IRIN interview with Human Rights Commission chairman

Afrasiyab Khattak is chairman of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP). During the administration of Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in 1974, the former student activist was tortured for opposing the government regime. An advocate by profession, Khattak spent more than three years in prison for opposing martial law under General Zia-ul-Haq, who seized power from Bhutto in a military coup in 1977. After his release, and fearing for his safety, he went into self-imposed exile in 1980 to neighbouring Afghanistan, where he stayed for over eight years. He returned to Pakistan in 1989, following the establishment of a civilian government under Benazir Bhutto, who called on all political exiles to return. Since his return, the acclaimed activist has arduously worked to bring about an improvement in human rights issues in Pakistan. In his interview with IRIN, he highlighted Pakistan's current human rights record. QUESTION: In your view, what is the most important human rights issue in Pakistan today? ANSWER: The most important problem in terms of human rights is the right of people to a representative government - the right to be governed by elected representatives of their own and the right to be governed by a constitution. These are things that are lacking. The constitution is suspended and the elected assemblies are also suspended. There is no road-map for elections, the restoration of democracy, and the restoration of the constitution. This is something that has to be addressed as a fundamental problem of human rights in today's Pakistan. Q: What is your view on the military's devolution of power programme? A: We do not regard it as a programme for devolution of power. First of all, it is very vague. Secondly, it bypasses provinces, [thereby] hitting at provincial autonomy. Thirdly, it lacks details and finances. Fourthly, we have serious doubts about the motives of the military government. We believe they are creating a constituency of their own - a continuance of collaborators like in the past. Q: What needs to be done? A: The best thing that they can do is to immediately declare a road-map for the restoration of democracy and the constitution. They should immediately come up with an exit strategy. Q: Recently, Pakistan has seen a dramatic increase in religious extremism. What effect has this had on civil society? A: It has definitely narrowed the space for the functioning of civil society, particularly for those organisations who are focusing their work on women's rights. It has created a terror in our society. It has led to more brutalisation and harassment. The most dangerous aspect of this development is the connivance of the state authority. We believe they couldn't have armed themselves at such a large scale without some tacit support by certain state organisations. There have been private courts created by Islamic extremists in Malakand division of North-West Frontier Province, and the government has not taken any action against these parallel systems, which of course leads to their encouragement. Q: So has the situation for women in Pakistan deteriorated? A: It has. This government has indulged in high rhetoric with regard to women's rights, but in practice the situation has deteriorated because of this rise of conservatism, spearheaded by religious elements. There have been cases of honour killings. There have been more and more mobilisations of extremists to curtail whatever little rights women have. The special seeds in these so-called local body elections have of course been a positive thing, but without a democratic context they are not going to change anything as far as women are concerned. Q: What about the status of Pakstan's religious minority groups? A: I think they have had a very raw deal. In recent months, there has been violence against religious minorities, particularly against Ahmadis in the Punjab. [According to a US State Department country report on human rights issued in February, the Ahmadis are subject to specific restrictions under law in Pakistan.] Some other groups are also fair victim to this violence as well. In recent weeks, there have been growing incidences of sectarian killings and clashes between the Muslim sects of Sunnis and Shi'ahs. Q: What needs to be done to curb sectarian violence in Pakistan? A: First of all, the most fundamental thing that can be done is the de-linking of religion and politics... We should abolish the so-called system of separate electorates for non-Muslims. It was introduced by General Zia-ul-Haq. In our constitution, which was originally passed in 1973, we had joint electorates. I think it was [during] the Zia-ul-Haq period where his policies based on religious communalism led to this discrimination against non-Muslims. And then this jihad [holy war] in Afghanistan had its effect on Pakistan. All these factors got together. Now what we should do is now first of all take them into the mainstream, take everyone as Pakistani. We should have joint electorates instead of separate electorates. Q: Pakistan suffers from chronic poverty and unemployment. How has this affected human rights in Pakistan? A: The rise of poverty has had a very negative impact on weaker sections of society. It has affected women. It has affected children. It has affected people who are underprivileged. The so-called "downsizing", at times called "right-sizing" by the government, has led to the unemployment of a very large number of people. We know the state cannot be an employer, but if they are throwing people out, they have to do it in a planned way. They should be provided with some alternatives, instead of throwing them on the street. The rise in the number of people who have committed suicide in Karachi this year shows that this unemployment has had very negative depressing consequences for underprivileged people. Q: Pakistan is home to over two million Afghan refugees, a difficult situation for any government to deal with. Your criticism of your government's policies has been quite harsh recently. Can you elaborate on that? A: We appreciate the difficulties faced by our government. The number of refugees is quite large, and the government of Pakistan cannot handle it alone. We would like the international community to intervene and help these refugees. But the way our government has handled this situation so far is very objectionable. They have, for example, dumped newly arrived refugees into the old camps without providing for new camps. They have rigidly refused to provide new space for these refugees. They literally do not have shelter, tents, or food. Then, in recent months, the police have been arresting so-called illegal refugees, that is those refugees who do not have documents or registration papers. It was no fault of theirs. They were not registered when they entered, and suddenly they are being declared illegal without any notice. They are being deported without due process of law and not being brought before a court of law. Now deportation is a penalty that can only be given by courts, but they [the authorities] have bypassed the courts. Police can arbitrarily arrest people, take them to the border and push them out. We have criticised that, and have asked our government to adopt a more humanistic approach towards these refugees. Q: Is forced deportation still a government policy? A: Up until last week, it has continued. But after criticism, I have learned that it is being reconsidered. I hope it is changed, because if it isn't, it will lead to very serious consequences. People's lives may be threatened due to deportation. Q: What would happen if the government continued on its current policies [with regard to the Afghan refugees]? Do you see a destabilising effect? A: Of course. It is a very serious problem, and I think the policies of our government are quite myopic. Instead of long-sighted, they are short-sighted, which can lead to chaos. Such a large number of people - if they are pushed too hard. If they die of starvation. If they are thrown on the street. You see, now there are 100,000 refugees threatened with eviction from Nasir Bagh camp without an alternative place. They will spread out through Peshawar. Every street will get its own share of these displaced persons who, without resources, could do anything. I believe it could give rise to social banditry. It can give rise to confrontations which may be in some ways similar to the situation in Lebanon and other countries where refugees had to rise up against local governments. This could be very dangerous in this case. These Afghans have lived here peacefully, and no major incident has taken place. On a people-to-people level, there have been quite good relations. I think it is a unique example of such a large population [of refugees having such good relations with the host community]. Q: So there is a danger? A: Yes, because of the government's policies. Q: Regarding the issue of torture in Pakistan, how institutionalised is it? A: I think it is quite widespread, particularly by our police. Unfortunately, our police system is still based on a colonial model. Their investigation methods are also quite primitive. They beat people to extract confessions. They use physical torture. Although there have been declarations by the government, although there have been court rulings against such torture, unfortunately there has not been a systemic and institutionalised change. With the change of government there was a decrease. But it does not go away. I think in the case of this government that when the military government took over, initially there were less people killed in police encounters. The police were careful for a while, but then it was back to normal. Q: How do you view the Pakistani judicial system? Are there any necessary reforms needed? A: Yes, of course. The judiciary needs to be strengthened as an independent organ of the state. In the present circumstances, it is subservient to the executive. Unfortunately, this new oath under the provisional government order has led to the subjugation of the judiciary to almost complete subjugation to the executive, because, after this oath, the judiciary is no longer the creation of the constitution, but the executive. We need to take the necessary steps to reinvent its independence. Q: It has been reported that thousands of people are still working as bonded labourers in Pakistan, despite rhetoric by the government to stop this practice. What is the current situation with regard to bonded labour, how serious a problem is it, and why has the government failed to do anything about it? A: It's a problem that is a large-scale problem, particularly in the province of Sind, where there are primitive feudal practices still going on. The government of Benazir Bhutto had brought in a law to abolish bonded labour: the Abolishment of Bonded Labour Act 1992. Now it needs implementation or enforcement, which is not there. In recent weeks, our activists, who have been working for the implementation of this law and for the liberation of bonded labourers, are facing a very difficult time, because the administration has refused to cooperate, and, unfortunately, even the judiciary does not have a very sympathetic approach towards these people that are living in bondage. So we are trying to look for ways and means to rejuvenate our campaign for the release of bonded labourers in Sind.