Critical Analysis of Objective Resolution 1949(Pakistan)

Critical Analysis of Objective Resolution 1949

            Objective Resolution 1949 has been the crucial-most yet the controversial-most document in the history of Pakistan. 7th March 1949 was the day when the then Prime Minister of Pakistan Liaquat Ali Khan put forward a document which was to determine what the constitution of Pakistan would be based upon. Where a lot of people said that it was useless and that a constitution should have directly been proposed, there for minorities this document was a glimpse into the future of Pakistan’s politics and to them it was a shock. The most vibrant reason behind this shock was that the founder of Pakistan, Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, always made the minorities believe that they would be treated as equal citizens of Pakistan and that Pakistan would be a Secular state. On the contrary, this document very clearly stated that Pakistan would be an Islamic state which created quite great a controversy. There were debates on the ideology of Quaid for Pakistan, his ideas about Pakistan as a state and the provisions of objective resolution in light of Quaid’s speeches.

Provisions of Objective resolutions, objections and proposed amendments:

•             Sovereignty belongs to Allah alone but He has delegated it to the State of Pakistan through its people for being exercised within the limits prescribed by Him as a sacred trust.

The very first provision of the objection resolution was very much controversial. The statement talks about how power that people exercise comes from Allah. This disturbed the minorities for in a secular state the power rests with people and besides Quaid-e-Azam himself said in his 11 August, 1947 speech: “The first and foremost thing I would like to emphasize is this: remember that you are now a Sovereign Legislative body and you have got all the powers.” Here very clearly Quaid-e-Azam sates that power belongs to people. Besides, if Sovereignty comes from Allah then there was an elaboration to be as to what are the limits of the power He delegates to people and this could be done in the light of Islam and therefore this apprehended minorities for they could see that Pakistan was being made into an Islamic state.

Minorities proposed the following amendments to this point:

-              “…….is a sacred trust” be omitted.

-              “…within the limits prescribed by Him” be omitted.

These amendments ensure that Pakistan will be a secular state because by eliminating “power is a sacred trust” and “…within the limits prescribed by Him.” the religious side of the point is lost. It becomes more secular.

•             The Constituent Assembly representing the people of Pakistan resolves to frame a constitution for the sovereign independent State of Pakistan.

This point is rather ambiguous for it doesn’t state what sort of constitution the Assembly is bound to make and besides it doesn’t tell what sort of state Pakistan is and minorities feared that Pakistan would be a secular state.

To this point following amendments were made:

-              After the word “independent” the word “democratic” should be inserted.

-              This paragraph should be also inserted: “Wherein the national sovereignty belongs to the people of Pakistan; wherein the principle of the state is government of people, for the people and by the people.

These amendments to a great extent make it clear that Pakistan will be a democratic and secular state.

•             The State shall exercise its powers and authority through the chosen representatives of the people.

This was the least criticized point of the resolution for it ensures a democratic system as it talks about the chosen representatives of people and there is no mention of any specific religion so this point was very favorable to minorities. However, the only amendment that ever came up for this point was:

-              This paragraph should be added: “wherein the elected representatives of the people shall exercise their powers through such persons as are by law authorized to do so. The elected representatives shall control act of government and may at any time divest it of all authority.”

All this amendment does is further emphasizing a democratic system of government. So it is basically an elaboration to the point not a criticism.

•             The principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed.

This point is totally claims that Pakistan is going to be an Islamic state and this is what bothered the minorities for what Quaid promised was a secular state where state and religion where different affairs. Besides, minorities didn’t know what Islamic ideology for these basic principles was and this also caused them to raise objections for they needed an elaboration as to what Islam says about these principles and how they apply to minorities and then decide whether or not they accept it.

The amendments raised for this point are:

-              “……..as enunciated by Islam.” Be omitted.

-              After the words “….as enunciated by Islam.” the words “and as based on eternal principles”, be added.

-              After “….as enunciated by Islam.” the words “and other religions”, be inserted.

-              After “….as enunciated by Islam.” the words “but not inconsistent with the charter of the fundamental Human rights of the UNO”, be inserted.

All these amendments ensure the rights of minorities. The mention of words like eternal principles and other religion clearly show how frightened minorities were of Pakistan’s being an Islamic state for they feared about their status in an Islamic state.

•             Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accordance with the teachings of Islam as set out in the Quran and Sunnah.

This point is the most criticized one for all it talks about is Muslims. It candidly claims that Pakistan is a state of Muslims. This point made the minorities feel as if they were not a part of Pakistan whereas Quaid-e-Azam had always talked about Muslims and non-Muslims being an equal member of Pakistan.

The following amendments were proposed:

-              In the place of “Muslims shall” the words “Muslims and non-Muslims shall equally” be substituted.

-              The words “of Islam as set out in the Quran and Sunnah” should be substituted by “of their respective religions.”

-              After the words “Quran and Sunnah” the followings words should be added: “in perfect accord with non-Muslims residing in the state and in complete toleration of their culture and social and religious customs.”

These amendments do make an attempt to change the direction of Pakistan as a state from Islamic to secular. Minorities have here made a desperate attempt to make sure that their rights are being preserved.

•             Adequate provisions shall be made to safeguard the legitimate interests of minorities and backward and depressed classes.

The objection to this point was basically that minorities were made to feel like they were outcasts. Although it is being promised that their rights will be preserved yet there is this sense of bias that can be felt. The point before this ensures how Muslims will be allowed to live their life according to their religion yet when it comes to minorities what is being ensured is just the preservation of their interests or rights. This bothered the minorities a lot for it was contrary to what Jinnah said on 11 August, 1947: “……you will find that in the course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the state.” There should have been no mention of Muslims and non-Muslims separately in the resolution.

The amendments proposed were:

-              The paragraph shall be substituted by “wherein shall be secured to minorities the freedom to profess and practice their religions and develop their cultures and adequate provisions shall be made for it.”

-              For the word “depressed classes”, the words “classes and scheduled castes” be substituted.

•             Pakistan shall be a federation.

•             Fundamental rights shall be guaranteed.

•             The judiciary shall be independent.

No objections were raised to these points of the resolution for they apply equally to both the Muslims and non-Muslims.

Conclusion: We have seen how many objections were raised to the resolution but the question is: “were these objections just?” The answer to this in my opinion is ‘Yes’. All the points that we discussed somehow separated the Muslims from the non-Muslims which was totally against Jinnah’s vision of “equality among the Pakistani people”. So it was only just for minorities to react the way they did. Their major fear was that their rights will be snatch off in an Islamic state and the people to fuel this propaganda were the Ulemas. It’s interesting to see that Ulemas were never in the favor of Pakistan; however, they ended up settling in Pakistan. Ulemas did support the Resolution yet they poisoned minorities against it. The question is why would they do such a thing? The answer to which is that they wanted to collapse the government. They knew if they would show minorities the wrong side of resolution and make them insecure, the minorities will object and rebel and the rebellion could lead to a revolution and ultimately crumple the government, and thereafter Ulemas could take control of the State and impose Islamic Sharia. Another controversial question was that whether Jinnah’s ideology for Pakistan was secular or Islamic. Although secularists say that Jinnah’s 11 august 1947 speech clearly shows that he wanted Pakistan to be a secular state yet those who support Islamic state quote Jinnah’s letters to Gandhi and other occasions like when Jinnah said: “Our demand for Pakistan is not merely for a piece of land but we want to establish an Islamic laboratory where we could practice our life according to Islamic teachings and principles.” What I believe is that Quaid-e-Azam was neither a secular nor a theocratic, he was a liberal democrat and Objective Resolution was very much in favor of what he wanted Pakistan to be like. However, hats off to Liaquat Ali Khan who very cleverly and satisfactorily convinced the minorities that this resolution will be in their interest and will safeguard their status in the state. Although all the proposed amendments of minorities were rejected yet there was no further rebellion or objection which signifies that the minorities were satisfied. All in all, Objective Resolution, however controversial it might be, was and is an important document whose importance can’t be declined.