Aza’adi Special: Jinnah’s Vision of Pakistan
Understanding Pakistan Project Team August 14th, 2007
By: Yasser Latif Hamdani
Today being the 60th anniversary of Pakistan’s independence is an opportunate moment to look at Quaid-e-Azam’s vision of Pakistan delivered 60 years ago, by Mr. Jinnah, Pakistan’s undisputed Leader, Governor General and elected President of the Constituent Assembly elaborated his vision for the future of Pakistan.
Jinnah’s vision is unambiguous.
- The state would be completely impartial to religion of the individual.
The state where every citizen would be equal and there would be no distinction between citizen on the basis of faith or caste or creed.
A lot of controverey has emerged about this speech. Any student of political science would tell you that is the classic exposition of a modern secular democratic state. However, the issue of whether this constitutes a “secular” state or an “Islamic” state is besides the point. A rose by any name is after all a rose.
Here is what Mr. Jinnah said on that fateful day. It is worth reading in the full:
“I know there are people who do not quite agree with the division of India and the partition of the Punjab and Bengal. Much has been said against it, but now that it has been accepted, it is the duty of every one of us to loyally abide by it and honourably act according to the agreement which is now final and binding on all. But you must remember, as I have said, that this mighty revolution that has taken place is unprecedented. One can quite understand the feeling the exists between the two communities wherever one community is in majority and the other is in minority. But the question is whether it was possible or practicable to act otherwise than has been done. A division had to take place. On both sides, in Hindustan and Pakistan, there are sections of people who may not agree with it, who may not like it, but in my judgment there was no other solution and I am sure future history will record its verdict in favour of it. And what is more it will be proved by actual experience as we go on that that was the only solution of India’s constitutional problem. Any idea of a United India could never have worked and in my judgment it would have led us to terrific disaster. May be that view is correct ; may be it is not; that remains to be seen. All the same, in this division it was impossible to avoid the question of minorities being in one Dominion or the other. Now that was unavoidable. There is no other solution. Now what shall we do? Now, if we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and especially of the masses and the poor. If you will work in co-operation, forgetting the past, burying the hatchet you are bound to succeed. If you change your past and work together in a spirit that every one of you, no matter to what community he belongs, no matter what relations he had with you in the past, no matter what is his colour, caste or creed, is first, second and last a citizen of this State with equal rights, privileges and obligations, there will be no end to the progress you will make.”
“I cannot emphasize it too much. We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities the Hindu community and the Muslim community-because even as regards Muslims you have Pathans, Punjabies, Shias, Sunnis and so on and among the Hindus you have Brahmins, Vashnvas, Khatris, also Bengalis, Madrasis, and so on-will vanish. Indeed if you ask me this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain the freedom and independence and but for this we would have been free peoples long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls in subjection ; nobody could have conquered you, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time but for this. Therefore we must learn a lesson from this. You are free ; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed-that has nothing to do with the business of the State. As you know, history shows that in England conditions some time ago were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some State in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God we are not starting in those days. 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. The people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the Government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today you might say with justice that Roman Catholic and Protestants do not exists ; what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen, of Great Britain and they are all members of the Nation.”
“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 the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.”
Many have alleged that this was the only time he expressed such a vision. Unfortunately, these people are not very well versed with the life and work of Quaid-e-Azam Mahomed Ali Jinnah, who was after all a staunch secular Indian nationalist for most of his life and had turned to the Pakistan idea only after exhausting all the options for a United India.
Here are some of his other statements regarding what kind of Pakistan he wanted:
25th October 1947. Interview with Reuters’ Duncan Hooper note: not to be confused with his interview with Reuters’ Doon Campbell which has been quoted in detail else where.
Minorities DO NOT cease to be citizens. Minorities living in Pakistan or Hindustan do not cease to be citizens of their respective states by virtue of their belonging to particular faith, religion or race. I have repeatedly made it clear, especially in my opening speech to the constituent Assembley, that the minorities in Pakistan would be treated as our citizens and will enjoy all the rights as any other community. Pakistan SHALL pursue this policy and do all it can to create a sense of security and confidence in the Non-Muslim minorities of Pakistan. We do not prescribe any school boy tests for their loyalty. We shall not say to any Hindu citizen of Pakistan ‘if there was war would you shoot a Hindu?’
30th October 1947. To a Mass Rally at University Stadium Lahore.
The tenets of Islam enjoin on every Musalman to give protection to his neighbours and to the Minorities regardless of caste and creed. We must make it a matter of our honor and prestige to create sense of security amongst them.
Same Day. On Radio Pakistan.
Protection of Minorities is a sacred undertaking. (On Partition Massacres) Humanity cries out loud against this shameful conduct and deeds. The civilized world is looking upon these doings and happenings with horror and the fair name of the communities concerned stands blackened. Put an end to this ruthlessly and with an Iron hand.
9th January 1948. Tour of Riot affected areas of Karachi.
Muslims! Protect your Hindu Neighbours. Cooperate with the Government and the officials in protecting your Hindu Neighbours against these lawless elements, fifth columnists and cliques. Pakistan must be governed through the properly constituted Government and not by cliques or fifth columnists or Mobs.
25th January. Address to the Karachi Bar association on the occasion of Eid Milad un Nabi.
I would like to tell those who are misled by propaganda that not only the Muslims but Non Muslims have nothing to fear. Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. Islam has taught Equality, Justice and fairplay to everybody. What reason is there for anyone to fear. Democracy, equality, freedom on the highest sense of integrity and on the basis of fairplay and justice for everyone. Let us make the constitution of Pakistan. We will make it and we will show it to the world.
3rd February 1948. Address to the Parsi Community of Sindh.
I assure you Pakistan means to stand by its oft repeated promises of according equal rights to all its nationals irrespective of their caste or creed. Pakistan which symbolizes the aspirations of a nation that found it self to be a minority in the Indian subcontinent cannot be UNMINDFUL of minorities within its own borders. It is a pity that the fairname of Karachi was sullied by the sudden outburst of communal frenzy last month and I can’t find words strong enough to condemn the action of those who are responsible.
21st March 1948. Mass Rally at Dacca.
Let me take this opportunity of repeating what I have already said: We shall treat the minorities in Pakistan fairly and justly. We shall maintain peace, law and order and protect and safeguard every citizen of Pakistan without any distinction of caste, creed or community.
22nd March 1948. Meeting with Hindu Legislators.
We guarantee equal rights to all citizens of Pakistan. Hindus should in spirit and action wholeheartedly co-operate with the Government and its various branches as Pakistanis.
23rd March 1948. Meeting with the ‘Scheduled Caste Federation’.
We stand by our declarations that members of every community will be treated as citizens of Pakistan with equal rights and privileges and obligations and that Minorities will be safeguarded and protected.
13 June 1948. Speaking to Quetta Parsis.
Although you have not struck the note of your needs and requirements as a community but it is the policy of my Government and myself that every member of every community irrespective of caste color, creed or race shall be fully protected with regard to his life, property and honor. I reiterate to you that you like all minorities will be treated as equal citizens with your rights and obligations provided you are loyal to Pakistan.
Jinnah’s address to the people of the US in Feb 1948.
In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State — to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non- Muslims — Hindus, Christians, and Parsis — but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan.
So what did Jinnah stand for?
He stood for justice and fair play for every one regardless of religion caste or creed. Let us make a solemn promise to ourselves on this Day that we shall honor this vision of Pakistan as a pluralist, inclusive and progressive democratic state.
- Mohammed Ali Jinnah , 2007 , Democracy , 1947 , Politics , Constitution , Religion , GuestColumns
Loading ...
Note: This post is slightly edited to ensure compliance with the comment guidelines for UPP. - Ed.
Author’s thesis has been discredited successfully on www.chowk.com.
Pursuing secularism is a worthy cause. However, associating Jinnah with Secularism by quoting selecting quotes and hiding other aspects is inherently dishonest. Jinnah said different things to different people at different times. Reducing his 72 years worth of diverse life into EXACTLY one interpretation…the interpretation that suits your agenda, is akin to being divorced from reality.
There is a reason by people of pakistan do not trust the “enlightened moderate” liberals and secularists - it is because these liberals lie through their teeth. This one sided article is a good example of that.
Following are the quotes that depict the OTHER side of Jinnah, the side that this biased author has conveniently whitewashed. From the quotes below Jinnah comes across as a nothing less than a leader who sees Pakistan as a theorcracy. Whether theocracy is good or bad is another debate, but lets not twist, turn and vandalize Jinnah’s legacy to turn him into what he was not. Pasting a plethora of “minority rights” quotes of Jinnah does not negate the fact that he saw these minority rights guaranteed within the context of a sharia based Islamic State.
Secularists need to look for a better poster boy for their cause. Sharia preaching Maulana Jinnah is definitely not that person.
Following are Maulana Jinnah’s quotes where he sees Islam not just in “personal” life of its citizens, but also in the “collective” life and covering “every department” of society. Nothing can be more clear than that. No further interpretation needed here.
Exhibit A
1- “Every Musalmaan, except those who are ignorant, knows that the Quran is the general code of the Muslims. A religious, social, civil, commercial, military, judicial, criminal, penal code, it regulates everything from the ceremonies of religion to those of daily life; from the salvation of the soul to the health of the body; from the rights of all to those of each individual; from morality to crime, from punishment here to that in the life to come. Therefore Islam is not merely confined to the spiritual tenets and doctrines or rituals and ceremonies. It is a complete code regulating the whole Muslim society, every department of life, collective[ly] and individually.”
- Jinnah , Eid message on September 1945
Exhibit B
It is my belief that our salvation lies in following the golden rules of conduct set for us by our great lawgiver, the Prophet of Islam. Let us lay the foundations of our democracy on the basis of true Islamic ideals and principles
- Jinnah(Civil, Naval, Military and Air Force Officers at Khaliqdina Hall Karachi on 11th October 1947)
Exhibit C
What is it that keeps the Muslims united as one man, and what is the bedrock and sheet-anchor of the community. It is Islam. It is the Great Book, Quran, that is the sheet-anchor of Muslim India. I am sure that as we go on there will be more and more of oneness, one God, one Book, one Prophet and one Nation
- Jinnah (All-India Muslim League, Karachi on 26th December)
This comment has been slightly edited to comply with UPP’s commenting guidelines. -Ed.
Dear Atif,
If you think the abovementioned vision is Islamic, why not pursue it. I have said so clearly that I won’t object to you calling it Islamic but to me this is secular.
Secondly… as for “Maulana” Jinnah… I think we should respect Jinnah’s own wishes as he himself asked people not to refer to him as Maulana … but then what Jinnah thought or believed in hardly matters, does it?
This comment has been slightly edited to comply with UPP’s commenting guidelines. -Ed.
The argument is and always has been very simple:
a. Jinnah- the one time secular Indian nationalist- championed the cause of Muslim minority in United India. His struggle was for and on behalf of the Muslim people(s) who he termed a nation so that there may be a consociationalist solution at the centre.
b. As a result of Jinnah’s efforts, Pakistan was created advertently or inadvertently… and Jinnah was opposed by all theocrats.
c. Jinnah spoke consistently of a Pakistan where the state would be impartial to faith of the citizen, where minorities would have equal rights and where priests with a divine mission will not run the state.
Now that c. is what the contention is about. Most people would say that this amounts to a secular state. Jinnah himself knew - as a lawyer- that legally anything that is not theocratic is by default secular. However… I for one have NEVER had any qualms with those who wish to call such a state Islamic. But where the hell is such a state? Atleast make it before you declare it secular or Islamic.
Now coming to your equally ignorant argument about the word secularism… could you produce a single artefact from say the foundation documents of the United States which has the word “secular” or “secularism”. How about France? Does the word secular or any french variant thereof appear in the original declaration?
The issue of secularism has always been a separation of Church and State- thus a secular state is:
1. One without a clergy determining law of the state.
2. One where the state is impartial to a person’s faith.
3. One where all citizens are equal before law.
4. Sovereignty rests with the people.
Now…
1. “In any event Pakistan is nto going to be a theocratic state to be run by priests with a divine mission”.
2. “You may belong to any religion caste or creed- that has nothing to do with the business of the state”
3. Numerous statements quoted in #1.
4. Read Jinnah’s interview with Doon Campbell where he says sovereignty will rest unconditionally with the people.
Now all you can prove by Jinnah’s references to Islamic ideals and Quran etc can only prove that Islam endorses above mentioned principles… but it cannot prove the opposite no matter how much you try.
The litmus test will be to show a single act or piece of legislation by the Pakistan Constituent Assembly that sought to Islamise the Constitution or Civil or criminal laws…. under Jinnah- who was a powerful civilian ruler.
Objectives Resolution- passed after Jinnah’s death- marked a departure from these principles enunciated by Jinnah…
Not only that it violated the basic principle on which you created Pakistan:
No permanent majority by sheer majority can dictate to a permanent minority
Secular, religious or something else this was the only principle Pakistan was created on. The objectives resolution was voted against by all Non-Muslims and one Muslim League Muslim as well. Therein lies the irony of those who claim nonsense like you’ve done in your post.
Quaid-e-Azam Mahomed Ali Jinnah stood unequivocally for the kind of system which would be described in modern parlance as a secular democracy. If it could be defined as an Islamic democracy as well just proves that Islamic democracy is a fancy term for Secular democracy. Jinnah certainly thought his vision was compatible with Islam…
The real question we should be asking is that whether Jinnah was right in proclaiming his essentially secular vision of the state as Islamic?
I think this article also argues the same