Finding the right credentials
Hypothetically, if we ask ourselves in an honest and righteous manner, that whether we lied or deceived anyone ever? Then without a slightest doubt; our answer would be negative. Sadiq – a qualitative metaphor used for a person who never spoke a lie, and Amin – can be defined as a symbolic representation of a person who never breached anyone’s trust. While keeping in view the above hypothesis, is anyone among us including the civil and military establishments a real ‘Sadiq and Amin’? Then how and why we expect the honourable elected members of the senate, national assembly and provincial assemblies to exhibit such a unique or perhaps an extinct set of qualities?
Who is or let us put it more precisely was ‘Sadiq and Amin’? It is a historical fact that there was simply one person not only on the planet earth but in the entire universe who was the real ‘Sadiq and Amin’ and that individual was Holy Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H). Apart from the Holy Prophet, almost 1, 24,000 other Prophets, the four rightly guided Caliphs of Islam, the Ahl-e-Bait, the wives and the companions of the Holy Prophet on the basis of their character and moral fibre were also among those who were Sadiq and Amin. The Holy Prophet was a man of his word and never resorted to deception or manipulation and not even the slightest exaggeration. As a consequence, the ardent, stubborn and rigid people of Makkah were so impressed and influenced by the personality, character and conduct of Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H) that they begin to honour him by calling as Sadiq and Amin. The entire life of the Holy Prophet is a testament to itself that he never abused power and showed unprecedented and unparalleled humbleness even after becoming the strongest political and military force in all of Arab.
The rationale behind writing on this particular topic is neither to criticise the Honourable Courts nor to encourage the incumbent political party or the former Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif. But the truth of the matter is that we need to realize the weakness and vulnerabilities prevailing in ourselves. How long can we remain sceptical that conspiracies are underway and are behind every major negative incident? We as a nation have to realise that in the context of morality, we are still lagging behind in relation to various nations in the world. The interpretation of the words or perhaps titles such as ‘Sadiq and Amin’ is very simple but applying these extinct qualities to people of this era is sheer thoughtlessness.
The people of Pakistan and the politicians in particular have to realise that such clauses were merely made a part of the constitution to uphold high moral grounds while preventing certain individuals to become part of the legislature. We know ourselves, what we do and what we have become habitual to do. There are certain things which have symbolic presence and are not suppose to be interpreted in literal meanings. The Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution can be said as example. It is an established opinion of the political pundits and analysts in Pakistan that not only the honourable members of the National Assembly but every major office-bearer in civil and military establishments – is neither a Sadiq nor an Amin.
The recent Gallup survey published its report on August 17, 2017 and reveals some astonishing facts. According to Gallup, 44pc of Pakistanis believe that they are ‘Sadiq and Amin’ while 18pc are not sure but amazingly 18pc believe that they are not ‘Sadiq and Amin’. It is quite unfortunate that even after being an independent state for almost 70 years, still we are weak and vulnerable when it comes to morality – without a doubt the lack of moral foundations in our behaviour, society, politics and daily life has severely backfired. The verdict by the Supreme Court of Pakistan disqualifying former PM Nawaz Sharif on the basis of him being no more a Sadiq and Amin will perhaps weaken the political culture and also it will have a spill over effect – probably it may go further disqualifying Imran Khan on the claims made by Ayesha Gulalai and Sita White. Any major verdict must reflect the national interest and the will of the people at large – otherwise such decisions are ultimately challenged by the defendant by taking the verdict in the ‘People’s Court’.
