Pakistan, Chicken as Evidence: Ahmadi Jailed and Denied Bail for Feeding the Poor

The surreal and ridiculous case of Munawar Ahmad illustrates the escalating persecution of Ahmadis.

By A. Sahara Alexander

July 24, 2025

Chicken biryani in its pot.

The “lawful” persecution of Ahmadi Muslims in Pakistan is a daily tragedy—one that grows steadily in both intensity and absurdity. Some cases are so outrageous that they verge on the ridiculous. One may serve as a telling example.

In Pakistan, a man was arrested for distributing free food to the poor. Does this mean that Pakistani law arrests those who are charitable? No. The man was arrested for doing charity as a Muslim. Does this mean that Pakistani law arrests its citizens for being Muslims—Pakistan, an Islamic Republic where Islam is the official religion of the state, as per Article 2 of the Constitution? No. The man was arrested for being a Muslim not as the government commands. That, Pakistan does: in Pakistan, the state decides who is—and who is not—a Muslim. The latter are openly persecuted in a cruel variety of ways, ranging from being beaten and killed in the streets to seeing their mosques and graveyards desecrated.

On July 6, 2025, Munawar Ahmad was arrested by agents of the Satellite Town police station in Gujranwala, the fourth most populous Pakistani city, in the province of Punjab, on the complaint of a Hafizabad Road resident. His case is documented in a bail application submitted by his lawyer, Jameel Ahmad Bhatti, which has been made available by the International Human Rights Committee (IHRC), a non-profit, non-governmental organization based in London that focuses on freedom of religion or belief (FoRB). He distributed delicious biryani, a mixed rice dish typically made with basmati rice and various kinds of meat or seafood seasoned with spices. This dish originated in the Near East and was introduced to the Indian subcontinent and South Asia by Muslim travelers and merchants.

Munawar Ahmad, a Muslim citizen of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, worked to improve the living conditions of impoverished Pakistanis by providing them with good food and delivering relief services.

He professes the “shahadah”, the declaration of Islamic faith. He believes in the concept of “Khātam an-nabīyīn”— affirming that Muhammad is the “Seal of the Prophets” (while he also holds that the founder of the Ahmadiyya is the promised Messiah and Mahdi). He observes the “arkān al-Islām,” the five pillars of Islam. Among these, the third pillar is “zakāt,” which refers to almsgiving. It typically involves a monetary donation intended to purify one’s wealth, although it can also be fulfilled through the giving of food and other goods. Every devout Muslim is expected to observe “zakāt,” just as they should uphold the other four pillars of Islam.

Pakistan considers state law to be an expression of Islamic law and made “zakāt” obligatory for Muslims in 1980, provided they meet certain criteria. According to Pakistani law, a 2.5% annual deduction is required from personal bank accounts and other assets that exceed the “nisāb” threshold—the minimum amount of wealth prescribed by shariʿa that obliges a Muslim to give to charity. This threshold is calculated based on the value of gold or silver and varies depending on the school of thought, typically ranging from 87.48 grams of gold to 612.36 grams of silver.

Munawar Ahmad was fulfilling his duty as a Muslim. However, according to the state of Pakistan, he is not recognized as a Muslim. Pakistan declared Ahmadis to be non-Muslims in 1974, and in 1984, it passed Ordinance XX, which amended the Pakistan Penal Code to criminalize Ahmadis who refer to themselves as Muslims. As a result, he is considered a heretic under the state’s laws.

The debate over the theological status of Ahmadis has been ongoing since Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835–1908) founded the “jama’at” in Qadian, which was then part of British Punjab, in 1889. Similar theological debates exist regarding various other groups and sects within the Muslim world, as well as in all religions and spiritual traditions.

Theological debate is both permissible and beneficial. Such discussions often lead to both disagreements and agreements. Different currents, orientations, paths, groups, and religions have historically judged one another as orthodox or heterodox, with some even excommunicating others. This is a normal aspect of religious discourse. However, debate should never escalate into violence, harassment, destruction, desecration, or killings; it must remain within the bounds of constructive dialogue, even when tensions run high.

Furthermore, it is crucial that theological debates are not co-opted by the state, nor should the state’s failings be translated into law. Matters of orthodoxy and heterodoxy should be left to theologians, clerics, and philosophers—not to state authorities, bureaucrats, or courts. When a government attempts to dictate the content of religious beliefs and restricts the liberties of its citizens based on this, it undermines the fundamental right of every individual to the essential freedom of religion, belief, or creed (FoRB), as well as the freedom of conscience.

Munawar Ahmad has been arrested because he “was distributing Baryani [sic] and portraying himself as a Muslim […] thereby committing an act prohibited under Section 298-C PPC,” that is, the provision of the Pakistani Penal Code that condemns an Ahmadi who claims to be a Muslim to prison.

If he had been distributing free food to the poor without openly expressing his faith in Islam—considering that he is a citizen of an Islamic country where Islamic charity is mandated by state law—he could have done so without fear of being accused of a crime or imprisoned.

Since he committed the act while claiming to be a Muslim, he has been imprisoned as a guilty citizen of an Islamic country. This country mandates Islamic charity by law but asserts the authority to define what constitutes Islam and who qualifies as a Muslim. By doing so, it arrogates the right to govern religious and theological matters. The Pakistani state has charged him with “portraying himself as a Muslim,” an act that is prohibited for any citizen without state authorization.

The July 15 order dismissing the bail application.

On July 15, Judicial Magistrate Sidra Gul Nawaz dismissed the bail application submitted by Munawar Ahmad’s lawyer. The judge’s decision cited that Ahmad’s public act of assisting fellow Pakistani citizens had “serious repercussions for law and order.” It was noted that the petitioner was “found guilty” and that “sufficient evidence” linked him to the commission of the offence. This compelling evidence included Ahmad’s affiliation with the Pakistani Ahmadi community, as well as “one large silver cooking pot (pateela)” containing chicken biryani, which was seized from his possession.

Munawar Ahmad remains imprisoned by the state of Pakistan for acting in a manner that the state itself mandates. He is punished for resisting the state’s serious infringement upon the religious sphere.

Source: bitterwinter.org