Paul, Joseph and Blake arrived at the courthouse at 11. Walking up the wide marble stairs that lead from the first floor to the second floor, Paul pointed to the stone engraving from the Qur'an that said, "God is just." Turning to Blake, Paul said, "I hope the justices read that, when they came to the Court this morning." Paul knew they would face a panel of five justices, supposedly chosen at random from the fifteen justices on the bench. No one knew whether or not the choice was made that way. Paul hoped that Justice Shahab, a fair and courageous man, would be on their panel

In the courtroom Paul saw Javed and Hassan standing beside one of the two tables before the bench where the justices would sit. Javed always looked like his clothes were too small for him, but Hassan was elegant in his tailored suit. Although Paul had great respect for Javed, he was glad that Hassan was speaking for him today.

Blake came up nowand spoke to the two lawyers briefly, before moving with Joseph to the seats reserved for visitors, while Paul stepped into the hall to look for a toilet before the hearing began. When he returned to the courtroom, he was surprised to find that Javed and Hassan were gathering up their papers.

"The bailiff has just informed us that the hearing has been rescheduled for this afternoon at three," Javed said.

"They might have told us earlier," Paul responded. "I wonder what prompted the delay?"

"Why don't we just have a leisurely lunch?" Blake suggested. Turning to Javed, he asked, "Do you know a good restaurant in Islamabad?"

"Sure," Javed replied. "Are you paying?"

"If you promise to eat lightly," Blake retorted.

They made their way into the hall and down the stairs. Javed conferred briefly with Hassan, and then once outside the courthouse they set off in two taxis. Javed led the way, with Blake and Joseph in his taxi. Hassan followed with Paul.

Traffic was heavy, so it took them about over half an hour to reach the Foochow restaurant that Javed and Hassan had selected.

"Why Chinese food?" Blake asked, when they stepped out of the taxis.

"Because the food is good and plentiful, and you won't complain about the price," Javed answered. The inside decor reminded Paul of the Chinese restaurant he'd visited several times when he was studying in Birmingham. Splashes of red, green and gold covered the walls, and a large dragon hung over the chalkboard where the specials for the day were posted.

After they ordered, the conversation continued in a light vein. It was almost as though they weren't about to appear in the Supreme Court in a couple of hours. They might have been on a casual luncheon outing, five men enjoying one another's company. Paul sat quietly listening to the banter between Javed and Blake. He noticed that Hassan, too, was quiet. Hassan must be thinking about what he will say in the hearing, Paul thought to himself.

When the food came, Blake proposed a toast. Out of respect for Javed and Hassan, who obeyed the Muslim precept against drinking alcohol, Blake had not ordered the beer that he really wanted. But lifting high his small cup of tea, he said merrily: "To our victory in the Court this afternoon." Carefully they clicked their teacups and drank a sip of tea.

Then Javed turned to Paul and said, "Please offer thanks for this food and for our struggle together for Pakistan."

It was the first time a Muslim had ever asked Paul to pray, but Paul was eager to oblige. He bowed his head and was silent for a moment, before beginning. "Gracious and loving God, we thank you for this food and for the friendship that we have known in this struggle. And we thank you for sustaining us, for overlooking our faults, and for giving us courage and hope. If it be your will, may our efforts help protect the rights of the people of Pakistan." Silently, Paul finished the prayer, "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen." He expected that Javed and Hassan were also in their minds adding to his prayer their own conclusions in Arabic. The men were all quiet for a moment after the prayer, until Blake began again to banter with Javed about the food.

They ate leisurely and then had coffee before Javed reminded Blake that this was on him. "It's my pleasure," Blake said, putting a credit card on the small plate presented to him by the waiter. A few minutes later, they left the restaurant and climbed into two more taxis to take them back to the courthouse.

Once inside the room schedule for the hearing, Javed and Hassan returned to the table for the petitioners and Blake moved to the seats in the back with Joseph. Paul looked toward the reporters gathered at the side of the room, as Khalida Ali slipped into the room.

Suddenly, the reporters and everyone else in the courtroom rose from their seats. As the bailiff called out, "The Supreme Court of Pakistan is now in session," the justices entered and took their places on the bench at the front of the courtroom. Justice Shahab, unfortunately, wasn't among them. A recorder came in with them and took her place below the bench. After the justices sat down, everyone else sat. Then the recorder read the number of the petition, the name of the petitioner, and the names of the attorneys of record. Paul's heartbeat quickened at the sound of his name, and he saw Hassan's back straighten when he heard his name.

Paul knew that under the rules of the Supreme Court the petitioner's attorney would be invited to speak first. He would summarize the arguments that the court had already received in written form. The attorney for the government would then present his arguments. Finally, the justices might question one or both of the attorneys. Paul sat back and tried to relax, waiting for Hassan to begin his statement.

Hassan stood, adjusted his glasses, and began to read the text he'd prepared. "Thank you, your honors, for agreeing to hear our petition challenging the constitutionality of Section 295 (c) of the Pakistan Penal Code. I will not repeat in detail the brief you have already received but will merely summarize our argument."

"As the petitioner, Fr. Paul Gill, has been charged with murder because of his participation in a demonstration protesting the destruction of Shantinagar by a mob incited by the rumor that blasphemy had been committed, we contend that he has standing to bring this petition before the Supreme Court. His freedom and his life are at risk because of this statute. He has reason, therefore, to challenge its constitutionality."

"In addition, we remind the Court that Section 295 (c) of the Pakistan Penal Code is vague in its definition of the crime of blasphemy. Section 295 (c) reads: 'Whoever by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation, or by any imputation or innuendo, or by insinuation, directly or indirectly defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, Peace Be Upon Him, shall be punished with death and shall also be liable to fine.' The statue does not require any proof of intent on the part of the alleged offender but only requires showing that someone feels that an action or statement of the alleged offender defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, Peace Be Upon Him. All that needs to be proven to render a decision involving the death penalty is that someone has taken offense. The Law and Justice Committee of the Senate warned that the statute was vague before it was passed. The Committee was right."

"The constitutional arguments are also straightforward. Article 8 of the constitution requires that all statutes are to be consistent with the rights protected by the constitution. Article 9 holds that the security of each citizen is to be protected by law. Section 20 says that 'Subject to law, public order and morality, (a) every citizen shall have the right to perform, profess, practice and propagate his religion . . ..' And Section 25 states that all citizens are equal before the law and are entitled to equal protection of the law. In the Jehandera Kishore case the Court held that this meant laws should be just and equitable."

"The petition asserts, first, that the blasphemy law is unconstitutional, because it has meant that equal protection of the law is not guaranteed to Christian citizens of Pakistan. This is not only true for Christians, however, who have been charged with committing blasphemy under Section 295 (c) of the Penal Code, but for all Christians as well. The statute has encouraged exploitation and violence against Christians in Pakistan. The heinous attack on Shantinagar due to a rumor of blasphemy is ample, if tragic, evidence of the results of this law."

"Second, enforcement of the statute does not lead to justice for the citizens of Pakistan. This is true, not only for Christians, but also for Muslims and Ahmadis who have been charged under Section 295 (c) of the Penal Code. Because the law does not require evidence of intent to commit blasphemy, a person who is charged is assumed to be guilty and must prove his or her innocence. But how is the accused able to prove the charge of blasphemy to be false, when the statute requires only that the accuser be offended?"

"Third, the blasphemy law brings the entire legal system into disrepute because it allows the law to be used as a weapon for settling personal grudges and intimidating members of minority communities. Because of this statute, justice is threatened not only for those accused under it, but for the entire society."

"In conclusion, the petitioner asserts that the blasphemy law is unconstitutional because it fails to provide equal protection for Christians, fails to offer justice to all those charged under it, and fails to encourage the rule of law within Pakistan. Section 295 (c) of the Penal Code is not only unjust for Christians and other religious minorities in Pakistan, it is unjust for all the citizens of Pakistan because it is an unjust law. Therefore, we request that the Court find the law unconstitutional and make permanent its injunction prohibiting the filing of charges and prosecution under Section 295 (c) of the Penal Code."

There was absolute silence in the courtroom when Hassan sat down. Paul wanted to clap, but he knew it would be out of order. Hassan had lived up to his reputation. His summary had been eloquent, succinct and convincing.

"Your honors," the lawyer responding for the government began, "we have, as you know, previously stipulated to the standing of the petitioner." The lawyer paused to clear his throat before continuing. "We have presented our arguments to the Court in detail and so will not repeat them here. But we do wish to challenge the statements made by the attorney for the petitioner."

"First, the argument that the statute is unconstitutionally vague was rejected by the National Assembly when it passed the legislation. The Law and Justice Committee of the Senate only recommended care in considering the law. It did not conclude that the present statute was unconstitutional. Unless it is clear that a law is vague on its face, the decision of the National Assembly in this regard should be upheld by the Court. The National Assembly thought Section 295 (c) was a good law. The Court should not rule otherwise."

"Second, equal protection is provided by the law for Christians. The attorney for the petitioner admits that Muslims and Ahmadis as well as Christians have been charged under the blasphemy statute. He does not mention, however, that more Muslims and Ahmadis have been charged than Christians. The blasphemy law has been applied to Pakistani citizens regardless of their religious affiliation. Thus, there is no substance to the claim that enforcing Section 295 (c) of the Penal Code involves a violation of the equal protection guarantees of the constitution."

"Third, the lawyer for the petition claims that the law has resulted in injustice. But he has not acknowledged that, although the statute requires the death penalty, not a single execution by the state has taken place. Not even those convicted of violating Section 295 (c) of the Penal Code have been put to death. Moreover, many of those charged have been found not guilty. Where is the injustice in the enforcement of this law? In one or two instances, mob violence has been unleashed against those charged under the blasphemy law, but unlawful behavior by unruly citizens does not prove that the blasphemy law is unjust."

"Admittedly, in some cases it appears that false charges have been filed, but once it was determined that these charges could not be substantiated, there was no further prosecution. To assist the police in the future, however, in reviewing any complaint filed under Section 295 (c), the government is presently drafting new rules that will require a hearing by a magistrate before a formal complaint is registered. Surely, this is an instance of the government affording justice to its citizens, rather than being the cause of injustice."

"And fourth, the government cannot concede that this statute has in any way brought the legal system in Pakistan into disrepute. After all, we are presently engaged in a hearing about the constitutionality of this statute. Is not this evidence of the rule of law in Pakistan? The attack on the village of Shantinagar is to be condemned, of course; but it is not evidence of the failure of the legal system in our country. An investigation has been ordered, and once the perpetrators are identified and apprehended there will be justice. It is outrageous that the petitioner and his attorneys impugn the legal system that has given them the opportunity to present their case before this Court. They owe the Court and the government an apology."

"Finally, the government would like to call the petitioner to the stand in order to clarify one or two points before this hearing is closed and the Court retires to render its decision."

Paul shuddered as he heard his name read by the bailiff. He'd never dreamed he would be called to testify. Neither Javed nor Hassan had discussed this possibility with him. As he turned to look at them, Hassan rose. "Objection, your honors. The position of the petitioner is fully set forth in the petition. There is no new evidence to be discovered by calling the petitioner to testify."

"Your honors," the lawyer for the government replied. "We believe there is new evidence to be gained from the petitioner's testimony, as we will show. Is there some good reason why the petitioner should not testify? Does he have something to hide?"

"The petitioner has nothing to hide," Hassan answered.

"Then why do you object to having him testify?"

Paul was keenly aware that the press was listening to this exchange. He had nothing to hide. Why shouldn't he testify? If Hassan persisted in his objection, the Court might rule against him anyway. As that would look bad in the press and might anger one or more of the justices, it would be better to give in. He stood and said, "I have nothing to hide and will be happy to testify, if the lawyer for the respondent and the Court wishes."

Hassan glanced with apprehension at Paul, but he obviously wasn't prepared to argue with Paul in front of the justices. "Given the petitioner's statement, I withdraw my objection," he said and sat down.

Paul walked forward to the witness chair and stood as he was sworn, his hand on the Bible. Had he been a Muslim, he would have been sworn with his hand on the Qur'an. He seated himself, feeling calmer now, and waited for the first question.

"Fr. Gill, are you a Christian?"

"I am a priest of the Catholic Church."

"Are you challenging the constitutionality of the blasphemy law as a Catholic?"

"No, as a Pakistani citizen. The evidence presented in my petition demonstrates that this statute denies citizens equal protection of the law and has resulted in injustice for many Pakistanis."

"But you swore to tell the truth before this Court with your hand on a Bible."

"Yes."

"So you swore to tell the truth as a Christian?"

"As a Christian citizen of Pakistan."

"Would you have sworn to tell the truth with your hand on a Qur'an?"

Paul's mind was racing, as he tried to see where these questions were leading. If I say no, then he will suggest that I have brought the petition as a Christian. In addition, it will seem as if I believe the Bible, but not the Q'uran, is the word of God.

"The question is speculative, as I know the Court would not ask a Christian to swear with by the Q'uran. But I would be willing to swear by the Qur'an," Paul answered. "There is but one God. Allah in Arabic means 'one God.' I believe that Christians who pray to God and Muslims who pray to Allah are praying to the same God, the one God, the Creator, the Sustainer, and the Redeemer of all life."

"You have sworn on the Bible, and you would swear on the Qur'an, because these Holy Scriptures are the word of God."

"Yes."

"And God is just."

"Yes." Paul knew it was best to answer as briefly as possible. He couldn't figure out where the lawyer was leading him, but he knew he had to be careful.

"Now you have argued in your petition that the blasphemy law is unjust."

"Yes."

"That would imply that the blasphemy law is contrary to God's will."

Paul felt his heart pounding within him. "I am not making any claim about the will of God in my petition," he answered. "I am only arguing that Section 295 (c) of the Penal Code violates the constitution of Pakistan."

"But you know Islamic teaching holds that blasphemy is to be punished, do you not?"

"Yes."

"And you know that Islamic law is the will of God, do you not?"

Paul was sweating profusely now. "It is not for me to decide what is the will of God."

"Yet, in the public forum you held two days ago in Lahore, did you not claim that religious freedom was the will of God?"

"Yes." There was no way to fudge the answer.

"So, you have made decisions about the will of God."

"I didn't decide about the will of God. I affirmed the teaching of my Church."

"You affirmed the teaching of your Church, because of your faith and the witness of your scriptures, the Bible."

"Yes."

"Muslims affirm that the blasphemy law is the will of God, because of their faith and the witness of their scriptures, the Qur'an. Isn't that so?"

Paul knew he was being cornered. He desperately tried to escape. "Muslims affirm that blasphemy is against the will of God, but not all Muslims affirm that Section 295 (c) of the Penal Code is the will of God. Muslims on the Senate Committee questioned the drafting of the statute, and my Muslim attorneys do not believe that the statute is the will of God."

"It is a question of who decides, isn't it? You have allowed your Church to decide what is the will of God. Should you not also allow the Muslim community through its leadership to decide what is the will of God?"

He couldn't answer, no. But he had to find some way to qualify his answer. "Of course, the Muslim community must decide for itself what is the will of God," Paul answered carefully. "But the question before this Court is whether the present statute is constitutional or not. The Court is not being asked to decide on the will of God."

"The question before this Court is whether the blasphemy law that was passed by a National Assembly of devout Muslims is just. You have asserted that it is unjust, have you not?"

"Yes." He couldn't quibble about the devotion of the members of National Assembly.

"And you affirm that God is just."

"Yes."

"All right. You claim the blasphemy law is unjust. You acknowledge, however, that it was passed by devout Muslims of the National Assembly who sought only to write Islamic law into the Penal Code. You agree that Islamic law, as understood by Muslim leaders, is the will of God. Are you not, therefore, claiming that the will of Allah concerning blasphemy is unjust?"

"No, not at all."

"But I have merely summarized what you have said." The lawyer's voice cut into Paul like a knife. "If you claim the law is unjust, but also agree that it represents what Muslim leaders have decided is the will of God, then are you not claiming that God is unjust?"

Paul's mind was racing. As he struggled to find a way out of this tangled net of words, he heard movement in the back of the courtroom and saw several mullahs rising from their seats.

"Blasphemy!" one of them leader cried. "He's blasphemed against Allah! God is just! He's committed blasphemy!"

Paul looked at Javed and Hassan and saw the fear in their faces. He turned toward the justices to appeal to them to restore order in the courtroom, but they were filing out the side door as the bailiff yelled above the noise in the courtroom, "The Court is adjourned!"

Paul saw Blake trying to push his way to where the press were seated. Joseph was struggling to free himself from the grasp of four policemen, and Paul winced as their clubs rained blows on Joseph's head and shoulders. As Paul was dragged toward a side door, he caught the eyes of Khalida Ali. "Help me," he pleaded, before the police pulled him from of the courtroom.