A fatwa has been issued against Muhammad Habib, a liberal Pakistani living abroad, following his outspoken criticism of Pakistan’s controversial blasphemy laws. The fatwa, which calls for Habib’s death, was issued after his cousin, a deeply conservative follower of religious authorities, reported his remarks. What began as a private conversation has now escalated into a life-threatening situation, leaving Habib in hiding and his family facing increasing harassment.
Habib’s remarks, made during a seemingly private discussion with his cousin, were not aimed at inciting violence or disrespecting Islam. Rather, he expressed deep concerns about the misuse of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, which, according to him, are often weaponized to target religious minorities, suppress political dissent, and silence those who criticize the status quo. These laws, which carry severe penalties, including the death sentence, have been frequently invoked to settle personal grudges or prosecute individuals for simply expressing opposing views.
Habib, a self-identified liberal, has always been cautious about discussing sensitive topics like religion in Pakistan, understanding the high stakes involved. However, he felt safe sharing his thoughts with his cousin, whom he trusted. Little did he know that his words would soon trigger a storm that would shatter his life.
His cousin, who holds conservative views and is loyal to Pakistan’s religious authorities, was deeply offended by Habib’s criticism of the blasphemy laws. Instead of keeping the conversation private, he reported Habib’s statements to local religious leaders, fueling a chain of events that led to the issuance of the fatwa. The fatwa, delivered by Nasiruddin Khan Khakwani, the leader of the Aalmi Majlis Tahaffuz Khatm-e-Nubuwwat (AMTK), an influential religious organization known for its hardline stance on blasphemy, called for Habib’s death, branding him an enemy of Islam and a threat to the sanctity of Pakistan’s religious laws.
The fatwa quickly spread across social media, igniting both outrage and support. Conservative religious groups hailed the decree as a necessary action to protect Pakistan’s blasphemy laws from perceived threats. They argued that Habib’s criticism was an affront to Islam and that such views could not be tolerated in a Muslim-majority country. On the other hand, human rights advocates and those critical of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws saw the fatwa as yet another example of how these laws are used to silence dissent, punish free speech, and target individuals for their personal beliefs.
For Habib, the news of the fatwa was nothing short of a nightmare. Having never intended to become a political martyr, he was simply seeking to voice his personal concerns about the system. His words, however, have now made him a target of extremists, forcing him into hiding. Friends and family members who once supported him have distanced themselves, fearing they too could be branded as enemies of Islam for associating with him. Habib’s once normal life has been turned upside down, and he now lives in constant fear of assassination or violent retribution.
As he explained to a close friend, “I never thought my own blood would betray me like this. I feel trapped.” Habib has stopped engaging in public discussions on sensitive topics and has erased his social media presence, hoping to avoid drawing further attention to his situation. His fear is not only limited to Pakistan; he is also concerned that radicalized individuals in the country where he currently resides could act on the fatwa. Habib’s isolation has grown as he remains uncertain about whom he can trust.
While Habib’s cousin has been widely praised within conservative circles for his actions, the incident has led to significant debates within the family and beyond. Some argue that family loyalty should have prevented such a drastic step, especially considering the severe consequences that Habib now faces. Others, however, maintain that his cousin acted out of a sense of duty to protect Islam and uphold what he saw as moral and religious values. This rift between the two cousins reflects the deep divisions within Pakistani society on matters of faith, free speech, and the role of religion in public life.
In the wake of the fatwa, international human rights organizations, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have condemned the use of religious decrees to silence individuals and curb freedom of expression. These organizations have called for greater global attention to Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, citing Habib’s case as a troubling example of how these laws are weaponized to stifle political opposition and target minorities. Amnesty International has particularly emphasized the chilling effect of such fatwas on free speech, pointing out that even expressing private concerns can lead to violent and often fatal consequences.
Despite the international condemnation, no significant action has been taken by the Pakistani government or international organizations to protect Habib or address the dangers posed by the country’s blasphemy laws. While some activists have urged Western governments to offer asylum to those facing religious persecution, including Habib, there has been no formal statement on his legal status. The lack of response from both the Pakistani authorities and global bodies underscores the vulnerability of individuals like Habib, who are caught between the risks of challenging entrenched religious laws and the limited support available for those seeking to exercise their right to free expression.
Habib’s case is not an isolated one. Over the years, Pakistan’s blasphemy laws have been used to target not only religious minorities but also journalists, human rights activists, and ordinary citizens who dare to criticize or challenge the country’s religious orthodoxy. Many individuals have been jailed, subjected to mob violence, or even murdered in connection with blasphemy accusations, highlighting the grave consequences of speaking out against these laws.
Habib’s story is a stark reminder of the perils of discussing religion openly in Pakistan, where even a private conversation can lead to death sentences, violent retribution, and societal ostracism. His case highlights the risks faced by those who challenge the powerful nexus between religion, politics, and law in the country.
As of now, Habib remains in hiding, uncertain of what the future holds. His case has prompted widespread discussion about the use of blasphemy laws to silence dissent and the ongoing challenges faced by those who seek to speak out in a society where religious orthodoxy holds significant sway over public discourse. Habib’s story is not just about one man’s fight for freedom; it is a cautionary tale about the dangerous consequences of challenging deeply entrenched religious laws in an increasingly polarized society.