MULTAN: An additional district and sessions judge on Saturday awarded death sentence, 10-year rigorous imprisonment (RI) and Rs100,000 fine to lecturer Junaid Hafeez on Saturday under Section 295-A in a blasphemy case, court sources said.
The court also awarded him imprisonment for life under Section 295-B of the PPC and death sentence under Section 295-C of the PPC and Rs500,000 fine. He would undergo further imprisonment of six months in case of default on payment of fine, and he would be hanged by neck until his death was confirmed by the court.
The AD&SJ court proceedings were held at Multan Central Jail.
Mr Junaid had served in the Bahauddin Zakariya University's Department of English as an instructor of the English literature.
The judge wrote in the short order that all sentences would run consecutively and the accused would not be entitled to the benefit of Section 382-B CrPC because in case of blasphemy, the court had found no circumstances for taking lenient view and it was also not permitted in Islam.
Alpha police had registered a blasphemy case No 103/13 against Junaid Hafeez under sections 295-B and 295-C of the blasphemy law, which restricted the police from conducting a detailed investigation through a joint investigation team before registering a case.
The case was based on an anonymous pamphlet and the FIR content was a copy of that pamphlet. No JIT was constituted to initiate an inquiry into the matter.
Human Right Commission of Pakistan’s Multan Coordinator Rashid Rehman pleaded his case when legal experts refused to contest it. Unidentified assailants had killed Rashid Rehman in his office in May 2014 when he was very close to proving him innocent in the court.
Police charged Junaid Hafeez with running a fictitious facebook page under the title of ‘Mullah Munafiq’ and disseminating blasphemous contents. However, the facebook page remained active and continued uploading contents after 14 months of his arrest and detention.
Junaid was a position-holder and a gold medalist in his intermediate examination held in 2003. Pakistan’s prestigious medical institution King Edward Medical College, Lahore, had admitted him to study medicines, but he left the institution within two years due to his interest in art and literature. He was a Fulbright scholar and spent a year at Jackson State University, Mississippi, studying theatre, photography and English literature in 2009.
The FIR claimed that Junaid was the founder and admin of the facebook page titled “So-called liberals of Pakistan” where some miscreants using a concealed ID under the title “Mullah Munafiq” commented on the most respected wives of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) in an indecent manner. The FIR claims that “Mullah Munafiq” was actually Junaid and, hence a blasphemer. Police submitted a challan along with more than 800 pages in the court.
The prosecution submitted 1,200 pages as evidence, including everything from the inbox of Junaid’s Facebook account, reports of conferences, a 4-5 page CV, and an online version of a book called “Progressive Muslims” sent to him for a review, which arrived four days after his arrest. The prosecution’s evidence included 13 contradictory statements from witnesses against him and Prof Dr Shirin Zubair.
The university immediately cancelled Junaid’s admission to MPhil programme, terminated his teaching contract and his house allotment. Moreover, the university banned his entry to the campus without conducting an impartial inquiry, which is against the university by-laws.
His counsel slammed the decision as the “most unfortunate”.
“We will appeal against this verdict,” he said.
Section 295-A deals with “deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs,” Section 295-B concerns the “Defiling, etc., of Holy Qur’an”, whereas 295-C deals with the “use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of the Holy Prophet.”
“The prospect of Hafeez getting even a semblance of fair trial came into question when his counsel Rashid Rehman was murdered inside his chamber,” Hafeez’s family said in a written statement issued after the verdict.
“Those involved in the murder were never apprehended. Rehman’s murder resulted in a wave of fear, putting off other lawyers from taking up his defence.
“The failure to apprehend those who shot Rehman dead was encouraging for other would-be vigilantes. Could any judge in such circumstances take the risk of doing justice? Those who could were transferred from the district or brought under pressure by groups of lawyers operating as mafias,” the family said.
“An appeal in the high court will be filed soon against the verdict and it is hoped that justice will be served without delay,” the statement said.
“In five years, at least eight judges have heard Hafeez’s case, making a fair trial virtually impossible,” the HRCP wrote in response to the verdict.
“Meanwhile, he [Hafeez] has undergone six years’ imprisonment in solitary confinement. Aasia Bibi, who was charged similarly, was acquitted after eight years’ incarceration. There are grave implications here for access to justice in such cases.
“HRCP reposes its faith in the higher judiciary and hopes that the verdict will be overturned in appeal.”
Meanwhile, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) is dismayed by the verdict handed down to academic Junaid Hafeez by the Multan district and sessions court on charges of blasphemy.
The HRCP believes that the blasphemy laws are heavily misused. This is compounded by a trial process ridden by delays and pressures at the level of the lower judiciary. The offence itself is already associated with vigilantism and entrenched impunity – underscored by the 2014 murder of Hafeez’s lawyer, Rashid Rehman. The resulting pressure on lower courts becomes apparent when most such verdicts are overturned by the High Court or Supreme Court, it added.
In five years, at least eight judges have heard Hafeez’s case, making a fair trial virtually impossible. Meanwhile, he has undergone six years’ imprisonment in solitary confinement. Aasia Bibi, who was charged similarly, was acquitted after eight years’ incarceration. There are grave implications for access to justice in such cases. The HRCP reposes its faith in the higher judiciary and hopes that the verdict will be overturned in appeal.
