What should Pakistani laws be based on?

[SyedAbduallah]

Re: What should Pakistani laws be based on?

I’m still on my self-imposed excile but this is important.

and that vast majority consists of JI and other bearded hazrat. We say their real supporters fit in a tonga (horse draw carriage).

Noone cares what you hindu/sufi tomb worshippers think. Not even your shia collaborators.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006/05/05/story_5-5-2006_pg7_45

Pakistani nationalism

By Hamid Alvi
A well-known Lahore based political columnist has bitterly complained against deliberate distortion of the origin of Pakistan nationalism carried on by those who are allegedly promoting a foreign agenda under the cover of Musharraf Doctrine of Enlightened Moderation. The erudite columnist also took the unusual step of appealing to knowledgeable Pakistanis to take notice of the dangerous propagation, which is intended to hit the very basis of Muslim state.
It is a pity that time is wasted on issues long settled. Opening and reopening of debate on delicate issues such as origin of our nationhood causes confusion and weakens faith in an entity with which is tied the fate of millions. Yet the issue has never been left alone. Always there are individuals around ready to dig up new excuses to question the generally accepted view that Islam imparted group identity to the Indian Muslims which ultimately transformed the community into a nation.
The first to question the Islamic basis of the Pakistan nationhood were the socialists. They advanced the theory that economic factor and not religion was the main reason for Muslims to demand a separate state. It was not surprising, because they could not bypass the Marxian thesis of economic determinism. But they were caught in a paradox, and remain there till today. Economic determinism presupposes the existence of class conflict with classes moulded by economic materialism.
But in the British India spiritual beliefs more than anything else shaped the history and contours of the conflict. The actors in the conflict were not the “have” and the “have-nots” but believers in Hinduism and Islam. On the last day of British Raj the dividing line stood not between the rich and the poor but Muslims and Hindus. From the Marxian stand point rich Muslims and rich Hindus should have stood together on one side of the divide and the poor of both on the other. The communal riots at the time of Partition were not class conflict.
Even if it is assumed that the economic factor, or the desire of 100 million Muslims to liberate themselves from the discriminatory practices of Hindu capitalists and bureaucrats motivated them to follow Jinnah’s line of politics, the question remains unanswered. It fails to resolve that why Muslims were discriminated as a community, and not as a class? We return to the earlier position that the smaller community was discriminated against because it pursued a certain faith, the religion of Islam, which imparted a distinct identity to it.
Later on the religion of Islam would become the basis of Muslim nationalism. It was not an unprecedented phenomenon. Religion i.e. Catholicism, Protestantism, had provided basis to French, German and recently to Bosnian, Czech and Slavic nationalism. In case of Bosnia its Islamic identity was the primary target of Serbian terrorism.
The theory that Muslims of India were a separate nation was expounded by Iqbal and Jinnah in response to Hindu community’s unwillingness to accept Muslims as equal, and its promotion of the myth that everyone who lived in India was a Hindu (currently known as Hinduta). To the amasement of Muslim leadership, in the early twentieth century, Gandhi Jee introduced some patently Hindu concepts in the Indian politics, which were also adopted by Congress which claimed to be secular organisation. These concepts included Swaraj for self government; stayagraha for non-violence; Ramrajya for golden age of independence; slogans like Bharat Mataki Jai; songs like Ramadhun (a Hindu hymn), Bunde Mataram (a rabidly anti-Muslim Bengali song) and above all the idea of Ahimsa (self-control or refraining from harming any living being).
The last one was such an integral part of Hinduism that Gandhi himself once said that if it “disappears”, Hinduism will disappear. (Incidentally Ahimsa was widely violated as our Hindu compatriots dealt with Muslims.)
According to K K Aziz, “Nationalism and religion were allied in Gandhi’s teaching. He found the substance of India’s life in Hinduism. Like Tilak (BJ) before him, he (Gandhi) felt that nationalism needed a spiritual base and provided it from Hindu dogma”.
Jinnah who had tried but failed to persuade the Hindu leadership to accept Muslim separatism and work out a constitutional formula which would provide sufficient safeguards to Muslims, finally reached the conclusion that division of India was the only answer. He based his case on the existence of an undeniable nationalism based on Islam.
**In his famous speech at Manto park, Lahore, March 22, 1940, when he spoke for two hours and forty minutes, Jinnah reviewed the highlights of Indian history and politics, and went on to identify the solid Islamic ingredients, which constituted the Muslim nation. The text of speech is available for anyone to see. It is a brilliant exposition of the two-nation theory. After reading this no one could question the Islamic basis of Pakistan. Those who still do, to them we ask that if Jinnah was not basing his two-nation theory on Islam then what else did he base it on?
The neo-liberals of Pakistan like their predecessor the socialists, also frequently quote Jinnah’s 11th of August 1947 Constituent Assembly speech to prove that the founder of statestood for secularism. The neo-liberals conveniently ignore dozens of other observations of Jinnah which categorically negate the comments he made on August 11, even though it could be argued that even in the August 11 speech he did not in essence say what is attributed to him.
However, Jinnah’s retraction of August 11 speech and positive statements according Islam the central position in the socio-political structure of the country are many. For instance on January 25, 1948, on the occasion of the Holy Prophets’ (PBUH) birthday he tried as best as he could to dispel the fears about the implications of an Islamic state both for Muslims and non-Muslims, and asserted without any qualifying phrase the universalism of Islam.
Addressing the Karachi Bar Association’s reception, Jinnah the governor General of Pakistan said “Islam and its idealism have taught democracy. Islam has taught equality, justice and fair play to everybody.” Throwing in his punch line Jinnah added “Let us make it (the future constitution of Pakistan), we shall make it and we will show it to the world.” After the above statement there is no room left for doubts about Jinnah’s commitment to Islamic ideals. **
http://nation.com.pk/daily/may-2006/8/columns4.php