Anti Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam
31st January 2000
Bismillah ar-Rehman ar-Raheem

Post Anti Qadiani Ordinance of 1984

(From Ahmadiyya Movement - British Jewish Connection by Bashir Ahmad)


Dr. Syed Rashid Ali


By a unanimous decision of the elected representatives of the supreme law-making body of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the Constitution of 1973 was amended by the Constitution (Second Amendment ) Act, 1974 (Act XLIX of 1974) to amend Article 106 and Article 260 thereof.


Article 106(3) of the Constitution as amended by both Houses of the Parliament reads: 

In addition to the seats in the Provincial Assemblies for the provinces of Baluchistan, the punjab, the North West Frontier and Sind specified in clause (1) there shall be in those Assemblies the number of additional seats hereinafter specified reserved for persons belonging to the Christian, hindu, Sikh, Buddhist and Parsi communities and persons of the Qadiani group or the Lahori group (who call themselves Ahmadis) or the scheduled castes: 
Baluchistan - 1 
The North West Frontier Province - 1 
The Punjab - 3 
Sind - 2
The other Amendment was in Article 260 inserting a new clause after clause 2. 
'A person who does not believe i the absolute and unqualified finality of Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon Him) the last of the prophets or claims to be a prophet in any sense of the word or of any description whatsoever, after Muhammad (pboH) or recognises such a claimant as a prophet or a religious reformer, is not a Muslims for the purposes of the Costitution or Law.'
Despite this constitutional amendment, unfortunately Bhutto Government, due to its pro-Qadiani policies, did not make necessary changes in Pakistan Penal Code, which gave Qadianis a chance to persist in their policies of misrepresenting Islam and abusing the Islamic epithet. Ordinance 44 was passed in September 1980 which added Section 298-A
to the Pakistan Penal Code Paksitan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860 ) recently added by Ordinance No. XLIV of 1980). It was
promulgated to stop Qadianis from using certain epithets, descriptions and titles reserved for the last 1400 years for Holy
Prophet Muhammad SAW, His Successors, His wives etc.
“Use of derogatory remarks etc. in respect of holy personages. Whoever by words, either spoken or written,  or by visible representation or by any imputation innuendo or insinuation  directly or indirectly defiles the sacred name of any wife (Umm-ul-Mumineen) or members of the family (Ahlebait) of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) “ or any of the righteous Caliphs (Khulafa-e-Rashideen ) or companions (Sahib) of the  Holy Prophet (peace be upon him ) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend for three years or with fine or with  both.”

But this Section was couched in general terms and was not made particularly applicable to Ahmadis only.

Despite these measures, Qadianis persisted adamantly in their behaviour to the great frustration and annoyance of Muslims. After a lot of agitation by Muslims over the persistence of the Ahmadis with their sacrilege, the impugned Ordinance was promulgated which added section 298-B and 298-C to the Paksitan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860) and made consequential amendments in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Act V of 1898) and West Press and Publications Ordinance, 1963 Sections 298-B and 298-C are as follows:

"Misuse of epithets, descriptions and titles, etc. reserved for certain  holy personages or places.
1) Any person of the Qadiani group or the Lahori group (who call themselves Ahmadis or by any  other name) who by words either spoken or written or by visible representation;
a) refers to or addresses, any person other than a  Caliph or companion of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) as 'Ameerul Mumineen', 'Khalifat-ul -Mumineen', 'Khalifat-ul-Muslimeen', 'Sahaabi’ or 'Razi–Allah-Anho'.
b) Refers to or addresses any person other than a wife of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon Him) as 'Umm-ul-Mumineen';
c) Refers to or addresses any person other than a member of the family (Ahle-bait) of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon Him) as  Ahle-bait; or
d) Refers to or names, or calls his place of worship as ‘Masjid’,
Shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also  be liable to fine.

2) Any person of the Qadiani group or Lahori group  (who call themselves 'Ahmadis' or by any other name) who by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation, refers to the mode or from of call to prayers followed by his faith as Azan; or recites Azan as used by the Muslims, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three  years, and shall also be liable to fine.”

“Person of Qadiani group etc. calling himself a Muslim or preaching or propagating his faith. -- Any person of the Qadiani group or the Lahori group (who call themselves Ahmadis or by any other name) who directly or indirectly poses himself as a Muslim or call or refers to his faith as Islam or preaches or propagates his faith or invites others to accept his faith by words either spoken or written or by visible representations, or any manner whatsoever outrages the religious feelings of Muslims, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

These Sections made it a criminal offence for an Ahmadi:-

a) to call or pose himself directly or indirectly as a Muslim or refer to his faith as Islam;
b) to preach or propagate his faith or to invite others to accept his faith or in any manner whatsoever outrage  the religious feelings of Muslims;
c) to call people to prayer by reciting Azan to refer to  his mode or form of call to pryer as Azan;
d) to refer or call his place of worship as Masjid;
e) to refer any person other than a Caliph or companion of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as Ameerul-Mumineen, Khalifatul-Muslimeen, Sahaaba, Razi-Allah Anho any person other than the wives of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) as Umm-ul–Mumineen  and any person other than a member of the family of  the Holy Prophet (PBUH) as Ahle-bait.’
As soon as this Ordinance was issued, Mirza Tahir fled the country. He dodged the police and intelligence agencies and managed to fly out of Karachi on a KLM flight on 30th April 1984, alongwith his family and a group of prominent Qadianis. (A Man of God, a biography by Ian Adamson)

In accordance with Mirza Tahir's instructions Qadianis who were left behind, reluctantly accepted the Ordinance. The word Masjid were removed from their places of worship and words like 'Bait-ul-Hamd' and bait-ul-Zikr' were written in its place. (Daily Nawa-e-Waqt, Lahore, 28 April 1984) Call to prayer on loud speakers was stopped and Ahmadiyya literature lying in open places like Khilafat Library, Rabwah, was removed. Many Qadianis went underground presuming arrest, many left the countries and sought asylums in various European countries. The Ordinance provided them an excuse to settle abraod and win the support of Western Governments and other anti-Islamic organisations working in the West under cover of different names. Qadianis and their Masters alongwith these organisation started a malicious campaign against Pakistan and General Zia-ul-Haq in the name of 'Persecution of Ahmadis in Pakistan'. Thus it became easier for Pakistani Qadianis to get political and financial assistance as well as asylum in countries where it was otherwise impossible for Pakistanis to settle eg. Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Japan, Germany etc. Canada, US and UK were also not lagging behind in providing asylum to Qadianis.

After his arrival in London, Mirza Tahir called a meeting of all leading Qadianis in the foreign missions to discuss the long term planning in the wake of Presidential Order. (Dawn Karachi 5 May, 1984)  Zafarullah Khan, M.M. Ahmad, Prof. Abdus Salam, and other senior Qadianis working in various countries of Europe, America and Africa attended the meeting. Mirza Tahir decided to stay in London and runs the affairs of his community from there. In his sermons, he bolstered the community's morale and justified the reasons for his fleeing the country. He made venomous attacks on Zia and the Government of Pakistan. His speeches from 1st February to 31st May 1985 during Friday sermons are a testimony of these attacks. (Qadianyat Islam kay leay aik Khatra per Mahakama, addresses No. 1-27, Additional Nashir Isha'at, London) He gave an interview to Urdu service of BBC on 25th May 1984 in which he criticised Zia regime for its anti-Ahmadiyya policy and enumerated the services of his community in the uplift of the country.

A Massive Campaign

To launch a massive campaign against President General Zia-ul-Haq and his regime, Mirza Tahir ordered his followers to set up special publicity centers in Amsterdam, Paris, Geneva, Copenhagen, Bonn, Haifa (Israel), Pretoria, Accra, Lagos and Washington to tell the world about 'the persecution of Ahmadis in Pakistan'. These centers put out massive literature and gave the instances of alleged violations of human rights, suppression of Ahmadis by fundamentalists and 'discrimination' in their social lives and services. (Ahmadiyya Movement - British Jewish Connection by Bashir Ahmad)

Mirza Tahir alleged that the Ahmadiyya Community was being used as a scape goat by the Military Government to boost its popularity. He said that he was prepared to go to prison; believing that public opinion would vindicate him. But Ahmadi traditions behoved him to consult his community before taking action. He believed that he was allowed to leave Pakistan because the Government was not yet prepared to set against him.
He further alleged that what was going on in Pakistan was power struggle between Mullahs and political parties. In his mind, President Zia had simply given in to some demands from the same group (Ahrar), a group which was nearly banned by the Government in 1950s. No politician since Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan and its first head of the State, who insisted on the Ahmadis' participation in the Government, had been able to keep the Ahrars in check. Ten years ago Premier Bhutto appeased this anti-Ahmadis group and today Zia was using their demands to obtain popular support, the Mirza claimed.

He added that although they represented a hard core of opposition, the Ahraris were not the only group opposing the Ahmadis. Groups in Pakistan and in Saudi Arabia were also aligned with Ahraris. He believed that rather than lead to a more Islamic State, a campaign against Ahmadis might lead to a divided Pakistan. Many groups and areas were opposed to Zia Government in Pakistan and outside support, either political or financial for an unpopular regime through minority groups could only be divisive, he emphasised.

(The Middle East Times, 17-24 November 1984)

US Concern for Tahir

Mirza Ahmad says:

In March 1984, officials of the US Embassy in Islamabad went specially to Rabwah and told him that they had in possession of some knowledge that might effect the future of the community. They wanted to know the reaction before reporting it to Washington. Mirza Tahir had since long maintained contacts with the British, French, Canadian, Chinese and many other embassies. The US officials informed him that Zia was importing men from NWFP to raid his house in Islamabad (obviously to kill him in the darkness of the night). Although General Zia, through an officer of Intelligence Bureau sent him a message not to worry about anything, an official of the Pakistan Intelligence Bureau and another officer of Police Intelligence alerted him. They requested him to leave Islamabad as soon as possible. Mirza Tahir also called on French Counsellar at his residence in Islamabad, who in a diplomatic way conveyed him the message of leaving Islamabad immediately. So he did.
(Adamson, A Man of God)

The Zionist-backed foregin press was sympathetic to the Ahmadiyya cause and very critical of so-called Islamabad Fundamentalism. The Qadianis shrewedlymixed their case with other tricky issues like 'Human Rights', 'Non representative character of Zia Government', 'Political suppression', 'Arrests under Martial Law' etc. They found an accomodating foreign press projecting their trash in an orderly way and over-sympathetic to their cause.

The correspondent of Washington Post based in Islamabad, reports the events after the promulgation of the Ordinance:

"Privately Pakistani officials say that the restrictions were needed to dampen a potentially violent backlash against the Ahmadis. The Ahmadis say the Ordinance was politically motivated and Zia was merely attempting to bolster his popularity among fundamentalist Muslims and broaden his constituency beyond the military in preparation for national elections that he has promised."
(The Washington Post, 17 May 1984)
The special correspondent of New York Times wrote:
"Zia bowed to mullahs in making a crime for Ahmadis to preach and profess their publicly. They actively seek converts all over the world. No census has been taken but the Ahmadis say they have 10 million adherents. Estimates say there are 3 million to 6 million Ahmadis among Pakistan's 84 million people. A further point of irritation for the Pakistan mullahs is that the Ahmadis have long had a community in Tel Aviv. Ahmadis point out that it existed long before Israel was created."
(The New York Times, 1st June 1984)
Stuart Schaar, an Associate Professor of Middle East History at Brooklyn College, USA, in an article in the NY Times criticised the US policy towards Pakistan. In his article Our Blind Enthusiasm for Pakistan's Tyrant he suggested the US Government to reconsider its blind enthusiasm for its ally and understand the implications of their alliance with General Zia's regime. while discussing human rights violation of Zia regime, he specifically cited Ahmadiyya persecution in Pakistan and feared persecution of other minorities also. He stated:
"Four million adherents of the Ahmadiya, a Moslem sect founded in the 19th Century, are being prohibited from practicing their religion publicly. Statements by fundamentalist Islamic leaders close to the Government indicate that the small Christian Community may also be subjected to the persecution."

He endorsed a Senate Staff Report which recommended that Congress should tie ($ 3.2 b) aid proposal to Pakistan's cessation of nuclear weapons development and emphasised that "Much more important now would be Congressional action to link aid to Pakistan's human rights records."
(The New York Times, 14 June 1984)

Newsweek published photographs of Mirza Tahir and his coterie and wrote the following lines under the caption of Persecution of a Religious Sect:
"The 3 million Pakistani members of Ahmadiya sect are now facing a wave of religious persecution. Ahmadis are anathema to the fervently Islamic Government of President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq. In April, Zia pushed through new laws designed to limit the way Ahmadis practice their particular version of the Muslim religion. Dozens of Ahmadis have been arrested, several of their mosques vandalised and one of their leaders has been murdered .... so far the violence against the Ahmadiya sect has been sporadic, without apparent Government direction. But the pressure on them is increasing ...... and Pakistan's Ahmadis are fearful of what may lie ahead."
(Newsweek 16 July 1984)
So much for the international press and their concern for human rights abuses and persecution of Ahmadis and other minorities. Surprisingly the same press turns a blind eye when a Muslim minority community is persecuted, tortured, killed  all over the globe.

Annual Convention

The annual Convention of Ahmadiyya Jamaat due to be held in December 1984 at Rabwah, was not permitted by the Government of Pakistan. Mirza Tahir announced the 20th Annual Convention of Ahmadis in the UK on 5-7 April 1985 at Tilford in Surrey, England, some 30 miles from London. With the support of his British well-wishers, Jamaat had bought a 25 acre land at a very cheap price. Tahir named it 'Islamabad' and converted it as one of the European centers, and now the Seat of the Caliphate. The convention was attended by delegates of forty eight countries, including the delegates of South Africa and Israel.

Mirza Tahir gave good tidings to his community in the traditionally elliptical language of visions and revelation and exhorted them to contribute generously for the 'tableegh' purposes.

In the Convention, an Ahmadiyya leader Muzaffar Ahmad Zafar declared in a press conference that the United Nations Human Rights Sub-Commission had been informed of the treatment meted out to members of Ahmadiyya Jamaat in Pakistan and preparation were being made to raise the issue in various world forums. He read out a long statement on the conditions of Ahmadiyya members in Pakistan to prove that they were being presecuted at the instance of the Government which he said, was exploiting the issue for political gains. He appealed to the Western public opinion to take notice of the situation on grounds of both avowed western concepts of human decency and non political self interest. (The Dawn Karachi, 13 April 1985)

Counter Measures

Mirza Tahir instructed his followers to start a counter-offensive against the Ordinance by:

With these measures, Qadianis intended to determine the extent of the enforcement of the Ordinance in different parts of the country. They very cleverly capatalised on some minr incidents of detention, arrests etc. to win the sympathies and support of their foreign mentors.

Qadianis found many well-wishers and sympathisers of their cause in the person of politicians, human rights activists, members of the foreign intellignece agencies and Zionist media-men in different parts of the world. They promoted and patronised Qadianiyat for it disrupted the unity of Muslims, attacked Islamic fundamentalism, aligned itself with pro-Imperialist forces, operated a powerful mission against Palestinians in Israel, condemned Jehad and all other types of resistance against Imperialist domination, looked to the support of anti-Islamic forces for its survival, carried a latent potential against the integrity of Arab states and served as a spring board for anti-Islamic forces in Africa. They were interested to see it flourish in all parts of the world and serve their nefarious political designs under the cover of a religious body. Ahmadiyya's sister organisation Bahaism also substantial support as they were allegedly "persecuted" by Ayatullah Khomeni's regime in Iran.

Without delving into the intricacies of Ahmadiyya issue, the foreign sympathisers harped on the persecution theme. They did not bother to study the innumerable writings of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani and utterances of his successors which establish the religo-political character of Ahmadiyya as a separate entity and a distinct community from Muslims. The fact is that Ahmadis undisputedly maintained their separation and considered all other Muslims as infedils and outside the pale of Islam. They revolted against Islam by believing in the heretical claims of Mirza Qadiani, specially his claim of prophethood. They knew well where they actually stood. But in order to infiltrate in the and file of Muslims and to reap economic and political benefits, they hypocritically posed themselves Muslims. The Ordinance (1984) merely sought to ensure that those who were a religious minority by their own proclamation, faith and practice should act accordingly so that no confusion could be created about their identity. It only gave a constitutional shape to what had been an unqualified consensus of the Muslim Ummah of all schools of thoughts from the very birth of Qadianism. It, therefore, reflected views, wishes and sentiments of millions of Muslims the world over. The protagonists of democarcy and fundamental rights do not care to accept and respect the sentiments of the absolute majority in extending support to their politcal whizkids. Sympathisers of Qadianiyat were oblivious of the fact that allegations of discrimination against Qadianis were totally baseless or grossly exaggerated. The Government as well as the Muslim Society are fully committed to protect their (Qadianis) rights through special constitutional measures it had taken to ensure their representation in National and Provincial Assemblies. Furthermore, Qadiani percentage in Military services as well as federal and provincial civil services was highly tilted in their favour as compared to their actual population.

Mirza Tahir Ahmad's loyalties for Pakistan and Islam came under sharp attack when he sent a special delegation to Israel to seek Zionist support for his cause.

"Sheikh Sharif Ahmad Amini, outgoing head of the Ahmadiyya Mission Israel called on the President of Israel alongwith Muhammad Hamid, the new head of the Israel mission. The Jerusalem Post, Israel gave a photograph of the meeting of the Israeli President with the Ahmadiyya leaders and wrote under it: Sheikh Sharif Ahmad Amini, the outgoing head of the Ahmadiyya, an Indian Muslim sect locally based in Haifa, introduces his successor Sheikh Mohammed Hamid Katpar to President Chiam Herzog yesterday (21 November 1985) at Bait Hanassi. The new leader of the sect, which has 1200 followers in Israel, brought numerous documents as evidence that the sect is persecuted in Pakistan. (Italics added). The outgoing Sheikh who is returning to India praised Israel for allowing his sect to enjoy complete religious freedom."
(Nawa-e-Waqt, Lahore, 12 January 1986)
A Potential Threat

The Government of Pakistan published a booklet on Qadianism (Qadianism -Threat to Islamic Solidarity, Pakistan Publications, Islamabad, 1984) and disseminated it widely through its Embassies. The booklet explained that the Qadianism originated under the instigation of a colonial power. It aroused bitterness and caused division not only among the Muslims of the South Asian Sub-Continent but also in the Muslim countries living in other parts of world, particularly in Africa. The allegiance of Qadianis to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a prophet, put them outside the pale of Islam. It traced the early history of this heretical and subversive movement, analysed its basic doctrines, gave the nature of its collaboration with erstwhile colonial powers and recapitulated the views of the Ummah and its reaction towards it so that the Muslims of ihe World could get fully aware of its goals and activities as well as the forces which played an active role to enact this drama. (Qadianism -Threat to Islamic Solidarity, Pakistan Publications, Islamabad, 1984)

Mirza Tahir Ahmad strongly criticized the Goverment move and tried hard to justify the position of his Jamaat. It was perhaps for the first time in the history of Ahmadiyyat that a Head of the community had so sharply criticized a Government. His father, Mirza Mahmud would have never done like that. Mirza Rafi Ahmad called him a 'nincompoop'in his private meetings. People demanded that he should be brought back to Pakistan through Interpol for his anti-state utterances. All those officials who directly or indirectly collaborated or connived at his flight should be punished. It was also demanded that his Pakistani citizenship be cancelled and his passport be impounded. All Pakistan Majlise Tuhaffaze Khatame Nabuwwat put forth the following demands in numerous public meetings in late 1985:

Ahmadis took advantage of the political chaos prevailing in the country in 1985 and collaborated secretly with anti-state forces to create instability in Pakistan. They strengthened their centres in Sind, which was in turmoil at that time.

Appeal Against the Ordinance

The Amir Jamaat Ahmadiyya, Lahore Chapter, Mujibur-Rehman Dard, filed an appeal in the Lahore High Court against the Ordinance on the instructions of Mirza Tahir Ahmad. A Division Bench of the Lahore High Court heard the inter-Court appeal. Qadianis contended in their appeal that:

i) the anti-Oadiani Ordinance was ultra vires of PCO No. I of 1981
ii) is void under Article 8 of the Constitution as it squarely offended the fundamental rights which guaranteed that every citizen can profess, practice and propagate his religion
iii) Pakistan was signatory to the Charter of Human Rights and was bound to abide by the Covenant
iv) it is against the speech delivered by the Father of Nation in the Constituent Assembly on 11 August, 1947.
The Division Bench dismissed the appeal on 25 September 1984 after hearing the arguments of Advocate General Punjab and appellant's advocates.

Shariat Court Decision

On 15 July 1984 Mujib-ur-Rehman, Amir Jamat Ahmadiyya Rawalpindi, on the instructions of Mirza Tahir Ahmad, filed a petition in the Federal Shariat Court against the Ordinance. A full bench of the Federal Shariat Court comprising Chief Justice Mr Aftab Hussain, Mr Justice Fakhre Alam, Mr. Justice Chaudhry Mohammed Sadiq, Mr Justice Maulana Malik Ghulam Ali and Mr Justice Maulana Abdul Qaddus Qasami heard the petition. Lahori Jamat also presented their viewpoint in detail. The Court continued hearing for 21 days and passed a short order on 12 August, 1984 dismissing the two petitions as having no force.

The Court had the assistance of Juris-Consultants viz, Prof Qazi Mujib-urRehman, Prof Mohammad Tahir-ul-Qadri, Prof. Mohammad Ashraf of Peshawar University, Maulana Tajuddin Hyderi, Allama Mirza Yousaf Hussain, Maulana Sadaruddin Rifai and Prof. Mahmud Ahmad Ghazi. The Federal Government was represented by Dr Riaz Hassan Gilani and Haji Shaukat Ghias Muhammad Advocates. The Court held that the allegations in the petitions as elaborated at the bar that the impugned ordinance violates the freedom of faith of Qadianis of either persuasion or restrains them from practicing their religion or affects their right of worship is not correct. The said Ordinance does not interfere with the right of the petitioners or other Qadianis to profess and practice their religion in accordance with the provisions of the constitution and the injunctions of the Holy Quran and  the Sunnah. They are at liberty to profess Qadianism or Ahmadisin as their religion and to profess their faith in Mirza Ghularn Ahmad as a prophet or the Promised Messiah or the Promised Mahdi. They are also at liberty to practice their religion and worship, interalia, in their places of worship according to the tenets of their religion.

The Judgement says the impugned ordinance is consequential to the constitutional Amendment of 1974 by which the Qadianis and Lahoris were declared non-Muslims in accordance with the dictates of Islamic Shariah. In implementation of the constitutional fiat, which was disregarded with impunity by the Qadianis, they have been restrained by the impugned ordinance from directly or indirectly calling or posing themselves as Muslims or calling their faith as Islam. To call their places of worship by the name of Masjid and to call people to prayers by calling Azan which are exclusive for Muslims; by the said name and the said call to prayers, the unwary among the Muslims are likely to be deceived and to be drawn to offer their prayers behind a non-Muslim Imam in a non-Muslim place of worship. Qadianis can call their place of worship by other name and call the adherent of their religion to prayer by use of any other method. The use of epithets like Ummul Mominin, Sahaba, Ahle-Bait etc by the Ahmadis not only outrages the feelings of the Muslims but also amounts to their posing indirectly as Muslims. The prohibition does not interfere with the right of Ahmadis to profess and practice their religion. The prohibition against propagation of the religion of Ahmadis is not contrary to the Quran and the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (p.b.o.h). This prohibition is also consequential to the declaration of Ahmadis or Qadianis as non-Muslims and restraint against their posing as Muslims. Their entire strategy in preaching is to satisfy the Muslim to whom they preach that by conversion to Ahmadism he shall remain a Muslim. This would be contrary to the constitution. (The Muslim lslamabad, 13 August 1984)

In the detailed judgement spreading over 224 foolscape  typed pages, the Court called Mirza Ghulam Ahmad an infidel. His life history shows, says the judgement, that he was 'a cheat and unscrupulous man who step by step and with a design manoeuvred by his writings and sayings to establish himself as Mahdi and Messiah.' All his predictions and prophecies were found false but in order to avoid the ridicule of his opponents, he on occasions interpreted his writings to say that he never claimed prophethood or apostleship. There was no covenant by the Quaid-i-Azam or Pakistan with Qadianis to treat them as Muslims or let them preach their faith in the name of Islam. (Dawn Karachi, 29 October 1984)

The Qadianis (both groups) challenged the decision of the Federal Shariat Court in the Supreme Court (Shariah Bench) under Article 203F of the Constitution. The petitioners-Mujib-ur-Rehman, Mirza Naseer Ahmad, Mubashir Lateef Ahmad and Muzaffar Ahmad represented Qadiani Jamaat and Captain (retired) Abdul Wajid presented the point of view of Lahore Jamaat. Qadiani petitioners submitted that the impugned ordinance encroached upon the basic rights of the belief and worship of the Ahmadis and was in conflict with letter and spirit of the Quran and Sunnah. They submitted:

"this memorandum of appeal with short grounds is therefore submitted based on the short order. The appellants will submit detailed ground for appeal as and when the detailed judgement is made available."
Their short grounds for the appeal were that the Federal Shariat Court held in its short order that: "The impugned ordinance was consequential to the constitutional amendment of 1974 by which the Qadianis, whether belonging to the Lahore Group or the other group were declared non-Muslims" and that the Ordinance was the implementation of the constitutional fiat, the Federal Shariat Court failed to appreciate whether or not the Ordinance was consequential to the constitutional amendment was totally irrelevant for the purposes of the petition (Article 203 D of the Constitution). All that the Federal Court was required to determine was whether the Ordinance was or was not repugnant to the injunctions of the Holy Quran and Sunnah. The dictates of the Constitution were not relevant. (Dawn Karachi, 11 October, 1984)

The Supreme Court of Pakistan heard both the Shariat Appeals on 10th and 11th of January, 1988. These were dismissed as withdrawn.

Human Rights Charade

The Human Rights agencies like Amnesty International, International Commission of Jurists, Human Rights Advocates Inc., UN Commission on Human Rights, etc. had always adopted double standards in their policies towards Human Rights conditions with regard to countries like Poland, Chile, Philippines, Lebanon and Afghanistan. They adopt a partisan attitude towards Islam and Muslims. The Islamic movements are discussed in the context of threat or terrorism while in the mention of Jews and Israel the issue of moral commitment, humanitarian concern, and Judeo-Christian heritage of the West are invariably raised.

In the reports prepared by Human Rights agencies which appeared during 1986-88, we find quite a few pages devoted to Ahmadiyya issue and an open sympathy is expressed with them. In April, 1986 Ms Karen Parker, a representative of the Commission on Human Rights of the United Nations visited Pakistan to conduct a study on Human Rights situation in Pakistan. She held discussions with Political Prisoners Release and Relief Committee, the Council for Civil liberties, and other Human Rights organizations. During her press talks, she released a resolution passed by the UN Commission on Human Rights about Qadiani community in Pakistan. The UN Commission, in its resolution expressed grave concern at the promulgation of Ordinance XX of 26 April, 1984 prohibiting persons claiming themselves as Ahmadis to refrain from behaving as Muslims and had also prescribed punishment for the violators. The resolution called upon Pakistan Government to repeal the said Ordinance and to restore human rights and the fundamental freedoms of all persons within its jurisdiction. (Muslim Islamabad 1st May 1986)

Ms Karen called on President Zia alongwith the US Ambassador in Pakistan to discuss Human Rights issues including Ahmadiyya affairs. She says in her report:

'The Government of Pakistan defends Ordinance XX by maintaining the limitations on the religious beliefs and practices of Ahmadis are acceptable under the 'public order and morality' exceptions. President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq made the same claim to the author. However the gravamen of their assertion is that Ahmadis consider themselves Muslims. The Memorandum (Pakistan Memorandum on Ahmadiyya Question circulated at 42nd Session of UN Commission on Human Rights) states: 'It was found necessary to specify and identify, in Ordinance XX, these practices of Ahmadis which portray them as Muslims and, when publicly manifested, cause grave affront to the religious sentiments of Muslims (to say nothing of the confusion they create in their minds') "President Zia told the author, Ahmadis offend me because they consider themselves Muslims……Ordinance XX may violate human rights but I do not care. " (Italics added) (Report of Karen Parker, Attorney at Law, Special Representative Human Rights Advocates, Inc. on Human Rights In Pakistan, January 1987, p.18)
In her report she had devoted 15 pages to the Ahmadya issue under the title, Persecution ofAhmadis in Pakistan.

In October 1986, after the arrest of Benazir Bhutto, the Socialist International led by Willy Brandt, formerly a Chancellor of West Germany sent a fact-finding Mission to Pakistan for preparation and submission of a report to the Human Right Bureau of the Socialist International in the meeting scheduled to be held in October in Bonn. Van Miert, Vice President of the SI visited Pakistan and expressed concern on the 'plight of Ahmadis' in Pakistan. (Muslim Islamabad, 11 October,1986)

In December 1986, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) sent a mission to Pakistan to study the process of return to a democratic form of Government after eight years (1977-1985) of Martial law rule. The mission, interalia, discussed the situation of minorities and minority religious communities. It comprised Judge Gustof Petren, former Supreme Court Judge; Mrs Helen Cull, Member of the Bar of New Zealand, Mr Jeremy McBride, lecturer in Law at the University of Birmingham, UK and Mr. D.J. Ravindran, Legal officer for Asia of the ICJ. The Mission held meetings with senior Government officials, Chief Justices and other members of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts of the Provinces. It also met the Human Rights activists of Pakistan. The report of the Commission was published in April 1987 from Geneva.

The Report specifically highlighted the Ahmadiyya issue vis-a-vis Ordinance 1984 and post-Martial Law Constitutional developments. It regarded the Ordinance a violation not only of religious freedom but of liberty and freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention.


Qadiani issue received good publicity in the Zionist-backed US press and corridors of power specially when the issue of American assistance to Pakistan came under discussion in the Congress. Mirza Tahir deputed some members of the American Jamaat, Abdul Rashid Yahya, missionary USA (South East Region), Dr Masoud Ahmad Malik, National Tabligh Secretary, to call on Congressmen and Senators on the Senate and House Committees viz. Clairborn Pell, Edward Kennedy, Pat Monyhinan and Stephen Solarz to seek their support in exerting pressure on President Zia. The US Congressman Tony P. Hall of Ohio introduced a Resolution in the House of Representatives on 17 July, 1986 concerning the so-called'persecution' of Ahmadis in Pakistan. He attacked the Ordinance (1984) and called upon the Government of Pakistan to repeal it: Several of my colleagues in both the House and Senate have brought their concerns about the plight of Ahmadiyya community to the Government of Pakistan. The Government of Pakistan refuses to acknowledge any discrimination or repression against Ahmadis, the Congressman explained. He further asserted that on the basis of information provided by Ahmadiyya Mission, London to the US organizations viz., Lawyers Committee on Human Rights and Human Rights Advocates, it is determined that Ahmadis were subjected to systematic and extensive discrimination on the basis
of religious belief. He proposed that $ 4.02 b US aid to Pakistan for the period 1988-1993 should be stopped and/or conditioned with the Ahmadiyya issue. M.M. Ahmad, a former notorious bureaucrat of Pakistan and grandson of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the impostor, after retirement from the World Bank turned an Ahmadiyya missionary and actively lobbied with the Congressmen.

As a result of Qadiani maneouvrings, Pakistan aid programme faced a rough passage. Besides Ahmadiyya pother the Congressional approval of the aid package was beset with problems arising out of the Democrats regaining control of Congressional Committees, Iran-Contra Scandal, Pakistan's 'pronouncement' about its nuclear programme as well as spending cuts mandated by Gramm-Rudman Budget balancing legislation (1986). Further the House sub-Committee was headed by Congressman Stephen Solarz, who was an avowed pro-Indian.

The US Government imposed a 105-day moratorium on aid to Pakistan. (Muslim Islamabad, 6 March, 1987)

As a result of active lobbying of Qadianis and their well-wishers' push, the US Administration sent an invitation to Mirza Tahir Ahmad, to address a meeting of Joint Select Committee in September, 1987, as a representative of Islam to explain his point of view on the persecution of Ahmadis in Pakistan.

The Muslim organizations of America strongly criticized the American move. The Federation of Islamic Organizations of American wrote a letter to the US President Reagan to intercede in the matter and stop Mirza Tahir from addressing the Joint House Committee. The Federation explained that Mirza Tahir was the great-grandson of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Oadiani who had hurled blasphemies against the Holy Messengers Hazrat Muhammad (PBOH) and Jesus, the son of Mary. The Federation emphasized the fact that appearance of Mirza Tahir had been manipulated by those who intended grievous harm to US Government and conspired to isolate it from 45 Islamic Countries in the world.

The Federation drew the attention of President Reagan to the fact that the Afghan resistance was very sensitive to the Qadiani issue. There was a definite background for this anti-Qadiani attitude. While ruling India, the British possessed farsight and struck at the very core of the freedom movement by urging the false prophet Ghulam Ahmed to declare that jihad was harram (unlawful) according to his divine revelation. This act alone, the Federation stated, brought so much civil unrest that Afghan Muslims, of whom the present resistance movement is comprised, remained extremely sensitive about Ahmadis.

The fact of Mirza Tahir appearance as a representative of Islamic world seems very offensive to Mujahideen whom the US had been supp~rtirg in their Jehad against the Soviet Union. The Muslims represented in the Federation strongly felt that the appearance of Mirza Tahir was bound to strengthen the hands of Jewish lobby in the United States. (The Nations, Lahore, 10 September, 1987)

Keeping in view the cordial relations existing between America and Pakistan, the State Department was reluctant to give undue importance to the 'plight' of Ahmadis in Pakistan in its aid package. The broad imperatives of American foreign policy and its interests in the Asian Region vis-a-vis Afghan problem overruled the issue and proved a rebuff for Mirza Tahir who waited in his wings to address the American Congress. To save his face and appease his gullible community he gave a suitable turn and twist to the whole affair, which was by all means an anti-Pakistan move. He was conscious of the fact that his utterances in the Congress would invite great repercussions against the Ahmadiyya Community in Pakistan.

He put up a mask of pseudo-nationalist and shrewdly proclaimed that the Congress was using different aspects of Human Rights to achieve its political objectives. In a special interview with the correspondent of the Daily Jang in Washington, he said:

'The American Congress had previously raised the issue of dictatorship, but when some sort of election was held in Pakistan, a matter which solved the issue, the American Congress raised the problem of Human Rights. At one stage, the members of the Congress and the Senate proposed that no aid should be given to Pakistan, unless the American President certifies every year that no injustices were committed against the Ahmadis. But I had protested against that proposal and sent message in which I said that on the one hand they were destroying the country and on the other hand they tried to use Ahmadis against their own country. I have strongly condemned this suggestion and advised the Ahmadis against it, because I visualized a substantial loss out of such a proposal.

I have received an invitation to address the joint session of American Congress and the Senate, but I rejected that proposal, because I am not a politician. The political representatives of Pakistan should address the Congress or the Senate. I apprehended that they would ask me questions which may defame Pakistan and, if Pakistan is defamed, there is no point of my participation in such a session. In fact the American Congress wants me to disgrace Pakistan, but I thought that such a thing was improper, therefore, I rejected the proposal.

The objectives behind the campaign pursued by the Government of Pakistan are political and not religious and the injustices committed by the present Government against the Ahmadis would decrease when it would be more stable and more confident of its survival.

Pakistan has become a scene of war for the Superpowers. If Pakistan stops playing the American game, it shall not face any danger from the Soviets." (Daily Jang, Rawalpindi, October 8, 1987)

The Indian-owned Press in the US gave wider publicity to the Ahmadiyya issue to block the passage of US aid to Pakistan Bill. They astutely promoted the Ahmadiyya cause merely out of hatred for Pakistan. Their papers: the Overseas Tribune, Washington; Indian Observer, New York and India Abroad, Chicago were on the forefront to project Ahmadya view point to the US public. (The Monthly Al Haque, Akora Khattak, July 1988 Report of Mr Muhammad Abdullah from Washington)

The US Senate cleared $ 4.02 b aid package to Pakistan with a six year waiver to a law that forbade American assistance to countries that imported unsafeguarded modern technology and equipment.


In accordance with the instructions of Mirza Tahir, Qadiani militants, in open and clear definance of the Ordinance and in utter disregard of susceptibilities of the Muslims of Pakistan wore Kalima badges, inscribed Kalima on their places of worship, threw bombs on the Muslim's mosques and desecrated their holy places. They made assaults on armless persons who dared to criticize their unruly behaviour. A large sum of money was spent to create sectarian and communal differences in Pakistan. They sought protection for themselves under the cover of sectarian conflicts. A good deal of sectarian and provocative literature was published in Rabwah and at other Qadiani printing presses without any print line for dissemination in Pakistan. Ethnic, religious and communal tension which erupted in mid 80s in the Punjab and Sind was mostly the result of the policy adopted by the unrepresentative Government of President Zia but had also roots in Qadiani manoeuvrings. Rather the tension was exacerbated by Oadiani agents in Pakistan by their invidious actions.

From mid-1984 to September 1988, as many as 2692 Qadianis miscreants were arrested on various charges of violation of the Ordinance. The precise details are as under:

Such Qadiani provocations and violations resulted in the death of 19 Ahmadis - 11 in Sind, 7 in Punjab and 2 in NWFP. In Sukkur and Tharparkar Divisions (Sind) and Sahiwal (Punjab) the Qadiani belligerents opened fire and killed two Muslims. A Qadiani Professor Nasir Ahmad Qureshi and his brother Rafi Ahmad Oureshi were sentenced to death by the Military Courts in Sukkur and two other Qadianis Ilyas Munir and Naimud Din were sentenced to death in Sahiwal case for killing Muslims.

Qadiani places of worship or more accurately the centers of anti-state activities were targeted by the Muslims. As a result of growing Qadiani militancy, ten places of worship were sealed by the police, six were demolished by the Muslim activists, twelve were set on fire or damaged and seventy seven were ramshackeled during the years 1985-88. The Government also proscribed 185 Ahmadya books and journals which indulged in anti-Islamic activities. Knowing well that Muslims did not allow Qadianis to bury their deads in their graveyards, they purposely provocked Muslims by burrying their deads in Muslim cemeteries and created unpleasant scenes. Muslim denied burial to 16 Oadianis deads and 18 dead bodies were exhumed. (See Persecution of Ahmadl Muslims in Pakistan, London Mission Publications, 1988)

Qadiani militancy continued unabetted in Pakistan. Their main Jamats, under the instructions of Mirza Tahir, remained involved in anti-state activities. These faceless enemies of country worked at the behest of their foreign mentors against the integrity and sovereignty of the country.

By mid 1988, Mirza Tahir performed another stunt to divert the attention of the people from the main issues which were being raised by the ulema in Pakistan. It was also meant to appease Qadiani youth and project his image of divinity. It was a Mubahila (mutual prayer duel) challenge.

Mubahila Ploy

On Friday, 10 June, 1988 Mirza Tahir Ahmed invited the'opponents and enemies of the Jamaat' to the Mubahila Challenge. He, in his Friday address declared:

"For the last several years the opponents of Ahmadiyyat in Pakistan have gone beyond all the limits in defiling the person of the Promised Messiah and committing atrocities against the Jamaat. Continuous efforts have been made by us in all possible ways to make the nation understand, but our advice has fallen on deaf cars. We are compelled, therefore, to give the false accusers and their leaders a challenge of Mubahila to make distinction between the right and wrong. The challenge for Mubahila is given to the Pakistan leadership at all levels, in the government, in the judiciary, among the ulema, the politicians, and other influential people and leaders of various groups. The challenge is on behalf of the entire world wide-Ahmadiyya Community.
He, interalia, denied Ahmadya collaboration with the erst while colonial Britain and a secret collusion with Zionist Israel. He declared that Qadianis were not anti-Pakistan and pro-Indian elements involved in spying against Pakistan and undertook sabotage and subversive activities at the behest of foreign powers. (Mirza Tahir Ahmed Mubahila Ka Khula Khula Challenge, Zia-ul-Islam Press Rabwah, 1988)

He boasted that after acceptance of this challenge his opponents would be afflicted with divine chastisement in an year's time ending in June, 1989.

A Mubahila challenge was an old technique which Mirza Qadiani adopted to humble and curse his opponents but had himself fallen victim to it. This word haunted Mirza Mahmud, Mirza Tahir's father during his lifetime. It was a desperate attempt on the part of Mirza Tahir Ahmad to buttress his sagging authority and boost the morale of young Ahmadis who questioned the religious beliefs of Ahmadiyya Jamaat and abhorred the clandestine political activities and covert operations of Qadiani elders in Pakistan and abroad. Qadiani zealots distributed thousands of copies of the challenge all over the country to provoke Muslims and create trouble in Pakistan. Hafiz Bashir Ahmad Misri, the son of Sheikh Abdul Rehman Misri, who one time had levelled numerous allegations against Mirza Mahmud in 1935, wrote a letter to Mirza Tahir inviting him to a Mubahila on 'instances of indulgences in sex orgy' by his father. He dared not face him.

The nature of Ahmadya beliefs and the past history of the movement spreading over a century furnished sufficient proof to safely condemn Qadianis for their errors of commissions and omissions. The simple way was to ignore this propaganda ploy as it was meant for specific ends in view. Still the ulema of all schools of thought accepted the challenge with an open heart. They asked Mirza Tahir to come to an open place with his family members and followers and in accordance with the teaching of the Holy Quran and Sunnah invoke the curse of Allah on the liar. Renowned scholars of Islam like Maulana Tahirul Qadri, Maulana Muhammad Yousaf Ludhanvi, Maulana Khan Muhammad and the ulema associated with the World-wide Khatame Nabuwwat Movement (as well as Syed Abdul Hafeez Shah who later formed the Anti Ahmadiyya Movement) persuaded Mirza Tahir to fix a venue of 'his choice' for Mubahila but he had not the temerity to accept it. He employed one excuse after another and insisted on a written Mubahila which was just to put signature on the Mubahila tract issued from Rabwah. A delegation comprising the ulema of Tahafuze Khatame Nabuwwat went to Mirza Tahir's Qasr-i-Khilafat at Tilford, Surrey, England, to see him but he whisked away to an unknown place and avoided a face to face encounter with them. All that proved his malicious intentions employed behind the facade of Mubahila and the diabolical role Qadianis ever played on such occasions.

On 17 August, 1988, Gen Muhammad Zia-Ul-Haq, President of Pakistan along with the American Ambassador, a US General and several senior Pakistan military officers died in an air crash. Mirza Tahir Ahmed found an opportunity to call it 'the latest living sign of the truth of Ahmadyat', a miraculous sign for which we should be grateful to Allah. (1. The Ahmadya Gazette USA, August, 1988) Gen Zia's death was called the direct result of Mubahila challenge although he always laughed at Qadiani gimmicks and had given least importance to such religo-political tricks.

After Gen Zia's death, elections were held in Pakistan in November 1988. Qadianis assiduously watched their political interests and remained indirectly involved in political manoeuvrings. A large amount of money was spent to win the favour of certain pro-Ahmadya national and provincial assembly candidates. Since Qadianis had been responsible to disenfranchise themselves by not registering themselves as non-Muslims voters they took indirect measures to safeguard and promote their interest.

Many Qadianis contested national and provincial Assembly seats in the elections of 1988 and in subsequent elections although Rabwah did not approve their candidature.


It was on 23rd March, 1889 that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had formally launched the Ahmadya movement by accepting bayat at Ludhiana, Punjab. Qadianis were making preparations for quite some time to celebrate the year 1989 as the centenary year of the Community. A detailed programme of Centenary Celebrations was chalked out by the Ahmadis of Rabwah to celebrate the occasion in a befitting manner. The Punjab Government, however, imposed a ban on these celebrations at Rabwah in March. The resentment against Ahmadis was mounting after their ruthless mobahila campaign and it was rightly apprehended that these celebrations would have provoked the Muslims to react vehemently against them. Despite the government restrictions Ahmadis living in Rabwah and other parts of the country celebrated the occasion properly. Embarassed by the Punjab Government ban on the celebrations, Rabwah elders subsequently moved a constitutional petition in the Lahore High Court praying the Court to declare illegal the orders of the Provincial Home Secretary dated 20 March, 1989 banning these celebrations in the province of Punjab as well as orders of the District Magistrate Jhang and Residential Magistrate Rabwah to remove ceremonial gates, banners, illuminations, besides ensuring that no further writings would be inscribed on the walls.

Appeal in Lahore High Court

The Court justified the ban on the centenary celebrations imposed by the Punjab Government. Mr. Justice Khalil-ur-Rehman, in his judgement observed that Qadianis continue to profess and practice their faith and enjoy all the freedom like Hindus, Sikhs, Parsis and other religious minorities but a difficult situation is created by presenting themselves Muslims and using Shaar-i-Islam or Kalima Tayyaba, one of the fundamentals of Islam. The Court held that no untoward situation or incident would arise in case the constitutional mandate was adhered to by Qadianis and they treat themselves as a Community different and distinct from Muslims which is their own case.

The Court observed that the role of substituting themselves for Muslims and of excluding general body of Muslim from the fold of Islam was not to be accepted by the Muslim Ummah. Their loyalty to the country, constitution and their separate entity would ensure their safety and well being. Why should they be allowed to hijack Islam? They are welcome to have any faith but why should they insist on impurifying the faith of Muslims. Any act of Muslims taken for safeguarding the purity of their faith should not disturb the Qadianis or should give them no cause of grievance. (The Nation Lahore, 18 Sept. 1991)
Appeal in Supreme Court

On the instructions of Mirza Tahir Ahmad Qadianis appealed against this order in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. They also challanged the Prohibition of Qadianyat Ordinance on the ground that it was violative of Article 20 of the Constitution which ensures freedom to every citizen to profess, propagate and practise his/her religion. In July 1993, the Full Bench comprising five Judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan headed by Mr. Justice Shafi-ur-Rehman by majority dismissed the Ahmadiyya appeal challanging various sections of the Ordinance XX. The full Bench comprised Mr. Justice Shafi-ur-Rehman, Mr. Justice Abdul Qadeer Chandhry, Mr. Justice Mohammad Afzal Lone, Mr. Justice Saleem Akhtar and Mr. Justice Wali Muhammad Khan.

Many of the Ahmadiyya appeals pertained to conviction under section 298-B of PPC for using a badge of Kalma Tayyaba and saying Azan. Mr. Justice Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry whose judgement was accepted by majority of the judges stated:

Verdict of Supreme Court, Justice Abdul Qadeer

"that it is not only in Pakistan but throughout the world that laws protect the use of words, names and epithets which have special connotations and meanings. Dealing with the contention of Ahmadis that many of them were convicted on the charge of placing badges inscribed with Kalima, Mr. Justice Chaudhry cited section 20 of Indian Company Law which prohibits any other registration on the same name. The learned Judge stated that the Indian Constitution has similar fundamental rights as ours but there is not a single decision of any Indian Courts declaring the registration violative there is not of fundamental rights. Using trade mark or description of others in order to make believe others that they belong to the user amounts to an offence and perpetrator can be imprisoned and fined.
Mr. Justice Abdul Oadeer stated that in this case the appellants who are non-muslim want to pose their faith as Islam. "It must be appreciated that in this part of the world, faith is still the most precious thing to a believer and he will not tolerate a governement which is not prepared to save him from such deceptions and forgeries".
The learned Judge stated that insistance on the part of Qadiani Community to use the prohibited epithets and "Shaa'ire-e-Islam" leave no doubt in the mind even of a common man that the appellants (Qadiani) want to do so intentionally and it mounts to defiling those pious personages and deceiving others.

The learned Judge quoted an American Jurist saying the cloak of religion or religious belief does not protect anybody in committing fraud upon the public.

"If the Ahmadi Community has no design to deceive why do not they coin their own epithets? Why do not they realise that relying on the exclusive sign, marks, practices of other religions will betray the hollowness of their own religion, and added that there is no law in Pakistan which forbids Ahmadis to coin their own epithets and use them exclusively."

Coming to the point that the impugned Ordinance is violative of religious freedom Mr. Justice Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry observed that freedom to profess religion is subject to law, public order and morality. The learned Judge stated that Courts of other countries have held freedom to act. Freedom to act is subject to law and can not be absolute. The learned Judge quoted John Stuart Mill from his essay on 'Liberty' and observed that liberty did not mean licence to individual to do just what they pleased; such liberty would mean the absence of law and order and ultimately the destruction of liberty.

Mr. Justice Abdul Qadeer observed that appellants (Ahmedis) have not explained that epithets in question are essential part of their religion. It is well established principle throughout the world that state will not permit anyone to violate or take away the fundamental rights of other in the enjoyment of his rights.

No one can be allowed to insult, damage or defile the religion of any other class or outrage their religious feelings so as to give rise to law and order situation"

The learned Judge quoted profusely from the writings of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed and his so-called caliphs to show that they (Ahmadis) are religiously and socially a Community separate and different from the Muslims. Ahmadis have no right to use the epithets etc and the 'Shaa'r-e-Islam' which are exclusive to Muslims and they have been rightly denied their use by law.

The learned Judge observed that it is cardinal faith of every Muslim to believe in every Prophet and praise him and therefore, if anything is said against the Prophet (PBUH) it will injure the feelings of the Muslims. "Giving permission of assembly or procession to Ahmadis on the street of public places is like permitting civil war", the learned Judge observed. (The Nation Lahore, 6 July 1993)


One hundred years ago, Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadiani launched the Ahmadya Movement' in a remote village of East Punjab. Aided and funded by the British Imperialism, this sapling grew into a tree, shooting out its branches in many parts of the world. The movement assiduously served the colonial interests and received the alien support in India and abroad. Mirza shrewdly realized the political needs of Imperialism and used the name of Islam to fulfill them for his personal ends. Under the British protection and taking maximum advantage of their policy of non-intervention in religious affairs, he claimed to be a Mujaddid, Promised Messiah, Nabi and Rasul, abrogated Jehad, desecrated the Quranic verses, condemned the world of Islam, rebuked the ulema and unabashedly used the name of God to promote political interests of Imperialism and their Zionist collaborators. He took pride in his sycophancy and volunteered to undertake spying for the welfare of the Raj. His vague utterances, ridiculous prophecies, repetition of certain pet subjects like death of Jesus, successes in the field of litigation, receiving large sum of money from his followers etc. constitute the main theme of his prophethood. The past character of the movement has established beyond doubt that it owed its existence to the British patronage. It flourished in former British colonies and Israel with the colonial aid and depends on the political and financial support of anti-Islamic forces specially Zionism for its survival and growth. Its faceless sympathizers do not want to see its existence in jeopardy because it carries a potential to meet the threat of fundamentalism, professes pacifist ideas and aligns itself with the West. From the religious point of view it strikes at the cardinal beliefs of Islam, breaks up the unity of Muslim Ummah by adding new sheeps to the flock of a pseudo-Messiah from among the Muslims. It has been providing a large number of spies and moles in the garb of Ahmadiyya missionaries to foreign powers to carry out subversive activities in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Though the Western economic and political dominance over weaker nations have assumed numerous forms and their techniques of infiltration in these countries have undergone drastic changes yet Ahmadiyyat is a potent force to be reckoned with.

Except some ridiculous theological discussions, the Qadiani literature had added nothing in the realm of theology. It has absolutely no 'liberation theology". Mirza and his second successor could never think of a free India without the British control. He anticipated permanent subjugation of India and advised his community to cooperate with the British to reap economic and social benefits. Lower middle class of India like petty clerk of courts, tehsildars, small businessmen, pseudo-mullahs etc. joined Qadiani community to get the favour of their British masters and prove themselves loyal servants of the Raj. Their kith and kin received preferences in civil & military services and received Government contracts and other economic favours and got higher social status in the society. Some religious-minded persons were tricked by the Qadiani chicanery, others joined Ahmadiyyat mainly for personal reasons. A few among them had a taste of it and then left it forever.

The Mirza was over-optimistic about his religious venture. He was confident that the British Government would not let this political agency be liquidated as it carried a good potential to serve their colonial ends. He anticipated a significant role the movement could play against religo-political developments of Islam in India and Arab lands. Inspired by the love and support of the British masters, he, in 1903 announced:

'0 mankind ! hearken, this is the prophecy of God who made the Heavens and the Earth. He will spread this Movement in all the countries and will give it supremacy over all through reasons and argument. Remember, no one will descend from heaven.....All the wise people will discard this belief and the third century from today will not have completed when all those who had been waiting for Jesus, both Muslims and Christains will despair of his coming and entertain misgivings and there will be only one faith in the world and one preceptor. I came only to sow the seed. That seed has been sown by my hand. It will now grow and blossom forth and none dare retard its growth". (Tazkira-tush-Shahaditain). (See related article)
Qadianis claim that there are 3.5 million members of their Jamaat living in Pakistan and about 6.5 million in rest of the world. (See new articles on the Qadiani figures) In the absence of authoritative statistics their claim can not be verified. They are, however, flourishing in the countries like the US, West Europe and some parts of Asia and the Pacific. The main concentration is in Africa while their power-base exists in Israel. The British Government has provided all facilities to Mirza Tahir Ahmad after his flight from Pakistan in April, 1984 to spread the message of Qadianyat in distant lands. He has established a centre in a farm in Sheephatch Lane, Tilford, Surrey and named it Islamabad. Many British MPs call on him and raise their voice in support of Ahmadiyya cause in the corridors of power.

Mirza Tahir Ahmad claims that annual subscriptions received from the Jamaat in Pakistan were Rs. 19.7 million in 1981-82 which had increased to Rs. 34.5 million in 1986. The amount received from other countries of the world had increased from Rs. 71.2 million to Rs. 183.6 million during these years. The collections from various other contributions had increased from Rs. 90 million to Rs. 219 million in the same period from outside Pakistan besides voluntary subscriptions of Rs. 108.3 million. (Souvenier, Karachi 1987)

There has been a tremendous increase in all types of contributions from 1986 to 1993. Exact figures are not available because Mirza Tahir Ahmad had advised his Jamaat to stop publishing these figures because Intelligence agencies in Pakistan get alarmed over it and people start questioning about the sources of funding.

Qadianis claim that Ahmadyat has entered into 130 countries of the world and 342 new Jamats have been established in these countries. Over 40 Ahmadiyya centre are functioning in Europe, 22 in the US and 157 in Africa. Special programmes for propagation of Ahmadiyyat has been prepared for the Arab world and the newly liberated Central Asian states.

The future of Ahmadiyya movement is invariably linked with the patronage of alien forces of the West and the covert support extended by the anti-Islamic lobby. It lacks stamina to withstand rational argumentation and objective criticism. There is also a small Ahmadiyya Community called, the Lahore Jamat, which is heading towards extinction. It has never been welcomed by the Muslims despite its soft attitude and comparatively less harmful and provocative beliefs. It has been the victim of its own deception. Rabwah-based-Ahmadiyya Community is comparatively well-organized and is headed by an astutute power-broker who is under the delusion of enjoying the status of a quasi-prophethood. He has established himself well in London and is reluctant to come to Pakistan especially after the death of his wife. Some members of moribund Lahore Jamat allege that he is cherishing the memories of his good old days when he was a young and energetic student at the University of London and frequented Soho for pleasure sake.

Thanks to dish antenna, his gullible followers can see his antics on miniscreen every week. From time to time he raises the bogy of progress of the Jamat to fill his coffers. Some people belonging to down-trodden classes of Africa had certainly joined the movement in the last few years for varied reasons, knowing little about the mumbo-jumbo of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, however the movement itself is devoid of any charm or appeal to attract the attention of sensible people.