| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Can Altaf Bhai speak against Jews in the UK? |
| 2013-04-06 |
| By Ansar Abbasi ISLAMABAD: Sorry Mr Altaf Hussain, and sorry the wayward and confused media! Your humiliating criticism of the Returning Officers’ questions, being asked from the candidates, reflects your bias instead of presenting the facts to the people of Pakistan. All the hullabaloo is focused on the questions being asked about the basic knowledge of Islam and the Islamic teachings. Has anyone the right to say why do the Returning Officers ask these questions? The answer is — it is the demand of the 1973 Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The media generally ignores this constitutional fact and Altaf Bhai also seems to be not interested in referring to it, which in its Article 62(1)(e) says: “(1) A person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) unless — (e) he has adequate knowledge of Islamic teachings and practices obligatory duties prescribed by Islam as well as abstains from major sins.” Some may feel shame about the Islamic scheme of the Constitution of Pakistan but this fundamental legal framework of the country does require from the Muslim parliamentarians that they should have “adequate knowledge” of Islam and Islamic teachings. The Returning Officers are bound by the law and the Constitution to judge every candidate on the basis of Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution. You can’t conduct a written exam of such candidates to see if they are well versed with the Islamic teachings but by asking a few simple questions about Islam and Islamic teachings the Returning Officers can judge whether or not the candidates, who want to lead the people of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, have minimum knowledge of Islam. Though the media is making mountain out of molehill, such questions are routinely asked in the most prized competitive examinations/interviews for the Central Superior Services and from military’s commissioned officers. Most importantly, all the questions being asked are very simple and relate to the basic teachings of Islam. Most of these questions could be answered even by an ordinary school child — such as the total RAKAT of five prayers; the total chapters/PARAS of the Holy Quran and the dua’as (prayers), which are part of the daily Namaz etc. Questions regarding number of wives become relevant as our leading politicians, as per media reports, have more than one undisclosed marriage. The questions about the behaviour of husband with his more than one wives would show how justly and fairly the person who intends to become the lawmaker of the country deals with his wives. Islam allows more than one marriage with the strict condition that the man should be just, fair and unbiased in his relationship with the wives. Some people claim that Articles 62 and 63 should also be applied to judges, journalists and bureaucrats. The Constitution, however, invokes these articles only in case of members of parliament. It is also being projected by some quarters that personal questions should not be asked from a candidate. But when a person jumps into the election fray, it is right of the people to ask questions about his public and private life. This right is enjoyed and exercised by the people of the United States. There is a difference between the personal life of an ordinary person and a leader. People used to follow their leaders whose life must be ideal. Those who want that no questions should be raised about their personal lives should not aspire to lead the people. In the case of Ayaz Amir’s disqualification, the liberal voices in the media appear to have greatly influenced Altaf Hussain. The MQM claims to do home work while issuing any policy statement but Altaf Hussain sounds oblivious of the Constitutional demand that a person is qualified to become member of Parliament if, according to 62(1)(g), “he has not, after the establishment of Pakistan, worked against the integrity of the country or opposed the ideology of Pakistan.” The nomination paper also contains a mandatory oath by every candidate that unambiguously says: “I will strive to preserve the Islamic Ideology which is the basis for the creation of Pakistan.” May I dare to ask Altaf Bhai how a person, who opposes the Islamic ideology and strives for secular Pakistan could become member of the Parliament in the presence of Article 62(1)(g)? Altaf Hussain, whose party propagates secular vision for Pakistan, also ignored the “Objectives Resolution” and other Islamic articles of the Constitution like Articles 2, 31 etc which leave no space for Pakistan to become a secular state. Islamic Ideology can’t be detached from Pakistan and its constitution unless the secular minority of the country chooses to go the masses with the slogan of changing the Islamic basis of Pakistan and its constitution to a secular country and secular constitution, wins 2/3rd majority in the Constituent Assembly and then alters the Islamic provisions of the present constitution. It may disappoint some opponents of Islamic scheme of the Constitution but they need to be educated by this very fact that Islamic provisions in this basic legal framework of the country are safeguarded as one of the five basic features of the constitution. These features can’t be amended even by a two-third majority but by the Constituent Assembly elected for the same purpose. It may also hurt some but the present constitution of Pakistan does not appreciate any secular vision for Pakistan. Instead such thoughts are blocked from entering into Parliament as the authors of the Constitution and the Objectives Resolution, adopted by the very first Constituent Assembly of Pakistan soon after the creation of Pakistan, knew that any effort to separate Islam from Pakistan would mean destruction of Pakistan. Living in London for many years now, Altaf Bhai despite being a British national can’t utter a word against Jews. If he does so, he would face legal and criminal proceedings. Only recently Lord Nazir was proceeded against just because he had uttered what in Pakistan could be considered an ordinary remark about any other community. In the west, you can’t oppose the holocaust. Altaf Bhai and no liberal from Pakistan can do that. However, in Pakistan you can oppose the Islamic Ideology of the country and yet become a parliamentarian. Constitution and law here become irrelevant because they do not suit us. |
| Posted by:john frum |