12:19 AM | 
Posted by
Syed Faheem Akbar
Saturday, May 21, 2011
COUNTRY’S FIRST BIO_FERTILIZER PLANT OPENED
LAHORE - The first-ever bio-fertilizer plant in the country with capacity of producing over 5,000 bags daily is being opened in City on Saturday (today), it was learnt.
Punjab Assembly Speaker Rana Iqbal will inaugurate the plant, which is equipped with the latest technology of 21st century, agricultural experts said and added that though this technology is available in advanced countries including China and India yet this plant is of its first kind being set up in Pakistan.
Pakistan Agricultural Scientists Chairman Jamshaid Iqbal Cheema while talking to The Nation said that bio-fertilizer will enhance the efficiency of DAP and other fertilizers, as most of their quantity is wasted in the fields.
He said that DAP or phosphorus usage efficiency is 15 to 20 percent. In the same way urea or nitrogen effectiveness is up to 40 percent, he said and added that use of bio-fertilizer will make the fertilizers more efficient, besides increasing the production up to 70 percent. He revealed that when a farmer uses DAP, 80 percent quantity is wasted in the soil. The usage of bio-fertilizer will enable this 80 percent wasted DAP to work, he stated.
Jamshaid Cheema told The Nation that the Auriga Group has itself made the design of the plant, as it had been working on the project for the last 5 years. He said that first year target of bio-fertilizer production is around 1 million bag which will fulfil the requirement of 1 million acres of fields in the country.
He expressed his hope the company will be able to export its production within five years period.
It is to be noted that in a shameless move to fleece farmers, the urea fertiliser manufacturers increased the price of 50kg bag by a whopping Rs190, pushing it from Rs850 to Rs1,040 in one go defying fertiliser price control committee, which is mandated to pre-empt cartelisation by manufacturers. In the same way last month, when DAP was needed for wheat sowing, its price was increased by Rs1,500 per bag.
The move will cost the farmers an additional Rs22.80 billion on the urea head alone every year as they use around 120 million bags in one year.
To put the urea price in regional context, India provides it to its farmers at mere Rs434 per bag. By those calculations, the Pakistani farmers are paying Rs72 billion extra to urea manufacturers, a crippling blow to local agriculture.
The federal government provides Rs70 billion subsidy to the manufacturers on the gas head alone, experts said. Out of these Rs70 billion, the manufacturers are returning only Rs19 billion to farmers, they added.
They said that imported urea cost Rs1,200 per bag at the current international price. The flood-hit farmers, who were already struggling to get back on their feet, could hardly afford such a severe blow to their livelihood and farming, they said.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Pakistan is a movement for unity of Muslim world
The First Islamic Republic
The role of Islam in politics was not at the center of Muslim politics during the struggle for Pakistan but was brought into the political debate after the nation was created. The issue proved to be the beginning of a decades long quest and debate over just what Pakistan's Islamic character should be. The Ulama identified their own political recognition with the Islamic constitution.
Ulema did not wait long to demand their share of power in running the new state. Soon after independence, Jamat-i-Islami made the achievement of an Islamic constitution its central goal.
Maulana Mawdudi, after the creation of Pakistan, revised the conception of his mission and that of the rationale of the Pakistan movement, [1] arguing that its sole object had been the establishment of an Islamic state and that his party alone possessed the understanding and commitment needed to bring that about. [2] Jamat-i-Islami soon evolved into a political party, demanding the establishment of an Islamic state in Pakistan.
It declared that Pakistan was a Muslim state and not an Islamic state since a Muslim State is any state which is ruled by Muslims while an Islamic State is one which opts to conduct its affairs in accordance with the revealed guidance of Islam and accepts the sovereignty of Allah and the supremacy of His Law, and which devotes its resources to achieve this end. [3]
According to this definition, Pakistan was a Muslim state ruled by secular minded Muslims. Hence the Jamat-i-Islami and other religious leaders channeled their efforts to make Pakistan an "Islamic State."
Maulana Mawdudi argued that from the beginning of the struggle for Pakistan, Moslems had an understanding that the center of their aspirations, Pakistan, would be an Islamic state, in which Islamic law would be enforced and Islamic culture would be revived. Muslim League leaders, in their speeches, were giving this impression. Above all, Quaid-i-Azam himself assured the Muslims that the constitution of Pakistan would be based on the Quran. [4]
This contrasts to his views about the Muslim League leaders before independence: Not a single leader of the Muslim League, from Quad-i-Azam, downwards, has Islamic mentality and Islamic thinking or they see the things from Islamic point of view. [5] To declare such people legible for Muslim leadership, because they are expert in western politics or western organization system and have concern for the nation, is definitely ignorance from Islam and amounts to an un-Islamic mentality. [6]
On another occasion, Maulana Maududi said it was not clear either from any resolution of the Muslim League or from the speeches of any responsible League leaders, that the ultimate aim of Pakistan is the establishment of an Islamic government.....Those people are wrong who think that if the Muslim majority regions are emancipated from the Hindu domination and a democratic system is established, it would be a government of God. As a matter of fact, in this way, whatever would be achieved, it would be only a non-believers government of the
Muslims or may be more deplorable than that. [7]
When the question of constitution-making came to the forefront, the Ulema, inside and outside the Constitutional Assembly and outside demanded that the Islamic Shariah shall form the only source for all legislature in Pakistan.
In February 1948, Maulana Maududi, while addressing the Law College, Lahore, [8] demanded that the Constitutional Assembly should unequivocally declare:
That the sovereignty of the state of Pakistan vests in God Almighty and that the government of Pakistan shall be only an agent to execute the Sovereign's Will.
That the Islamic Shariah shall form the inviolable basic code for all legislation in Pakistan.
That all existing or future legislation which may contravene, whether in letter or in spirit, the Islamic Shariah shall be null and void and be considered ultra vires of the constitution; and
That the powers of the government of Pakistan shall be derived from, circumscribed by and exercised within the limits of the Islamic Shariah alone.
On January 13, 1948, Jamiat-al-Ulema-i-Islam, led by Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, passed a resolution in Karachi demanding that the government appoint a leading Alim to the office of Shaikh al Islam, with appropriate ministerial and executive powers over the qadis throughout the country. [9] The Jamiat submitted a complete table of a ministry of religious affairs with names suggested for each post. It was proposed that this ministry be immune to ordinary changes of government. It is well known that Quaid-i-Azam was the head of state at this time and that no action was taken on Ulema's demand. [10] On February 9, 1948, Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, addressing the Ulema-i-Islam conference in Dacca, demanded that the Constituent Assembly "should set up a committee consisting of eminent ulema and thinkers... to prepare a draft ... and present it to the Assembly.[11]
It was in this background that Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan, on March 7, 1949, moved the Objectives Resolution in the Constituent Assembly, according to which the future constitution of Pakistan was to be based on " the principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice as enunciated by Islam."
While moving the Resolution, he said: "Sir, I consider this to be a most important occasion in the life of this country, next in importance only to the achievement of independence, because by achieving independence we only won an opportunity of building up a country and its polity in accordance with our ideals. I would like to remind the house that the Father of the Nation, Quaid-i-Azam, gave expression of his feelings on this matter on many an occasion, and his views were endorsed by the nation in unmistakable terms, Pakistan was founded because the Muslims of this sub-continent wanted to build up their lives in accordance with the teachings and traditions of Islam, because they wanted to demonstrate to the world that Islam provides a panacea to the many diseases which have crept into the life of humanity today."[12]
The resolution was debated for five days. The leading members of the government and a large number of non-Muslim members, especially from East Bengal, took a prominent part. Non-Muslim members expressed grave apprehensions about their position and role in the new policy.
Hindu members of the Constitutional Assembly argued that the Objectives Resolution differed with Jinnah's view in all the basic points. Sris Chandra Chattopadhyaya said: "What I hear in this (Objectives) Resolution is not the voice of the great creator of Pakistan - the Quaid-i-Azam, nor even that of the Prime Minister of Pakistan the Honorable Mr. Liaquat Ali Khan, but of the Ulema of the land." [13] Birat Chandra Mandal declared that Jinnah had "unequivocally said that Pakistan will be a secular state." [14] Bhupendra Kumar Datta went a step further: ...were this resolution to come before this house within the life-time of the Great Creator of Pakistan, the Quaid-i-Azam, it would not have come in its present shape...." [15]
The leading members of the government in their speeches not only reassured the non-Muslims that their position was quite safe and their rights were not being impaired but also gave clarifications with regard to the import of the Resolution. Sardar Abdur Rab Nishtar, the Deputy Leader of the House, while defending the Resolution said: "It was remarked by some honorable members that the interpretation which the mover of this Resolution has given is satisfactory and quite good, but Mr. B.C. Mandal says: "Well tomorrow you may die, I may die, and the posterity may misinterpret it." First of all, I may tell him and those who have got some wrong notions about the interpretation of this resolution that this resolution itself is not a constitution. It is a direction to the committee that will have to prepare the draft keeping in view these main features. The matter will again come to the House in a concrete form, and all of us will get an opportunity to discuss it." [16]
In his elucidation of the implications of the Objectives Resolution in terms of the distribution of power between God and the people, Omar Hayat Malik argued: "The principles of Islam and the laws of Islam as laid down in the Quran are binding on the State. The people or the state cannot change these principles or these laws...but there is a vast field besides these principles and laws in which people will have free play...it might be called by the name of 'theo-cracy', that is democracy limited by word of God, but as the word 'theo' is not in vogue so we call it by the name of Islamic democracy. [17]
Ishtiaq Hussain Qureshi further elaborated the concept of Islamic democracy: Since Islam admits of no priest craft, and since the dictionary meaning of the term "secular" is non-monastic -- that is, "anything which is not dependent upon the sweet will of the priests," Islamic democracy, far from being theocracy, could in a sense be characterized as being "secular." [18] However, he believed that if the word "secular" means that the ideals of Islam, that the fundamental principles of religion, that the ethical outlook which religion inculcates in our people should not be observed, then, I am afraid,...that kind of secular democracy can never be acceptable to us in Pakistan.[19]
During the heated debate, Liaquat Ali Khan stressed: the Muslim League has only fulfilled half of its mission (and that) the other half of its mission is to convert Pakistan into a laboratory where we could experiment upon the principles of Islam to enable us to make a contribution to the peace and progress of mankind.[20] He was hopeful that even if the body of the constitution had to be mounted in the chassis of Islam, the vehicle would go in the direction he had already chosen. Thus he seemed quite sure that Islam was on the side of democracy. "As a matter of fact it has been recognized by non-Muslims throughout the world that Islam is the only society where there is real democracy." [21] In this approach he was supported by Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani: " The Islamic state is the first political institution in the world which stood against imperialism, enunciated the principle of referendum and installed a Caliph (head of State) elected by the people in place of the king." [22]
The opposite conclusion, however, was reached by the authors of the Munir Report (1954) [23] who said that the form of government in Pakistan cannot be described as democratic, if that clause of the Objectives Resolution reads as follows: " Whereas sovereignty over the entire Universe belongs to Allah 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." Popular sovereignty, in the sense that the majority of the people has the right to shape the nation's institutions and policy in accordance with their personal views without regard to any higher law, cannot exist in an Islamic state, they added.
The learned authors of the Munir Report felt that the Objectives Resolution was against the concept of a sovereign nation state. Corroboration of this viewpoint came from the Ulema themselves, (whom the Munir Committee interviewed) "including the Ahrar" and erstwhile Congressites with whom before the partition this conception of a modern national state as against an Islamic state was almost a part of their faith. [24] The Ulema claimed that the Quaid-i-Azam's conception of a modern national state....became obsolete with the passing of the Objectives Resolution on 12th March 1949. [25]
Justice Mohammad Munir, who chaired the committee, says that "if during Quaid-i-Azam's life, Liaquat Ali Khan, Prime Minister had even attempted to introduce the Objectives resolution of the kind that he got through the Assembly, the Quaid-i-Azam would never have given his assent to it.[26]
In an obvious attempt 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 and eloquent speeches, he argued that "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." [27]
The Objectives Resolution was approved on March 12, 1949. Its only Muslim critic was Mian Iftikhar-ud-din, leader of the Azad Pakistan Party, although he believed that "the Islamic conception of a state is, perhaps as progressive, as revolutionary, as democratic and as dynamic as that of any other state or ideology." [28]
According to Munir, the terms of the Objectives Resolution differ in all the basic points of the Quaid-i-Azam's views e.g: [29]
The Quaid-i-Azam has said that in the new state sovereignty would rest with the people. The Resolution starts with the statement that sovereignty rests with Allah. This concept negates the basic idea of modern democracy that there are no limits on the legislative power of a representative assembly.
There is a reference to the protection of the minorities of their right to worship and practice their religion, whereas the Quaid-i-Azam had stated that there would be no minorities on the basis of religion.
The distinction between religious majorities and minorities takes away from the minority, the right of equality, which again is a basic idea of modern democracy.
The provision relating to Muslims being enabled to lead their life according to Islam is opposed to the conception of a secular state.
It was natural that with the terms of the Resolution, the Ulema should acquire considerable influence in the state. On the strength of the Objectives Resolution they made the Ahmadis as their first target and demanded them to be declared a minority.[30] After the adoption of Objectives Resolution, Liaquat Ali Khan moved a motion for the appointment of a Basic Principles Committee consisting of 24 members, including himself and two non-Muslim members, to report the house on the main principles on which the constitution of Pakistan is to be framed. A Board of Islamic Teaching was set up to advise the Committee on the Islamic aspects of the constitution.
In the course of constitutional debates, a number of very crucial issues were raised that caused much controversy, both inside and outside the Constituent Assembly over specific questions such as the following:
The nature of the Islamic state: the manner in which the basic principles of Islam concerning state, economy, and society were to be incorporated into the constitution.
The nature of federalism: questions of provincial autonomy vis-a-vis federal authority with emphasis on the problems of representation on the basis of population and the equality of the federating units; the structure of the federal legislature -- unicameral or bicameral.
The form of government: whether it was to be modeled on the British or the U.S. pattern -- parliamentary or presidential.
The problem of the electorate: serious questions of joint (all confessional groups vote in one election) versus separate (each confessional group votes separately for its own candidates) electorate.
The question of language both national and regional. These very fundamental issues divided the political elites of Pakistan into warring factions that impeded the process of constitution-making. The Basic Principles Committee submitted two interim reports; one in September, 1950 and the other in December 1952. Neither of them could be adopted. The first one was withdrawn in the wake of a storm of protests in East Pakistan [31] while the second one was amended during the debates in the Constituent Assembly. However, the second report proved more productive and was adopted on 6th Oct. 1954.
The second report was widely criticized by the Ulema. A convention of Ulema was convened in Karachi in January 1953 to discuss the report. The convention, attended by 33 Ulema of different schools of thought, suggested more than two dozen amendments to accept the report.[32] Earlier in January 1951, almost the same Ulema had agreed unanimously on 22 points on the fundamental principles of an Islamic state.
The main features of the Committee's second report regarding the place of Islam in the future constitution were: that the Objectives Resolution 1949 should form the Preamble of the future constitution; that the Directives Principles of state should be the preservation of democracy within the limits prescribed by the Quran and the Sunnah; that the state should take steps to bring the existing laws in conformity with the Islamic principles XE "Islamic principles"; that no legislation be made which was repugnant to the Quran and the Sunnah: that the Islamic moral standards be promoted and maintained.
In response to considerable pressure, the Report of the Basic Principles Committee contained a proposal that no law passed by any legislature in Pakistan should be valid if it were repugnant to the Holy Quran and the Sunnah. To prevent passage of legislation repugnant to the Quran and the Sunnah, the Committee recommended the appointment (by the head of state) of a board consisting of not more than five persons well versed in Islamic law. This Board of Ulema should act in an advisory capacity and determine whether the laws that the Assembly passed were in conformity with or repugnant to Islam. The Committee also recommended that the Head of State should be a Muslim; and that separate electorates should be maintained for Muslims and non-Muslims.
When the Committee's report was considered by the Constituent Assembly, the Islamic character of the recommendations was severely criticized. There was not, however, much discussion on such matters as making the Objectives Resolution 1949, as part of the Preamble, or including the Directive Principles of State policy in the future constitution. It was argued that these provisions were not legally enforceable and were merely 'pious hopes.' But recommendations - that the Head of the state should be a Muslim, that separate electorates should be maintained, and that a Board of Ulema should be appointed to supervise the legislative activity of the Assembly were opposed during the constituent assembly debates. During the debate that the Head of state should be a Muslim, Sardar Shawkat Hayat Khan pointed out that the provision was against the fundamental rights. He remarked: " I imagine that the population of this country will be 85 percent Muslim. If a Muslim cannot be returned as Head of the State with 85 percent Muslims population and a Hindu is returned with a population of only 15 percent that Hindus must be saint......" [33]
The recommendation of the Basic Principles Committee that a board of five Ulema be appointed to determine whether the laws passed by the Assembly were in conformity with or repugnant to Islam, also came under sharp criticism. It was, therefore, argued that since the proposal to form a board of Ulema had received support only from a section of the people, it should be dropped and the Supreme Court of Pakistan should be given the necessary jurisdiction to judge whether the laws passed by the Assembly were in conformity with or repugnant to the Quran and the Sunnah. This was agreed to by the first Constituent Assembly but later dropped by the second.
During the discussion in the first Constituent Assembly the report of the Basic Principles Committee was substantially amended regarding the 'repugnancy clause.' Any law of a Pakistan legislature which is in conflict with the Quran and the Sunnah was again declared to be invalid. But the later provision was that Supreme court alone should have jurisdiction in such a case. Any objection on the ground of repugnancy to Islam was to be filed within three months of the giving of assents to a bill. Furthermore, it was provided that, for a period of at least twenty-five years, the repugnancy sections should not apply to 'fiscal and monetary measures, laws relating to banking, insurance, provident funds, and credit system.'
The East Pakistan Muslim League passed a resolution regretting that the repugnancy clause was not to be enforceable in the courts. This criticism was more than countered by the attitude of the Awami League. Mr. Hussein Shaheed Suharwardy asserted that his party wanted true Islam in the government and policies of Pakistan, but that the existing state of affairs was so far from Islam that the title should not be included in the name of the state. "I say that you are deluding the people here by calling this an Islamic state." He argued that it was quite unnecessary to provide in the constitution that the President was required to be a Muslim since 86 per cent of the electorate would be composed of Muslim voters. [34]
In 1953, Pakistan was declared an Islamic Republic, in spite of the opposition of a few Muslims and many of the non-Muslim members of the Constituent Assembly. The Report of the Basic Principles Committee was eventually adopted by the assembly on September 21, 1954 with some amendments. The proposal for a Board of Ulema had been dropped; the question of separate or joint electorates was left to be determined by the Central and Provincial Assemblies formed under the constitution. They adopted the principle of joint electorates. After much debate, the Constituent Assembly was able to prepare a final draft of the constitution in 1954 which visualized an Islamic Republic of Pakistan with a parliamentary system and a federation of five units, each with a bicameral legislature. It seems that the constitutional draft could have been adopted in the Constituent Assembly but it was not approved by the ruling elites, that is to say, members of the civil and military bureaucracy and feudal elements of West Pakistan. When the Assembly passed a bill in September 1954 which made the Governor General subservient to the advice of Prime Minister, Governor General Ghulam Mohammad, a senior member of the Indian Audit and Accounts Service, backed by Chaudhry Mohammad Ali, dissolved the Constituent Assembly and dismissed Prime Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin, a Bengali. Perhaps this was the first step towards ultimate bureaucratization and consequent militarization of Pakistan's political system.[35]
The second Constituent Assembly was inaugurated in July 1955 and on January 8, 1956 it presented a draft constitution which was finally adopted on February 29, with certain changes. After nine years of effort, Pakistan was successful in framing the constitution which was implemented on March 23, 1956. Most of the West Pakistani politicians and bureaucrats dreaded the exercise of the will of the people according to the majority principle since that could put the Bengalis (representing 56 per cent of the population) in a commanding position. It took them nine years to devise the so-called parity formula according to which East and West Pakistan would have equal representation in the federal parliament and government.
The constitution provided for a federal structure composed of two units, East and West Pakistan. The parliamentary form of government was adopted and unicameral legislature was based on the principle of 'parity' of representation between the two wings of the country. The merger of the provinces of West Pakistan in 1955 was initiated (against the wishes of Baluchistan, Sindh and North Western Frontier Province in order to transform a federation originally based on five units into a bipolar federal system. This would ultimately imply perpetual confrontation between East and West Pakistan. No attempt was made to abolish feudalism in the country while colonial-era system of civil administration was maintained. Islamic provisions in the 1956 constitution were contained in the Directives Principles of State Policy, which were not enforceable in the courts. The directive principles reaffirmed the statement in the preamble that "steps shall be taken to enable the Muslims of Pakistan individually and collectively to order their lives in accordance with the Holy Quran and Sunnah. Further the state was to endeavor (a) to provide facilities to the Muslims to enable them to understand the meaning of life according to the Holy Quran and the Sunnah; (b) to promote unity and observance of Islamic moral standards; (c) to secure the proper organization of Zakat and Awkaf.
Article 24 provided that the state should endeavor to strengthen the bonds of unity among Muslim countries. The same article enjoined Pakistan to foster friendly relations among all nations.
There was no provision to make Islam the state religion in Pakistan. Article 21 provided that no person should be compelled to pay any special tax, the proceeds of which were to be spent on the propagation of any religion other than his own. The Head of State was to be a Muslim not younger than 40 years of age. The constitution of 1956 represented a decision to transfer to the people and not the Ulema or other religiously privileged class, the responsibility, if not for making the authoritative interpretation of Islam, at least for choosing which interpretation shall become authoritative.
Insofar as Islam was given any practical legal significance in the 1956 Constitution, it was in two ways. First, through Article 197 the president was obliged to set up an organization for Islamic research and instruction in advanced studies to assist in the reconstruction of Muslim society on a truly Islamic basis; and under article 198 the President expected to appoint a Commission of Experts to make recommendations ' as to the measures for bringing existing laws in conformity with the injunctions of Islam. ' The Commission was to submit its report to the President within five years of its appointment. This report was to be placed before the National Assembly, and the Assembly after considering the report was to enact laws in respect thereof. [36]
The constitution had something to offer to both sides; it gave grounds to the orthodox traditionalist that his cause might be advanced, while there was nothing in the Islamic clauses to cause a liberal democrat to feel that Pakistan was incapable of becoming the kind of a state he wishes to see. The constitution did little to settle the fundamental issue of the desirable role of Islam in a modern state. Nor did its adoption serve to bridge what one writer had called the ' wide gulf between the Ulema of the orthodox schools and the intelligentsia." [37] The 1956 constitution was accepted without widespread opposition from religious groups concerning its Islamic provisions. Jamaat-e-Islami described it as an "Islamic constitution." A statement issued by the Majles-e-Shura of the Jamaat on 18th March 1956 said: "The preamble of the constitution, its Directive Principles and Article 198 of the constitution have finally and unequivocally settled the 8-year old struggle between the Islamic and anti-Islamic trends in favor of the former. And the fact that the future system of life in this country has to be shaped on the basis of Islam and that the Quran and the Sunnah shall ever reign supreme here has been so firmly embodied in the constitution of the country that no worldly power shall, Insha Allah, be able to obliterate it." [38]
The constitution of 1956, that took seven years to adopt, was abrogated only after two and half years of its existence by the civilian-military coalition of power elites that brought about a military coup d'état on October 7, 1958. President Iskandar Mirza (a retired Major General who later joined the civil service) imposed martial law and appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, General Mohammad Ayub Khan, later to be named a Field Marshal, as the Chief Martial Law Administrator. Three weeks later General Ayub dismissed President Iskandar Mirza and assumed the presidency. This act marked the transformation of the bureaucratic state system into military regime in which the civilian bureaucrats came to play a sub-servient rather than a dominant role.
The fate of democracy was not allowed to improve even after the enforcement of the 1956 democratic constitution. Political bickering and intrigues which began under the interim constitution after 1953, -- when Prime Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin, who had enjoyed the confidence of the legislature, was arbitrarily dismissed by the Governor-General, Ghulam Mohammad, and when a sovereign constituent assembly was also dissolved by the same Governor-General in an undemocratic manner in 1954, -- continued to dominate the Pakistan political scene even after the adoption of the 1956 constitution. On the political intrigues of President Iskandar Mirza, General Ayub wrote: "The President had thoroughly exploited the weaknesses in the constitution and had got everyone connected with the political life of the country utterly exposed and discredited." [39]
It was expected that general elections will take place in accordance with the provisions of the new constitution but like the interim constitution (1947-56) no elections were held. There were seven prime ministers in Pakistan during the era of parliamentary democracy from 1947 to 1958. With the exception of the first prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, none of the remaining six prime ministers were elected as a result of any election or even as a result of the vote of confidence in the legislature. They were the products of "palace intrigues" by the two governor -generals -- Ghulam Mohammad and Iskandar Mirza (who later became the first president of Pakistan). There was a cabinet, there was a parliament, but the real powers were exercised by the Governor-General with the help of a ruling elite, composed of the top civil and military officials. The constitutional forms and trapping of democracy had only provided a cloak for the ruling elite.
The political order in Pakistan had practically turned into an oligarchy under a democratic constitution. Pakistan's political system was rightly described as a 'modernizing oligarchy,' in a study on the politics of the developing areas. [40] The various government changes that took place in the country from 1953 to 1958 could be traced to the inordinate desire of this ruling oligarchy to perpetuate its power and position. It is no doubt true that this oligarchy was able to maintain its hold because of the lack of cohesion and integrity among the political parties and their leaders. But this is also true that the powerful oligarchy was determined to crush the democratic institutions in the country and it always encouraged splits and disintegration of the parties whenever any of them constituted a threat to its hold and dominance. It was therefore the role and policy of this particular group, which had actual control of the governmental machinery, that was more responsible than any other factor in the unsatisfactory working of the democratic institutions in the country.
A constitution commission appointed by Ayub Khan in 1960 enumerated the following reasons for the failure of democracy in Pakistan: (i) lack of proper elections, (ii) undue interference by the heads of the state with the ministers and political parties and by the central government with the functioning of the government of the provinces, (iii) lack of leadership resulting in the absence of well-organized and disciplined parties, lack of character of the politicians and their under interference in the administration. However, the commission failed to mention the real threat and challenges to democracy in Pakistan that came from an all-powerful and irresponsible executive which was aided and supported by a powerful civil and military bureaucracy.
For more details, click OUR SOURCE here!
Back to top
ISLAMIZATION PROGRAMME OF GENERAL ZIA-UL-HAQ
General Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq proclaimed Martial Law in 1977 and assumed the office of the President of the country. The then government had to issue several martial law regulations to effectively control the aggravating situation in the country. There is one strong opinion which has effectively prevailed over the years and that is hat the process of Islamization, in fact, began the day the Qadianis were declared as non-Muslims on their negation of the finality of Prophethood in 1974. The opinion seems to carry some weight as the action of the Government of Mr. Z.A. Bhutto, declaring the Qadianis as non-Muslims, was understood as a step to have been taken for the safeguard of the basic tenants of Islam. However, it was the martial law regime under General Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq which took practical steps for the process of Islamization.
The Islamization Programme: - The Islamization programme of General Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq contained the following steps.
1. Hadood Ordinance.
2. Qazaf Ordinance.
3. Nizaam-e-Salaat Committees.
4. Zakat Ordinance.
5. Ushr Ordinance.
Central Zakat Council.
Provincial Zakat Council.
District Zakat Committee.
Tehsil Zakat Committee.
6. Establishment of Federal Shariat Court.
7. Interest Free Banking.
8. Compulsory teaching of Pakistan Studies and Islamiat.
9. Ordinance for the sanctity of Ramzan-ul-Mubarak.
10. Ban of Nudity.
11. Arabic News.
12. Use of Dopatta.
13.Majlis-e-Shoora.
in contravention to this Ordinance was liable to three yeas imprisonment and a fine of RS. 500/-. However, hospitals, railway stations, seaports, bus stands, trains and airports were exempted from this Ordinance.
The Government in order to make Pakistan a real Islamic State strived hard to introduce Islamic System in the country.
The Government for this reason needed staunch support and cooperation from the masses. Pakistan at that time was passing through the transitory stage towards the ultimate goal of achieving an Islamic society. A very long span was required to mould Pakistan into an Islamic State.
10. Ban of Nudity: -
The Government imposed a strict ban on the display of nude posters particularly on portraying women as publicity symbols. Display of nude scenes and moving films with nudity were also banned ob the television.
11. Arabic News: -
Everyday, five minutes were reserved for Arabic news on the television. This act is still in practice. Arabic was also introduced as a compulsory subject in high schools. Great efforts were mad for teaching Arabic as a language. Arabic language courses were introduced on ‘Radio Pakistan’ and ‘Pakistan Television’ in Arabic from other medias.
12. Use of Dopatta: -
Female television announcers were forced to cover their heads with dopattas.
13. Majlis-e-Shoora: -
The President of the country, General Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq selected his Majlis-e-Shoora, the Islamic Parliament, to act as the Parliament of Pakistan in place of the National Assembly.
The role of Islam in politics was not at the center of Muslim politics during the struggle for Pakistan but was brought into the political debate after the nation was created. The issue proved to be the beginning of a decades long quest and debate over just what Pakistan's Islamic character should be. The Ulama identified their own political recognition with the Islamic constitution.
Ulema did not wait long to demand their share of power in running the new state. Soon after independence, Jamat-i-Islami made the achievement of an Islamic constitution its central goal.
Maulana Mawdudi, after the creation of Pakistan, revised the conception of his mission and that of the rationale of the Pakistan movement, [1] arguing that its sole object had been the establishment of an Islamic state and that his party alone possessed the understanding and commitment needed to bring that about. [2] Jamat-i-Islami soon evolved into a political party, demanding the establishment of an Islamic state in Pakistan.
It declared that Pakistan was a Muslim state and not an Islamic state since a Muslim State is any state which is ruled by Muslims while an Islamic State is one which opts to conduct its affairs in accordance with the revealed guidance of Islam and accepts the sovereignty of Allah and the supremacy of His Law, and which devotes its resources to achieve this end. [3]
According to this definition, Pakistan was a Muslim state ruled by secular minded Muslims. Hence the Jamat-i-Islami and other religious leaders channeled their efforts to make Pakistan an "Islamic State."
Maulana Mawdudi argued that from the beginning of the struggle for Pakistan, Moslems had an understanding that the center of their aspirations, Pakistan, would be an Islamic state, in which Islamic law would be enforced and Islamic culture would be revived. Muslim League leaders, in their speeches, were giving this impression. Above all, Quaid-i-Azam himself assured the Muslims that the constitution of Pakistan would be based on the Quran. [4]
This contrasts to his views about the Muslim League leaders before independence: Not a single leader of the Muslim League, from Quad-i-Azam, downwards, has Islamic mentality and Islamic thinking or they see the things from Islamic point of view. [5] To declare such people legible for Muslim leadership, because they are expert in western politics or western organization system and have concern for the nation, is definitely ignorance from Islam and amounts to an un-Islamic mentality. [6]
On another occasion, Maulana Maududi said it was not clear either from any resolution of the Muslim League or from the speeches of any responsible League leaders, that the ultimate aim of Pakistan is the establishment of an Islamic government.....Those people are wrong who think that if the Muslim majority regions are emancipated from the Hindu domination and a democratic system is established, it would be a government of God. As a matter of fact, in this way, whatever would be achieved, it would be only a non-believers government of the
Muslims or may be more deplorable than that. [7]
When the question of constitution-making came to the forefront, the Ulema, inside and outside the Constitutional Assembly and outside demanded that the Islamic Shariah shall form the only source for all legislature in Pakistan.
In February 1948, Maulana Maududi, while addressing the Law College, Lahore, [8] demanded that the Constitutional Assembly should unequivocally declare:
That the sovereignty of the state of Pakistan vests in God Almighty and that the government of Pakistan shall be only an agent to execute the Sovereign's Will.
That the Islamic Shariah shall form the inviolable basic code for all legislation in Pakistan.
That all existing or future legislation which may contravene, whether in letter or in spirit, the Islamic Shariah shall be null and void and be considered ultra vires of the constitution; and
That the powers of the government of Pakistan shall be derived from, circumscribed by and exercised within the limits of the Islamic Shariah alone.
On January 13, 1948, Jamiat-al-Ulema-i-Islam, led by Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, passed a resolution in Karachi demanding that the government appoint a leading Alim to the office of Shaikh al Islam, with appropriate ministerial and executive powers over the qadis throughout the country. [9] The Jamiat submitted a complete table of a ministry of religious affairs with names suggested for each post. It was proposed that this ministry be immune to ordinary changes of government. It is well known that Quaid-i-Azam was the head of state at this time and that no action was taken on Ulema's demand. [10] On February 9, 1948, Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, addressing the Ulema-i-Islam conference in Dacca, demanded that the Constituent Assembly "should set up a committee consisting of eminent ulema and thinkers... to prepare a draft ... and present it to the Assembly.[11]
It was in this background that Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan, on March 7, 1949, moved the Objectives Resolution in the Constituent Assembly, according to which the future constitution of Pakistan was to be based on " the principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice as enunciated by Islam."
While moving the Resolution, he said: "Sir, I consider this to be a most important occasion in the life of this country, next in importance only to the achievement of independence, because by achieving independence we only won an opportunity of building up a country and its polity in accordance with our ideals. I would like to remind the house that the Father of the Nation, Quaid-i-Azam, gave expression of his feelings on this matter on many an occasion, and his views were endorsed by the nation in unmistakable terms, Pakistan was founded because the Muslims of this sub-continent wanted to build up their lives in accordance with the teachings and traditions of Islam, because they wanted to demonstrate to the world that Islam provides a panacea to the many diseases which have crept into the life of humanity today."[12]
The resolution was debated for five days. The leading members of the government and a large number of non-Muslim members, especially from East Bengal, took a prominent part. Non-Muslim members expressed grave apprehensions about their position and role in the new policy.
Hindu members of the Constitutional Assembly argued that the Objectives Resolution differed with Jinnah's view in all the basic points. Sris Chandra Chattopadhyaya said: "What I hear in this (Objectives) Resolution is not the voice of the great creator of Pakistan - the Quaid-i-Azam, nor even that of the Prime Minister of Pakistan the Honorable Mr. Liaquat Ali Khan, but of the Ulema of the land." [13] Birat Chandra Mandal declared that Jinnah had "unequivocally said that Pakistan will be a secular state." [14] Bhupendra Kumar Datta went a step further: ...were this resolution to come before this house within the life-time of the Great Creator of Pakistan, the Quaid-i-Azam, it would not have come in its present shape...." [15]
The leading members of the government in their speeches not only reassured the non-Muslims that their position was quite safe and their rights were not being impaired but also gave clarifications with regard to the import of the Resolution. Sardar Abdur Rab Nishtar, the Deputy Leader of the House, while defending the Resolution said: "It was remarked by some honorable members that the interpretation which the mover of this Resolution has given is satisfactory and quite good, but Mr. B.C. Mandal says: "Well tomorrow you may die, I may die, and the posterity may misinterpret it." First of all, I may tell him and those who have got some wrong notions about the interpretation of this resolution that this resolution itself is not a constitution. It is a direction to the committee that will have to prepare the draft keeping in view these main features. The matter will again come to the House in a concrete form, and all of us will get an opportunity to discuss it." [16]
In his elucidation of the implications of the Objectives Resolution in terms of the distribution of power between God and the people, Omar Hayat Malik argued: "The principles of Islam and the laws of Islam as laid down in the Quran are binding on the State. The people or the state cannot change these principles or these laws...but there is a vast field besides these principles and laws in which people will have free play...it might be called by the name of 'theo-cracy', that is democracy limited by word of God, but as the word 'theo' is not in vogue so we call it by the name of Islamic democracy. [17]
Ishtiaq Hussain Qureshi further elaborated the concept of Islamic democracy: Since Islam admits of no priest craft, and since the dictionary meaning of the term "secular" is non-monastic -- that is, "anything which is not dependent upon the sweet will of the priests," Islamic democracy, far from being theocracy, could in a sense be characterized as being "secular." [18] However, he believed that if the word "secular" means that the ideals of Islam, that the fundamental principles of religion, that the ethical outlook which religion inculcates in our people should not be observed, then, I am afraid,...that kind of secular democracy can never be acceptable to us in Pakistan.[19]
During the heated debate, Liaquat Ali Khan stressed: the Muslim League has only fulfilled half of its mission (and that) the other half of its mission is to convert Pakistan into a laboratory where we could experiment upon the principles of Islam to enable us to make a contribution to the peace and progress of mankind.[20] He was hopeful that even if the body of the constitution had to be mounted in the chassis of Islam, the vehicle would go in the direction he had already chosen. Thus he seemed quite sure that Islam was on the side of democracy. "As a matter of fact it has been recognized by non-Muslims throughout the world that Islam is the only society where there is real democracy." [21] In this approach he was supported by Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani: " The Islamic state is the first political institution in the world which stood against imperialism, enunciated the principle of referendum and installed a Caliph (head of State) elected by the people in place of the king." [22]
The opposite conclusion, however, was reached by the authors of the Munir Report (1954) [23] who said that the form of government in Pakistan cannot be described as democratic, if that clause of the Objectives Resolution reads as follows: " Whereas sovereignty over the entire Universe belongs to Allah 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." Popular sovereignty, in the sense that the majority of the people has the right to shape the nation's institutions and policy in accordance with their personal views without regard to any higher law, cannot exist in an Islamic state, they added.
The learned authors of the Munir Report felt that the Objectives Resolution was against the concept of a sovereign nation state. Corroboration of this viewpoint came from the Ulema themselves, (whom the Munir Committee interviewed) "including the Ahrar" and erstwhile Congressites with whom before the partition this conception of a modern national state as against an Islamic state was almost a part of their faith. [24] The Ulema claimed that the Quaid-i-Azam's conception of a modern national state....became obsolete with the passing of the Objectives Resolution on 12th March 1949. [25]
Justice Mohammad Munir, who chaired the committee, says that "if during Quaid-i-Azam's life, Liaquat Ali Khan, Prime Minister had even attempted to introduce the Objectives resolution of the kind that he got through the Assembly, the Quaid-i-Azam would never have given his assent to it.[26]
In an obvious attempt 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 and eloquent speeches, he argued that "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." [27]
The Objectives Resolution was approved on March 12, 1949. Its only Muslim critic was Mian Iftikhar-ud-din, leader of the Azad Pakistan Party, although he believed that "the Islamic conception of a state is, perhaps as progressive, as revolutionary, as democratic and as dynamic as that of any other state or ideology." [28]
According to Munir, the terms of the Objectives Resolution differ in all the basic points of the Quaid-i-Azam's views e.g: [29]
The Quaid-i-Azam has said that in the new state sovereignty would rest with the people. The Resolution starts with the statement that sovereignty rests with Allah. This concept negates the basic idea of modern democracy that there are no limits on the legislative power of a representative assembly.
There is a reference to the protection of the minorities of their right to worship and practice their religion, whereas the Quaid-i-Azam had stated that there would be no minorities on the basis of religion.
The distinction between religious majorities and minorities takes away from the minority, the right of equality, which again is a basic idea of modern democracy.
The provision relating to Muslims being enabled to lead their life according to Islam is opposed to the conception of a secular state.
It was natural that with the terms of the Resolution, the Ulema should acquire considerable influence in the state. On the strength of the Objectives Resolution they made the Ahmadis as their first target and demanded them to be declared a minority.[30] After the adoption of Objectives Resolution, Liaquat Ali Khan moved a motion for the appointment of a Basic Principles Committee consisting of 24 members, including himself and two non-Muslim members, to report the house on the main principles on which the constitution of Pakistan is to be framed. A Board of Islamic Teaching was set up to advise the Committee on the Islamic aspects of the constitution.
In the course of constitutional debates, a number of very crucial issues were raised that caused much controversy, both inside and outside the Constituent Assembly over specific questions such as the following:
The nature of the Islamic state: the manner in which the basic principles of Islam concerning state, economy, and society were to be incorporated into the constitution.
The nature of federalism: questions of provincial autonomy vis-a-vis federal authority with emphasis on the problems of representation on the basis of population and the equality of the federating units; the structure of the federal legislature -- unicameral or bicameral.
The form of government: whether it was to be modeled on the British or the U.S. pattern -- parliamentary or presidential.
The problem of the electorate: serious questions of joint (all confessional groups vote in one election) versus separate (each confessional group votes separately for its own candidates) electorate.
The question of language both national and regional. These very fundamental issues divided the political elites of Pakistan into warring factions that impeded the process of constitution-making. The Basic Principles Committee submitted two interim reports; one in September, 1950 and the other in December 1952. Neither of them could be adopted. The first one was withdrawn in the wake of a storm of protests in East Pakistan [31] while the second one was amended during the debates in the Constituent Assembly. However, the second report proved more productive and was adopted on 6th Oct. 1954.
The second report was widely criticized by the Ulema. A convention of Ulema was convened in Karachi in January 1953 to discuss the report. The convention, attended by 33 Ulema of different schools of thought, suggested more than two dozen amendments to accept the report.[32] Earlier in January 1951, almost the same Ulema had agreed unanimously on 22 points on the fundamental principles of an Islamic state.
The main features of the Committee's second report regarding the place of Islam in the future constitution were: that the Objectives Resolution 1949 should form the Preamble of the future constitution; that the Directives Principles of state should be the preservation of democracy within the limits prescribed by the Quran and the Sunnah; that the state should take steps to bring the existing laws in conformity with the Islamic principles XE "Islamic principles"; that no legislation be made which was repugnant to the Quran and the Sunnah: that the Islamic moral standards be promoted and maintained.
In response to considerable pressure, the Report of the Basic Principles Committee contained a proposal that no law passed by any legislature in Pakistan should be valid if it were repugnant to the Holy Quran and the Sunnah. To prevent passage of legislation repugnant to the Quran and the Sunnah, the Committee recommended the appointment (by the head of state) of a board consisting of not more than five persons well versed in Islamic law. This Board of Ulema should act in an advisory capacity and determine whether the laws that the Assembly passed were in conformity with or repugnant to Islam. The Committee also recommended that the Head of State should be a Muslim; and that separate electorates should be maintained for Muslims and non-Muslims.
When the Committee's report was considered by the Constituent Assembly, the Islamic character of the recommendations was severely criticized. There was not, however, much discussion on such matters as making the Objectives Resolution 1949, as part of the Preamble, or including the Directive Principles of State policy in the future constitution. It was argued that these provisions were not legally enforceable and were merely 'pious hopes.' But recommendations - that the Head of the state should be a Muslim, that separate electorates should be maintained, and that a Board of Ulema should be appointed to supervise the legislative activity of the Assembly were opposed during the constituent assembly debates. During the debate that the Head of state should be a Muslim, Sardar Shawkat Hayat Khan pointed out that the provision was against the fundamental rights. He remarked: " I imagine that the population of this country will be 85 percent Muslim. If a Muslim cannot be returned as Head of the State with 85 percent Muslims population and a Hindu is returned with a population of only 15 percent that Hindus must be saint......" [33]
The recommendation of the Basic Principles Committee that a board of five Ulema be appointed to determine whether the laws passed by the Assembly were in conformity with or repugnant to Islam, also came under sharp criticism. It was, therefore, argued that since the proposal to form a board of Ulema had received support only from a section of the people, it should be dropped and the Supreme Court of Pakistan should be given the necessary jurisdiction to judge whether the laws passed by the Assembly were in conformity with or repugnant to the Quran and the Sunnah. This was agreed to by the first Constituent Assembly but later dropped by the second.
During the discussion in the first Constituent Assembly the report of the Basic Principles Committee was substantially amended regarding the 'repugnancy clause.' Any law of a Pakistan legislature which is in conflict with the Quran and the Sunnah was again declared to be invalid. But the later provision was that Supreme court alone should have jurisdiction in such a case. Any objection on the ground of repugnancy to Islam was to be filed within three months of the giving of assents to a bill. Furthermore, it was provided that, for a period of at least twenty-five years, the repugnancy sections should not apply to 'fiscal and monetary measures, laws relating to banking, insurance, provident funds, and credit system.'
The East Pakistan Muslim League passed a resolution regretting that the repugnancy clause was not to be enforceable in the courts. This criticism was more than countered by the attitude of the Awami League. Mr. Hussein Shaheed Suharwardy asserted that his party wanted true Islam in the government and policies of Pakistan, but that the existing state of affairs was so far from Islam that the title should not be included in the name of the state. "I say that you are deluding the people here by calling this an Islamic state." He argued that it was quite unnecessary to provide in the constitution that the President was required to be a Muslim since 86 per cent of the electorate would be composed of Muslim voters. [34]
In 1953, Pakistan was declared an Islamic Republic, in spite of the opposition of a few Muslims and many of the non-Muslim members of the Constituent Assembly. The Report of the Basic Principles Committee was eventually adopted by the assembly on September 21, 1954 with some amendments. The proposal for a Board of Ulema had been dropped; the question of separate or joint electorates was left to be determined by the Central and Provincial Assemblies formed under the constitution. They adopted the principle of joint electorates. After much debate, the Constituent Assembly was able to prepare a final draft of the constitution in 1954 which visualized an Islamic Republic of Pakistan with a parliamentary system and a federation of five units, each with a bicameral legislature. It seems that the constitutional draft could have been adopted in the Constituent Assembly but it was not approved by the ruling elites, that is to say, members of the civil and military bureaucracy and feudal elements of West Pakistan. When the Assembly passed a bill in September 1954 which made the Governor General subservient to the advice of Prime Minister, Governor General Ghulam Mohammad, a senior member of the Indian Audit and Accounts Service, backed by Chaudhry Mohammad Ali, dissolved the Constituent Assembly and dismissed Prime Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin, a Bengali. Perhaps this was the first step towards ultimate bureaucratization and consequent militarization of Pakistan's political system.[35]
The second Constituent Assembly was inaugurated in July 1955 and on January 8, 1956 it presented a draft constitution which was finally adopted on February 29, with certain changes. After nine years of effort, Pakistan was successful in framing the constitution which was implemented on March 23, 1956. Most of the West Pakistani politicians and bureaucrats dreaded the exercise of the will of the people according to the majority principle since that could put the Bengalis (representing 56 per cent of the population) in a commanding position. It took them nine years to devise the so-called parity formula according to which East and West Pakistan would have equal representation in the federal parliament and government.
The constitution provided for a federal structure composed of two units, East and West Pakistan. The parliamentary form of government was adopted and unicameral legislature was based on the principle of 'parity' of representation between the two wings of the country. The merger of the provinces of West Pakistan in 1955 was initiated (against the wishes of Baluchistan, Sindh and North Western Frontier Province in order to transform a federation originally based on five units into a bipolar federal system. This would ultimately imply perpetual confrontation between East and West Pakistan. No attempt was made to abolish feudalism in the country while colonial-era system of civil administration was maintained. Islamic provisions in the 1956 constitution were contained in the Directives Principles of State Policy, which were not enforceable in the courts. The directive principles reaffirmed the statement in the preamble that "steps shall be taken to enable the Muslims of Pakistan individually and collectively to order their lives in accordance with the Holy Quran and Sunnah. Further the state was to endeavor (a) to provide facilities to the Muslims to enable them to understand the meaning of life according to the Holy Quran and the Sunnah; (b) to promote unity and observance of Islamic moral standards; (c) to secure the proper organization of Zakat and Awkaf.
Article 24 provided that the state should endeavor to strengthen the bonds of unity among Muslim countries. The same article enjoined Pakistan to foster friendly relations among all nations.
There was no provision to make Islam the state religion in Pakistan. Article 21 provided that no person should be compelled to pay any special tax, the proceeds of which were to be spent on the propagation of any religion other than his own. The Head of State was to be a Muslim not younger than 40 years of age. The constitution of 1956 represented a decision to transfer to the people and not the Ulema or other religiously privileged class, the responsibility, if not for making the authoritative interpretation of Islam, at least for choosing which interpretation shall become authoritative.
Insofar as Islam was given any practical legal significance in the 1956 Constitution, it was in two ways. First, through Article 197 the president was obliged to set up an organization for Islamic research and instruction in advanced studies to assist in the reconstruction of Muslim society on a truly Islamic basis; and under article 198 the President expected to appoint a Commission of Experts to make recommendations ' as to the measures for bringing existing laws in conformity with the injunctions of Islam. ' The Commission was to submit its report to the President within five years of its appointment. This report was to be placed before the National Assembly, and the Assembly after considering the report was to enact laws in respect thereof. [36]
The constitution had something to offer to both sides; it gave grounds to the orthodox traditionalist that his cause might be advanced, while there was nothing in the Islamic clauses to cause a liberal democrat to feel that Pakistan was incapable of becoming the kind of a state he wishes to see. The constitution did little to settle the fundamental issue of the desirable role of Islam in a modern state. Nor did its adoption serve to bridge what one writer had called the ' wide gulf between the Ulema of the orthodox schools and the intelligentsia." [37] The 1956 constitution was accepted without widespread opposition from religious groups concerning its Islamic provisions. Jamaat-e-Islami described it as an "Islamic constitution." A statement issued by the Majles-e-Shura of the Jamaat on 18th March 1956 said: "The preamble of the constitution, its Directive Principles and Article 198 of the constitution have finally and unequivocally settled the 8-year old struggle between the Islamic and anti-Islamic trends in favor of the former. And the fact that the future system of life in this country has to be shaped on the basis of Islam and that the Quran and the Sunnah shall ever reign supreme here has been so firmly embodied in the constitution of the country that no worldly power shall, Insha Allah, be able to obliterate it." [38]
The constitution of 1956, that took seven years to adopt, was abrogated only after two and half years of its existence by the civilian-military coalition of power elites that brought about a military coup d'état on October 7, 1958. President Iskandar Mirza (a retired Major General who later joined the civil service) imposed martial law and appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, General Mohammad Ayub Khan, later to be named a Field Marshal, as the Chief Martial Law Administrator. Three weeks later General Ayub dismissed President Iskandar Mirza and assumed the presidency. This act marked the transformation of the bureaucratic state system into military regime in which the civilian bureaucrats came to play a sub-servient rather than a dominant role.
The fate of democracy was not allowed to improve even after the enforcement of the 1956 democratic constitution. Political bickering and intrigues which began under the interim constitution after 1953, -- when Prime Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin, who had enjoyed the confidence of the legislature, was arbitrarily dismissed by the Governor-General, Ghulam Mohammad, and when a sovereign constituent assembly was also dissolved by the same Governor-General in an undemocratic manner in 1954, -- continued to dominate the Pakistan political scene even after the adoption of the 1956 constitution. On the political intrigues of President Iskandar Mirza, General Ayub wrote: "The President had thoroughly exploited the weaknesses in the constitution and had got everyone connected with the political life of the country utterly exposed and discredited." [39]
It was expected that general elections will take place in accordance with the provisions of the new constitution but like the interim constitution (1947-56) no elections were held. There were seven prime ministers in Pakistan during the era of parliamentary democracy from 1947 to 1958. With the exception of the first prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, none of the remaining six prime ministers were elected as a result of any election or even as a result of the vote of confidence in the legislature. They were the products of "palace intrigues" by the two governor -generals -- Ghulam Mohammad and Iskandar Mirza (who later became the first president of Pakistan). There was a cabinet, there was a parliament, but the real powers were exercised by the Governor-General with the help of a ruling elite, composed of the top civil and military officials. The constitutional forms and trapping of democracy had only provided a cloak for the ruling elite.
The political order in Pakistan had practically turned into an oligarchy under a democratic constitution. Pakistan's political system was rightly described as a 'modernizing oligarchy,' in a study on the politics of the developing areas. [40] The various government changes that took place in the country from 1953 to 1958 could be traced to the inordinate desire of this ruling oligarchy to perpetuate its power and position. It is no doubt true that this oligarchy was able to maintain its hold because of the lack of cohesion and integrity among the political parties and their leaders. But this is also true that the powerful oligarchy was determined to crush the democratic institutions in the country and it always encouraged splits and disintegration of the parties whenever any of them constituted a threat to its hold and dominance. It was therefore the role and policy of this particular group, which had actual control of the governmental machinery, that was more responsible than any other factor in the unsatisfactory working of the democratic institutions in the country.
A constitution commission appointed by Ayub Khan in 1960 enumerated the following reasons for the failure of democracy in Pakistan: (i) lack of proper elections, (ii) undue interference by the heads of the state with the ministers and political parties and by the central government with the functioning of the government of the provinces, (iii) lack of leadership resulting in the absence of well-organized and disciplined parties, lack of character of the politicians and their under interference in the administration. However, the commission failed to mention the real threat and challenges to democracy in Pakistan that came from an all-powerful and irresponsible executive which was aided and supported by a powerful civil and military bureaucracy.
For more details, click OUR SOURCE here!
Back to top
ISLAMIZATION PROGRAMME OF GENERAL ZIA-UL-HAQ
General Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq proclaimed Martial Law in 1977 and assumed the office of the President of the country. The then government had to issue several martial law regulations to effectively control the aggravating situation in the country. There is one strong opinion which has effectively prevailed over the years and that is hat the process of Islamization, in fact, began the day the Qadianis were declared as non-Muslims on their negation of the finality of Prophethood in 1974. The opinion seems to carry some weight as the action of the Government of Mr. Z.A. Bhutto, declaring the Qadianis as non-Muslims, was understood as a step to have been taken for the safeguard of the basic tenants of Islam. However, it was the martial law regime under General Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq which took practical steps for the process of Islamization.
The Islamization Programme: - The Islamization programme of General Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq contained the following steps.
1. Hadood Ordinance.
2. Qazaf Ordinance.
3. Nizaam-e-Salaat Committees.
4. Zakat Ordinance.
5. Ushr Ordinance.
Central Zakat Council.
Provincial Zakat Council.
District Zakat Committee.
Tehsil Zakat Committee.
6. Establishment of Federal Shariat Court.
7. Interest Free Banking.
8. Compulsory teaching of Pakistan Studies and Islamiat.
9. Ordinance for the sanctity of Ramzan-ul-Mubarak.
10. Ban of Nudity.
11. Arabic News.
12. Use of Dopatta.
13.Majlis-e-Shoora.
in contravention to this Ordinance was liable to three yeas imprisonment and a fine of RS. 500/-. However, hospitals, railway stations, seaports, bus stands, trains and airports were exempted from this Ordinance.
The Government in order to make Pakistan a real Islamic State strived hard to introduce Islamic System in the country.
The Government for this reason needed staunch support and cooperation from the masses. Pakistan at that time was passing through the transitory stage towards the ultimate goal of achieving an Islamic society. A very long span was required to mould Pakistan into an Islamic State.
10. Ban of Nudity: -
The Government imposed a strict ban on the display of nude posters particularly on portraying women as publicity symbols. Display of nude scenes and moving films with nudity were also banned ob the television.
11. Arabic News: -
Everyday, five minutes were reserved for Arabic news on the television. This act is still in practice. Arabic was also introduced as a compulsory subject in high schools. Great efforts were mad for teaching Arabic as a language. Arabic language courses were introduced on ‘Radio Pakistan’ and ‘Pakistan Television’ in Arabic from other medias.
12. Use of Dopatta: -
Female television announcers were forced to cover their heads with dopattas.
13. Majlis-e-Shoora: -
The President of the country, General Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq selected his Majlis-e-Shoora, the Islamic Parliament, to act as the Parliament of Pakistan in place of the National Assembly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Facebook Badge
Popular Posts
-
Some Prominent Ulema of 1857 Revolt. ( By Allama Yaseen Akhtar MIsbahi) (Founder Darul Qalam Delhi) The Revolutionary Voice As India...
-
Nishan-e-Haider The highest gallantary award and is the senior most among civil and military awards. It is admissible to all ranks for ac...
-
By Maulana Muhammad Wali Rahmani, Historians and historiographers are expected to study and narrate an event objectively and without showi...
Awareness
of law
