June 2, 2025
By Mahnoor Omer
Eid-ul-Azha – or Baqra Eid – meant to be a time of spiritual reflection and community, now also lays bare the divide among people – who is celebrating it, and how. Yet in the case of the Ahmadi community, it raises the question of how many innocent citizens will face harassment, simply for sacrificing an animal on the same day, as intolerance towards them only seems to be growing.
It is not unlawful for any other member of a religious minority to make a sacrifice on the same day, just as it is not unlawful to celebrate Holi with a Hindu friend. However, if an Ahmadi citizen were to make the sacrifice for Eid, it could result in a frivolous charge, leading to a criminal trial or, even more disturbingly, an attack on their life. Under Pakistan’s infamous Ordinance XX, passed in 1984 by Zia-ul-Haq, it is a crime for Ahmadis to ‘pose’ as Muslims.
This article is not about theological debates over who qualifies as a Muslim. It is a settled law that Ahmadis are a non-Muslim minority. But unlike other minorities, the Ahmadiyya community is especially treated with hatred, and targeted for their faith. Not only are they denied the right to live peacefully, they are also denied the right to die in peace. In recent years, over hundreds of Ahmadi graves have been desecrated. Many graveyards refuse to accept Ahmadi burials. Worse, even after a body has been laid to rest, it is not safe from exhumation.
According to a 2024 report by the National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR), over 700 criminal cases have been filed against Ahmadis under Ordinance XX.
From 1984 to 2023, at least 280 Ahmadis were killed in targeted violence, and over 400 have been physically assaulted. Fifty-one places of worship have been demolished, with many more set on fire or occupied.
These statistics show a glimmer of the injustice that the Ahmadi community faces – showing that it is not merely a matter of social prejudice, but a law backed apartheid. Laws must be clear in their wording to prevent misuse and weaponization. It remains unclear what exactly it means to “pose” as a Muslim.
If legislators and clerics hold this law so dearly, then they must ensure it clearly defines what acts are unlawful in public. Moreover, while it should go without saying, the law must explicitly state that what someone does within the four walls of their home or place of worship is their private matter. Without such clarity, the continued misuse of this Ordinance and others like it will lead to the continued targeting of innocent citizens.
The landmark case of Zaheeruddin v. State (1993) challenged the constitutionality of Ordinance XX. The petitioners argued that it violated many fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution such as the right to dignity, the right to freedom of religion, and that under Article 8, the Constitution itself states that any law inconsistent with fundamental rights must be declared void. Yet, the Supreme Court upheld the ordinance, claiming the state could limit rights to preserve public order and protect Muslim sentiment. It does not appeal to a prudent mind to withhold certain absolute rights from citizens simply in the name of public order. Are the sentiments of some citizens worth more in the eyes of the law than the life of others ? History shows the answer to be in the affirmative.
Many judges have reaffirmed the importance of religious freedom, as Justice Mansoor Ali Shah noted in a judgment, “To deprive a non-Muslim of our country from holding his religious beliefs, to obstruct him from professing and practicing his religion within the four walls of his place of worship is against the grain of our democratic Constitution and repugnant to the spirit and character of our Islamic Republic.” However it is not the prerogative of the Supreme Court to make legislation or amend it. The apex court may only interpret the law and give observations. It is the job of the legislature and executive to build their own capacity to ensure they can root out the most damaging disease which plagues Pakistan – that disease being intolerance.
We often criticize India’s Hindu nationalist government for targeting Muslims. We decry cow vigilante violence and lynchings, and the banning of Eid animal sacrifices. But how are we different, when we endanger Ahmadis for doing the same? India has razed centuries old mosques in the name of development. This January, Pakistan did the same by demolishing a historic Ahmadi worship site in Punjab under the pretext of “encroachment.” Even when the law is silent, fear does the job: Politicians fear the right-wing; judges fear backlash; police officers fear mobs. In the presence of constant fear, justice dies. The civil society must ask themselves how much intolerance they are willing to forgo. We must hold our legislators and state officials accountable, not only for their silence when our rights are being trampled upon, but also for neglecting the rights of the most marginalized among us.
It is easy to reiterate that religious tolerance must be taught in schools, seminaries, workplaces, and to employees of state institutions. Law enforcement must be trained to protect all citizens equally, so crime reports are as swiftly drafted against bigots as they are against minority community members. It is difficult to actually put this into practice but it is not impossible. If intolerance continues to go unchecked, it will not stop at the margins; it will consume the centre too.
The writer is a lawyer, human rights activist and a public policy consultant.