Practically applying the theory
Whether Pakistan was created in the name of Islam or/and what factors invoked the constitution to imply Islam as a state religion; are questions of rather a paradoxical nature and may include authority as a decisive force to lead a nation to either secularism or theocracy. The idea of secular Pakistan should stand on its own terms rather manipulating the statements of authority to conform with a proposed argument. While arguing about the religious and state matters one must know that secularism is not the antithesis of religion, it does not defy religious doctrines practiced in a state. It only frees people from following the religion of the majority and rejects the monopoly of the favored religion. Talal Asad in his book, “Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity”, places secularism as a doctrine and distinguishes between private reason and public discipline. He says that that private reason is not same as private space, it is only immunity from the public reason. The various interpretations and multifaceted texts and its relevance are a complex business depending upon the personal habit, temperament and perceived demands of the social situations. In his book, he argues that Religion and Secularism overlap and are not fixed categories. He assumes that there is nothing ESSENTIALLY religious nor any universal essence that defines sacred language. He concludes his work by stating that secular cannot be viewed as a successor to religion neither can be seen as on the side of rational. It is a category, with multi-layered history related to major premises of modernity, democracy and concepts of human rights.
If we wish to find roots of secularism in history, we may want to look at “French Laicite System”. It refers to the idea of Res Publica (Republic) i.e., to address everyone—believers, atheists and agnostics alike. What pertains to some cannot be applied to all and public institutes must not be under supervision of religion. In the book State and Secularism, the writers differentiate French Laicite and Turkish Laicite: that Kemal Ataturk prohibited religious outfits in the street, which is not the case in France. In France, people were free to choose the kind of faith they wanted. The book moreover, emphasizes that faith can be taught at other places so school is a place where taste of culture and science must be developed. Also, ‘Intelligent design” cannot be taught in Laic schools, it belongs to faith rather a sphere of knowledge. Similarly, in Greece, identity papers do not mention religious beliefs of the bearer anymore and the government of Jose Luis in Spain banned compulsory religious course in public schools. Sweden has also adapted French Laicite system. These are the countries with higher growth rate than the nations holding religion as a sacred law that cannot be surpassed or challenged by the human mind. Countries like Bangladesh, which after 28 years of having Islam as a state religion, has decided to separate State and Religion. Whereas, Pakistan deems secularism as some “Western Agenda” that is threatening to the force of Islam and the only way to propagate Islam is if it is practiced as a state religion. The force of Islam, as we know it, did not spread its wings until Zia’s Islamization. Christophe Jaffrelot in his book, Pakistan: Nationalism Without a Nation, mentions how Islamism controls the politics of sectarianism and displays far more concern for religious orthodoxy than Protestant and Catholic politics do in Northern Ireland. He further blames Islamization which transformed government institutions and policy making apparatuses in accordance with Islamic teachings. Zia’s Islamization was reduced to “Sunnification”, in which Sunni Islamists were not prepared to accept equal status for Sunnis and Shias. Pakistan belonging to 25 percent Shia population and 8-10 percent Ahmadi population is a hub for ethnic and minority differences. However, the intolerance created by exclusive political and economic institutions among states cannot be justified by a single narrative.
We have many examples of secular states with underprivileged ethnic minorities such as Iraq’s era of modernization under Sadam Hussain, Turkey’s secularity where Ataturk granted equal rights to religious minorities but he granted full freedom to private worship. However, he was a believer in the assimilation of ethnic minorities such as Greeks and Armenian Christians, and not to forget rise of BJP in secular India. Islamic Republic of Pakistan was created to cater the Muslim minority of the sub-continent and the Article 20 of the constitution clearly mentions the right to choose from any religion one wants to BUT the laws must pertain to the Islamic Ideology (sunni-ism) that ought to be followed by every national of the state. What do these nations have in common regardless of their religious affiliation with state? These nations have a huge ethnic diversity and they have failed to provide private space for each individual to practice his/her faith or faithlessness. Would these nations have catered minorities better if these were purely secular? I cannot be sure, however, I do know what will happen if Pakistan becomes secular and disengage with religion in public sphere.
To answer this, let’s imagine Pakistan to be a secular state. Not only does it sound good but it can prosper both economically and socially if it resorts to secularism. First of all we should know that the view of secular constitution as atheistic constitution is altogether wrong, it only provides built-in guarantee of religious freedom. For a religiously pluralistic society as Pakistan, if the religion is kept aside of constitution, a higher value is placed on the notion of citizenship rather on religion. The creation of a citizen identity is especially crucial in a pluralistic setting. Secondly, it makes it difficult for the negotiation to take place among religious groups in a society because a religious constitution will always have a privileged religion, and no matter how accommodative government or judiciary might be, the primal force to carry the decision making will have to adhere to the religion of the state- that necessarily means the diminution of another. To a greater extent, the inter-religious conflicts will be rather less volatile if the enemy is not another “religious group” but a state instead. This approach may work well in the case of Shia-Sunni conflict, may positively encourage Ahmadi’s participation in the society, and the jobs may be given on the basis of merit rather than preferring one’s religion. The whole idea of a secular society is to democratize religious sentiments among the public institutions; by privileging no particular religion and ensuring equal rights for all. If only the educational institutes welcome every religious school of thought and design a rather secular curriculum, we can see next generations exploring new horizons in the field of science and research. If only we can teach students about the work of Dr. Abdus Salam in the field of theoretical physics instead of vilifying him because his religion did not conform to the religion of the state. Now more than ever, Pakistan needs a rule of law that can flourish without tyrannizing the voiceless religious minorities.
