Perspective on Custodial Death and Torture in Pakistan
Islam's Position on Torture and Custodial Deaths
By Fida Mohammad, Ph. D.
Portales, New Mexico

The Quran and 'sunna' are already the supreme law of the land, which is known as Pakistan. Any law that contravenes Quran and Sunna is null and void.

Keeping the above in mind, let us say that torture and custodial killings are un-Islamic, and hence criminal acts. Ironically, even the legal system Pakistan inherited from her masters (British) also forbids such acts.

According to Cr.PC. Section 16:

(1) No police or other person in authority shall offer or make, or cause to be offered or made, any such inducement, threat or promise as is mentioned in the Evidence Act, 1872, Section 24. In the Evidence Act of 1872, which was amended in 1984, Section 24 is now Article 37 and reads:

A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in criminal proceeding, if making of the confession appears to the Court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise having reference to the charge against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give the accused person grounds which would appear to him reasonable for supposing that by making it he would gain advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him.

Before going further let us define 'torture'. According to the United Nations definition, "torture is the severe infliction of physical pain or mental suffering."

Although torture is directed against the body, its target is to break the human will, ultimately to destroy a person's and Allah-bestowed dignity and free will.

Voluntariness of confession in American legal system is established by the Miranda rights. A police officer is legally obligated to read Miranda rights to a suspect before any questioning in a custodial envirnonment.

Any time during an interview (Interrogation has negative connotation in Pakistan) a suspect can invoke Miranda rights and at that moment interview must cease. Under Miranda rights police officer must inform a suspect of his or legal rights: "you have the right to remain silent; whatever you say can and will be used as evidence against you in the court of law; if you have your attorney, call your attorney, if you don't have one we will provide one free of charge."

The basic aim of the Miranda Rights (warning) is to protect an accused from torture and other psychological abuses."

The Holy Qu'ran states: "0, ye who believe! Enter not houses other than your own without first announcing your presence and invoking peace upon the people therein. That is better for you, that you may be heedful ... and if you find no one therein, still enter not until permission hath been given, and if it be said unto you: go back just now: then go back; for it is purer for you.' Allah knoweth what you do" (Surat al-Nur XXIV:27, 28).

Thus, according to the Qur'anic text, entry into the dwelling is prohibited unless consent is given by the inmates. This prohibition is not limited to places actually occupied by the owner; it applies also to the owner's property during his absence. This is explicit in the verse cited above which precludes entry without "permission," and requires consent.

This right also extends to one's clothing in that no one has the right to inspect the clothing of another person to determine what may be concealed therein, without reason and without permission. It thereby embodies the proscription against unreasonable searches of the person. The inviolability of the dwelling is linked with the inviolability of the person, for the latter derives from the former as a manifestation of individual freedom. It is meaningless to protect the house without protecting the owner as well"(Al-Saleh).

The most important pillar of individual rights in Islam is the Principle of Presumption of Innocence. From its inception Islamic law has recognized the presumption of innocence as a right inherent to all people. The Holy Prophet(PBUH) said: "Prevent punishment in case of doubt."

In Islamic law, a conviction must be based upon assurance and certainty of guilt and not on mere probability. Hence any doubt is resolved in favour of the accused. If the judge has reasonable doubt of guilt based on all the evidence before him, he must conclude that the accused is not guilty. This principle is based on the saying of the Prophet: "Prevent punishment in case of doubt. Release the accused if possible, for it is better that the ruler be wrong in forgiving than wrong in punishing." (Al-Saleh)

Guarantees of the Accused During Interrogation:

In Islamic jurisprudence confessional statement could be used to prove guilt. According to Ma'amoun M. Salama and Osman Abd-el-Malek al-Saleh:

Interrogation under Islamic law differs from simple questioning. Besides charging the suspect with a crime, interrogation requires confronting him with the established evidence against him, and discussing that evidence so that he may either refute it or confess because of it. A very crucial right of the accused in the investigation of Hudud crimes is the right to refuse questioning and the right to remain silent. An accused who exercises this right is guaranteed that his silence will not be used as incriminating evidence against him. Hudud crimes can be proved only by means of an avowal or other positive evidence and never by means of the accused's silence. Refusal to answer questions is, therefore, inadmissible evidence to convict the accused.

Torture and inhuman practices are strictly forbidden in Islam. However, in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan some of the torturers boast that "with a big stick even a dead person would speak."

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is not satisfied with the Islamic clauses of the Constitution, and wants to make it more Islamic by a new constitutional amendment. It is surprising in a sense that Pakistanis have not yet seen the fruits of what is already in the Constitution and now the people of Pakistan are to be subjected to with some heavy doses of Islam, ostensibly to benumb thier critical senses.

The author teaches interrogation and has a Ph.D. in the field. Torture and interrogation are not the same thing; for real interrogation one need skills in communication both verbal and non-verbal.

In our country, one doesn't need any qualifications; all one needs is lack of humanity and no conscience.

Interrogation conducted by sadists will obviously be physical in nature, and victim will be on the receiving end. Citizens of the Islamic Republic are treated worst than animals.

Perhaps, we are not aware that in civilised societies even animals have rights. In the United States of America, according to the New Mexico Criminal and Traffic Manual, 1994, Cruelty to animal consists of:

1. torturing, tormenting, depriving of necessary sustenanace, cruelly beating, mutilating, cuelly killing or overdriving animal;
2. unnecessarily failing to provide an animal with proper food or drink; or
3. cruelly driving or working any animal when such animal is unfit for labor. . . Injury to animal.

Injury to animals consists of willfully and maliciously poisoning, killing or injuring any animal . . . Whoever commits injury to animals is guilty of misdemeanor.

That is the status of Animal Rights in 'kafir'America versus of khalifat ullah in the Islamic Republic.

According to Amnesty International Report, in Pakistan, dozens of people reportedly die in custody, in many cases following alleged torture. Medical reports are falsified.

An interrogator once explained to the author, the role of medical officers in the following words: as long as somebody is breathing, for the medical officer he is fit for interrogation [torture]. We cooperate with doctors and they cooperate with us. Sometime we beat an accused to the extent that he cannot stand, so we carry him on a stretcher to hospital and doctor writes 'okay.' Once in a while, the condition of the accused is so bad that we cannot not take him to hospital. What we do is take another healthy prisoner to the doctor. The doctor does not care about the identity of who we are presenting; he simply writes 'okay'. It is routine.

After talking to many interrogators in Pakistan, the following list of the various types of torture administered to suspects in police custody was compiled. The list is not exhaustive, nor could it be. There could always be new methods depending on the sadistic imagination of the interrogators:

1. Tieing the thighs with ropes and then pulling them in opposite directions.
2. Anal insertion, e.g., with batons, sticks, wooden penises of various sizes, large reddishes; and ice.
3. Burning the body with cigarette butts.
4. Forced exercise until complete exhaustion ensues.
5. Covering the face with a basket filled with human feces.
6. Beating with fists and sticks.
7. Rape (both homosexual and heterosexual, basically for humiliation).
8. Pulling nails.
9. Laying on ice slabs.
10. Putting hot chilies in the anus.
11. Inserting a hot rod in the anus.
12. Choking and suffocation in cold water during winter.
13. Sleep derivation.
14. Electric shocks.
15. Hanging upside down.

In the Islamic Republic of Pakistan rape by law-enforcement agents both homosexual and heterosexual are very common. In order to humiliate baton covered with chillies or other objects are iserted in the victim's rectum.

According to the Amnesty International reports, torture, including rape, and various forms of ill-treatment were frequently inflicted on political and criminal detainees to extract confessions, and in some cases to obtain information about suspected government opponents.

At least eight women were allegedly raped by police while in custody. In July, two women were reportedly beaten with leather thongs in Mandi Bahauddin Saddar police station, Punjab province (Pakistan). They were then reportedly stripped and raped by six or seven police officers in turn, who also thrust sticks into their vaginas. . . In Sindh province (Pakistan) an inquiry was called into the alleged rape of Saima Anjum, a 16-year old criminal suspect, by police at Landhi in December 1988. Police officers were said to have beaten and raped her, and forced chilies into her uterus (1990, p. 183).

Now the question arises, why a country which pretends to be more Islamic than Islam, resorts to these barbaric un-Islamic practices? Practice of torture could motivated by many factors. In country like Pakistan, primary factor behind torture is to protect the power of politico-militro-bureaucratic oligarchy.

Torture creates a political culture of silence, whereby people accept the political status-quo as a fate.

Torture is a political act prompted by the insecurity of ruling classes. Ruling classes who have a legitimacy crisis always have the fear of losing power, and that fear becomes an obsession with possession and the use of power. Confessions extracted through torture inscribe the political power of the ruling elites on the bodies of political dissidents.

It has been found that one cannot use criminal means to fight crimes. If that is the case, then there is no difference between criminals in uniform and criminals without uniform, both carry AKó47.

If, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is interested in Sharia, then he must remember that it came to us through Mohammad (PBUH) and not Machiavelli. Machiavelli wrote "Prince" and not the Quran and Sunna. Crime is the anti-thesis of Islam.

Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) was Rahmat-ulil-Al-amin, and he was not a Marcus, Shah of Iran, Pinochete or Stalin. Islam is very clear, there is no such thing "crime for the good of Islam." Unfortunately Pakistani wolves use Islam as a camouflage for thier criminal ends.

How can one believe in a confession in which the accused dies. How can one believe in a testimony in which others are implicated while the implicator dies without publically expressing his confession.

Torturers, aren't you afraid of Allah, have you ever thought about the day of judgment, what if in future your sons, daughters or wife are subjected to the things which you practice on others. Would you like it? If not, don't do it toothers.