KARACHI, March 7: Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah wanted to create a 'Muslim state' and not an 'Islamic state' that had to be a democratic, progressive and liberal country.
This was stressed upon by prominent politician and parliamentarian Chaudhry Aitezaz Ahsan in response to the contentions presented by Maulana Asadullah Bhutto of the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal at a seminar where Mr Ahsan was the main speaker.
The seminar was organized by the Dialogue Pakistan on The LFO Deal and the Quaid's Secular Democratic Pakistan Ideal here on Sunday. Contesting the MMA leader's contention, Dr Aitezaz Ahsan referred to the Quaid's speech on Aug 11, 1947 and quoted the remarks: "Religion has nothing to do with the business of the state."
He said that Quaid's concept of a Muslim state was similar to that of France and Britain which could be referred to as Christian states because of the religion of their majority.
Mr Ahsan said if the logic, presented by Maulana Bhutto to prove that the Quaid-i-Azam wanted creation of an Islamic state, were accepted for the sake of argument, then one should be right to ask why had the Jamaat-i-Islami opposed the Quaid.
Mr Ahsan said that a secular state did not mean an anti-religion state, but a state where religion had no role to play in its affairs. Referring to the LFO deal, Mr Ahsan, who is also a senior PPP leader, said that federation, democracy and supremacy of parliament were three pillars of the unanimously adopted Constitution of 1973.
By making the 17th amendment to the Constitution, all the three pillars were damaged. Through the retention of the Article 58-2 (B) the President was again authorized to dismiss the parliament, thus making the parliament subservient to extra-constitutional forces.
Likewise, creation of the National Security Council was another move to establish an institution over and above the parliament.Aitezaz Ahsan also criticized election of president through a vote of confidence and said the procedure negated the democratic dispensation and was violative of its federal characteristic.
The president has the powers to appoint provincial governors while the prime minister has no say in the matter. This, he said, was against the federal character of the state.
Mr Ahsan pointed out that out of the 54 Muslim states in the world, only four are models of Islamic states. He named them as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Somalia and Sudan. Pakistan should decide that what type of a Muslim state it should be, he suggested.
He was of the view that "if we would not address three issues, our country would remain a black-hole. The issues are a) whether India is our neighbour or enemy; b) whether army should be a dominant power in the state or the state should be dominant power; and c) whether religion should have any role in the state's business.
Maulana Asadullah Bhutto, in support of Pakistan's status as an Islamic state, quoted from various speeches by the Quaid-i-Azam - at Muslim League sessions in December 1946 and June 3, 1947 and at the Bar Association meeting on Jan 25, 1948 - and also from his reply to the Pir Manki Sharif.
The MMA leader argued that the Quaid had clearly mentioned that the only force that could keep Muslims united was Islam, and that the holy Quran was its anchor, and that the Constitution of Pakistan would be based on Islamic principles.
Maulana Bhutto pointed through the 10 elections held so far, those who assumed offices of the President and Prime Minister were all enlightened people and none of them was a 'Maulvi'. They maintained the Islamic character of the country in all constitutional documents due to public pressure.
On the issue of the Legal Framework Order, Maulana Bhutto said that the MMA had been opposing the LFO and would continue to oppose it. However, as far as the package on LFO was concerned, it was announced four months before the deal on it. A bill was later tabled in the National Assembly and a debate was held.
Regarding the ARD's reservations, he recalled that the alliance had also participated in the debate on Dec 26-28 besides taking part in the vote on eight out of the total 10 points of the package. Had the session not been adjourned on technical grounds, the ARD might have participated in voting on the remaining two points, Maulana Bhutto claimed.
Clarifying the walkout by the ARD, the MMA leader said that it was not staged on the question of voting on the remaining two points, but on the question of the production warrants by the Speaker who had not issued such a warrant for the production of Makhdoom Javed Hashmi in the House.
Maulana Bhutto was of the view that the ARD's 'solo flight' was ultimately benefiting Gen Pervez Musharraf. He pointed out that despite having its own governments in the NWFP and Balochistan, the MMA did not participate in the vote of confidence for the President.
By presenting the LFO package in the parliament, he added, the alliance had proved that it recognized supremacy of parliament, forced the President to announce a precise date of quitting as army chief, got the retirement age of judges settled to send home one dozen judges, and secured freedom for judges from government pressure.
Ms Zahida Hina in her paper said that in Quaid-i-Azam's Pakistan, Constitution, parliament and rule of law had to remain dominant. As such, she added, dictatorship and the LFO were a total negation of his concept.
Mr Adrian A. Husain, in his thought-provoking paper, said that the Quaid's commitment to the Muslim nation was a commitment to a holistic Muslim culture and philosophy of social and economic emancipation which subsumed formal religion as its nucleus rather than as an exclusivist religion as such.
The debate was followed by a question-answer session. Chairman of the host organization Dr Adrian A. Husain and noted journalist Zahida Hina read out their papers. Abubakr Chundrigar welcomed the guests and Ghazi Salahuddin introduced the speakers. Ms Khurshid Haider conducted the proceedings.