Analyzing Secular Objections on Pakistan’s Islamic Constitutional Identity

⭑ An Analytical Response to Secular Objections on Pakistan’s Islamic Identity ⭑
Written by: Muhammad Asif

❖ Introduction to the Objectives Resolution​

The Objectives Resolution is recognized as the foundation of Pakistan's democratic, parliamentary, and constitutional structure. Through it, the Constituent Assembly unanimously affirmed:


➤ The Constitution of Pakistan would be based on Islamic and democratic principles.
➤ Sovereignty belongs to Allah, and elected representatives would exercise power as a sacred trust.
➤ Minorities would enjoy full religious freedom and the right to preserve their cultural identity.

✿ Democratic Approval of the Resolution​

• The resolution was presented by Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan before the Constituent Assembly.
• Opposition leader Sris Chandra Chattopadhyay strongly criticized it, advocating popular sovereignty.
• Despite his opposition, he was given full democratic freedom to express his views.
• Ultimately, the resolution was passed by majority vote—a clear democratic decision.

◈ Secular Objections​

Secular critics claim:


➤ The Objectives Resolution deviates from Quaid-e-Azam's vision.
➤ It is a “crooked brick” in the foundation of Pakistan’s ideological structure.

But the real questions are:​

➤ If sovereignty of Allah was declared through a democratic process, should it not be accepted as a democratic choice?
➤ Why are Muslims not allowed to define their system through democratic means, just as secular societies do?

✦ The Jinnah-Secularism Narrative​

Secularists often label Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah as a secular leader, using his quotes to advocate for a secular state.


But:


➤ Even if Jinnah held secular views, does his individual opinion override the collective decision of the Constituent Assembly?
➤ Secularism itself rejects the idea of one individual or text being the final authority in public life.
So how can Jinnah’s personal stance be made the ultimate constitutional standard?

❖ The “Religious Takeover” Argument​

Secularists accuse religious groups of hijacking the state through the Objectives Resolution, calling it a religious conspiracy.


But facts prove:


➤ The resolution was passed through a transparent and democratic process.
➤ There was no coercion or imposition involved.
➤ If this were a religious takeover, why have religious parties never dominated power through electoral victories?
➤ Why have they consistently faced defeat in elections?

✿ Pakistan’s Islamic Identity and the Constitution​

• Article 2 of Pakistan’s Constitution declares Islam as the state religion.
• Article 2-A incorporates the Objectives Resolution as an operative part of the Constitution, affirming Allah’s sovereignty.
• Article 31 obligates the state to facilitate Muslims in living according to the Qur’an and Sunnah.

❖ A Vital Question:​

If secular voices accept other constitutional clauses, why do they reject the Islamic provisions?


Isn’t this selective acceptance contradictory to the spirit of constitutionalism and democracy?

◈ Contradictions in the Secular Stance​

➤ In Britain, secularists accept monarchy as a democratic choice.
➤ But in Pakistan, they reject the people’s democratic decision to adopt an Islamic identity.


➤ If religious hardliners reject parts of the Constitution, they are labelled extremists.
➤ Why is it not extremism when secularists reject the Islamic clauses of the same Constitution?

❖ Final Word​

Pakistan’s Islamic identity is not the result of coercion or conspiracy, but of a legitimate democratic process.


Secular thinkers must reflect on their position:


➤ Do they truly believe in democracy and constitutionalism?
➤ Or do they only support systems that align with their ideological preferences?