@@INCLUDE-HTTPS-REDIRECT-METATAG@@ Raymond Davis case: the shameful story about the nexus between civil-military leadership of Pakistan?

Raymond Davis case: the shameful story about the nexus between civil-military leadership of Pakistan?


Uproar prevails in Pakistan on the book written by Raymond Davis. Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) chairman Imran Khan has said the recently-published book of the former CIA contractor, Raymond Davis, has exposed the “shameful” role played by Pakistan’s civil and military leadership in arranging the escape of a murderer from the country.

 

Raymond Davis, a former contractor of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) who had shot dead two men in Lahore in January 2011, in his book The Contractor: How I Landed in a Pakistani Prison and Ignited a Diplomatic Crisis, has recalled the events that took place during his trial in a Lahore prison and the efforts made by his country in making his escape possible with the help of the then civil and military leadership of the country.

 

Raymond Davis has claimed that former chief of the Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) Shuja Pasha was “clearly committed” to ensuring that the deal for his release was successful.

 

Davis has also explained that the plan to rescue him by paying blood money hinged on the acquiescence of the 18 family members of his victims and “ISI agents applied as much pressure as needed to get them to accept the diyat”.

 

Davis claims that the ISI agents took the family members to Kot Lakhpat Jail and encouraged them to accept the deal. They were told that if they forgave Davis, they would be given a large sum of money in return.

 

Raymond Davis’s book, “The Contractor: How I landed in Pakistani prison and ignited a Diplomatic Crisis”, also leaves unanswered a leading question as to who provided the “diyat” (blood money), US$2.34 million (over Rs240m), that was paid to the heirs of the three slain Pakistanis to win his freedom.

 

What is Diya?

 

Diya in Islamic law, is the financial compensation paid to the victim or heirs of a victim in the cases of murder, bodily harm or property damage. It is an alternative punishment to qisas (equal retaliation). In Arabic, the word means both blood money and ransom, and it is spelled sometimes as diyah or diyeh.

 

It is only apply when victim's family want to compromise with guilty otherwise qisas applies.

 

Diya compensation rates have historically varied based on the gender and religion of the victim. Muslim women victims have typically been compensated at half the rate as Muslim male victims, while non-Muslims compensation rates have varied between 1/16 to 1/2 of a Muslim, for an equivalent case.

 

Diya in Pakistan: Legal and social status

 

Pakistan, which is predominantly Hanafi Sunni Muslim nation, introduced Qisas and Diyat Ordinance in 1990, amending sections 229 to 338 of Pakistan Penal code. The new Ordinance replaced British era criminal laws on bodily hurt and murder with sharia-compliant provisions, as demanded by the Shariat Appellate Bench of Pakistan's Supreme Court. The Criminal Procedure Code was also amended to give legal heirs of a murdered person to enter into compromise and accept diyah compensation, instead of demanding qisas-based retaliatory penalties for murder or bodily hurt. The democratically elected government of Nawaz Sharif, in 1997, replaced the Ordinance by enacting the qisas and diyah sharia provisions as the law, through an Act of its Parliament.

 

The sharia-compliant Qisas and Diyat law made murder a private offense, not a crime against society or state, and thus the pursuit, prosecution, and punishment for murder has become the responsibility of the victim's heirs and guardians. The Pakistan Penal Code modernized the Hanafi doctrine of qisas and diya by eliminating distinctions between Muslims and non-Muslims.

 

The diyah law of Pakistan has proven to be controversial, for a number of reasons. First, a number of cases of hdiyahdiyah law. Second, scholars have cited a number of cases of intentional murder and bodily harm inflicted on the poor by the wealthy, where the guilty escaped legal process and simply paid compensation.