Mirpurkhas

Accusation, Execution, Celebration!

In a society increasingly influenced by mob mentality, state representatives are more interested in appeasing public sentiment than upholding the rule of law.

By Sajad Jatoi | November 2024

In Mirpurkhas on September 19, a blasphemy suspect, who was a doctor from Umerkot, was shot dead in what authorities claimed was a police encounter. The doctor had been accused of blasphemy after some offensive posts surfaced on a Facebook account under his name. Outraged mobs protested, and an FIR was lodged against him. In a video statement, the doctor denied any involvement and asserted that his account had been hacked. He repeatedly called for an impartial police investigation. Despite his willingness to cooperate, many believed he was executed in a staged encounter as he had been arrested in Karachi and later killed in Mirpurkhas.

This incident is not isolated but part of a larger, disturbing pattern. It echoes a recent case in Quetta, where a policeman shot dead another blasphemy suspect while he was already in custody. Instead of raising the alarm, the public celebrated the officer as a hero. Local people flocked to his home, congratulating his parents for raising such a ‘brave’ and ‘pious’ son. These two cases, among many others, reveal a troubling trend in Pakistan: the increasing approval of extrajudicial killings by both law enforcement and the public, especially when blasphemy charges are involved.

Both killings were extrajudicial, bypassing the judicial process, and should have sparked outrage. Yet, in Sindh and Balochistan, the initial public response was shockingly opposite. In the case of the young doctor, the DIG and the SSP involved were not condemned but lauded. They were even adorned with garlands by a local representative, having become celebrated figures for killing someone seen as the proverbial Dajjal. This celebration of law enforcement officers acting as judge, jury, and executioner speaks to a broader societal issue—one where accusations of blasphemy, often based on unverified claims, lead to instant death.

While blasphemy charges are undeniably sensitive, they do not justify bypassing due process. The Constitution does not grant law enforcement the authority to determine guilt and mete out punishment. If the authorities believed the doctor was guilty, they should have presented evidence in court. These extrajudicial actions raise fundamental questions about the role of law enforcement. Are they fulfilling their constitutional duty to uphold the law, or are they succumbing to extremist pressures and mob rule? Instead of respecting legal protocols, the police seem more concerned with placating angry mobs, abandoning the principles of justice and due process.

These incidents also call into question the integrity of the social contract—the foundational agreement that modern states are built upon. The state is entrusted with the protection of its citizens’ lives and liberties, but the reality in Pakistan often shows the opposite. The police, who are constitutionally tasked with maintaining law and order, seem to have taken on the role of vigilantes, stripping citizens of their right to a fair trial. The state’s failure to safeguard its citizens in cases like these undermines its legitimacy and the trust people place in the justice system.
In a society increasingly influenced by mob mentality, these incidents suggest that those in power—particularly the representatives of the state—are more interested in appeasing public sentiment than upholding the rule of law. The celebration of these killings reflects a dangerous shift, where accusations of blasphemy, often rooted in rumors or unverified claims, lead directly to death. This is a clear deviation from the principles of justice and a grave injustice to those falsely accused.

Read More