The decision of the two-member bench of the Lahore High Court on Oct 16, 2014, upholding the verdict of trial court that awarded death sentence to Asia Bibi in 2009, again puts the issue of blasphemy laws under the spotlight.

According to experts, the case could have been quashed in the trial court on legal grounds as it was registered five days after the incident occurred. The complainant of the case was not present at the place where the incident happened and the testimony of ‘interested witnesses’ was not corroborated by some independent evidence.

The detailed judgment of LHC’s decision on the case has not been issued yet. The trial court in its judgment had drawn a strange inference from the statement of Asia Bibi. "Asia admitted that she exchanged ‘hot words’ with those two Muslim sisters. When a Muslim and Christian exchange ‘hot words’ the blasphemy was a natural outcome. And, thus, she committed blasphemy," reads the decision of the trial court.

Asia’s family says she was abused and tortured by a crowd in the village before she was arrested. "Police told me that they had arrested her for her safety," Ashiq Masih, her husband, tells TNS. "Everybody knows she did not commit blasphemy but she is on death row. She has been behind bars since June 2009. I am pinning hope on the Supreme Court to get justice."

Nearly a quarter of the countries in the world -- mostly Muslim -- have blasphemy laws in place but it is only Pakistan’s law which comes under spotlight again and again. Here a mere charge of blasphemy in Pakistan means the end of one’s life.

The police, in most instances, register a case against the accused under the pressure of a mob on the pretext of "safeguarding the life of the accused". The trial courts, in most cases of 295-C, convict the accused under pressure from religious elements that make sure they are present in big numbers during the proceedings of such cases, not only in trail courts but also in higher courts.

It has been observed that blasphemy laws have been misused to settle sectarian and personal issues. The issue of amending blasphemy laws is too sensitive. A former judge of Lahore High Court, Mian Nazir Akhtar, reportedly, told a religious gathering in December 2010 that parliament had no right to amend blasphemy laws and if it happened, it would be un-Islamic and Muslims would take the law in their own hands and kill people involved in such an act.

The supporters of blasphemy laws say other laws are also misused in Pakistan and even fake murder cases are registered in the country.

A Lahore-based senior police official, who has interrogated several cases of blasphemy, says there is difference in the two instances. "The conviction rate in terrorism cases is two per cent while of murder cases it is between 5-20 per cent while the conviction rate for blasphemy cases in almost 90 per cent. The blasphemy accused and his/her family has to pay a heavy social price for the allegation," he says.

The police cave in under mob pressure in blasphemy cases. "It is true that police does not find the opportunity in most cases of blasphemy to investigate freely. Police also reflects the government which does not want to create ‘panic’ in society for the sake of one individual," he adds.

The official gives a suggestion, "I think a joint investigation team should be set up to investigate blasphemy cases related to 295-C which would include a senior police official, a psychologist, religious scholars, and rights’ activists."

Critics of blasphemy laws say the law should not be liable to abuse. "The first step towards a way out could be holding of a broad-based consultation between parliamentarians and jurisconsults from Muslim countries to devise a blasphemy law that meets the definition of a just measure and offers due safeguards to innocent victims of human malice," writes I.A. Rehman, human rights activist in his column in Dawn on October 23, 2014.

Experts on Pakistan’s blasphemy laws say there are lacunas in our blasphemy laws. "The language of blasphemy laws is very vague and it is easy to put blame on anybody without providing solid evidence," says Dr Osama Siddique, senior faculty member at Institute for Global Law and Policy (IGLP) and an expert on Pakistan’s criminal justice system who has done extensive research on blasphemy laws.

It may be true that the law persecutes particular minorities and there is no requirement of intent and the offences are described in very vague terms. But the problem is more severe and chronic than making some procedural changes or empowering different institutions to deal with blasphemy related issues.

"Procedural amendments in handling blasphemy cases would improve things somewhat but not significantly unless Pakistan amend or change its current criminal justice system," says Siddique.

The other side of this issue is related to our social situation. "Our education and economic systems have failed to deliver. Intolerance is on the rise but every case of blasphemy issue also has its own political economy as well. This is the manifestation of a larger problem."

The issue of blasphemy in Pakistan has become a political and social issue. "The human rights strategy may not be a good tool to fix it. There is no partial solution. This may not be the right time to talk about amendments in this law but we can talk about and promote tolerance in society without talking about this law. We need to build a narrative," says Siddique.

True, reforming the procedure is easier said than done in country where blasphemy is and will remain a sensitive and ‘popular’ issue. According to a September 2013 PEW Research poll, 75 per cent of Pakistani Muslims say blasphemy laws are necessary to protect Islam in their country.

We have also seen that procedural changes in blasphemy laws in the past have failed to deliver. For example, the reform in 2004 initiated by then president Musharraf where no police officer below the rank of superintendent could investigate cases involving derogatory remarks in respect to the Holy Prophet should have led to fewer cases. "Instead, the opposite happened -- the number of blasphemy cases and vigilante incidents actually increased after 2004," says Dawood Ahmed, a Research Fellow at the Comparative Constitutions Project whose research focuses on exploring the origins and consequences of adopting Islam in global constitutions.

The evidence is that it is not just a matter of procedure; rather there are certain problems in society like radicalisation, increase in intolerance, violence, and economic frustration that has probably increased in that period (partly due to the destabilising effects of the war on terror).

These socio-economic factors are the underlying factors which have made blasphemy such an aggressive device; so, for example, one sees cases are also often brought up due to property disputes and not genuine blasphemy allegations. "So, an attempt should be made to study why this has happened and what are the underlying problems that made people resort to mob violence, increasingly so in the last 10 years," suggests Dawood.

Giving more power to the lower police staff and lower judiciary to register blasphemy cases may improve things somewhat but not significantly. "Perhaps one suggestion would be to give only higher level police officers (such as SSP’s) and courts (such as High Courts) the power to register/adjudicate blasphemy complaints, since it will make it harder to pursue blasphemy allegations with mob pressure," but he, like Siddique, does not take it as a solution. "Overall, our justice system -- courts and police --needs to be overhauled and perhaps even privatised to some extent for any major change to happen with regards to blasphemy but also other crimes."