Why this tolerance?

The rise of religious fundamentalism has become a powerful, dangerous force threatening the very fabric of Pakistani society today. Setting up a theocratic state and "jihad" are two objectives of all fundamentalist movements. Claiming to be true custodians of Pakistan and self-proclaimed guardians of faith, religious groups have created a perception amongst their followers that they fought successfully for Pakistan in order to establish a theocratic state for Muslims. Facts contradict such claims. With the exception of Ghulam Ahmad Parvez's pro-Pakistan Tulu-e-Islam, all religious groups and parties, including Jamiat-i-Ulama-e-Hind, Majli-e-Ahrar and Jamaat-e-Islami, had bitterly opposed the Pakistan Movement and abused its leadership, which was secular. The important Islamic theologians were on the side of Indian nationalism. Historical facts show that politics, not religion, was the major factor that led to the vivisection of the sub-continent. Muslims were searching for an identity throughout the 19th and 20th Centuries. They desired a homeland that would safeguard and protect their interests and rights, a cultural home where they could live as a nation. The role of Islam was not at the centre of Muslim politics during the struggle for Pakistan but was brought into the political debate after the nation was created. After partition, Maudoodi and the Jamaat saw the Islamisation of Pakistan, via the implementation of Sharia, as a primary objective. The fundamentalist parties gradually raised Islamic issues, and the demand for making Pakistan an Islamic state kept growing to the extent that they now openly challenge the writ of the government, are creating a state within a state and raising armies of vigilantes on rampage to intimidate locals into accepting their brand of Islam.

It is commonly believed that the Talibanisation of Pakistan started in the era of Ziaul Haq. Many believe that it started barely six months after the death of Quaid-e-Azam. On

March 7, 1949, the Qarardad-e-Maqasid, or Objectives Resolution, which now serves as the grundnorm of Pakistan, was introduced by the first prime minister of Pakistan, Liaquat Ali Khan, and adopted by the Constituent Assembly on March 12, 1949. The resolution which had Maulana Maudoodi's blessings was presented with the consensus of religious scholars and incorporated as the preamble to the Constitution of Pakistan. The resolution states that "sovereignty over the entire universe belongs to God Almighty alone and the authority which He has delegated to the State of Pakistan through its people for being exercised within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust; The State shall exercise its powers and authority through the chosen representatives of the people; the principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice as enunciated by Islam shall be fully observed; the Muslims shall be enable to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accord with the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out in the Holy Quran and the Sunnah.

Minority members of the Constitutional Assembly argued that the Objectives Resolution differed with Jinnah's view. Harish Chandra Chattopadhyaya said: "What I hear in this resolution is not the voice of the great creator of Pakistan, the Quaid-e-Azam, nor even that of the prime minister of Pakistan, the Honourable Mr Liaquat Ali Khan, but of the ulema of the land." Birat Chandra Mandal declared that Jinnah had "unequivocally said that Pakistan will be a secular state." Bhupendra Kumar Datta went a step further. "Were this resolution to come before this house within the lifetime of the great creator of Pakistan, the Quaid-e-Azam, it would not have come in its present shape"

To correct the erroneous notion that the Objectives Resolution envisaged a theocratic state in Pakistan, Liaquat Ali Khan repeatedly returned to the subject during his tour of the United States (May-June 1950). In a series of persuasive speeches, he argued "We have pledged that the State shall exercise its power and authority through the chosen representatives of the people. In this we have kept steadily before us the principles of democracy, freedom equality, tolerance and social justice as enunciated by Islam. There is no room here for theocracy, for Islam stands for freedom of conscience, condemns coercion, has no priesthood and abhors the caste system. It believes in equality of all men and in the right of each individual to enjoy the fruit of his or her efforts, enterprise, capacity and skill -- provided these be honestly employed."

Despite the clear statement made by Liaquat Ali Khan, later religious ideologues have claimed that the Objectives Resolution was a charter for the imposition of the Sharia, although the word Sharia does not occur anywhere in the resolution. By declaring that no law in the country would be adopted in Pakistan which was against Islamic beliefs, the religious parties obtained exclusive control over legislative discourse through which they could influence every segment of society. Even today a certificate of compliance is required from the ulema before the passage of any legislation. The amalgamation of the state and religion since Liaquat Ali Khan adopted the Objective's Resolution in 1949, the acceleration of the process by Zia-ul-Haq in the '70s, and misguided exploitation of religious ideology by successive governments as a source of legitimacy has spawned sectarian and fundamentalist tendencies in the society. Our present tribulation directly emanates from these harmful and invidious tendencies. This is unacceptable, not only because the conduct is in complete violation of the law but more so because it aims at forcing mediaeval values on a vast majority who do not share this narrow-minded and intolerant view of their faith.

The state's writ must run, even if it means taking swift, firm action against the violators of the law. Religious fanaticism which uses violence and coercion as a means of achieving its goals set by a mediaeval mindset must not be allowed to take root. With religious disputes marring much of Pakistan's brief history, it has changed its name and status three times. It started life as a Dominion which it remained until 1956, then became Islamic Republic of Pakistan; later the Republic of Pakistan and again Islamic Republic of Pakistan in 1963. Ironically, today it's neither Islamic nor a republic, and certainly not Jinnah's Pakistan. Considering developments in terms of religious parties' credo and aspirations, the proliferation of religious militancy and sectarian violence, it's time for the State to exercise its powers and revert to the Republic of Pakistan or People's Republic of Pakistan. This needs to be contemplated upon before more damage is done to the social order. Our actions in the past are responsible for our present condition. Our present actions will shape or mould our future.



The writer is a freelance columnist. Email: nosheensaeed58@hotmail.com