Since we have been talking here about Jinnah’s vision for Pakistan, maybe we should also think about Jinnah’s vision on Pakistan’s governance. Particularly on the issue of ‘uniforms’ in politics, which is the concern of the day in Pakistan. Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah was thinking well ahead of his time. His following address has never been so pertinent as it is now.
On June 14, 1948, addressing the officer at the Military Staff College in Quetta, the Quaid-i Azam said:
During my talks with one or two very high-ranking officers I discovered that they did not know the implications of the oath taken by the troops of Pakistan. Of course, an oath is only a matter of form; what is more important is true spirit and heart. But it is an important form and I would like to take the opportunity of refreshing your memory by reading the prescribed oath to you:
“I solemnly affirm, in the presence of Almighty God, that I owe allegiance to the Constitution and the Dominion of Pakistan and that I will be duty bound honestly and faithfully serve.”
As I have said just now, the spirit is what really matters. I should like you to study the Constitution which is in force in Pakistan at present and understand its true constitutional and legal implications.
(Jinnah, Speeches and Statement 1947-1948, Oxford University Press, 2000).
Lets’ also take a few minutes to review the oath taken by members of the armed services and also the presidential oath, in terms of the constitution:
Oath of allegiance for armed services:
“I, do hereby solemnly swear that I will bear true faith and allegiance to Pakistan and uphold the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan which embodies the will of the people, that I will not engage myself in any political activities whatsoever and that I will honestly and faithfully serve Pakistan in the Pakistan army by and under the law.”
Let me reiterate, the oath states, “not engage myself in any political activities whatsoever”.
Presidential oath:
“That I will not allow my personal interest to influence my official conduct or my official decisions. That I will preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.”
Jinnah’s vision on the matter of governance of Pakistan and the supremacy of the Constitution and rule of law is very clear. Much more so than that of the rulers of today.
You can visit ATP on your Mobile Phone. Here's how!
Actually, Mush may be regretting having remitted their sentence now. The highjacking case was bogus, but if they had been in jail right now, it would have been very hard to petition the courts for relief now. In the existing situation, legally, NS and SS had a very strong case; no citizen can be stopped from entering the country. If someone has commited a crime, then they can be tried in a court and punished, but no citizen can be forced out of t he country.
Whether we like the judgement in case of NS and SS, I think Jinnah would have been proud the way courts have finally shown some spine.
The court has permitted NS and SS to come back. It has also ordered the government not to create any hurdles for their return.
My thougths exactly Aqeel! The constitution has been trampled under the boots with impunity. This is not a statement for public consumption, but a fact.
Today our society is at a point where insidious statements that imply subversion of constitution/treason are uttered with impunity on public television. Here are some egregious examples:
1) Sh Rashid saying president will not accept evey judgement from SC with good will, a threat to the superior judiciary.
2) Sh Rasheed saying democracy can be derailed.
3) Q leaguers in government implying imposition of martial law if Mush can’t be reelected.
4) Intelligence chiefs spying on judges of SC, and then having the nerve to present this material in the SC.
6) CJP incarcerated in the GHQ for 5 hours.
7) The very existence of political cells in military intelligence agencies.
8) Politicians like Qazi urging treason in the army by saying, “How long will the army be a silent spectator?” This was uttered during Nawaz Sharif’s 2nd term.
9) The 17th ammendment iself! Justice Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim had the guts to bring this up before the supreme court during the CJP case, but sadly no judgement was issued on his arguments.
The list is endless.
Instead of digging old corpses the judiciary should atleast, from now on, start taking firm action on violations of article 6.1 (deals with treason) in the constitution.
As a country founded by a person like Quaid-i Azam, we should be the most law-abiding nation in the world.
Actually, it is important that any law be enforced through punishments for violaters, otherwise, it can lose teeth. So the question is, will Mush and the other generals who participated in the coup (in violation of their oath) with him face any trial?
The same is true for others like General Hameed Gul and Asad Durrani who as ISI chiefs were responsible for directing funds into IJI. Are they ever going to be put behind bars?
Kruman, this speech of Mr. Jinnah clearly reveals that he had some kind of doubt about Army Officers that is the reason that he read the oath by himself.
My God, this man was too ahead of his time and look at us what we have done to this country.
Tread carefully, any encouragement of army’s participation in politics/frivolous comments about their oath of allegiance to the consitution is tantamount to treason, besides a being a “court-martialable” offense.
Even general Musharraf, does not talk in this kind of a tone about army’s role in politics or his oath. Even he says the rights things, that army should not be involved in politics while giving his own reasons on how he was sucked into the political areana.
I believe and agree with some of the comments here. Civilian administrations since the creation of Pakistan are *somewhat* responsible for supporting coups and rules by the Army. Even today the ruling Muslim League (Q) is doing the same thing. They aren’t called the kings party for nothing ;) Our politicians are also very poor losers. They cry foul and incite the army to overthrown a civilian government whenever they are in opposition. The oath becomes meaningless when the very people (representatives of the people) who legislated them invite the army to rule the country. As far as I am concerned Pakistan army is another political party interested in running the country. It is well armed compared to other parties and that is the reason why every politician considers them a power broker and is afraid of them (this being the only reason). What was that about an oath again?