The focus on the woman in grey
Kamila Hyat
The bizarre case of Dr Aafia Siddiqui lingers on. As the process of determining her sentence begins in New York, Interior Minister Rehman Malik has written to US attorney general Eric H Holder, Jr, to ask that she be repatriated. Relevant UN instruments that would permit this have been cited in the letter.
It must be noted that no similar missives have been sent out to secure a return home for the hundreds of other Pakistanis held overseas. Many -- in Saudi Arabia, in Thailand, in Greece and elsewhere -- report they have been subjected to the most brutal treatment. So too have prisoners, including many women, held at home-either in prisons or in the custody of security forces in Balochistan, Swat and other places.
The exclusive focus on Dr Siddiqui is odd and appears to have been driven by the campaign highlighting her case.
Projected by the media -- most notably Urdu newspapers and most television channels -- this campaign holds that Dr Aafia Siddiqui is the victim of prejudice and gross injustice. There may be some element of truth in this, but too many facts have been ignored.
American and Pakistani journalists investigating the case have found links between Dr Siddiqui and organisations that funded extremism. US journalist Deborah Scroggins has noted a "paper trail" had been left by Dr Siddiqui in the form of emails and other communications with groups that promoted "jihad." Others have noted she played a part in the purchase of equipment that could be used by terrorists. Links with persons accused of supporting Al-Qaeda have been mentioned.
It is impossible to say what the complete truth is in the Dr Aafia Siddiqui case. But too little effort has been made to put this before people. The whole affair has been painted as one involving the framing of an innocent woman and the abduction of her children. Groups which-discreetly or indiscreetly back the Taliban-have taken their protests to the streets.
Some accounts insist that no evidence against her was presented during the 14-day trial hearing in New York, at the end of which she was convicted on charges of attempted murder and armed assault. This is absurd. The testimonies at the trial documented Dr Aafia Siddiqui's past and did indeed present evidence that played a key part in leading the jury to its "guilty" verdict.
Also astonishing is the attempt to portray the case as one involving the rights of women. Organisations such as the Jamaat-e-Islami, which has played a key role in the campaign for her release, have never been known as advocates of the rights of women.
Cases of inhumane treatment of women at home have rarely been commented on and have never led to rallies on the streets. There is no doubt at all that Dr Aafia Siddiqui -- and her children, if they are indeed in custody-deserve humane treatment, and medical or psychological assistance, if required, and a fair judicial process.
But so do the thousands of women detained at home, some of whom have faced ****, torture and deliberate brutality in jails or police lockups. Surely the groups so incensed by the fate of Dr Aafia Siddiqui should also speak up for them. Most have far less ability to put forward their cases than the well educated, and well connected, Siddiqui family.
With the political parties and religious groups, organisations such as the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) have taken up the crusade. They have been able to offer no answers when the families of persons missing at home have asked why Dr Aafia Siddiqui rates higher in priority than their husbands, fathers or sons, or why indeed this case has been singled out.
There are many reasons why we need to understand how the Aafia Siddiqui case has made such a deep impression at home.
While, for many, the affair has served as yet another means to lambast the US, the story of Dr Siddiqui is one we should all hear. The truth is about a young woman who may have been inducted into the extremist cause in the 1990s at a prestigious university campus in the US. It is also about the state of fundamentalism in a country where it exists in many forms, ranging from the obscurantism of the Taliban who oppose education to the views held by her family who combined Western scientific learning with religious zeal.
It is perhaps no accident that Gen Ziaul Haq was a family friend of the Siddiquis, who never made a secret of their connections with the late military dictator.
The process through which the young Aafia Siddiqui was enrolled into extremism, at MIT, and her till-then benign devoutness used to draw her in, offers up many lessons.
The same effort to take over the minds of young people continues and has been reported from many campuses in the UK, the US and presumably elsewhere. Groups such as the Hizb-ut-Tehrir focus on educated people who may in the future influence society or attain significant positions within it. This is something that needs to be watched and guarded against; the same means are also being used at home to recruit people.
There are, as such, many reasons why we need to hear more about the sad affair of Dr Aafia Siddiqui. But what we need to hear is the truth: not lies and manipulations intended to serve particular purposes. The media has a moral responsibility to ensure it can bring the full story before people, and not become a party to games played by various political forces. Meanwhile, the government needs to explain to us why her case has taken so much precedence over those of other nationals held abroad, and why it has been so vigorously pursued at many different levels. After all, the primary duty of government is to all citizens, who should before its eyes be equals.
kamilahyat@hotmail.com
