Daily Times

Looking at a cartoon of Fazal ur Rehman, the one who also calls himself a‘maulana’, walking out with his bag of burdens from the ministers’ enclave made me sad — not because I have the slightest shred of sympathy for such merciless merchants of religion, but because, ever so treacherously, they have been provided the space in this country to indulge in unabated loot and plunder by creating schisms among people in the name of their faith.

He is a dishonourable enlistment among the coterie of the new homeless of this country. This comes at the end of a 13-year uninterrupted stint in the ministers’ enclave, having been part of three consecutive governments of general Musharraf, PPP and PMLN — a singular feat in hypocrisy by itself. In this exclusively coveted domain, he may be the only one who could beat that ultimate intellectual pervert going by the name of Mushahid Hussain.

During this prolonged phase of habitation, all he did was enjoy the perks and privileges of his position secured by exploiting the religious vote bank that he claimed to command, but did nothing by way of promoting the task that was entrusted to him as Chairman of the Kashmir Committee with ministerial status.

That brings me to the larger question whether religion should, at all, be allowed to play a role in politics, and whether religious parties should go unchecked in using the places of worship to promote their political agendas.

Notice was taken of the same in the National Action Plan which vowed to initiate “decisive action against elements which spread sectarianism”. Now, what does a party like the one headed by Fazal ur Rehman do? Does it spread harmony, or does it cultivate discord among people and communities, pitting one against the other leading to death and destruction, for accruing petty political gains?

The unleashing of the ultra-right hydras, garbed as political parties, has aggravated the crisis further. This necessitates urgent corrective measures.

Whatever may be the causes or motivations behind this fundamental malady, the fact remains that we exist in an environment which is not guided by what can or cannot be done, or what should or should not be done. We are caught up in a phase of liquidation of state institutions and a break-down of rules of operation and benchmarks of morality. We are the victims of multifaceted paralysis

The Code of Conduct for Political Parties takes note of it at number 44 which states that “contesting candidates, election agents and their supporters shall refrain from speeches intended to arouse parochial and sectarian feelings and controversy of conflicts between genders, sects, communities and linguistic groups”.

At number 45, the same document states that “political parties, contesting candidates, election agents and their supporters shall not propagate against the participation of any person in the elections on the basis of gender, ethnicity, religion or caste”.

This concern also reflects in the Elections Act, 2017 which at 200 (4) (c) states that “a political party shall not promote sectarianism, regional or provincial hatred or animosity”.

There is no ambiguity about the kind of role that a political party can or cannot play in the political arena. Why is it, then, that all of them transgress their limits and get into doing things which are in contravention of the basic parameters set forth in the documents that they must abide by? Does it reflect a palpable lack of understanding of the relevant rules and regulations, or reluctance to agree with them, or inability, unwillingness, even complicity of the state institutions in failing to enforce them?

Whatever may be the causes or motivations behind this fundamental malady, the fact remains that we exist in an environment which is not guided by what can or cannot be done, or what should or should not be done. We are caught up in a phase of liquidation of state institutions and a break-down of rules of operation and benchmarks of morality. We are the victims of multifaceted paralysis.

This environment has been systematically created by a string of rulers whose credibility and the right to rule were extremely dubious and who came by way of despicable compromises made with the paramount interest of the state and its right to not only survive, but continue to grow and prosper. Under the rules devised and promulgated to advance person-specific interests, the state has not only stagnated, it has regressed to a point of virtual collapse.

Everyone who is anyone think that they are gods unto themselves, fully empowered to devise and implement mechanisms that they construe would suit their self-elevating agendas, be this in the arena of politics, religion, media, bureaucracy, or other annals of governance. So, we have multiple yardsticks operating at cross-purposes, thus creating a well-orchestrated environment that has not only vitiated, but continues to inflict damning wounds on the body politic of the state and the charter of its creation as enshrined in its founding principles.

In this age and time, it is profoundly painful to revisit the Quaid’s speech of August 11: “We are starting in the days when there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens, and equal citizens of one state…Now, I think, we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that, in course of time, Hindus would cease to be Hindus, and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense because that is a personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the state”.

After the death of the Quaid, and under mounting pressure by the regression-driven segments, the likes of Fazal ur Rehman and sundry, Objectives Resolution was adopted and the process of bifurcating the society among Muslims and Minorities was effectively stamped: “The Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accordance with the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out in the Holy Qur’an and Sunnah…Adequate provision shall be made for the minorities to freely profess and practice their religions and develop their cultures”.

Consequently, the state became an instrument in the hands of the bigots to flaunt and continue winning concessions in the name of religion. From the speech of the Quaid to the adoption of the Objectives Resolution to creating ignoble merchants of religion of the ilk of Fazal ur Rehman et al, it has been an agonising journey which has plunged us deep into pits of regression. All other manifestations of this contagious disorder have flowed from the grave mistakes made in the early days after the creation of the new state.

Alongside numerous other challenges, this is a mammoth one that awaits Khan in the pursuit of creating a new Pakistan. He’ll succeed in his endeavour if he is able to change the direction of the country by removing the strictures that create divisions among its people along multiple artificial fault lines. A cosmetic treatment will not suffice. He should get to the core of it and begin there, just like there is a need of getting to the sources of terror and eliminate them.

There is quite a burgeoning tribe of these new homeless, and it is likely to grow further with time. Now that their sickening brand of politics is fading away, they have to look for pastures without becoming a burden on the state. Happy grazing!

The writer is a political and security strategist, and heads the Regional Peace Institute — an Islamabad-based think tank. Email: raoofhasan@hotmail.com. Twitter: @RaoofHasan

Published in Daily Times, August 14^th 2018.