Custom Search

Hassan Nasir: A Story of McCarthyism in Pakistan

Posted on July 15, 2009
Filed Under >Umer A. Chaudhry, Books, History, Law & Justice, People
22 Comments
Total Views: 39601

Share

Umer A. Chaudhry

""Book Review: Hasan Nasir Ki Shahadat, by Major Ishaq Mohammad. Xavier Publications, Multan; Rs. 500.

The letters of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg moved the lyrical pen of Faiz Ahmed Faiz to write his monumental poem hum jo tareek rahon mein mare gaye.’ The Rosenbergs were Marxists and victims of McCarthyism. A few hours before they were sent to the electric chair in 1953, they left an everlasting message of hope for their children: ‘Be comforted then that we were serene and understood with the deepest kind of understanding, that civilization had not as yet progressed to the point where life did not have to be lost for the sake of life; and that we were comforted in the sure knowledge that others would carry on after us.’

McCarthyism is widely documented as a dark chapter in the history of the U.S.A. It is considered synonymous with Communist witch-hunts, state-sponsored red bashing, illegal detentions of left-wing activists and the arbitrary use of state power to censor progressive political expression. McCarthyism was not merely an American experience. During the heyday of the Cold War, systematic repressive measures against Communism were introduced by almost all allies of the U.S.A. Pakistan was no exception, although there has been very little written on this subject, and there is no accessible documentation in this regard.

Who were the victims of anti-Communist repression in Pakistan? How were these radical Socialists persecuted? What is their history? These unconventional questions are usually sidelined or silenced.



Major Ishaq Mohammad’s book ‘Hassan Nasir ki Shahadat’ lays bare to some extent the murky historical chapter of state repression of Communism in Pakistan. Major Ishaq Mohammad needs no introduction. He was imprisoned for four years along with Faiz Ahmed Faiz and Syed Sajjad Zaheer in the hitherto unresolved 1951 Rawalpindi Conspiracy Case.

Ishaq Mohammad gained massive popularity during the 60s and 70s as the leader of the Mazdoor Kissan Party. He led the peasant revolts of Hashtnager and was well-known for his militant stand against capitalism and landlordism. Arrested after the military coup of General Zia-ul-Haq, he suffered from paralysis during his imprisonment. Despite his ill-health, he refused the military government’s offer for medical help provided he tendered an apology. Defiant till his last breath, he bade farewell to this world in 1982.

‘Hassan Nasir ki Shahadat’ is woven around a tale that has never been told. The story is set in the winter of 1960 when Ishaq Mohammad, a young lawyer well into the second year of his legal practice, met Faiz Ahmed Faiz on Lahore’s Mall Road and found him unusually depressed and perturbed. Faiz told Ishaq Mohammad that ‘a Communist from Karachi’ had been brought to the Lahore Fort. He was subjected to heavy torture – so much so that his cries of pain terrified other prisoners in the Fort. It was the wife of one such prisoner who had told Faiz about the horrifying torture.

Ishaq Mohammad had been to the Lahore Fort as a detainee in 1959 and 1960, though only for short periods of time. The Lahore Fort was a symbol of terror in Pakistan at that time. This symbol of Mughal majesty had been turned into a draconian detention and investigation center during the period of British colonialism. The ‘criminals’ of the independence movement were often detained in the Fort for questioning through questionable means. After 1947, the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) took over the command of the Lahore Fort. The conditions there, well-documented in the book under review, were already horrific enough to paralyze a sane mind. The law enforcers, trained under the colonial regime, applied their "investigation techniques" on stubborn detainees.

""After the ban on the Communist Party along with its sister organizations, and the military coup of 1958, the Lahore Fort was often used to interrogate leftist political activists. Major Ishaq Mohammad knew that the ‘Communist from Karachi’ was none other than Hassan Nasir, the Provincial Secretary of the banned underground Communist Party active in Karachi. He was also a member of the National Awami Party (NAP). Despite being the scion of a landlord family of Hyderabad, Deccan, Hassan Nasir had taken up the cause of the oppressed in Karachi. He was arrested in 1952 and exiled to India for one year. He returned to Pakistan immediately after the completion of the exile period and gave up his comfortable life to continue with his political struggle.

Ishaq Mohammad moved a habeas corpus petition in the High Court at Lahore through the able representation of Mahmood Ali Kasuri on November 22, 1960. It was during the hearing of the petition on the next day that the news of Hassan Nasir’s death surfaced. According to the government version, Hassan Nasir committed suicide by hanging himself from a nail in his detention cell at the Lahore Fort on November 13. Progressive circles around Pakistan were shell-shocked. How could a young man full of hope and commitment take his own life? Ishaq Mohammad also refused to believe the government’s version. In order to protect his comrade’s dignity, he devoted himself to the magisterial inquiry into the cause of death of a detainee in police custody, mandated under section 176 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.

Gradually Ishaq Mohammad started to uncover the lacunas in the State’s version: the discrepancy about the position of hanging marks on Hassan Nasir’s neck, the contradictory accounts of marks found on Hassan’s elbow and knee, and the absence of any plausible motive for suicide. A great deal was required before the inquiry could be finalized. The attitude of the state officials and the magistrate towards Ishaq Mohammad was highly hostile. For more than half of the questions asked by Ishaq Mohammad during different cross-examinations, the police officials standing in the witness box took the plea of secrecy in order to frustrate the legal process.

""The most sordid episode in the magisterial inquiry emerged when the dead body of Hassan Nasir was exhumed. Ishaq Mohammad considered the dead body to be his primary evidence that could conclusively prove that he had died due to torture and not suicide. Despite his repeated requests before the magistrate and the High Court, the dead body was not permitted to be exhumed. Even the site of the grave was not identified by the police, nor did the Court order the police to do so. Hassan Nasir’s dead body was only allowed to be exhumed when his mother arrived from India to take the body back home with her. On closely inspecting the teeth, hair and feet of the corpse shown to her, his mother, Zehra Alambardar Hussain, refused to accept it as that of her son. The police had decided to conceal Hassan Nasir’s body from even his mother. It was at this point that Ishaq Mohammad decided to withdraw from the magisterial inquiry. The whole apparatus of the state under military rule had united to keep the circumstances of Hassan Nasir’s death a secret. The judicial probe was thwarted.

Ishaq Mohammad’s efforts to document the course of the inquiry have filled a major vacuum in Pakistan’s history. While informing readers about the proceedings in the magisterial inquiry, the book under review touches some very important topics like the colonial character and workings of the Punjab police, state sponsorship of torture, and the cruelties that occurred in the Lahore Fort.

At many points in the book the author has written that history will do justice to the cause of Hassan Nasir. Disappointed by the magisterial enquiry, Ishaq Mohammad left the final verdict to the conscience of the people of Pakistan by writing ‘Hassan Nasir ki Shahadat’. He was sure the records that were buried by the police under the plea of secrecy and ‘the broad national interest’ would one day see the light of day. That day has not yet arrived. The publication of the book under review is a grim reminder of justice denied to a person who sacrificed himself for the betterment of humanity. It is also an indictment against the current rulers of Pakistan who continue to keep the details of this gruesome episode a secret.

Umer A. Chaudhry blogs at The Red Diary and this book review was first published in The Friday Times, Lahore July 10-16, 2009 issue.

Foes hope Mass. weddings will help push U.S. ban on gay marriage.

San Jose Mercury News (San Jose, CA) May 17, 2004 Byline: Jim Puzzanghera WASHINGTON _ Opponents of gay marriage hope the sight of same-sex couples taking legal wedding vows in Massachusetts will jump-start the stalled attempt to pass a federal constitutional amendment banning such unions nationwide.

Despite President Bush’s backing, which he reiterated Monday, and polls showing the public also supports an amendment outlawing gay marriage, the push has not gained traction in Congress so far.

Gay-marriage supporters predicted that when the general public realizes the world will not end now that state-sanctioned gay marriages have begun, the amendment will become even more of a long shot.

But opponents of gay marriage hope the wedding scenes from Massachusetts will have the opposite effect, igniting an uproar from average Americans.

So while the nation’s attention was focused Monday on Massachusetts, another battle was being waged in the nation’s capital. In a series of news conferences and appearances, gay marriage opponents hoped to revive the push for a constitutional amendment. this web site gay marriage facts

“Usually something isn’t believable until it is on fire, and heterosexual marriage has now been seriously damaged,” said the Rev. Lou Sheldon, chair of the Traditional Values Coalition, which opposes gay marriage, who held a news conference Monday with black clergy. `It’s almost like the enemy has attacked and now there has to be a serious comeback. And I believe you’re going to see a serious comeback in the next few months.” Another group opposing gay marriage, the Family Research Council, is participating in four events this week designed to build support for a constitutional amendment.

The new reality emanating from Massachusetts will change the dynamic of the amendment debate, said Genevieve Wood, the group’s vice president for communications, because it “causes the American public to realize it’s not just a public policy debate, it’s a reality that may be coming to their state.” But most Americans will find the new reality is no threat to them, supporters of gay marriage said.

“Once marriages go forward in Massachusetts, and several months from now it is clear there are no negative social consequences, the argument goes away,” said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., an openly gay legislator who opposes the gay marriage amendment. Frank said the low-key approach gays in Massachusetts appeared to be taking, compared with the jovial celebrations that surrounded the gay marriages in San Francisco earlier this year, will help mute any potential backlash.

“Making a bigger deal of this than is necessary to get people married is not a good idea,” Frank said from his Capitol Hill office. “I don’t think people should look like they’re gloating. This is not San Francisco East.” In the wake of the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision that the state could not prohibit gay marriages, and with San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom issuing same-sex marriage licenses, Bush urged Congress in February to pass a constitutional amendment outlawing such unions. But many members of Congress, including some key Republicans, oppose such an amendment. website gay marriage facts

To approve a constitutional amendment It takes a two-thirds majority in the House of Representatives and the Senate, and then approval by at least 38 states. So far only 120 of 435 House members have signed on as co-sponsors to the marriage amendment, and only 12 of 100 Senators. With legislative time running out this year, neither proposal has been voted out of a committee.

A lead sponsor of the amendment, Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo., is pushing for a full House vote this summer, said her chief of staff, Guy Short.

“There are folks out there realizing that today there is gay marriage in America and the American people want a voice in that,” Short said.

In a written statement Monday, Bush reiterated his support for an amendment.

“The sacred institution of marriage should not be redefined by a few activist judges,” Bush said. “The need for that amendment is sill urgent, and I repeat that call today.” His likely Democratic rival, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, also opposes gay marriage, but supports civil unions.

Jonathan Rauch, author of “Gay Marriage: Why It is Good for Gays, Good for Straights and Good for America,” said Monday that Congress should stay out of the debate and let Massachusetts serve as a laboratory for gay marriage. The state’s voters will be able to see how legal gay marriage works and then will a chance to express their opinion in a vote on an amendment to the Massachusetts constitution banning the unions, probably in 2006.

“Now is the time for the federal government…to have the courage to do absolutely nothing for the foreseeable future,” he said Monday during a debate at the libertarian Cato Institute that also involved Wood.

But Sheldon said it is time for Congress to act. He is trying to start a grass-roots movement among clergy nationwide to urge parishioners to lobby Congress to pass the amendment.

“The stakes are so high,” Sheldon said. “There’s an unbelievable level of threat to marriage.” ___ Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.

Related Posts with Thumbnails

22 comments posted

Comment Pages: [3] 2 1 » Show All

  1. LUIZA says:
    March 7th, 2010 2:30 pm

    ?????????¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶?????
    ???????1¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶????
     ??????¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶  ???
    ?????o¶¶¶¶¶¶¶$???????ø¶¶¶¶¶¶??
     ?????¶¶¶¶¶¶?????????????ø¶¶¶¶?
    ????¶¶¶¶¶¶???????????????o¶¶¶?
     ???¶¶¶¶¶¶¢????????????????$¶¶?
    ???¶¶¶¶¶ø?ø¶$¶¶¶ø?????????1¶¶1
     ??o¶¶¶¶¶?1o¶¶¶¶¶???1¶¶ø¢o$?¶¶¶
     ??¶¶¶¶¶?????7o71???¶¶øø$1?¶¶¶ø
    ?$¶¶¶¶¶o???????????¶?¢¶¶¶o¶¶¶ø
    7¶¶¶¶¶1????????????$?????7¶¶¶ø
    ø¶¶¶¶¶7?????????1??¶?????¶¶¶¶ø
    ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶??????¢¶¶¶¶7????¶¶¶¶¶¶
    ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶1??¶¶¶¶¶ø¶¶ø?o¶¶¶¶ ¶Â¶Â¶
    ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶$¶¶??7117¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶ ¶Â¶
    ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶O¶¶¶¶????????¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶ ¶
    ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶7?¶¶¶¶¶oo7$¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶ ¶¶
    ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶7??¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶ ¶Â¶Â¶Â¶
    ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶?????ø¶¶¶¶¶¶¶??¶¶¶¶¶¶ ¶Â¶
    ¶¶¶¶¶¶O???????????????1¶¶¶¶¶¶¶
    ¶¶¶¶¶??????????????????¶¶¶¶¶¶ que Deus te proteja , beijooos boa noite…

  2. LUIZA says:
    March 7th, 2010 2:28 pm

    QUE AS BENÇÃOS DE JESUS CRISTO E DEUS NOSSO SENHOR POOSA ESTAR COM TODOS!!!!!!!!!!! Só Deus pode
    criar
    Mas você pode valorizar o que Ele criou
    Só Deus pode dar a fé
    Mas você pode dar o seu testemunho
    Só Deus pode dar o amor
    Mas você pode ensinar amar
    Só Deus pode dar a alegria
    Mas você pode sorrir à todos
    Só Deus pode dar a força
    Mas você pode apoiar à quem desanimou
    Só Deus é a luz
    Mas você pode fazê la brilhar aos olhos dos seus
    irmãos.
    Só Deus é o caminho
    Mas você pode indicá lo aos outros
    Só Deus é a vida
    Mas você pode restituir aos outros o desejo de viver
    Só Deus pode fazer milagres
    Mas você pode ser aquele que trouxe os cinco pães
    e os dois peixes
    Só Deus pode fazer o que parece impossível…
    Mas você pode fazer o possível
    Só Deus se basta à si mesmo, Mas ele preferiu
    contar com você.
    DEUS te abençoe…

  3. Umer says:
    July 28th, 2009 8:00 am

    Can you please refer to where Tariq Ali said all this?

    I remember to have read completely opposite from him.

  4. sattar says:
    July 16th, 2009 9:48 pm

    McCarthyism is still alive in Pakistan. the witch hunt against those we do not agree with and the way we demonize them and turn them into ‘agents’ if not of Russia then of India or America is built into us and we do it at all levels in society, even ordinary people.

  5. Khurram says:
    July 16th, 2009 9:30 pm

    Nice review. But the book is a little one sided because of who is writing it. Yes, history should be revealed, but from both sides.

  6. fuzair says:
    July 16th, 2009 8:39 pm

    Sorry, the Tariq Ali speech url is still not up.

    BTW, according to Tariq Ali, the last of the red hot Trotskyites, the Rawalpindi Conspiracy Case was absolutely on the level and the conspirators had plans to execute quite a large number of people–i.e., it was to be a true Communist takeover and not the usual Pakistani bloodless coup. Given his personal connection to and knowledge of the coup, I expect that for once he might know what he is talking about.

Comment Pages: [3] 2 1 » Show All



Have Your Say (Bol, magar piyar say)

Please respect the ATP Comment Policy.

Keep comments on topic; no personal attacks; don't submit indecent, inflammatory, slanderous, uncivil or irrelevant comments; flamers and trolls are not welcome; inappropriate comments will be removed or edited.

If you won't say it to someone's face, then don't say it here!

Readers who want to use a URL should please use the TINY URL program.

Thanks, and keep the comments coming!