www.chitraltimes.com

Social Justice is at the heart of Ushr

Dear Editor,

In a subsequent letter, Mr. Fazal Illahi correctly highlights aspects of the practice of Ushr.

In particular he explains that Pakistan government functionaries and not Chitral State functionaries contributed to the later day problems described by an earlier writer who was critical of Ushr. In fact both letters, one critical and one supportive, prove the unique contribution of Chitrali society in effective implementation of social justice within the Islamic framework.

It is important that the history of Chitral State and Chitral District be distinguished in our discussion of Ushr. I am not a religious scholar nor do I make any pretense of claiming greater knowledge of religious affairs. I am simply relaying historical facts that enable the people of Chitral to celebrate our collective past, including centuries of social justice as exhibited in Ushr. Ushr, as part of Islamic law has been practiced for centuries in Chitral under the rule of the Mehtars. I have spoken of its utilitarian benefits and its proven record as a vehicle of social justice. We can debate faults in its workings but we must be clear that its later day abuses took place under inexperienced government functionaries and not under the rule of the Mehtars.

The introduction of Deputy Commissioners, Tasildars and Thanidars took place while Chitral State was under the control of a political agent. Elders of that generation of Chitralis will recall the events surrounding the untimely death of Mehtar Saif Ur Rehman. Following the Mehtar’s death, his son assumed the throne of Chitral. However, a guardian was placed in charge of the Mehtar’s son who was then a child. For all intents and purposes, decision making was carried out by a Pakistan government functionary and his assigned bureaucrats. Unlike the practice of the Mehtars, Ushr was now auctioned off on a village to village basis with bidding done on the Ushr. One writer speaks of abuses and Gudams, not knowing that these Gudams did not exist during the period of the Mehtars but were introduced when Chitral State was directly ruled by an agent of the Federal government.

I readily admit that abuses of the Ushr may have taken place under the government bureaucrats who took over the Chitrali model of Ushr. I have already mentioned that bidding on the Ushr as contracts was a problem but a greater problem was the government’s refusal to accept goods as payment. Indeed the government would accept only money in return for Ushr contract awards. This created difficulties for the awarded contract holder and the locals.

The displeasure that some communities may have felt with the Ushr under the Federal government did not take place under the rule of the Mehtars for one simple reason. Minority communities such as the Kalash were exempt from the Ushr deduction. When Chitral State was placed under direct control of Pakistani bureaucrats an attempt was made to extend the Ushr collection throughout the district in keeping with Federal ordinances. This attempt was reversed when people refused to be part of the programme as in Laspur. I believe strongly that multiple layers of government bureaucracy created unnecessary wastage and corruption in our systems. Dare I say all government bureaucracies the world over are replete with abuses and anemic responses to social needs. This is as true for the developed West as it is for the Developing World.

Again I would emphasize that most Chitralis of my parents’ generation speak very fondly of the Ushr and recall how all citizens would gladly give more than their required share for the Ushr. The question of crop failure or poor crop yield is not an issue since no Ushr would be collected in such an instance. I still fervently believe that all eligible Chitralis would readily contribute to the Ushr had a simple, transparent and accountable model continued to exist as under the rule of the Mehtars.
Sincerely,

Shahzadi Sofia Baig