Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Sami (JUI-S) head Maulana Samiul Haq on Thursday demanded trial of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif under Article 6 of the Constitution for his remarks about liberal Pakistan. “Pakistan came into being in the name of Islam. The prime minister has committed treason by passing remarks against the ideology of the country,” he stressed. He was speaking at the condolence reference for late religious scholar Maulana Dr Sher Ali Shah at the Darul Uloom Haqqania in Akora Khattak. Jamaat-i-Islami chief Senator Sirajul Haq, chief of Jamatud Dawa (JuD) Hafiz Saeed, chief of Ansar-ul-Umma organization Maulana Fazlur Rehman Khalil, tribal elders and religious scholars from across the country and students of seminaries attended the event. Maulana Samiul Haq said the prime minister’s remarks had hurt the feelings of the people as he had linked the future of the country with liberalism. He urged the Chief Justice of Pakistan to take suo moto notice of the prime minister’s statement and try him for treason under Article 6 of the Constitution. “Nawaz Sharif’s statement is tantamount to committing treason. The word Islamic and not liberal Pakistan has been used in the Constitution,” the JI chief Sirajul Haq argued. It would perhaps be academic to point out that the prime minister had made use of the word “liberal” at an investment conference in the context of the country’s economy, not to describe Pakistani society. Right-wing ideologues such as Maulana Samiul Haq — also known as the father of the Afghan Taliban — and others are chafing under what they perceive as curtailment of the clergy’s influence compared to the carte blanche they enjoyed before the military action against terrorist sanctuaries located in the north. In the months leading up to the operation, they had positioned themselves as no less than brokers of peace between the Pakistani Taliban and the government. The attack on Karachi airport put an end to that farcical exercise; and the massacre at APS Peshawar on Dec 16 brought home, in the most horrific way possible, the consequences of the decades-long policy of co-opting religious extremists as a tool of statecraft. However, while the right wing has fashioned its narrative to suit the circumstances, the government is falling short. There is confusion all around, not least because some of the state’s own actions demonstrate a reluctance to completely discard its old ways. Instead, ‘assets’ that toe the line continue to remain untouched, at liberty to undermine democracy and democratic values, and subvert the tentative counter-narrative that is beginning to emerge. We stand at an important crossroads, where prevarication is no answer.
pk.shafaqna.com
