No corrupt can be allowed to tinker with sensitive laws: Dr Tahir-ul-Qadri

PAT Chairman Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri expressed his serious concern on the government’s act of replacing an affidavit with a simple declaration with regard to finality of Prophethood. He said that it appears there is no difference in the meaning and understanding between an oath and a simple declaration in the eyes of the government, adding that if this is so, why was the need to bring about the change felt and why the word ‘swearing’ was not retained? He said that oath has a status of an evidence and it has huge legal value. He said that whenever anyone offers an evidence before a court of law, he/she takes an oath to speak the truth and his statement follows. He said that deletion of oath from the declaration form was not a coincidence. He asked the government to restore the original text and explain who did it and why. He demanded that anyone who indulged in this act should be exposed before the nation and Parliament.

Dr Tahir-ul-Qadri said that the matter of change in the oath is not a matter like the Panama Papers which the rulers can subject to self-serving interpretations and mislead the nation. He said that the corrupt and his accomplices cannot be allowed to change a sensitive law as per their will on the basis of their numerical strength in Parliament. He said that such matters enjoy consensus of all schools of thought.

Dr Qadri made these remarks while talking to a delegation of Ulama and Mashaykh at his residence yesterday. He said that such terms as ‘honesty, ‘truthfulness’, and ‘trustworthiness’ were purposefully targeted in the Elections Reforms Act 2017 and all those terms were done away with that demanded good character, transparency and honesty from the public representatives. He said that the rulers have disfigured the Islamic identity of the Constitution in order to protect their personal interests. So much so they did not feel any qualms while making a change in the declaration form. Only an endnote was provided that this form was meant for the Muslims.

The PAT Chairman said that no party, organization or a segment of society demanded this change in the oath inside or outside of Parliament. Nor was it discussed or demanded at media forum. The Sharif family is not facing any difficulty in their post-verdict legal battles on this count. Nor has it been mentioned in 24000 documents of corruption of the Sharif family. The question arises then as to what kind of pressure it is under which this change was approved and a footnote was added. He demanded an immediate withdrawal of the change in declaration form and revive the old text.