In reply to my question, Zaid Hamid sahab recommend us to study Yusuf Kazzab’s case and also put forward a number of questions as “tips” or “guidelines” on what to look for? With a limited time and effort which I spent on reading about the Yusuf Kazzab case, following is what I’ve found:
Q.1. “What did Maulana Sattar Niazi and dozens of scholars say in writing about Yusuf (Kazzab)?”
Read yourself what Maulana Abdul Sattar Khan Niazi says about Yusuf Kazzab.
Also, please see how all of the following took a united stand as “One Muslim Ummah” against murtid Yusuf Kazzab:
- Ulama e Karam from all school of thoughts (Deobandi, Barelvi, Ahle Hadis, Shia, Tanzeem e Islami, Jamat e Islami, etc),
- Religious and Political parties (JUI-F, JUI-S, SSP, JUP-Niazi, JUP-Noorani, ST, PML-N, PML-F, PML-J, PPP, PPP-SB, PTI, JI, etc)
- Professionals, Businessmen, Masajid, Madrassas, etc
- General public
I wish we be able to stand united exactly the same way against all issues concerning Ummat e Muslimah in general and Pakistan in specific.
Q.2. “What is the sessions court judgment on his conviction?”
Verdict against Yusuf Kazzab was published in book form in October 2000. You can read the front and back cover of the court verdict against Yusuf Kazzab and the foreword written by Muhammad Ismail Qureshi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, (Urdu translation available here) who was one of the senior prosecution lawyers in the case.
Q.3. “Is he sentenced to death on claim of prophet hood or something else?”
According to the court verdict, Yusuf Kazzab was convicted and sentenced on following charges:
- 295(C) - Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of the Holy Prophet:
Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
- 295(A) - Defiling, etc., of Holy Qur'an:
Whoever wilfully defiles, damages or desecrates a copy of the Holy Qur'an or of an extract therefrom or uses it in any derogatory manner or for any unlawful purpose shall be punishable with imprisonment for life.
- 298 - Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound religious feelings:
Whoever, with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of any person, utters any word or makes any sound in the hearing of that person or makes any gesture in the sight of that person or places any object in the sight of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year or with fine, or with both.
- 298(A) - Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of holy personages:
Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of any wife (Ummul Mumineen), or members of the family (Ahle-bait), of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him), or any of the righteous Caliphs (Khulafa-e-Rashideen) or companions (Sahaaba) of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
- 505(2) - Statements conducing to public mischief:
(2) Whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement or report containing rumour or alarming news with intent to create or promote, or which is likely to create or promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years and with fine.
Explanation: It does not amount to an offence within the meaning of this section, when the person making, publishing or circulating any such statement, rumour or report has reasonable grounds for believing that such statement, rumour or report is true and makes, publishes or circulates it in good faith and without any such intent as aforesaid.
- 420 - Cheating and dishonestly Inducing delivery of property:
Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment, of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
- 406 - Punishment for criminal breach of trust:
Whoever, commits criminal breach of trust snail be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.
Q.4. “Who were the witnesses whose evidence was used?”
Following were the main witnesses (I’ve found so far):
- Brig. Retd. Dr Muhammad Alsam – Karachi
- Muhammad Akram Rana – Karachi
- Muhammad Ali Abu Bakr – Karachi
- Hafiz Muhammad Mumtaz Adani – Lahore
- Mian Muhammad Owais – Lahore
Q.5. “Were sharia and sunnah requirements were fulfilled in the sessions court ?”
They must have fulfilled, otherwise Ulama e Karam from all school of thoughts would have pointed it out.
Q.6. “Why no religious scholar appeared in the court to testify against him?”
To be honest, I wasn’t expecting this question because only “witness” can “testify”. And, none of the witness was an Aalim/Scholar/Mufti.
Q.7. “What was the judgment of council of Islamic ideology after this case verdict?”
Council of Islamic Ideology doesn’t pass any judgment on this case verdict.
Q.8. “Why no media group projected the case except Khabrain and Takbeer? In fact, Nawai Waqt and nation defended Yusuf by publishing statements of top scholars defending yusuf ?”
Ummat, Takbeer, Khabrain, Nawai Waqt and Jang reported events among the main stream newspapers. While Nawai Waqt and Jang also published the paid advertisement from Yusuf Kazzab. Only two scholars are on record who say in favor of Yusuf Kazzab, out of which Maulana Abdul Sattar Khan Niazi clarify his position the very next day.
Q.9. “Was that a case of blasphemy or money disputes and sectarian warfare?”
100% a case of blasphemy as per the judgment given by LHC. Please refer to answer of question number 3 above.