitist, yet fiery, crusader for women's rights.

(M Arif, White Star)

Most crucially, Asma Jahangir's own view of an average lawyer changed. "This man who has dressed up so neatly and nicely lives in a two-room house and does not know in the morning whether he will have money to feed his children or not," is how she summerises her understanding of the financial predicament lawyers face. When asked about the incidents of violence and hooliganism that lawyers often engage in, she responds by drawing attention to their working conditions. "What we do not see is the humiliation that lawyers have to suffer."

Those who have been on the receiving end of bad behaviour by lawyers - and that includes politicians, judges, government officials and often junior-level policemen - may dismiss her argument as mere justification by someone who cannot afford to antagonise her voters.

Asma Jahangir's role in bar politics certainly demands that she win popularity contests (through elections, that is) ­ something Asma Jahangir, the contrarian and the firebrand human rights activist, at best did not care about and on previous instances very deliberately rebelled against. Neelum Hussain believes Asma Jahangir has changed ­ from being a private person to a public agitator to a politician.

Still, Asma Jahangir is different from most of her colleagues in bar politics ­ in more ways than one. She smokes beedis in the bar room, talks loudly and bluntly and makes direct eye contact with those she is conversing with. She is undiplomatic yet she has a disarming common touch. She has the ability to be frank and honest without sounding abrupt and pretentious. She is a contrarian but she is also a conciliator ­ with the ability to find points of convergence.

She is also a wife, a mother and a grandmother ­ and is quite comfortable with her family roles. Her eyes light up when she talks about Tahir Jahangir, her husband. For a moment, she lets her iron lady persona drop. "I was absolutely in love with him ­ madly in love with him. I think in some ways I still am, despite my many differences with him."

She gives him some backhanded compliments. "He was one of the reasons I was able to work. He was one of the reasons I learned to negotiate. He said you can practice law but you cannot go to court. I agreed, but then I went to court. Then he said you can practice law but you will not do it for money. I agreed, but then I did it for money too," she says, laughing.
It was only when Asma Jahangir went to jail that Tahir Jahangir "realised that things had gone too far". She was first put under house arrest in 1983. A few months later, she was arrested and sent to Kot Lakhpat Jail, Lahore, to face trial by a military court. When she got out of prison, she did not know if Tahir Jahangir would let her back into their house. But he was there at the prison gate to receive her. He patted her on the back even though he "was shell-shocked".

They have an unwritten agreement ­ Tahir Jahangir never listens to any of Asma Jahangir's speeches nor attends any of the protests she organises; Asma Jahangir does not read his columns, mostly written about nature, and mostly refuses to accompany him on trips to the mountains.

Asma Jahangir's daughter Munizae recalls how Saima Waheed, a plaintiff in a famous love marriage case in the mid-1990s, was surprised to see her in shalwar kameez. Munizae, a journalist, wears baggy shalwar kameez to press conferences on the advice of her "very conventional mother" who at times is "horribly conservative". She is a typical Punjabi mother, says Munizae, "who is never happy with how my sister keeps her house or is bringing up her kid". On the other hand, "our brother gets away with the dumbest of jokes all the time."

Munizae had just started her first job as a television reporter for India's NDTV in 2005 when in May that year Asma Jahangir, along with other human rights activists, organised a women-only marathon in Lahore to highlight violence against women. There was serious opposition to the idea by religious parties and groups. On the day of the marathon, the police attacked participants with batons, kicking and dragging them into police vans and taking them to the Model Town police station.

When Munizae arrived at the site of the marathon, the first image she saw was of her mother with her "clothes torn off, her bare back exposed ­ being manhandled by police officials". Her reporter colleagues had smirks on their faces. They looked at Munizae from the corner of their eyes. She felt embarrassed ­ more than that, she was shocked, traumatised.

Asma Jahangir's husband was out of the country at the time. He immediately came back, only to see Asma's bare back on the front page of a newspaper. Munizae broke down and cried when she saw her father but Tahir Jahangir was unfazed. If anything, he was proud.

Asma Jahangir was later transferred to jail from the police station. When Munizae got there, she saw her mother "in the same shirt, now stitched up with safety pins". She was "shouting and essentially leading a protest in jail".

Nothing, it seems, can ever stop Asma Jahangir from being what she has always been.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The writer is a lawyer and a columnist and a member of the Human Rights Watch.

 

Global: In presence & absence of laws against, Female Genital Mutilation remains widespread Print E-mail

 

Tuesday February 06, 2018

Female genital mutilation painful, gory reality, world unites to end it

AP
'Later when my menstruation began, because the opening was too tiny, the pain worsened even more.'
 
Deep in Ethiopia's desert region of Afar, about nine in 10 women and girls undergo female genital mutilation, many before their first birthday. (Representational Image)

Bekarredar (Ethiopia): The 25-year-old Kedija had her external genitalia removed and her vagina sewn up when she was just seven days old. She has faced a lifetime of pain.

"I was unable to hold my urine for long," she said.

"I isolated myself from socializing because of that. Later when my menstruation began, because the opening was too tiny, the pain worsened even more. And after I got married it was painful to have sexual intercourse with my husband."

Three childbirths later, she was diagnosed with near-fatal renal complications.

Deep in Ethiopia's desert region of Afar, about nine in 10 women and girls undergo female genital mutilation, many before their first birthday.

Campaigners on Tuesday marked the International Day of Zero Tolerance for FGM as they seek to end the practice. Nearly 200 million around the world live with its effects, the United Nations says.

Ethiopia's government has declared FGM illegal.

Addu Abdala Dubba used to perform the circumcisions. She sharpened a small blade against a steel rod to demonstrate how she prepared for the task.

"There were even times when I performed consecutive cuttings in one day with this one blade," she said. "But I carefully sanitized it after each circumcision by heating it in a fire or dipping it in hot water to avoid infection."

She once thought the job gave her a sense of purpose. She thought it helped women preserve their virginity and remain faithful in marriage - seen as essential to a family's honor.

But after attending trainings by the government and religious leaders, "I now understand this practice is wrong and it can destroy a child's future," she said.

Now she is a midwife and spreads the word about the dangers of FGM.

The lone primary hospital in Asaita, the former capital of Afar regional state, struggles to look after the women who have complications from FGM, especially during childbirth. A lack of funds has forced the hospital to operate with reduced staff for most of the past fiscal year.

Dr. Saleh Yusuf Imam, the medical director, said the hospital's counseling service has had some success in raising awareness.

After women who face difficulty with penetrative sex receive pain-free incisions in their vagina and post-treatment counseling, "we hear most of them vow to not let a single woman they know endure female genital mutilation ever again," he said.

There is still a long way to go in changing people's attitudes, he added.

Kedija, the 25-year-old, said she is determined to stop another generation of girls from suffering like she did.

"Whenever I find a parent that still insists on practicing female genital mutilation, I try to convince them otherwise," she said.

"But when my efforts are not enough to change their minds, then I always report them to local health facilities so that they can intervene.”
~~~~~
 Monday February 05, 2018

Three in four Bohra girls undergo genital mutilation: Study

Press Trust of India, New Delhi:

Representative image.

Every three in four girls from the Bohra community in India are forced to undergo genital mutilation during their pre-teens, according to a report made public today.

The findings of the study come in the backdrop of the Centre's affidavit in the Supreme Court, claiming that "at present, there was no official data or study (by the National Crime Records Bureau etc) which supported the existence of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) in India".

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), FGM comprises "all procedures that involve the altering or injuring of female genitalia for non-medical purposes and is recognised internationally as a violation of the human rights of girls and women".

The survey on the prevalence of FGM or "khafd" among the Bohras in the country also highlighted that in the urban areas increasingly doctors in medical facilities also performed FGM in addition to traditional cutters.

The report titled "The Clitoral Hood a Contested Site: Khafd or Female Genital Mutilation in India" was released by Congress MP Shashi Tharoor at an event here.

It has been prepared jointly by a survivors' collective called WeSpeakOut and Nari Samta Manch.

The study included responses from 94 participants, of which 83 were women survivors of FGM and 11 were men.

The survey was carried out in four Indian states with high concentration of the Bohras -- Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Rajasthan -- as well as Kerala, where a few Sunni Muslim sects are known to practise FGM.


The Bohra community is a Shia sect of Muslims. Today there are three Bohra sects -- Dawoodi, Alvi and Suleimani who practise FGM.

The Bohra expats from Canada, the United Arab Emirates and the US, as well as traditional circumcisers and healthcare professionals, were also included in the sample.

The women surveyed were aged between 17 and 89 years. All the interviewees together had 81 daughters, of which six were too young, 55 were subjected to "khafd" and 20 were not.

This indicated that nearly 75 percent of the daughters underwent FGM, the study pointed out.

Further, these women cumulatively knew 1,248 women within their families who had undergone "khafd", i.e. each participant knew approximately 14 women in their family.

The study also included testimonies of survivors of FGM as well as traditional circumcisers.

One such cutter has been quoted in the report as saying that she has performed 6,000 "khafd" in 20 years of her practice and another confessed to cutting 4,800 to 6,000 girls over 50 years.

Often forceps, scissors, scalpels and blades are used to perform FGM.

Tharoor said that the findings of the study made the government's stance on the issue in the Supreme Court that there was no evidence of the practice "untenable".

The founder of WeSpeakOut demanded a law to ban the practice.

"By turning a blind eye and doing nothing about FGM, the government of India is denying women and girls their rights enshrined in the Indian Constitution. In keeping with its international human rights commitments under numerous treaty bodies, India must at once pass a law that bans the act of providing FGM," Founder of WeSpeakOut Masooma Ranalvi said.

Among the respondents subjected to "khafd", six were cut by medical doctors and 75 were cut by traditional cutters, the report said.

Those who have undergone "khafd" have reported painful urination, physical discomfort, difficulty in walking and bleeding immediately following the procedure. Some suffered from recurrent urinary tract infections and incontinence, in the long term.

Nearly 33 percent women subjected to "khafd" in the study said that it had negatively impacted their sexual life.

Many experienced fear, anxiety, depression, low self- esteem after undergoing FGM.

While supporters of the practice claim that "khafd" was practised by the Bohras and is just "a nick on the clitoral hood", the writer of the report said in reality what was practised was much more grievous.

"Most women subjected to khafd in India undergo Type 1 FGM or clitoridectomy which includes partial or total removal of the clitoral hood or clitoris. Very few younger women may be subjected to Type 4 FGM which includes pricking, piercing or cauterisation," Lakshmi Anantnarayan, writer of the report, said.

The report also warned that in the absence of a law banning the practice in India, the country was at the risk of becoming a hub for FGM for expat and foreign Bohra girls following a crackdown in Australia and the US.

A Bohra doctor was arrested in Michigan, the US, last year for allegedly performing female genital mutilation on two seven-year-olds.

In Australia, three people were convicted of FGM in a landmark trial in 2015.

An online petition initiated by WeSpeakOut on Change.Org has garnered over one lakh signatures. A copy of this was presented to Women and Child Development Minister Maneka Gandhi last year.

Subsequently, the minister promised to bring a law as well as write to the Syedna, the spiritual leader of the community, asking him to enforce a ban.

However, neither of these was done and the ministry has been maintaining a silence on this issue.

~~~~~~~~~~~
 Tuesday February 06, 2018

Lack of sex education contributing to female genital mutilation in India: Study

Absence of anti-FGM laws in the country has aided rise in incidents

FGM is being performed in the Bohra (a Shia Muslim sect) community and foreign girls in India, the study says. An absence of anti-FGM laws in the country has aided the rise in these incidents. File photo

A lack of sex education within families is an important factor contributing to the prevalence of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) in India, according to a recent study titled "The Clitoral Hood A Contested Site."

FGM is being performed in the Bohra (a Shia Muslim sect) community and foreign girls in India, the study says. An absence of anti-FGM laws in the country has aided the rise in these incidents.

The main sources of sex education for the study participants were through friends, books or pornography. Most respondents had poor knowledge of women's sexual anatomy and were unfamiliar with proper language to discuss their body.

About 32% of study participants revealed that FGM had negatively impacted their sexual life. Several women had questions about FGM, its impact on women's sexual health, sexual pleasure and the anatomical structure. A majority of women did not know what was done to their bodies during FGM.

The study also revealed that about 75% of Bohra women in India (aged seven and above) are victims of FGM. In India, FGM is practised mainly in Dawoodi, Suleimani and Alvi Bohras in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and some Sunni sects in Kerala.

Recently, women have started to speak out against the practice of FGM and anti-FGM movements like WeSpeakOut and Sahiyo have succeeded in breaking the silence surrounding the practice.

Minister for Women and Child Development Maneka Gandhi announced in May 2017 that the government intended to pass an anti-FGM law if the Bohra community did not abandon the practice.

However, no progress has been made till date. Moreover, the ministry has responded to the Supreme Court stating that “there is no official data or study which supports the existence of FGM/C in India.”


The study has revealed that around 37% of the women in Bohra community support FGM and around 65% are against it. The main reason behind the rise in the number of women against FGM is the daughters' strong position against FGM and confrontations with the parents due to pain and suffering.

India: 8-month-old baby girl's rape coincides with overdue warning of perilous patrilinear misogyny Print E-mail
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
Tuesday January 30, 2018

8-month-old baby raped by 28-year-old cousin undergoes surgery, stable                            

New Delhi: An eight-month-old baby girl was raped allegedly by her cousin in northwest Delhi's Netaji Subhash Place, police said. The accused has been arrested, they said.

The baby is stable after she underwent a surgery.

The 28-year-old confessed to raping the baby under the influence of alcohol, said a senior police officer.

The girl's parents used to go out for work and leave their daughter in the custody of their sister-in-law. Since it was a Sunday, their sister-in-law's son was at home, he said.

When he saw that his mother was not around, the accused allegedly forced himself on the baby, police said.

When the girl's mother, who works as a maid, returned home at around 12.30 pm, she saw blood stains on her daughter's clothes and informed her husband.

The baby was rushed to a hospital where it was found that she had been sexually assaulted, police said.

Subsequently, the police were informed and a case was registered.

Delhi Commission for Women chief Swati Maliwal visited the girl at a hospital yesterday. In a series of tweets today, Maliwal expressed her anguish over the incident saying the "DCW has been raped".

She said that despite her repeated demands to punish rapists within six months, nothing has happened. The girl underwent a surgery and was doing fine, the police said, adding that she will be discharged soon. Her parents are being counselled. PTI
~~~~~~~~~~~~~             

  Tuesday January 30, 2018
 

Turning pink in attempt to abort son preference

              

New Delhi: The pink-coloured Economic Survey document today recommended that India must confront the societal metapreference for a son, observing that the adverse sex ratio of females to males has led to 63 million “missing” women.

The colour of this year’s survey cover was chosen as a symbol of support for the growing movement to end violence against women, which spans continents.

Laying special emphasis on gender development, the survey cautioned that on several indicators, notably employment, use of reversible contraception and son preference, India has some distance to traverse despite the country’s economic progress. The survey states that just as India has committed to moving up the ranks in ‘Ease of Doing Business’ indicators, a similar commitment should be endeavoured on the gender front.

The percentage of working women has declined over time from 36 per cent being employed in 2005-06 to 24 per cent of women employed in 2015-16, pointed out the survey.

It acknowledges that the government’s ‘Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao’ and ‘Sukanya Samridhi Yojana’ schemes, and mandatory maternity leave rules are all steps in the right direction, pointing out that measures such as increasing maternity leave will offer support to women in the workforce.

Given these observations, the states and all stakeholders have an important role to play in increasing opportunities available for women in education and employment, it said.

As per the survey, nearly 47 per cent of women do not use any contraception. The survey highlighted another phenomenon of son metapreference, which involves parents adopting fertility “stopping rules” having children until the desired number of sons are born. ­ PTI
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  Tuesday January 30, 2018  

India has 21 million 'unwanted' girls due to preference for sons                   

Thomson Reuters Foundation, Mumbai:


   The government's Economic Survey said that around 21 million girl children are 'unwanted' in the country owing to the preference given to sons. Reuters file photo for representation.  

Some 21 million girls in India are "unwanted" and receive fewer resources because their parents wanted a son, the government said, as analysts called for action to boost women's earnings.

The government's annual economic survey, presented to parliament on Monday with a pink cover, included a chapter on women's issues for the first time - emblazoned #MeToo in recognition of the global campaign against sexual harassment.

"India must confront the societal preference, even meta-preference for a son, which appears inoculated to development," it said.

While India is set to regain its position as the world's fastest-growing major economy, development "has not proved to be an antidote" for its skewed sex ratio, lack of women in the workplace and low contraceptive use, the survey said.

A sex ratio of 943 females per 1,000 males has led to the identification of some 63 million "missing" women, it said.

While sex-selection abortions are widely prevalent despite a ban, the preference for sons also manifests in parents choosing to keep having children until they have sons, leading to an estimated 21 million "unwanted" girls, the survey noted.

"Consigning these odious categories to history soon should be society's objective," it said.

"A son 'meta' preference ... may be detrimental to female children because it may lead to fewer resources devoted to them."

Many parents prefer sons because they can inherit property while families have to pay dowries when their daughters marry.

Only 24 percent of women in India were employed in 2015-16 and almost 47 percent do not use any contraception, it said.

Analysts welcomed the government's acknowledgement of the challenges to gender justice but said it must do more to ensure equal rights for women.

"There is no recognition of the failure of economic policy with respect to women's rights and women's work - including unpaid labour," said Jayati Ghosh, a professor of economics at the Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.

"They are also not doing enough to stop violence against women, which is seriously limiting women's labour participation," she told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Nearly two-thirds of Indian women with college degrees are without jobs, and female labour force participation is among the lowest in the world, according to World Bank data.

Ensuring property rights for women, and ending gender stereotyping in Indian popular culture can also help, said women's rights activist Kamla Bhasin.
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Tuesday January 30, 2018

India’s ‘unwanted’ girls: Economic Survey highlights how preference for sons is hurting daughters

By K Deepalakshmi
 
    A scene at Fangadi village on the outskirts of Ahmedabad. (Reuters)  

The Economic Survey has mentioned that the desire for a male child has created 21 million “unwanted” girls in India between 0 and 25 years.

Chapter Seven of the Survey, tabled in Parliament on Monday, deals with gender equality. While India has shown improvement in several parameters related to women's empowerment, the preference for a son has not diminished. “In some sense, once born, the lives of women are improving but society still appears to want fewer of them to be born,” the Survey stated.

The Survey has taken note of the behavioural pattern of Indian parents who prefer to have children “until the desired number of sons are born.” Calling this the “son meta-preference,” the Survey has found that while an average Indian family prefers to have two children, there are instances where families have more than five children if the last child is not a male.

The biologically determined natural sex ratio at birth is 1050 males per 1000 females. After sex selection was declared illegal in India in 1994, the sex ratio at birth (SRB) began to stabilise. In 1970, the SRB was 1060 males per 1000 females. In 2014, this rose to 1108, contrary to the belief that development would mend the skewed sex ratio.

GENDER AND SON META-PREFERENCE
          

The Survey pointed out the missing link by analysing the sex ratio of last child (SRLC). The SRLC in India is biased against females and is lower by 9.5 percentage points in 2015-16 in comparison with other countries.

The sex ratio among families with one child stood at 1.82 i.e., 1820 males per 1000 females. This drops to 1.55 for families with two children and rises to 1.65 for three, and drops to 1.51 and 1.45 for four and five children, respectively. Comparing it with the sex ratio of families where the last child is not a male, it stands at 1.07, 0.86, 0.85, 0.84, 0.88 respectively. This shows the Indian families tend to "stop" having children after a son is born.

The Survey pointed out several reasons behind preferring a male child such as compulsion of a woman to move to her husband's house post marriage, inheritance of property, rituals performed by sons, and dowry, among others.

Male child preference lowest in Meghalaya
The male child preference is highest in Punjab and Haryana and lowest in Meghalaya. More than 2 million women go missing across age groups every year either due to sex-selective abortion, disease, neglect, or inadequate nutrition, according to the National Family and Health Survey (NFHS).

While more women are educated, employed and earning than 10 years ago, they still do not have control over their earnings and childbirth. Quoting the NFHS, the Survey pointed out that more women tend to quit their employment after marriage or childbirth.

The Survey recommended that the nation must confront the societal preference for male offspring. Noting that schemes such as Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao, Sukanya Samridhi Yojana, enhanced maternity leave and mandatory creches in workplaces are steps in the right direction, the Survey called for a stronger commitment on the gender front similar to the government’s push for Ease of Doing Business.
        

Europe-Nth America: Rampant "Islamaphobia Industry" creates vicious hostility towards veiled women Print E-mail

~ Issue 1376, (11-17 January 2018)

Challenging times for veiled women

Wearing the Islamic veil has become increasingly challenging for many women in Western societies, where a piece of fabric can be used to exacerbate already rising Islamophobia, writes Gihan Shahine

No to Islamophobia

Many veiled women living in the West may have found great comfort in the heartening call of President of Austria Alexander Van der Bellen for all women to wear headscarves in solidarity with Muslims and fight what he described as “rampant Islamophobia”. For the left-wing former Austrian Green Party leader, the veil is a matter of “freedom of expression”, which is “a fundamental right”.

“It is every woman’s right to always dress how she wants. That is my opinion on the matter,” he told an audience of school pupils last May.

Safety for Muslims

But not everybody in the West thinks the same way, especially in the light of the rise of right-wing groups. Many observers say that right-wing politicians in Western societies have been using the Muslim veil as a rallying point, claiming that they are protecting secularism and Western identity from the threat of the “Islamisation of Europe”, for example.

They may use the hijab, or Islamic headscarf, as a trigger to rally racist or anti-Muslim sentiments across Europe and America. Many women may be judged, sometimes even misjudged, for what they choose to wear.

“Whenever I open the drawer where I keep my scarves, I look at them and say to myself, what a loss, what a loss that I ever took off my hijab.”

Thus said 33-year-old Ibtisam Al-Zahir with tears in her eyes, as she expressed her regrets at taking off the Islamic headscarf (hijab) or veil in order to be sure to get a job in Spain where she lives.

An emotionally charged interview with Al-Zahir was part of a documentary filmed by the UK website guardian.com following a ruling by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in March 2017 that allows employers to ban religious symbols in the workplace. The decision is part of a ruling on the issue of women wearing Islamic headscarves at work in the EU, allowing employers to ban religious clothing.

Chapel Hill funeral

Although the ECJ insists that the ruling “does not constitute direct discrimination” against Muslims, many Muslims and non-Muslims think otherwise. There is almost a consensus among Western Muslims that the decision was part of a wave of Islamophobia that has been sweeping Europe and the West in general.

“I hope that I can wear them again,” Al-Zahir said as she passed her fingers over a set of colourful scarves neatly folded in her bedroom drawer.

Al-Zahir may not be the only one feeling pressured by the ECJ decision. As the guardian.com documentary shows, many Muslim women now face “a stark choice: lose their hijab or their job.”


At least for Al-Zahir, losing the hijab was forced upon her after having spent three years looking for a job. As a divorced and single mother of two kids, she desperately needed a job in order to survive, rent a house and feed her kids.


“I applied to work in a restaurant,” Al-Zahir said. “It was a cleaning job ­ nothing to do with a hijab. In the end, I said, ok I will take it off, just give me work.”

But not all veiled women living in Europe were equally unlucky. Ayan Baudouin from London told the documentary that she had “never had any issues” getting a job in the UK, but that she was “quite fortunate because not everybody’s experience is like that”.

“We’ve had mixed reactions here: some women like myself will never give up the hijab for the sake of Allah, and we are determined to fight for it,” 44-year-old Dalia, an Egyptian-British woman, told Al-Ahram Weekly.

“Some have been deterred and have got scared, so they’ve either changed the way they wear their hijab through hats or Spanish-style hijabs and some have taken it off. But only a minority have taken off the veil altogether, as more often than not those wearing classic abayas and khimars [robes] tend to downgrade their veil by wearing normal clothes or adapting them,” she said.

Dalia does not work at the moment, but says she has ‘“definitely heard of jobs being harder to attain for a hijabi, and yes some have had verbal and physical abuse.” Dalia said she personally had suffered from abuse in the form of “dirty looks mainly by white men” in the street. “Usually they get a piece of my mind if the persist,” she added.

Baudouin similarly lamented how many people in Europe may still tend to stereotype a veiled woman as “illiterate, uneducated and probably not able to speak their language.”

Friends paying tribute to Hassanen
Many Muslims living in the West seem to have had this feeling of disrespect if recent research by the US-based Gallup research firm is anything to go by. “Specifically, 52 per cent of Americans and 48 per cent of Canadians say the West does not respect Muslim societies,” Gallup said. “Smaller percentages of Italian, French, German and British respondents agree.”

THE VEIL AND ISLAMOPHOBIA: According to the Gallup studies, “researchers and policy groups define Islamophobia in differing detail, but the term’s essence is essentially the same, no matter the source: an exaggerated fear, hatred and hostility towards Islam and Muslims that is perpetuated by negative stereotypes resulting in bias, discrimination and the marginalisation and exclusion of Muslims from social, political and civic life.”

Although Islamophobia is manifested in different ways, many observers suggest it is becoming more aggressively directed towards veiled Muslim women because the veil acts as a visible sign of Muslim identity. Recent research reports on Islamophobia in the West suggest increasing levels of hostility directed towards Muslim women who seem to be bearing the brunt of attacks against Muslims, with many suggesting that the veil has been used or abused by right-wing politicians and the architects of what they call the “industry” of Islamophobia in the West.

Those talking to the Weekly referred to the many recent hostile attacks on veiled women in the UK and the US as cases in point. In one case a veiled woman was pushed into the path of an oncoming underground train apparently for no other reason than her wearing the veil.

“For Muslim women, Britain’s streets are more hostile than ever” was the headline of a story in the UK newspaper the Daily Telegraph last week. “In 2017, we continued to worry a lot about what women wear,” it wrote.

The incident where a veiled Muslim woman seemingly miraculously survived being hit by a London Underground train went viral on social media, showing how she slammed into the train and rebounded onto the platform. The man who pushed her was held on charges of attempted murder, but many insist the attack is only one of many other manifestations of how veiled women have been at the heart of Islamophobic attacks.

US author Nathan Lean, author of The Islamophobia Industry, told the Weekly that “the veil is simply a visible symbol around which anti-Muslim agitators unite.” In Lean’s view, the veil “is not provoking Islamophobia itself, but rather offers people who already hold negative views of Islam an object at which to direct their ire and angst.”

 Al-Sherbini

“The Islamophobia industry uses whatever objects and symbols it can to suggest that Muslims are frightening,” Lean elaborated via e-mail. “It may seem that the veil is the symbol most often referenced today, but there have been instances of prejudice directed at mosques, minarets, and other Islamic cultural signifiers” in the West as well.

Erik Bleich, a professor of political science at Middlebury College in the US, similarly noted that “the hijab is one factor among many that Islamophobes use to identify and stigmatise Muslims.” The hijab has always been a controversial issue in both the West and in some Muslim-majority countries, he said. It is largely seen by Muslims as a religious obligation and as such many women choose to don it as an act of piety.

Many in the West, however, also tend to see the veil as a political symbol, a manifestation of a “different” identity, and, perhaps, a refusal to integrate. Politicians designing anti-hijab laws in the West may claim they are doing so in order to emancipate women from “the shackles of veil” and help them better integrate.

“The veil is viewed differently in Europe compared to the United States,” Bleich elaborated. “In many European countries, it has become a symbol for religious fundamentalism and a refusal (or at least a reluctance) to integrate. This is even more true when it comes to niqabs or burqas,” he said, referring to the full-face veil.

In the United States, according to Bleich, although the veil is of less prominent concern because Americans are generally more open to the public expression of religion, it still “functions as a marker of ‘Muslimness’, which is increasingly seen in the United States as a threatening identity to many.”

Lean said that in some cases veiled Muslim women “must feel hurt by the way in which a pious symbol of their religious identity has become politicised and subjected to such unnecessary prejudice”.

“Some of those who welcomed the ECJ ruling said the headscarf was a ‘political statement of oppression’. I find that deeply offensive,” 33-year-old Fayza Hassan, a European Muslim, wrote on the UK newspaper the Guardian’s blog.

“To me, it’s an act of worship, a choice I made, that it has no impact on anyone other than myself. I don’t expect others to understand my reasoning, but I find it strange that people who have very little understanding of my faith feel they have a right to tell me how to interpret it or what to do.”

ANTI-VEIL SENTIMENT IN EUROPE : It has been particularly in France where an estimated eight per cent of the population is Muslim that the veil has provoked intense public debate.

France has passed two laws on the veil, one in 2004 banning the wearing of the veil in public elementary and secondary schools, and another in 2011 banning the wearing of full-face veils in public places, even though these are worn by only a tiny portion of the population. Many countries followed suite, including Holland, Belgium, Italy, Switzerland, Bulgaria and Austria, where prohibitions on religious symbols and full or partial bans on full-face veils were implemented.

The recent ECJ ruling allowing employers in the EU to oblige veiled women to take off their veils at work has been met with wide public acceptance in many European countries, including France where “83 per cent of French people” were in favour of the law, according to the UK Independent newspaper.

In an article entitled “French Muslims Say Veil Bans Gives Cover to Bias”, the New York Times said that in France “the head coverings of observant Muslim women, from colourful silk scarves to black chadors, have become one of the most potent flash points in the nation’s tense relations with its vibrant and growing Muslim population,” adding that “mainstream politicians continue to push for new measures to deny veiled women access to jobs, educational institutions and community life.”

“They often say they are doing so for the benefit of public order or in the name of laïcité, the French term for the separation of church and state,” the report went on. “But critics say these efforts, rather than promoting a sense of secular inclusion, have encouraged rampant discrimination against Muslims in general and veiled women in particular.”

Lean argues that the ECJ decision also “enforces conformity to so-called “Western values”. “But ‘Western’ values include religious freedom and individual civil liberties, which would mean that religious expressions of this sort should be encouraged, not discouraged,” Lean told the Weekly.

Critics of the law also wonder why politicians in France focus on the hijab when other issues related to women’s rights do not get the same level of public attention. According to a report published in the UK Independent newspaper entitled “Why is the Right of Muslim Women to Wear the Veil still so Controversial in France”, “in France, one woman dies every three days because of domestic violence, a woman is raped every eight minutes, the difference in pay between men and women is still 27 per cent, and some political parties would rather pay a fine than abide by the rule of gender parity in elections.”

“Why then waste all this energy on the hijab, a piece of fabric, a personal choice, that doesn’t harm or affect anyone,” the report queried. For Bleich, banning the wearing of the veil by women is a “risky step” because it “may increase integration in some instances, but it will increase feelings of isolation in others.”

Many veiled women living in Europe say that the focus on the hijab and the widening trend of enshrining anti-hijab sentiments into law on the part of politicians has not only affected them economically by denying them jobs, but has also made them targets of abuse by the public, ranging from looks of disdain, to being spat at, to incidents of hijab-pulling and even hate crimes.

The 2009 murder of veiled Egyptian pharmacist Marwa Al-Sherbini, who lost her life for no other reason than her religion in Dresden, Germany, at the hands of a Russian-German racist, will always be remembered as one of the most tragic hate crimes directed against veiled women in Europe. But these crimes seem to have increased since then.

“Following the terrorist atrocity in Paris on 13 November 2015, media outlets reported that the number of hate crimes against perceived Muslims had skyrocketed, particularly in France and Britain,” said a report by the United Nations University (UNU), the academic and research arm of the United Nations. “According to these media articles, the majority of victims were ‘visible’ Muslim women, particularly those wearing the veil.”

Tell Mama, an NGO which documents incidents of Islamophobia across the UK by collecting data independently and in collaboration with 15 police forces, also recorded a 326 per cent increase in anti-Muslim incidents on the streets of Britain in 2015. The organisation received direct reports of verbal and online harassment and abuse from more than 1,100 Muslims in the same year and collected details of a further 1,400 incidents recorded by the police.

Tell Mama said the greatest impact of anti-Muslim hatred was being felt by women, making up 61 per cent of all incidents recorded by the organisation. “75 per cent of all female victims had been easily identifiable as Muslims by wearing the hijab or the niqab,” it said.

THE VEIL IN THE US: Although there is no anti-hijab legislation in the US and freedom is deeply enshrined in the US constitution, Abdel-Sattar Ghazali, editor of the Journal America online magazine, says that anti-hijab sentiments are also on the rise in the US.

“No doubt the veil/hijab is provoking animosity against Muslim women,” Ghazali, who is also the author of Islam & Muslims in the Post-9/11 America (2014) and Islam & Muslims in the 21st Century (2017), said. “This animosity sometimes becomes violent.”

During Ramadan last June, veiled 17-year-old Nabra Hassanen of northern Virginia in the US was assaulted and killed as she walked home after prayers at a mosque near Washington. Police have charged 22-year-old Darwin Martinez Torres with her murder, but once again the murder shocked the local Muslim community which was still getting over the Chapel Hill hate crime in 2015 that claimed the lives of 23-year-old American-Syrian Muslim Deah Shaddy and his veiled bride 21-year-old Yusor Mohamed Abu Salha, together with Yusor’s veiled sister 19-year-old Razan. The three were shot dead in a “dispute over parking”, but their family has insisted that the murder was a hate crime motivated by the religious identity of the victims.

“The veil is rarely used by American Muslim women, but simply using the headscarf makes them the target of hate attacks,” Ghazali noted.

Ghazali further referred to another tragic incident occurring last May when two men were murdered while trying to stop a white supremacist from abusing two young Muslim women, one of them wearing a headscarf, in Portland, Oregon, as a case in point. He also referred to a series of chilling incidents of scarf-snatching across the US in public places and in schools.

According to the Pew Research Centre, a US public-opinion survey organisation, “rates of physical attacks on Muslims reached post-9/11 levels” in 2015 in the US, which it said were “spurred at least in part by the presidential campaign of Donald Trump, who called for a ban on Muslim immigrants and tapped into a current of Islamophobia running throughout the country.”

A 2016 report by the newspaper USA Today revealed how over one week three women in one location in the US had been targeted because they were wearing the veil. “To protect themselves, some women are uncovering their hair,” the report said. “Others are buying pepper spray, applying for concealed carry permits, or taking self-defense classes.”

WHY ON THE RISE: According to the second annual European Islamophobia Report for 2016, a survey across the continent, “Muslims are seen as the enemy ‘within’. Thus, physical attacks and political restrictions can often be carried out and even defended in an atmosphere of wide distrust and enmity” in Europe.

Analysts mention the rise of terror attacks carried out by the Islamic State (IS) group in Europe and the US and the recent influx of immigrants from war-torn countries like Syria into Europe following the Arab Spring as reasons behind the rise of anti-Muslim sentiments. Others blame the rise of the right-wing groups in Europe and US President Donald Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric for boosting anti-Muslim sentiments.

Some observers stand in the middle, suggesting that extremism is generally on the rise and is turning bloody. It can be blamed on both some Muslims and some non-Muslims who are turning to the right, and in both cases ignorance serves as the greatest enemy. Whereas non-Muslims may have misconceptions about Islam, some Muslims, mainly jihadists, also misinterpret Islamic teachings in their own way.

Religious scholars insist that militant jihad, for instance, has strict conditions in Islam and should take place only on the battlefield or in the case of a country that has been militarily invaded. But jihadists, they say, have violated that strict condition when they have expanded the battlefield to include the streets of Europe and the US.

 

The Western media, for its part, has tended to focus on terror attacks in order to portray Muslims as the “enemy”, ignoring the fact that these terror attacks are carried out by small groups and are rejected by mainstream Muslims. The Western media also often only mentions Islam in the context of negative news.

“Islamophobia is on the rise because of a variety of factors, but chief among them today is the degree to which politicians in the United States and Europe have intentionally represented Islam and Muslims as an enemy ‘other’ in the service of advancing their political agendas,” Lean said.

According to Bleich, “Islamophobia rises in times of uncertainty, feelings that core national identities are being challenged, and in the light of political leaders taking advantage of these situations.”

“Politicians like Donald Trump, Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, and Marine Le Pen in France (among many others) are tapping into a sense that the world is changing in ways that make some individuals and voters in Europe and North America vulnerable,” Bleich elaborated. “Organising Islamophobia is a way for those leaders to gain power, and for their followers to feel more powerful, too.”

Ghazali quotes US journalist Reed Richardson as saying that “fuelled by the president’s nativist agenda and a new alliance with the alt-right, the professional anti-Muslim industry has never been stronger or more dangerous” in the US. Ghazali agrees with Richardson that “like the US military-industrial complex, which wields influence and makes money under the banner of ‘national security’,” there is now also an “anti-Islam industrial complex” at work in the US.

The Islamophobia industry likewise exhibits interwoven subsidiaries, joint ventures and lobbying groups, which enrich themselves while ostensibly promoting ideals like freedom of expression, women’s rights and national security
,” Ghazali told the Weekly.

One recent report by the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network (IJAN) has highlighted “how ‘big money’ is channelled to the ‘industry of Islamophobia’ in the West, which revolves around a fear-mongering demonisation of Arabs and Muslims intended to legitimise both US and Israeli bellicose machinations in a region with highly coveted resources.”

“But the problem of Islamophobia is not a Muslim problem only,” Lean said. “It is not the responsibility of Muslims to solve it. It requires everyone’s efforts, and all people who value equality and peace should stand up and reject such bigotry anywhere and everywhere it is present.”

Muslims can also do their bit to fight bigotry. “Muslim communities and individuals can respond effectively by making their case that veiling is an act of piety, not an act of rejection of European values,” Bleich suggested. “They can certainly organise politically and pursue legal cases where needed. The more Muslims can show they are committed to other values that Europeans (and North Americans) recognise as common values, the less veiling can be used as a symbol that Muslims have diametrically opposed values. Building bridges with other faith communities and with non-faith based organisations will help as well,” he said.


Global: An insight into Bill Gates as the world's deadliest Do-Gooder Print E-mail

 Sunday December 31, 2017

Ghost in the Machine, Part 5 ­ Lies, Denial, Deceit and Manipulative ‘Research’

Story at-a-glance
*    Vaccines are Big Pharma's new profit center, which has caused an onslaught of manipulative, dishonest “research”
*    The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation enriches pharmaceutical corporations and wealthy institutions with its questionable overseas vaccination agenda
*    To fight a growing number of people questioning the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, the drug industry discredits vaccine injury statistics and has rolled out an aggressive and shocking ad campaign

By Dr. Mercola

In the last decade, vaccines have become Big Pharma's biggest profit center. A report published by MarketsandMarkets estimates the global vaccine market, currently valued at $34.30 billion a year, will grow to an astounding $49.27 billion by 2022.1

Why the boom? As blockbuster drugs like Lipitor, Viagra, Seroquel, Zyprexa, Singular and Concerta have gone off patent, vaccines prove a lucrative replacement. Not only are they priced much higher than pills, governments and NGOs shamelessly help market vaccines to huge swaths of the world's population.

These unethical partnerships, using taxpayer or NGO money, advance misleading research intended to frighten the public. Worse, they discredit vaccine critics who raise legitimate safety and efficacy questions and even discredit the families and victims of vaccine injuries themselves. To cash in on vaccine profits Big Pharma, governments and NGOs have characterized all vaccines as "life-saving." One of the clearest examples is the attempt to present vaccines against the HPV virus as vaccines "against cancer."

"Science" articles warn that as many as 90 percent of adults, especially baby boomers, silently harbor the HPV virus much like articles that warn many baby boomers are infected with the Hepatitis C virus.

In both cases, the drug industry is trying to "grow" the market for its products by inflating the amount of estimated sufferers. Reporters either wittingly or unwittingly help in the effort by repeating the drug industry supplied "facts." The truth is more than 90 percent of HPV infections are cleared by the body2 without symptoms and only 20 percent of HPV infections are the high-risk type that could develop into cancer if not identified and treated.3

Big Pharma's misleading advertising is not working, though. Many families of adolescent boys and girls targeted by HPV vaccine marketing by drug companies and government health officials are refusing the vaccine.4

Reacting to the HPV vaccine dropouts, Big Pharma launched an offensive "shame" campaign last year in which young adults with cancer blame their parents for not vaccinating them when they were adolescents. The ads were so over-the-top even supporters of the vaccine complained. Twitter remarks accused the company of trying to guilt-trip parents to bolster corporate profits.5

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Promotes Vaccines and Their Profits

One of the world's leading funders of vaccine development and promotion is the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (B&MGF).6 In 2002, it began buying billions in drug stocks7 and subsequently added huge amounts of Monsanto stock.8 Two of the B&MGF's research heads were hired right out of Pharma ­ one from GlaxoSmithKline, with whom the B&MGF had a long-standing collaboration, and the other from Novartis.9

Even more shocking, it hired the former president of product development at Genentech to serve as its current CEO, Dr. Susan Desmond-Hellmann.10 This is how health writer Ruben Rosenberg Colorni describes the true nature of the foundation:11

  • "The Bill & Melinda Gates 'Foundation' is essentially a huge tax-avoidance scheme for enormously-wealthy capitalists who have made billions from exploiting the world’s people. The foundation invests, tax free, money from Gates and the 'donations' from others, in the very companies in which Gates owns millions in stocks, thus guaranteeing returns through both sales as well as intellectual-property rights.
  • To add insult to injury, the system perpetuates the spread of disease rather than aids in their eradication, thus perpetually justifying his endeavors to “eradicate” them (solving a problem they are creating)."

In a 2011 Forbes interview, Bill Gates admitted the new profitability of vaccines.12 "Ten or 15 years ago, nobody in the drug business would have held up vaccines as profit centers," he said, conceding that "vaccines are so tough, particularly because of liability issues." But now, "people are making money in the vaccine business," he noted.

Questions About Overseas Vaccination Programs

Questions about the ethics of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's overseas vaccination programs have swirled for years, specifically a study aimed at validating a low-cost way to screen for cervical cancer in India.13 This summer, STAT News reported that "new evidence of ethical lapses" has been published.14

  • "Dr. Eric Suba, a pathologist at Kaiser Permanente Medical Center in San Francisco and co-author of the paper, provided STAT with a copy and links to supporting documents. In an interview, he described the Mumbai study, which ended in 2015, in stark terms: 'catastrophic, 'monumentally unethical, and a radical departure from normal scientific procedures’ …
  • "Critics of the 18-year trial said that U.S.-funded Indian researchers used ineffective screening that endangered thousands of poor women in Mumbai. They were told the test could help prevent cancer, but far fewer pre-cancerous lesions were found than expected, suggesting that some lesions were missed ­ possibly leading to an unknown number of deaths."

In 2015, judges in India's Supreme Court heard a challenge claiming the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation failed to obtain the informed consent of the children or their parents and demanded answers about juvenile deaths from the vaccine trial.15

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Is a Big Investor in Monsanto and Promoter of GMOs

In 2012, Bill Gates announced he would try to end world hunger by growing more genetically modified (GM) crops. He had already invested $27 million into Monsanto. At the time, I said Gates was leading the pack as one of the most destructive "do-gooders" on the planet and that his views on addressing poverty and disease in poor countries were short-sighted and misinformed.

Shortly thereafter, a team of 900 scientists funded by the World Bank and United Nations determined the use of GM crops is not a meaningful solution to the complex situation of world hunger. The Seattle Times also called Bill Gates' support of GM crops as a solution for world hunger unsound science. It's an undisputed fact that the introduction of genetically engineered crops lead to diminished biodiversity ­ the direct opposite of what the world needs.

To save the planet and ourselves, small-scale organic and sustainable farming not only must prevail but flourish, and GM crops do not help; rather, they threaten their existence. Seeds have always been sold and swapped freely between farmers, preserving biodiversity, and without that basis, you cannot have food sovereignty. With fewer farmers, "feeding the hungry with GM crops" is nothing but a pipe dream.

A clear example of the false promise of GM crops is seen with the GM Golden Rice designed to bring beta-carotene to the diets of people in poor countries and supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's donation of $20 million. The GM crop was ill conceived for two reasons. People eating the low fat, poor diets seen in poor countries generally cannot convert beta carotene to the vitamin A and it was estimated that someone would have to eat 16 pounds of Golden Rice a day to receive the benefits.

Unethical Vaccine Marketing Only Tells Half the Story

As I said earlier, marketing of the HPV vaccine relies on half-truths, scare tactics and alarmist advertising. By manipulatively presenting it as a "vaccine against cancer," which all but neglectful parents would give to their children, vaccine makers hope to occlude the real questions about safety and documented injuries.16,17 A few years after the vaccines were launched, questions about research and transparency had already arisen, according to the Huffington Post.18

  • "Critics ask why the primary endpoint in trials was not cervical cancer, but lesions that could become malignant and why placebo data was spun to make the vaccine look more effective ... There are also transparency questions. Why did former First Lady Laura Bush work with Merck-funded citizen front groups to promote the original vaccine and why are governors like Texas’ Rick Perry trying to mandate vaccination of all girls?
  • University of Queensland lecturer Dr. Andrew Gunn was silenced by his university when he dared to question the vaccine and ordered to apologize to the vaccine maker, CSL, according to the Courier Mail. Dr. Gunn expressed doubts about the vaccine’s 'marketing as a solution to cancer of the cervix when at best it’s expected to prevent about two-thirds of cases and 'the incorrect and dangerous perception that it might make Pap smears unnecessary'...
  • And one of Gardasil’s and Cervarix’s [two HPV vaccines] original developers, Dr. Diane Harper, a consultant to the World Health Organization, also questioned the vaccine’s lack of safety and effectiveness ... only to appear to retract her remarks later."

‘Herd Immunity’ Incorrectly Used to Sell Vaccines

Vaccine makers and the governments and NGOs that help their marketing use the concept of "herd immunity" to sell mass vaccination ­ the idea that the vaccination rate in a given community must be kept high so that those who have not been immunized do not endanger others.

But of course, HPV, which is a sexually transmitted disease (STD), is not spread through mere close proximity to another person like non-STD diseases. You can’t transmit or get HPV infection in a public setting, like in a classroom or crowded elevator. Maybe that is why the "cancer prevention" angle is pushed.

Purveyors of the herd immunity theory never seem to be able to explain why the majority of outbreaks of diseases targeted by vaccines occur in communities thought to have already achieved herd immunity status, i.e., where the majority of people are fully vaccinated and transmission of infection "should" not occur.

In fact, health officials appear to deliberately confuse the public. Natural herd immunity certainly exists but artificial vaccine-acquired herd immunity, which is temporary at best, is a misnomer. Vaccination and natural exposure to a given disease produce two qualitatively different types of immune responses.

Vaccine Injuries Dismissed and Downplayed

Vaccine injuries are well documented and the HPV vaccine is a case in point. Here is what the Indian Medical Journal of Medical Ethics reported in 2017.19

  • "The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been linked to a number of serious adverse reactions. The range of symptoms is diverse and they develop in a multi-layered manner over an extended period of time. The argument for the safety and effectiveness of the HPV vaccine overlooks the following flaws:
  • (i) no consideration is given to the genetic basis of autoimmune diseases, and arguments that do not take this into account cannot assure the safety of the vaccine; (ii) the immune evasion mechanisms of HPV, which require the HPV vaccine to maintain an extraordinarily high antibody level for a long period of time for it to be effective, are disregarded;
  • and (iii) the limitations of effectiveness of the vaccine. We also discuss various issues that came up in the course of developing, promoting and distributing the vaccine, as well as the pitfalls encountered in monitoring adverse events and epidemiological verification."

Yet vaccine makers, government regulatory agencies and doctors administering vaccines continue to insist the many injuries seen after vaccination are mere coincidences and not caused by the vaccines. Controlled clinical trials have found no causal association between HPV vaccination and different adverse effects, say the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.20
In addition to inflating the number of people suffering from diseases such as HPV, vaccine promoters inflate the effectiveness of their vaccines. The HPV vaccine has cut infections by up to 90 percent in the past 10 years, brags one science website, as if cutting infections and cutting the incidence of cancer were the same thing. It is especially irresponsible because the cancer rates cannot be determined until years or decades after the vaccine is given.21

<< Start < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Results 19 - 27 of 488