Much has been written and said about Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. However, little has been implemented by maintaining the true essence of his precious guidelines. The easy-to-understand percepts of the founding father have been reserved for historical archives, political sloganeering and rhetoric. Every year, August 14 and December 25 seem to be a ripe time for commemorating what should have been established as ‘law of the land’, till now. These dates on the calendar are unconditionally meant to spurt out the love for the country. The ‘Go Green’ furore encapsulates us (Pakistanis), twice a year (add two more to it if there is a cricket match between Pakistan and India). Zealous ‘spirits of nationalism’, undoubtedly, should be portrayed, but not at the expense of their institutionalisation. Referring to M A Jinnah, during verbose speeches, substantiates the arguments of the present day leaders without ameliorating the distraught status quo.
Akbar S Ahmed in his well-wrote book, ‘Jinnah, Pakistan and Islamic Identity: the search for Saladin’, questions the Pakistani leadership that has there been a plan devised to marginalise the ‘real Jinnah’? If not, then what is the record of Pakistan for promoting Jinnah’s stand on the international stage? The answers are still to be extracted and the procedure, like others prevailing in Pakistan, is not that easy. For the past 65 years, political bouts among the self-appointed custodians of Pakistan’s ideology, power-hungry politicians, the belligerent bureaucracy and so-called military saviours have enslaved the inspiring miracle of the 21st century.
Instead of focusing on the essential messages of the founder, divergence over interpretations of his speeches has segregated the nation. ‘Debating Jinnah’ outweighed the acquisition of ‘visionary Jinnah’. To this day, attempts are being made to deconstruct Jinnah’s inclination towards secularism or Islamic polity. Construing most of his speeches would lead to the conclusion that majority of the notions presented are accomodative of both the mindsets (religious and secularist).
It is a matter of common sense to utilise the ‘irrefutable commonalities’ for building immutable blueprint of governance. The most simplistic example revolves around the golden motto of ‘unity, faith and discipline’. A clear manifestation of any three, on part of the Pakistani leadership, has not been witnessed.
Being a human, Jinnah too had a right to hold some personal liberty in views and actions. Our failure lies in the unfair demarcation of his subjective and objective opinions. All this has dragged the illiterate majority into a state of self-pity and oblivion, which some people term as ‘identity crisis’ nowadays. The ‘intellectual demise’ of Pakistani politics had a ‘trickle-down effect’ that limited Quaid’s principles within ‘portrait frames’, bank notes and floozy declamations.
Nations have an inherent tendency to learn this behaviour when they fail to translate ‘words of wisdom’ into ‘actions of value’. Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah believed in the ‘power to act’ and advocated appropriate actions. He adopted struggle as his passion, not as a way for achieving desired results. His achievements were a by-product of his untiring devotion towards his passion. This is the reason that his name will rest in world history as a man who altered the globe.
Pakistanis have an example that needs to be emulated through sincerity with their respective professions. Quaid-e-Azam’s justice with his profession made him the father of Pakistan. He was not a priest, philosopher, poet, writer or even a politician. In fact, Jinnah was an incorruptible lawyer, who won the biggest case of his life in the international court of justice the day Pakistan came into existence. For all the explanations implicitly stated in this piece of writing, I couldn’t muster the courage to end it with a quotation of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah.
FAKIHA HASSAN RIZVI
Lahore
