বাংলাদেশের স্বাধীনতা যুদ্ধ দলিলপত্র (প্রথম খণ্ড)/১০২
| শিরোনাম | সূত্র | তারিখ |
|---|---|---|
| যুক্ত নির্বাচন বিল | পাকিস্তান গণপরিষদ | ১০ ও ১১ই অক্টোবর, ১৯৫৬ |
Joint Electorate Bill in National Assembly in Pakistan
10th and 11th October, 1956.
Excerpts from the speech of Mr. H. S. Suhrawardy: Sir, I beg to move:
“That the Bill to provide for the principle of electorate in elections to the National Assembly and Provincial Assemblies be taken into consideration.”
It may appear strange to those who have not been able to adapt themselves to the change in political outlook resultant on the creation of Pakistan, that I, who was an advocate of the two-nation theory in undivided India, and whose contribution to the creation of Pakistan was perhaps not insignificant, and who believed in separate electorate in undivided India, should advocate joint electorate in Pakistan as a salutary constitutional principle. Undoubtedly separate electorate formed the cardinal creed of the Muslim of undivided India, and was strongly advocated with irrefutable logic by Sir Abdulla Suhrawardy in his minute of dissent to the Simon Report as early as 1918-19. but it was not based on the two-nation theory as such a theory advocated as late as 1940 in the political document known as the Lahore Resolution. Separate electorate was a device to secure proper representation in the Legislatures for the Muslim minority; it took something away from the majority population; it was certainly never meant to be a device to safeguard the interests of a majority population. Although the Lahore Resolution appeared to endorse the two-nation theory, it actually never did so; it threw it overboard when it visualized in the same Resolution that minorities would be left behind in the two countries of Pakistan and India. The two-nation theory carried to its logical conclusion would have connoted total exchange of population-the creation of a completely Hindu nation in India and the creation of a completely Muslim nation in Pakistan.
Of course, by a strange illogicality all the non-Muslim nations were lumped together as one Hindu nation. The two-nation theory was advanced by the Muslims as a justification for the partition of India and the creation of a State made up of geographically contiguous units where the Muslims were numerically in a majority. Once the State was created, the two-nation theory lost its force even for the Muslims. If it is still persisted in, it will logically lead to the partition of Pakistan and the creation of a State made up of contiguous areas where non-Muslims are. in a majority; a contingency from which every Pakistani must recoil with horror. The Muslims, who were a nationality in undivided India, are now citizens in their own country, Pakistan, in which every citizen, whatever may be his religion, is a member of the Pakistani nation. All of the Muslims and non-Muslims are Pakistanis first and last and we take pride and glory in our having achieved nationhood. There is, thus, a radical difference between the conception of the Millat-i-Islam which transcends geographical boundaries, and the conception of a Pakistani nation or qaum which has boundaries and has a peculiar entity which differentiates it from other nations. Circumstances thus have changed, and so must our political outlook change with the establishment of Pakistan. Today we do not want to develop fissiparous tendencies within the country but must create one nation. I. therefore, avocate joint electorate because this will help in welding all the people together into one great Pakistani nation, in creating mutual confidence and co-operation in the service of the country and in destroying the seeds of suspicion, distrust and hatred between the citizens professing different religions. I want to help in the creation of a Pakistani nation. I want the citizens to have only one ideal, namely, service to Pakistan each according to his own religious convictions but all united to advance the stability. integrity and the glory of Pakistan and all dedicated to their motherland. Surely, this is an ideal worth struggling for a worth achieving.
It is said by some that joint electorate is contrary to the tenets of Islam and that if our National Assembly passes it, it will be doing something un-Islamic. Apart from the conviction which I hold, a conviction which is supported by all the Muslim countries of the world that there are no injunctions regarding electorates in Islam and that it is wholly wrong to drag Islam into this controversy. I maintain that under our constitution, labeled as Islamic by those gentlemen who consider joint electorate to be un-Islamic, the final word as to what is Islamic or not rests with the State and its organ, the National Assembly........
It is said that joint electorate is un-Islamic. Joint Electorate implies that Muslims and non-Muslims vote for a particular person. Are we not always doing that in our Legislatures? Have you not jointly voted for the President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan? Do we not, Muslims and non-Muslims, vote jointly for every measure in our Legislature? Have we not voted jointly for your venerable self when we elected you as our speaker? How do these gentlemen, who consider that joint electorate is un-Islamic and a sin, remain members of a Legislature and vote with non-Muslims for individuals and for measures? Indeed the Members of this very National Assembly have been returned by a joint electorate, namely, the Provincial Legislatures composed of Muslims and non-Muslims. The argument that joint electorate is un-Islamic should hardly appeal to the members here who by their very association in the Legislature must be groveling in sin.
Then again, is Pakistan the only Muslim country in the world? Are there not other Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Jordan and even Afghanistan where they declared law is the Shari at law, and is there separate electorate in any of these countries? In the days of colonialism, in the days of their subjugation one or two of them had separate electorate. This was a device to divide the people. No sooner did they attain independence than they had one electorate and made no difference between Muslims and non-Muslims. What will these countries think of the thesis that joint electorate is un-Islamic? What will those countries think of Pakistan and its divines? I leave the people to ponder.
Let us go nearer home. In East Pakistan members are returned by joint electorate to all the self-governing bodies, like Union Boards, District Boards, the Municipalities, the School Boards and so on. No one up till now has doubled the system un-Islamic or should it be said that it is only when it comes to electing representatives to a Legislature that the joint electorate becomes un-Islamic, but is absolutely Islamic in all other cases even in the election of our President.
In my opinion this problem must be viewed only from one angle, namely, what is in the interest of Pakistan? As I have pointed out, joint electorate will help to create one country and one nation and destroy all fissiparous tendencies. Separate electorate will keep alive the flame of difference based on religion, which will in their turn lead to differences in outlook and even discrimination between citizens and citizens. However, much we shall endeavor to avoid it. Separate electorate is unhealthy if we want to create a nation. It IS useful if we wish to divide. It is a powerful weapon for division. If we search Our hearts sincerely, we shall find that the present Muslim demand for separate electorate is based on deep suspicion and distrust and even hatred of the non-Muslim element. I know that the scars resultant on the partition has not yet healed. Generations will pass before they will heal, but the process of healing must begin, and, living as we must, side by side, with the realistic conviction that the transfer of population is impossible, that the migration of the 4.5 crores of Muslims in India may well result in Pakistan being swept into the sea, we have to accept the fact that Pakistan will remain a country inhabited by Muslims and non-Muslims all of whom must have equal rights and are entitled to be treated as equal citizens. This can only be produced by a feeling, that all are entitled equally to participate in the future of the country through the political institutions of a democratic state. I know that the protagonists of separate electorate will loudly deny that they have any such feeling of distrust, suspicion and hatred against non-Muslims but we cannot escape basic facts and the only way to prove that they entertain no such feeling is to accept joint electorate.
Those who support separate electorate declare that in the system of joint electorate, the Hindus will dominate over the Muslims, capture all the seats, corrupt the Muslims and so on. It is strange that this has been voiced in an area of Pakistan where there are not more than 2 percent Hindus. Strange that these people in West Pakistan, who know nothing at all about. East Pakistan, should try and impose on it this political panacea, and pose as its saviors, as if the Muslims of East Pakistan understand nothing. Do they not realize that it constitutes a slanderous condemnation of the Muslims of East Pakistan, where Hindus still dwell in significant numbers? Let me tell those who think in this manner that there is no such danger. Muslims of East Pakistan, who have not lost their faith in themselves and who basically, are true Muslims, know how to perform their duty to their country. Whether we have joint or separate electorate matters little in West Pakistan where the non Muslims are in such a negligible minority, but it does matter a lot in East Pakistan and the Muslims of East
Pakistan pray to be saved from those who consider them so contemptible that they will sell the interests of the country for the money of non-Muslims. In view of this it is hardly relevant to point out that the wealthy Hindus have migrated from this country, for I do not admit that the Muslims of East Pakistan are in danger, but I point this out for the benefit of those who entertain such contemptuous ideas regarding their brother Muslims. Let me give you a few instances of joint electorate in action in East Pakistan to show how incorrect is the view of its so-called saviors.
In the district of Khulna, where the Hindus and Muslims are almost equally divided, and from wherein the Provincial Assembly which is based on separate electorate, there are 8 Muslims and 7 Hindus, there are in its District Boards of 30 Elected members. where there should have been on the same basis 16 Muslims and 14 Hindus, 28 Muslims and 2 Hindus. In the Faridpur District Board, where on the basis of separate electorate, there should have been 25 Muslims and 11 Hindus, 32 Muslims and 4 Hindus have been returned. In Dinajpur, where On the basis of electorate, based on population, there should have been 12 Muslims and 9 Hindus, 21 Muslims have been returned and no Hindu. These figures speak for themselves, and show that in a system of joint electorate Hindus have little chance of being returned unless they cooperate with the Muslims and identify themselves with them. Indeed, joint electorate if it does any harm at ail in the matters of representation will harm the Hindus. I deliberately use the words “in the matter of representation", for I think they will gain otherwise from the point of view of creating identity of interest and a sense of common endeavor in a common cause for a common country, which is so vital for a minority community, for its safety, for its dignity and for its future progress, more particularly if the majority community is willing and prepared to be just and to live with the minority community as equal partners and share with its hopes and its fears. It may, therefore, well be asked why, if the Hindus stand to loose so much in representations, do they advocate joint electorate. I have already given the answer but there are other answers as well. It is difficult for the Hindus, who, when they were citizens of undivided India, denied to the Muslims the right of separate electorate as a proper method or representation to claim that right for themselves now that they are in the position of a minority. Apart from this the Hindus find that in a system of separate electorate they will remain for all time a constitutional minority subject to a minority complex and at the whim of a majority complex. It is always to the interest of the minorities if there these complexes are removed and the idea of one nation takes its place and the term minority community loses significance. In the system of separate electorate, the Hindus will be entitled to such a large number of seats that they will always hold the balance of power between the contesting Muslim groups. It is a political and logical phenomenon that the minority community closes its ranks and stands solid as a group, while the majority community that wields power will always be divided. It is to the credit of the Hindus of East Pakistan that they realize that it will be fatal for their future if they place themselves in the position of being able to playoff one group against the other. Their position can become so dominant that they can place the smaller Muslim party in power by combining with it and oust the larger party. This while giving to the Hindus minority some temporary advantage will build up against it forces of distrust and the major Muslim group cannot but entertain unfriendly feelings towards it. It speaks greatly for the political insight of the Hindu community that they prefer to reap the benefits of trust and cooperation and one nationhood rather than scramble for representation on the basis of numbers. A time will come. I hope, when Muslims and non-Muslims will forget the difference of religion in the service of the country, and we shall find ourselves working together, side by side and shoulder to shoulder, in all nooks and corners of the country, and through such work attain a common nationhood, and take our rightful place in representative institutions, in local bodies and in legislatures according to the service we render to our fellow creatures.
I beg the House, therefore, and the people outside the country to view this problem only from one angle, namely, the interest of Pakistan. It is so easy to mislead our people who are prepared to sacrifice everything in the way of Islam, to mislead them in the name of Islam. It is so easy to excite passion, so easy to kindle fires, so easy to destroy, so difficult to build, that I would beg of those who are utilizing this controversy, for the sake of opposition, not to fan the flames of fanaticism and bigotry and hatred but to pause and build Pakistan on the solid foundation of trust and unity between all the peoples inhabiting this beloved country of ours.
I commend my motion to the house...