Imran Khan — Dawn File Photo
Imran Khan — Dawn File Photo

“Quaid-i-Azam’s vision was of a Pakistan that would be an Islamic welfare state. While he had fought for a homeland for the Muslims of India, he was acutely conscious of the rights of every citizen irrespective of their caste or creed.

Are we an Islamic welfare state? The answer is clearly in the negative. In the last 65 years the gap between the rich and the poor has widened. This is also reflected in the disparity in access to fundamental social services.

While private schools provide quality education to the children of the elite, the poor have no access to education or struggle through poorly funded government schools. The same story is repeated in health services. The development sector’s priorities are skewed towards the elite through investment in projects that cater to them, such as motorways and ring roads.

We are also far from the Quaid’s vision of a tolerant society where everyone’s beliefs would be respected. The upsurge in sectarian violence and targeting of minority communities is a huge departure from the kind of society Jinnah envisioned.”

- Imran Khan, chairman, Pakistan Tehrik-i-Insaf

Opinion

Editorial

Impending slaughter
Updated 07 May, 2024

Impending slaughter

Seven months into the slaughter, there are no signs of hope.
Wheat investigation
07 May, 2024

Wheat investigation

THE Shehbaz Sharif government is in a sort of Catch-22 situation regarding the alleged wheat import scandal. It is...
Naila’s feat
07 May, 2024

Naila’s feat

IN an inspirational message from the base camp of Nepal’s Mount Makalu, Pakistani mountaineer Naila Kiani stressed...
Plugging the gap
06 May, 2024

Plugging the gap

IN Pakistan, bias begins at birth for the girl child as discriminatory norms, orthodox attitudes and poverty impede...
Terrains of dread
Updated 06 May, 2024

Terrains of dread

Restored faith in the police is unachievable without political commitment and interprovincial support.
Appointment rules
Updated 06 May, 2024

Appointment rules

If the judiciary had the power to self-regulate, it ought to have exercised it instead of involving the legislature.