Pak Tea House » Lahore, liberal Pakistan » Letter and spirit of the Lahore Resolution
Letter and spirit of the Lahore Resolution
By Yasser Latif Hamdani (in Daily Times)
Very rarely do politics, history and sport overlap but when they do they can produce the most heart-warming of coincidences. As millions of Bangladeshi fans cheered them on, the trouble-prone Pakistan cricket team completed a clinical victory over the West Indies on March 23, the 71st anniversary of the Lahore Resolution. The most charming coincidence was the fact that the stadium we won in was named after Sher-e-Bangla, A K Fazlul Haq, one of the founding fathers of our republic and the gentleman who moved the Lahore Resolution all those years ago.
Every child in Pakistan is taught about the symbolic significance of the Lahore Resolution but hardly anyone in the country has ever bothered to read the words that are cited as nothing less than a founding document for the country. In many ways, the Lahore Resolution is Pakistan’s equivalent of the US’s Declaration of Independence, though perhaps less eloquent. Indeed, much like the American declaration of independence, there is an original draft with handwritten corrections by Pakistan’s founders, which lends us clues as to what it was that they were after on that momentous occasion.
Yet the Lahore Resolution is much more than that because it is a live document laying out not so much a blueprint but more an eternal guideline on how we were to shape the new state. Arguably, at the time it was presented it was intended to be little more than an alternative to the existing constitutional thesis forwarded by both the British and Congress. Increasingly dependent on Muslim support for the war effort in the wake of Congress’ refusal to be forthcoming, Lord Linlithgow had pressed Jinnah to come up with an alternative to the Government of India Act, 1935, and had also asked British India’s foremost constitutional expert, Sir Zafarullah Khan, to draft a memorandum on the idea of two dominion states. It was Zafarullah’s memorandum that was finally adopted by the League in its Lahore session as the ‘Lahore Resolution’.
The Lahore Resolution did not envisage a partition of India per se. It remained vague in so much as it used both “autonomous” and “sovereign” for constituent units with contiguous Muslim majorities. Thus the issue really was of sovereignty for Muslim majority areas, which itself went against the grain of the interests of the Muslim League’s core constituency, i.e. the Muslim salaried classes of UP and Bombay — indeed nothing less than a reversal of the famed Lucknow Pact that Jinnah had engineered 24 years prior. It was what the resolution implied that was most significant, i.e. an extended period of time where foreign affairs, defence and customs would remain the domain of a centre. This was the bargaining counter that Jinnah wanted the League to have.
Documents of fundamental national importance and constitutional nature however take on a life of their own, unconnected with the political realities that brought them about. The Lahore Resolution is therefore to be taken as more than a mere resolution of a political party or, in the League’s case, a big tent political grouping. There are certain undeniable fundamentals of the new state that have been laid down by it, most important being the idea that constituent units are sovereign entities delegating their sovereignty to a Pakistan centre. This means that the centralised state that has been in existence for over 63 years is ultra vires the letter and spirit of the Lahore Resolution. When stripped of the history and baggage of partition and honestly applied to our present condition, the Lahore Resolution envisages a “nation of nations”. The Two-Nation Theory itself was not so much a statement of exclusive nationalism but a connecting bridge between what the Communist Party of India described at the time as submerged Muslim nationalities. To this end even Gandhi very shrewdly pointed out to Jinnah in their discussions that the Lahore Resolution contained no reference to the Two-Nation Theory.
Given the debate on the role of religion in Pakistan, the Lahore Resolution lays down a clear rule on how this proposed nation of nations would deal with its religious minorities. Not only does the resolution contain no reference to Islam per se — a gaping hole for those who say Pakistan was created in the name of religion — but it goes on to say that “adequate, effective and mandatory safeguards shall be specifically provided in the constitution for minorities in the units and in the regions for the protection of religious, cultural, economic, political, administrative and other rights of the minorities, with their consultation.” Notice the word ‘consultation’, which has been defined to mean effective consultation in other cases in our jurisprudence. The minority view then would have to be the binding view unless there were good reasons to the contrary.
Now compare this situation to how the notorious Objectives Resolution was passed in 1949. The voting pattern shows that all Muslim members of the constituent assembly save one voted in favour and all non-Muslims voted without exception against it. There were several amendments proposed by the non-Muslim members, which were rejected by the majority. In essence, the spirit of the Lahore Resolution was thus betrayed at the very outset of the constitution making process. Pakistan thus voted in as its ‘grundnorm’ a document that went against the very spirit of the basic document on which the country claimed to be based.
Similarly, the main crux of the sovereignty thesis forwarded by the Lahore Resolution was negated when Pakistan chose to ignore Mujibur Rehman’s six points, which were, in essence, the elaboration of the Lahore Resolution. That led to the separation of Bangladesh.
The way Bangladeshi supporters cheered for Pakistan in the quarterfinal was a political statement in its own right. In 1971, they had rebelled not as much against the idea of Pakistan but the negation thereof. Hence there is no animus towards Pakistan and the Pakistani flag in that country even as they accuse West Pakistanis of having exploited and oppressed them.
Religious minorities in Pakistan cheered for their country as well, even as they question the oppression of an increasingly exclusivist theocratic state.
Filed under: Lahore, liberal Pakistan · Tags: country, Lahore Resolution, Muslim, Pakistan
15 Responses to "Letter and spirit of the Lahore Resolution"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- AKB
said How utterly amazing is someone who flees from some... - AKB said UGLY INDIA!!
.
India’s slide leads to an i...
- JB
said Here is the reality and the sooner Pakistanis and... - AKB said DAMN THESE LIBERAL MULLAHS!!
.
Dharun Ravi Sen...
- AKB said @ ahem
I have never seen a bigger idiot than y...
- RajTOO
said Tajender,
you copy and paste machine, do you even... - tajender
said rajtoo like anyother brhmnst u have nothing except... - RajTOO said Tajender is a pure Paki. Just because he copies an...
- ahem
said to rex
Monotheism is inherently totalitarian an... - ahem said tajender reveals himself as a tamilian muslim....
@ YLH
Given the debate on the role of religion in Pakistan, the Lahore Resolution lays down a clear rule on how this proposed nation of nations would deal with its religious minorities.
Lahore resolution’s mention of “minority rights” was more for the muslim minorities in rest of India. You have missed the last line …. wont say deliberately but it does change the whole context of what you are saying. Here is the full text …
“That adequate, effective and mandatory safeguards shall be
specifically provided in the constitution for minorities in the units and in the regions for the protection of their religious, cultural, economic, political, administrative and other rights of the minorities, with their consultation.
(and the part you missed) Arrangements thus should be made for the security of Muslims where they were in a minority”.
[...] Letter and spirit of the Lahore Resolution [...]
@KP
Read the paragraph before and you will see that the “units” referred to where the rights of minorities are to be protected are where the Muslims are in the majority. Thus, it is obviously referring to non Muslim minorities in areas where Muslims are in the majority. Further, minorities is plural, so even if you are a pessimistic grammarian, minorities in Muslim lands would be included in the statement of tolerance.
…with such territorial readjustments as may be necessary that the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in a majority as in the North Western and Eastern Zones of (British) India should be grouped to constitute ‘independent states’ in which the constituent units should be autonomous and sovereign.
That adequate, effective and mandatory safeguards should be specifically provided in the constitution for minorities in these units and in the regions for the protection of their religious, cultural, economic, political, administrative and other rights and interests in consultation with them and in other parts of India where the Muslims are in a minority adequate, effective and mandatory safeguards shall be specifically provided in the constitution for them and other minorities for the protection of their religious, cultural, economic, political, administrative and other rights and interests in consultation with them.
“The voting pattern shows that all Muslim members of the constituent assembly save one voted in favour and all non-Muslims voted without exception against it….”
Does anyone know how many members of the Pakistani CA 1949 were present at the AIML session 1940 when the Lahore resolution was passed?
What change for those members who were present at both the places between 1940 and 1949?
Some information on the Objectives Resolution:
“The absence of a committee to draft the aims and objects of the Constitution during the first one and a half years of the Assembly’s existence developed an attitude among the Hindus that an “Objectives Resolution” was no longer necessary. Probably unknown to them, the Muslim League Parliamentary Party had been holding prolonged deliberations until agreement was reached over such a resolution. Copies of this document were mailed to the Assembly Members a few days before the fifth session commencing on March 7, 1949.
….
….”Prem Hari Barma, a Hindu member from East Bengal, attempted to delay its approval until April 30, 1949 to elicit public opinion. …he [Liaquat Ali Khan] accommodated the request for postponemnt but only until the next day. Barma’s seven-week delay was rejected.
Some information on Pakistan’s commitment to secularism: “”On the second day of the opening session, Abul Kasem Khan shattered (Kiran Sankar) Roy’s hopes for a secular state by saying that the Constitution of Pakistan would be based on Islamic foundations.”
This and the previous are quoted from:
Oraction, Lossiete A. (1968) CONSTITUTION-MAKING IN PAKISTAN (1947-1956). PhD thesis, University of Karachi, Karachi.
Maulana Hasrat Mohani was a Khilafatist and opposed Jinnah’s quest for Pakistan. A website (newageislam.com) reports:
“From among the Indian Muslims, the opposition of the Objectives Resolution by Maulana Hasrat Mohani is a part of history. Ahmad Bashir writes that when he asked Hasrat Mohani in 1951 why he was opposing the Objectives Resolution as it testified to the authority of Allah, Maulana Mohani replied,” The Objectives Resolution or La hakam ill-Allah ( no authority but Allah) was the slogan of the Khawarijs. Do you know what Hadhrat Ali had said to them? He had said,” Well, it is a great ideal but it is being used to strengthen the evil. Liaqat Khan wants to rule with the help of the feudal lords and maulvis but I am afraid he will not be able to.”
To be clear: Hasrat Mohani was a member of the Indian Constituent Assembly, not the Pakistani one; his opinion was solicited on the Pakistan Objectives Resolution.
“In essence, the spirit of the Lahore Resolution was thus betrayed at the very outset of the constitution making process.”
Hogwash. The spirit of the 1940 was betrayed the day center decided not to follow the independent states clauses in the resolution. That day was not in 1949. That was August 15, 1947 a day after the independence and Jinnah was adamant about the center’s premier position in the states affairs.
There was not even a draft constitution available when the OR was passed. But the denial of the states rights took place way before that. The reason Pakistan did not have a constitution until 1956 was due mostly to center’s desire to retain as much powers as it could and give nothing to the provinces. The one unit formula was designed to deny rights to all provinces.
Religious minorities issue was not even a burning issue then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shabbir_Ahmad_Usmani
Shabbir Ahmad Usmani
In 1944, he became a member of the Muslim League and was one of the few Deobandis who supported the creation of Pakistan.
http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=2672
In Februrary 1948, Maulvi Shabbir Ahmad Usmani gave a notice to the speaker of the Legislative Assembly to present two resolutions. The first resolution said,” Since the Muslims had demanded Pakistan with the purpose to establish an independent state where they could live according to Islamic laws and shariah and shape their society based on them and since the citizens of Pakistan have been waiting to achieve these noble objectives anxiously and the constitution will be based on Islamic shariah, the Assembly presents this resolution that an advisory committee should be constituted comprising prominent ulama and Islamic thinkers which will make recommendations for the preparation of the constitution according to Islamic Shariah.”
It should be mentioned that February 1948 was the time when the serious differences on the question of the national language had come to the fore and Qaid-e-Azam had faced harsh criticism on this issue during his visit to the East Pakistan in the first week of February.
It is interesting to note that the resolution presented by Shabbir Ahmad Usmani did not mention federal units, economy, education and the foreign policy because the understanding of these complexities was not expected from an imam of Hyderabad Deccan. This is to put the historical records straight that the proposal to include Qaid-e-Azam’s name in the address of Friday prayers also occurred to Maulana’s mind. Maulana’s second proposal was also in direct accordance with the interests of the religious peshwas. Please have a look at the text:
“To take the first immediate step towards the fulfilment of the desire of the people of Pakistan to mould their life according to the Islamic shariah, the Legislature presents the resolution that a legislative body be constituted which will perform duties relating to the functioning of Islamic religious institutions and Awkaaf, the advancement and propagation of Islamic education and other affairs.”
=====
In Pakistan’s first constituent assembly, the demand for an Islamic state, even during Jinnah’s lifetime, came from the Deobandi scholar who supported Pakistan.
“On March 29, 1948, a resolution was passed in a conference at Jama Masjid Kalan Wazirabad, presided by Maulvi Bahaul Haque Qasmi Amritsari (famous columninst Ataul Haque Qasmi’s father) in which it was demanded that foremost it should accept this basic principle that Pakistan was an Islamic state, its official religion will be Islam and the Quran will be its law.”
http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=2672
The web says that this Maulvi Bahaul Haque Qasmi Amritsari worked for Pakistan.
Y’all amplify Maududi and downplay the native fundamentalists in the Muslim League. Y’all’s great honesty is showing.
Shabbir Ahmad Usmani
As per Wiki:
In 1944, he became a member of the Muslim League and was one of the few Deobandis who supported the creation of Pakistan.
http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=2672
In Februrary 1948, Maulvi Shabbir Ahmad Usmani gave a notice to the speaker of the Legislative Assembly to present two resolutions. The first resolution said,” Since the Muslims had demanded Pakistan with the purpose to establish an independent state where they could live according to Islamic laws and shariah and shape their society based on them and since the citizens of Pakistan have been waiting to achieve these noble objectives anxiously and the constitution will be based on Islamic shariah, the Assembly presents this resolution that an advisory committee should be constituted comprising prominent ulama and Islamic thinkers which will make recommendations for the preparation of the constitution according to Islamic Shariah.”
It should be mentioned that February 1948 was the time when the serious differences on the question of the national language had come to the fore and Qaid-e-Azam had faced harsh criticism on this issue during his visit to the East Pakistan in the first week of February.
It is interesting to note that the resolution presented by Shabbir Ahmad Usmani did not mention federal units, economy, education and the foreign policy because the understanding of these complexities was not expected from an imam of Hyderabad Deccan. This is to put the historical records straight that the proposal to include Qaid-e-Azam’s name in the address of Friday prayers also occurred to Maulana’s mind. Maulana’s second proposal was also in direct accordance with the interests of the religious peshwas. Please have a look at the text:
“To take the first immediate step towards the fulfilment of the desire of the people of Pakistan to mould their life according to the Islamic shariah, the Legislature presents the resolution that a legislative body be constituted which will perform duties relating to the functioning of Islamic religious institutions and Awkaaf, the advancement and propagation of Islamic education and other affairs.”
=====
In Pakistan’s first constituent assembly, the demand for an Islamic state, even during Jinnah’s lifetime, came from the Deobandi scholar who supported Pakistan.
My apologies, all the comments above were meant for the “Pakistan search for a nation” thread. If they can be transferred, please do so.
The first Constituent Assembly of Pakistan nominally had 79 members. Some seats were vacant. 54 members attended the first day, August 10, 1947, and 4 more on the second day.
Here are some of the members (48)
Abdul Hamid (Sylhet)
Abdul Matin Choudhury
Abdulla-al Mahmood
Abdus Sattar Pirzada
Abul Kasem Khan
Abul Masud Abdul Hamid
Akshay Kumar Das
B.R. Khuhro
Begum Jahan Ara Shah Nawaz
Begun Shaista Suhrawardy Ikramullah – joined Feb 24, 1948
Bhabesh Chandra Nandy
Bhim Sen Sachar
Birat Chandra Mandal
Chandra Chattopadhyaya
Dewan Bahadur S.P. Singha
Dhirendra Nath Datta
Dr Mahmud Husain
Dr Maulvi Abdul Haq
Dr. Omar Hayat Malik
Dr. Qureshi
Fazlul Haq
Gazder
Ghazanfar Ali Khan (quit to become Ambassador to Iran)
Ghulam Bhik Nairang
Ghyasuddin Pathan
Jogendra Nath Mandal
Kamini Kumar Dutta
Khwaja Nazimuddin
Khwaja Shahabuddin
Kiran Sankar Roy
Liaqat Ali Khan
Malik Khuda Bakhsh Khan
Maulaan Abdullah-el Baqui
Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Osmani
Mian Muhammad Iftikharuddin
Mian Mumtaz Daultana
Mir Muhammad Zafrullah Khan (took Ghazanfar Ali Khan’s place)
Muhammad Ali Jinnah
Nazir Ahmad Khan
Nur Ahmed (East Bengal)
Nurul Amin
Prem Hari Barma
Raj Kumar Chakravarty
Sardar Abdur Rab Khan Nishtar
Sardar Amir Azam Khan
Sardar Shaukat Hayat Khan
Syed Shamsur Rahman
Tamizuddin Khan
@KP
“(and the part you missed) Arrangements thus should be made for the security of Muslims where they were in a minority”.
I do not find these wordings in the original Resolution. Was there any amendment/addendum some time after 24th of March, 1940?