By Naila Inayat
The News on Sunday: What is the current status of minorities in Pakistan? Are you satisfied with it?
Cecil Chaudhry: Overall we are not satisfied with the status. If we go by the basic concept of democracy, which was given to the nation by Jinnah in his address to the constituent assembly on August 11, 1947, he promised equal rights for everybody. And the minorities of Pakistan are not even constitutionally enjoying equal rights.
TNS: How did this situation evolve, especially after the promulgation of the Objectives Resolution in 1949?
CC: Objectives Resolution was the worst legislation that ever took place in this country. In fact, it was a piece of document that totally countermanded Jinnah's thoughts for Pakistan. It brings forth a close relationship between state and religion. Jinnah clearly said that religion had nothing to do with the business of the state. There should have been a clear-cut separation of state and religion.
TNS: Do you feel it has gone from bad to worse?
CC: There was a time when discrimination against the minorities didn't exist, though a bias against the Hindu community was always there and they weren't allowed into the armed forces. The Christians were serving in the forces. It is of interest to know that when Pakistan came into being, 15 percent of the officers in Pakistan Air Force were Christians. They made a tremendous contribution in setting up the Air Force. So, earlier, there was no discrimination except for high positions. For instance, nobody in the army went beyond the rank of a brigadier. That started at the time of Ayub Khan, and probably the reason was that if you have a Christian head of the army and he declares martial law he becomes the head of the state. The worst discrimination in the services, civil included, was seen in Ziaul Haq's regime when minorities were denied appointments.
TNS: How will you compare the situation in Pakistan with that in India?
CC: Religious discrimination has seen a rise in India in recent years. There have been tremendous atrocities against minorities, too. But as a nation they do not discriminate against the minorities. Their first president -- Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad -- was a Muslim; their services chiefs have belonged to all religions and so have their prime ministers. Even their senior ministers have belonged to different religions. For instance, Fernandes was the minister of defence which is a vital post in any government. Their only field marshal, Manak Shaw is a Parsi. Constitutionally, it is a secular country. At government level there is no discrimination. But there is an anti-minority feeling which the extremists have perpetuated.
TNS: What is your take on the 18th amendment wherein the prime minister can only be a Muslim?
CC: It is blatantly discriminatory, against the non-Muslim citizens of the country. You cannot have democracy until you separate state from religion.
Let us not forget that two leading minorities -- Hindus and Christians -- stood side by side with the Indian Muslim League in the creation of Pakistan. Punjab's resolution was primarily a Christian move. Similarly, the resolution of Sindh to become a part of Pakistan was spearheaded by Jugarnath Mandal, a provincial minister at the time, and the same person who Jinnah asked to chair the first session of the National Assembly. He was also responsible for getting non-Muslims reserved seats in the Senate.
TNS: Isn't the proposed amendment then contradictory to the fundamental rights as envisaged in the constitution?
CC: Interestingly, whereas earlier only be a Muslim could be the president, now the prime minister has to be a Muslim. This is against the Fundamental Rights as envisaged in article 25 of the constitution. Let me reiterate that democracy has no religion.
TNS: What reforms do you propose in the constitutional and political system of the country?
CC: At the time when the constitution was made, Objectives Resolution was only a preamble to it. Ziaul Haq made it an integral part of the constitution under article 2 which, interestingly, talks about the minorities to freely profess their religion. The word "freely" was removed, whereas it is still there in the preamble. In my opinion, Objectives Resolution should be thrown out of the constitution and the preamble to the constitution should be Jinnah's August 11 address. He was very clear when he said, "You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan… We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State." The entire constitution should be based on his speech.
TNS: Every time we have a Gojra or a Shantinagar we wake up to the fact of discrimination and insecurity of the minorities. How do these constitutional changes impact the minorities in general?
CC: The minorities are perpetually in a state of fear. Let's not forget that Shantinagar happened two days after the general elections, and the reason was Zia's separate electorate system; it was nobody's constituency. Had it been a joint electorate, it would have been a different story altogether. Similarly, when Gojra happened, every Tom Dick and Harry ran there to muster future votes from the area. We saw the same pattern in Toba Tek Singh, Sialkot and Kasur.
Take another example. Arabic has been made a compulsory subject in public educational institutions. My question is, why impose the language on non-Muslim students? If you take a look at a class 8 Arabic book, more than about language, it is a book of religion. I feel we are getting deeper and deeper into the mess.
No comments:
Post a Comment