![tribune tribune](https://i.tribune.com.pk/media/images/744198-AsadRahimKhanNewagainagain-1407170607/744198-AsadRahimKhanNewagainagain-1407170607.jpg)
1954 was the Year of Munir: when our first parliament was sacked for the first time. The CJ stamped his approval, and disaster ensued (AR Cornelius wrote the sole dissent — Lord Cornelius was the North Star of the judiciary; all others can be measured by how far their positions fall from his).
![](https://i1.tribune.com.pk/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Never-before-have.jpg)
But 1954 was also the year of the Munir Report; and there haven’t been many like it since. The report raised some of the most profound moral questions splitting Pakistan at the seams, questions that haunt us today. Justice Munir found that, while the ulema were adamant as to who fell outside the pale of religion, they were far less clear as to who made it in.
“Who is a Musalman?” the judge asked; a question so simple, each had a different answer. When one aalim expressed his opinion, the judge asked whether he would change his mind if the subject “steals other people’s things, embezzles property entrusted to him, has an evil eye on his neighbour’s wife, and is guilty of the grossest ingratitude to his Benefactor?”
“Such a person,” came the answer, “if he has the belief already indicated, will be a Muslim despite all this.”
The justices eventually threw their hands up, penning those famous few lines: “Keeping in view the several definitions given by the ulema, need we make any comment except that no two learned divines are agreed on this fundamental (…) and if we adopt the definition given by any one of the ulema, we remain Muslims according to the view of that aalim, but kafirs, according to the definition of everyone else.”
The justices also went for a parting kick, calling the rioters “subversives” who “were opposed to the creation of Pakistan”. But everyone knew that already: the ideological distance between our founders and fundamentalists is no coincidence. “Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state,” said the Quaid, “to be ruled by priests with a divine mission.”
The barrister from Bombay read Dicey, was interested in the Liberal Party, and thought Islam the most pluralist of philosophies. His foes, meanwhile, looked to literalism — more revivalist than rational — to stand firm against the Raj. This lost all relevance when the Empire ended, and the maulanas repackaged themselves as the purest Pakistanis around. “He wears a mask,” Orwell once said, “and his face grows to fit it.”
But Pakistan, at its purest, was built over a sacred trust: the protection of minorities. That ideal has come crashing down — in Gujranwala and Gojra and Joseph Colony, again and again and again. Courtesy this government’s fetish for flyovers, ‘legislation’ and ‘pluralism’ and ‘inclusivity’ are words too big, too complex, too intangible to sate the Punjabi voter. Never before have the aspirations of so many been reduced to language so low: ‘bullet trains’ and ‘metro buses’ and, hold your breaths, ‘underpasses’. Enough bricks and mortar, this government says, and Istanbul’s not far ahead.
But if the Muslim League can tolerate southern Punjab becoming a sectarian swamp, it certainly doesn’t lose sleep over Hazaras in Quetta, over Christians in Peshawar, over Hindus in Ghotki. Qadri rallies, maybe — the killing of our most vulnerable, not so much. Meanwhile, our sectarian groups grow stronger, the will to fight them grows weaker, and Islamabad spends its workdays appointing DCOs and DPOs.
Which is why when it comes to setting policy, in making the gears of this country grind, minorities are nowhere. They are treated as tokens by political parties. They have never been accorded four stars in any service, let alone charged with chief. They can never be PM or president, courtesy the Constitution. Even sans modest goals, they face crippling prejudice in all walks of life.
The judiciary fares better: the only thing Justices Dorab Patel, Rana Bhagwandas and AR Cornelius have in common is sound adjudication. And it is the judiciary again that led the way last June.
In the autumn of his tenure, Chief Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani decided the landmark SMC 1 of 2014 — a suo motu after Peshawar’s horrific church bombings (among other evils). It stands the most significant judgment for our religious rights jurisprudence in memory. It is also testament to the influence one good man can have after decades of division: it has singlehandedly changed the national conversation.
“The very genesis of our country is grounded in the protection of religious rights for all, especially those of minorities,” writes His Lordship. The judgment fleshes out the ambit of the Constitution’s Article 20 “(…) every citizen shall have the right to profess, practice and propagate his religion (…)” and interprets it as it was meant to be.
It both takes 2013’s Human Rights Commission Report in context, and finds toeholds in international human rights law: weighing its ruling against the UN’s Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, 1981.
And it tells us how to cure the disease: a federal task force to encourage tolerance, a special police force for minorities’ places of worship, a national council for minorities’ rights, reform in curriculum, the punishment for hate speech and the enforcement of quotas. Directives so clear, even this administration can implement them.
Yes, minorities are central to the idea of Pakistan, white fused with green. But the white is bleeding out, as these pages scream day in and day out. Before they split apart — white surrender flags on one hand, PML green on the other — it’s time we act.
Pakistan is no longer the country Justice Munir wrote about 60 years ago. But it can still be made into the one Justice Jillani foresees today.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 5th, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (41)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Hornet: My apologies Hornet. My comments were factually incorrect. I went overboard. I did not mean it in a literal sense. It has never been the official policy of Pakistan to teach such things in schools. I was being sarcastic -- poor judgement on my part. I retract the last line of my posted comment.
@Bin Ismail: I am personally greatful to you Mr Bin Ismail that you gave us that information which I never read anywhere though I have read so many books on Our Great Leader Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. His stand for untouchables touched my heart when I compare the present Muslim league and All India Muslim league. I cursed the day when the objective resolution was passed, I cursed the people who negatively influenced khan Liaqat Ali khan to allow that resolution to be passed. Thanks Mr Bin Ismail. May Allah Bless you. Ameen.
@Amjad: there is no bar on any Muslim citizen of USA or UK to be the head of the state constitutionally. It is written in Pakistan constitution that non Muslim cannot become head of the state. So the constitution itself discriminates against the minorities. Please do not compare with other more liberal countries. Even in India there are examples of Muslims and Sikhs being president and prime minister.
@Shamsher Singh Bhangi: Yes, India (for that matter every country) has problems, but at least their constitutions are much more fair to all citizens. If lawmakers add discriminatory language in the constitution against a section of its own citizens then what can one expect from illiterate mobs. I like what India teaches in its school, "Hindu, Muslim, Sikh Issai, sab hain bhai bhai" though they should teach it with more honesty and passion because India remains divided along racial and religious lines. Yet I will say, give them credit for trying. In Pakistan they teach, "Hindu, Shia, Ahmadi, Issai, kaato in ki gardann, bulao Kissai"
The Muslim-majority states of Undivided India - all five of them together - six if you include Kashmir - formed the "minority bloc" among the collective states of Undivided India, while the Hindu-majority states of Undivided India formed the "majority bloc". So essentially, the idea of "Pakistan", as advocated by Jinnah, was based on the idea of securing the rights of the "minority bloc". On the other hand, and concurrently so, the general populace of the Indian Muslims, spanning from the Khyber Pass to the Hills of Chittagong, formed the "minority community" within Undivided India, while the Indian Hindus formed the majority. On both planes, Jinnah emerged as the "Voice of the Minority". It should be noted that the Muslims were not the only minority he cared and stood for. In his letters to Gandhi, he expresed similar concern for the Indian Shudhra Community - known also as the "Untouchables" and the "Dalits". Hence, we find Jinnah declaring, "..in the name of Humanity, I care more for them (the Untouchables) than for Mussalmans.." [Jinnah, Address at the All India Muslim League session at Delhi, 1934]. The Untouchables were not Muslims, but they were indeed a minority. Under Jinnah, the Muslim League had actually emerged as a champion of the rights of minorities. Also, note that he did not utter these words in a Hindu or Dalit congregation, where he could have expected a standing ovation. He uttered these words during the session of the Muslim League.
Whatever happened post-Jinnah - be it the Objectives Resolution, or the concept of a State Religion, or the mixing of religion and politics, or the persecution of minorities in Pakistan - happened not due to Jinnah, but because the nation and its rulers failed to uphold the sterling principles of Jinnah, upon which this country was founded.
Asad Rahim Khan -- what a fantastic writer you are! How well you have dissected history and made some sense out of it. If the Quaid, or the leadership of the Pakistan movement ever knew that the minorities of Pakistan would be so badly treated. He would not only abandon the idea of Pakistan but possibly fight against its creation. This nation needs to think very calmly and objectively on the events that have lead his to this mess.
@ Me Once in a talk show a member of Christian Community was asking that why can't a Christian citizen of Pakistan become president or prime minister of Pakistan. I have the same question from him why American or UK Muslim cannot become president or prime minister of these countries in which "democracy" has flourished for centuries. Secondly what is happening to Muslims in countries like Burma or India? These questions are put forward to test IQ level of "insightful" author.
@John B: @Parvez: I like your comments since they tantamount to " contempt of court" and Pakistan constitution as well as the suppression of my reply to John B by ET.!! Pakistan is indeed a dysfunctional state one of three most unpopulare states in the world. I dare ET to print it.
Rex Minor
We blame the politicians, the military, the clergy for all the ills befallen this country and to a great extent, rightly so.......but in my view the judiciary are equally if not more so, responsible.
I do not understand why we use the word 'minorities' or ' majority'.Everyone is a Pakistani. Why to differentiate on the basis of religion. Discrimination on the basis of religion should be declared illegal. Let us all be Pakistanis, one nation. Why we say so and so is Christian, Hindu or Ahmadi. Religion is one's personal matter . Why should others bother about it. In the same way on all official documents such as ID cards, passports should not mention religion.
@Rex Minor, it is only abnormal for the faithful of Abrahamic religions that claim 'others are false'. The faithful of non-Abrahamic religions claim 'others are not good enough for me'. There is a significant difference in the attitude, should you think about it.
@wiserneighbour:
Notwithstanding any legislations in Pakistan or any other self proclaimed Islamic States to the contrary, let it be said that Islam does not permit the practice of ex-communications which is a norm in christianity..
Rex Minor
@Rex Minor, most normal people other than from "religion of peace" don't interfere with others unless its a security issue for them.
in Pakistan the contest is to prove who is the best Muslim. They have disqualified the ahmedis and the Shias in the first round itself. Since they are out of race, they do not have a place in track.So these executions.The Utopian khilafat is the dream.You know one khilafat is unfolding in Iraq. May the real Allah save Pakistan.
All the problems of PAK today, justification and criticism based on constitutional clause, is due to contradictory spirit and value and statements of PAK constitution.
PAK constitution starts with a statement of totalitarian idea that "all sovereignty is accorded by Allah...". No one had ever thought through what would this statement mean to a non-Muslim in the land that the Muslims are sharing with.
Providing rights of worship subsequently in the constitution only reiterates the point that "the minorities will discriminated and remedy is needed.
Consequently, the issue becomes who is minority(non Muslim) and who is majority (Muslim) and hence the problem.
PAK constitution starts of saying that PAK is only for muslims. In other words, it also says that even if a Muslim relinquishes the faith, they have no place. This principle essentially means that there is no freedom of conscientious decision on choosing ones faith. The blasphemy law seals the fate of all.
@gopal paul: Why not use logic instead of prejudice; most normal people regard their faith to be the bestl. and show intolerence towards those who denegrade it. Do'nt you? If not then your behaviour is abnormal one.
Rex Minor
@Hornet: says The problem of having the inability of living with others is India specific.
Shocking you should say this. Let us take the history since 1947: 1) East Pakistanis could not live as one nation with west Pakistan. 2) Ahmadis have been classified as Non-Muslims against their wishes by the establishment. 3) Constitution in Pakistan does not allow non muslims to become head of state 4) Pakistan minority population has exponentially reduced since independence.
I guess you are blaming all of this due to the Indianess left in you.
@Shamsher Singh Bhangi: One thing is common in Muslims, literate and illiterate. they think their religion is the best and every other religions are nowhere near theirs. They have no tolerance for others. Now others are showing intolerance to Muslims, some elites in Muslims have waken up.
@Hornet: Can I ask you a simple question, are Indian Muslims running away to Pakistan like Pakistani Hindus are running to India? Express Tribune reported the case of Ahmadis and Shias seeking refugee in Sri Lanka. Should that not tell you something? India is no angel by any mean, we have had our share of mistakes in the past, but our laws do not discriminate against anyone. India never became a Hindu country it became a secular country. "Hindu Muslim Sikh Isayi, Charon hai Bhai Bhai" is the slogan taught to us in our school. - Shamsher Singh Bhangi
@Jawaid: cy!ga his le
How can one end lunacy, which is his legacy and is not only practiced by those in Khakis but in white clothing as well.
Rex Minor
@jay: And where do you reckon they should head towards, certainly not Kashmir?
Rex Minor
@Ali Z: Green is bleeding because green never stood up for white when it was bleeding. as a matter of fact, green still not standing up for the white, instead green is burning down the houses of white and dancing around it as if theyve freed palestine! wake up for godsake! or at least stop using Islam and Holy Prophets name when commiting hidious crimes against fellow human beings.
@SD: Well said!! One trusts that the author understands it too. Mr Jinnah and his followers simply recognised the reality with white colour and not to give them special rights.
Rex Minor
@Ali Z: Your minorities are already wiped out. Majority is still alive.
@Hornet: Pakistan amount was stopped because Pakistan declare war on India because of Kashmir which was against partition act. Pakistan got more than 25% of land of British India based on then Muslims population but only 15% of Indian population. Pakistan population density of pakistan is lower than India.
As if the green is not bleeding? Entire Pakistan is bleeding and suffocated some in the name of religion while others due to corruption, terrorism and lack of law n order. It is just that the minority gets more highlighted.
@Sun Tzu: I have always wanted to change the flag to all green (or all white for that matter) not because I am a fundo but because I believe we started discriminating against the minorities (I detest that word btw) the day we cut out a separate portion for them on the flag and marked them as 'the other'.
Minorities are not an issue here, same thing is happening with majority. No justice at all, due to corruption in all law and order institutions. And the reason is the rulers a.k.a government hire their touts in police and judiciary and their main purpose is to serve their masters rather than the public. We must stand up for Justice for All.
We do have our own problems and those problems have been created by us, I must confess that the biggest mistake done by our elders was the passing of objective resolution by the then national assembly and later more venom was added by Gen Zia. We are trying to resolve this issue and hopefully we will soon get out of the clutches of mullahs. The problem of having the inability of living with others is India specific. If you study the history you will learn that it was the Indian govt which denied the due share of economy to Pakistan and for that Mr Ganghi severerly criticized the then Indian govt and the great leader of India was subsequently killed. There are numerous examples which can be quoted. So it's not the Pakistan which acks the ability to live with others it's rather India which lacks this quality.@Shamsher Singh Bhangi:
The white is slowly but surely turning red with the blood of innocents, All minorities should jump off this sinking ship asap. After all the minorites are done and dusted the fight would b for the title of " who is a better muslim" Pakistan as was built on blood and hatred for the Hindu's , now "blood n Hatred" is coming back ten fold
Et b fair.
Is it any coincidence that the 'Danda' (the Flagpole) is inserted through the 'White' side of the flag?
Minorities are central to the idea of Pakistan ..... Really? Since when? The areas that became Pakistan were muslim majority anyway, they still needed a separate nation, where they wouldn't have to set eyes on a Hindu. The minority in the west started treating the majority in the east like a colony soon after, leading to the creation of Bangladesh. Pakistan was based on the principle of intolerance of the other, & now u see what a vicious cycle it is.
Pakistan and many of Islamic countries have a permanently damaged the reputation of Islam by their handling of minority issues. Given that 90% of them are converted or driven out of the country not sure anything you do will be enough. This is similar to what Taliban did to bamiyan statues. They are permanently gone, how to course correct that.
@Sohail What you have written is 100% true. Admire the moderator for allowing your truthful post. This is why our claims - there are articles appearing even in ET- that we are a misunderstood people is bogus. No amount of propaganda can hide this ugly reality.
Too late author !!! Rab rakha
"Pakistan is no longer the country Justice Munir wrote about 60 years ago."
But Pakistan is the country it is today because of what Justice Munir wrote 60 years ago, using the crutches of the Doctrine of Necessity.
A very good article. Very noble and thoughtful. However, does majority Pakistan really care about the minorities? Implementation of what you have stated according to Justice Jillani - even getting an iota of this done would be impossible. In 25 years time, not even a 100th of what Justice Jillani has asked for would get done, but what I can bet on this is that most of the minorities would have withered away - we would have forced them to convert, or escape/migrate to new countries - or then simply killed them.
The only folks who care are the ones who are western educated - have lived and studied abroad. For most others, I am sad to say, even if they are middle or upper class or have education - we do not care about the minorities - we are happy with them being second or third class citizens. It is true for our armed forces, our government employees, police , politicians and even the judiciary.
I am stating the plain facts - this is how it is - this is what we are.
Tell me I am wrong. Be honest before you pen down a response.
There is an urgent need to undo general Ziaul's legacy of intolerance and blood lust that was groomed through his patronage.