The success of a modern majoritarian state should be gauged by the protection and security it provides to its minorities.
Minorities means any group of people that is not represented to the extent of its majority or one that is excluded because of differences, like language, colour, religion or geography.
Majoritarian rule was the fundamental sticking point between Jinnah and Gandhi. Jinnah simply could not accept a state structure where government was awarded by virtue of the greater numbers of people. No matter how secular or liberal the sentiments of the leaders of the Congress were, Jinnah knew that deep differences between peoples would some day resurface to award the state structures in the hands of a particular majority that is identified not by virtue of some adherence to a liberal-secular philosophy but by virtue of traditional homogenizing traits like religion, language, race, and geography.
And so, when modern majoritarian states fail to protect their minorities, it is essentially a negation of the whole idea of having a majoritarian state since it fails to protect those who are already in a minority and must be protected. Christians and Hindus in Pakistan are two such minorities, which have not been accorded such protection by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Hindus in rural Sindh especially face periodic assaults on their democratic choices of faith and fraternity. They are forcibly converted by Muslims who feel that their acts of forced-conversion are a service to Islam, when in reality, they are violating the very fundamental tenet of Islamic doctrine of Free Choice.
Every man and woman are free to choose which religion to follow. They are free to choose their marriage partners, and they are free to choose if they want to work or not. Islamic doctrine, however, expects that given the realities of the world a Muslim man and a woman should always make a free choice while always weighing it against the better-sense. If better-sense dictates otherwise than free choice should be reconsidered.
Participation of minorities in important rooms of the state structure is important if the state wants to go beyond its conservative boundaries. Conservative doctrines have the drawback that they do not make room for liberal ideas. As for liberal doctrines they certainly have room for a lot of conservative ideas. Majoritarian rule becomes a conservative doctrine if the majority is only concerned with the protection of its own kind, while pushing the minorities to the fringes. It can become a liberal success if minorities are included and given an equality of opportunity that is transparent.
Pakistan and the majority Muslim societies the world over have this problem of a lack of interest in protecting the minorities and working for their social mobility. Be it the religious minorities or even the ones like women who are not represented according to the strength of their numbers. Majoritarian rule rewards more numbers.
So, if that logic is followed, it is realized that representation of women in national and provincial legislatures of Pakistan is hopelessly low. This is not a case of who gets to make a decision about policy. This is a description of the fact that when logical contradictions are found in the essential structure of the state, that state cannot prosper.
According to the population census of 2017 the total female population of Pakistan is 101,344,632, whereas, that of males is 106,318,220. The percentage of males and females above the age of 18 in the total population is 27 percent and 26.4 percent respectively, whereas, the percentage of males and females eligible to contest elections (25 years) is 20.4 percent and 20 percent respectively. The total number of women who are members in the National Assembly of Pakistan is 70. This number includes 10 women elected on general seats, 59 on seats reserved for women, and 1 woman elected from the seats reserved for minorities. The total number of women in the National Assembly thus becomes 70 which is 20.4 percent of the total seats i-e 342.
Whereas, the percentage of men’s seats with virtually the same population as women above the age of 25 is a staggering 79.2 percent. This is a very fundamental statistic showing that there is a fundamental contradiction in the way representative structures are engineered in Pakistan. Twenty percent of the total eligible men are charged with making decisions about 100 percent of the population, and since having only a meagre 20 percent representation what hope can women have of affecting policy.
Men and women are fundamentally different, in the same way that Muslims and non-Muslims are, by virtue of their belief systems. The differences between men and women are so acute that they cannot be counted as one. Women are different, primarily, anatomically from men. These differences of anatomy are then translated into differences of psychology and choices. But there is no indication that women have less brains. They can take a decision very well in the same manner as is expected from a man. And men will always take good decisions, is not always the case. Just look at male-dominated traditional Muslim societies. They are in tatters.
If differences between men and women are so huge that it makes it necessary to place them in a separate category from men, then it also makes for a case that in a representative system women should be accorded representation according to their numbers. The number of men and women above the age of 25 is the same. Their representation is, however, hopelessly skewed in favour of men. Men control the parliament and all the policy that is being made, not that they are very good at it. Women should have equal representation in parliament by virtue of their eligible numbers. Since this number is equal to that of men then women should have 50 percent seats in the parliament on separate electorate basis.
The problem of representation of women is not simply a matter of getting elected into parliaments. It is a problem which excludes a sizeable proportion of the population from having a say and contribution in all walks of life, be they political, economic, social, judicial, religious, or even cultural. Exclusion of women is a negation of the idea that they are equal human beings with the ability to make equally good and sensible decisions. If they are pushed against a wall and all decision making is taken over by men, it means that men think that they are superior to women and that they know better what is best for the society.
Well, it may come as a surprise but that is not the case.
Having an overbearing conviction that men know better and that men make better decisions is a bit too arrogant. Arrogance creates rigidity. And when the reins of the state are in hands of rigid people with rigid beliefs and worldviews, that makes for a rigid state. A rigid state is unable to move forward in time since equal number of its people, in this case women, are not allowed to practice the doctrine of free choice. Their weight holds the state down as they are not allowed to carry their own weight.
As of now, Muslim women in Iran, India, Afghanistan, and some European states are fighting for their rights. In Iran they are fighting to have a choice to wear the hijab or not. In India they are fighting for a right to wear the hijab. In Afghanistan they are fighting for everything that they feel should be their choice like education, employment, travel, and speech.
In Pakistan women are in nearly as bad a shape as in these neighbouring countries. The structural persecution of women by denying them equal representation in a state system that is essentially built on a majoritarian model is a fundamental contradiction. This fundamental contradiction is taking its toll on the lives of millions of women in Pakistan by denying them a say in policy decisions that is theirs by virtue of a right.
Pushing women in isolation and denying them a chance to exercise their better-sense is a show of a lack of better-sense on the part of men. Women must be given a chance to come out freely and express themselves freely. Liberating women from the chains of patriarchal arrogance and giving them equal representation in parliaments will liberate Muslim states from rigidity and slumber. Only then we will see a gradual progress in the state of Muslim societies.
Women must be respected. The respect that they deserve should be shown by giving them equal representation and allowing them to exercise their better-sense in face of a respecting male society. If men keep on disrespecting their women, they cannot expect women to exercise a better-sense.
Minorities means any group of people that is not represented to the extent of its majority or one that is excluded because of differences, like language, colour, religion or geography.
Majoritarian rule was the fundamental sticking point between Jinnah and Gandhi. Jinnah simply could not accept a state structure where government was awarded by virtue of the greater numbers of people. No matter how secular or liberal the sentiments of the leaders of the Congress were, Jinnah knew that deep differences between peoples would some day resurface to award the state structures in the hands of a particular majority that is identified not by virtue of some adherence to a liberal-secular philosophy but by virtue of traditional homogenizing traits like religion, language, race, and geography.
And so, when modern majoritarian states fail to protect their minorities, it is essentially a negation of the whole idea of having a majoritarian state since it fails to protect those who are already in a minority and must be protected. Christians and Hindus in Pakistan are two such minorities, which have not been accorded such protection by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Hindus in rural Sindh especially face periodic assaults on their democratic choices of faith and fraternity. They are forcibly converted by Muslims who feel that their acts of forced-conversion are a service to Islam, when in reality, they are violating the very fundamental tenet of Islamic doctrine of Free Choice.
Every man and woman are free to choose which religion to follow. They are free to choose their marriage partners, and they are free to choose if they want to work or not. Islamic doctrine, however, expects that given the realities of the world a Muslim man and a woman should always make a free choice while always weighing it against the better-sense. If better-sense dictates otherwise than free choice should be reconsidered.
There is no indication that women have less brains. They can take a decision very well in the same manner as is expected from a man. And men will always take good decisions, is not always the case. Just look at male-dominated traditional Muslim societies. They are in tatters.
Participation of minorities in important rooms of the state structure is important if the state wants to go beyond its conservative boundaries. Conservative doctrines have the drawback that they do not make room for liberal ideas. As for liberal doctrines they certainly have room for a lot of conservative ideas. Majoritarian rule becomes a conservative doctrine if the majority is only concerned with the protection of its own kind, while pushing the minorities to the fringes. It can become a liberal success if minorities are included and given an equality of opportunity that is transparent.
Pakistan and the majority Muslim societies the world over have this problem of a lack of interest in protecting the minorities and working for their social mobility. Be it the religious minorities or even the ones like women who are not represented according to the strength of their numbers. Majoritarian rule rewards more numbers.
So, if that logic is followed, it is realized that representation of women in national and provincial legislatures of Pakistan is hopelessly low. This is not a case of who gets to make a decision about policy. This is a description of the fact that when logical contradictions are found in the essential structure of the state, that state cannot prosper.
According to the population census of 2017 the total female population of Pakistan is 101,344,632, whereas, that of males is 106,318,220. The percentage of males and females above the age of 18 in the total population is 27 percent and 26.4 percent respectively, whereas, the percentage of males and females eligible to contest elections (25 years) is 20.4 percent and 20 percent respectively. The total number of women who are members in the National Assembly of Pakistan is 70. This number includes 10 women elected on general seats, 59 on seats reserved for women, and 1 woman elected from the seats reserved for minorities. The total number of women in the National Assembly thus becomes 70 which is 20.4 percent of the total seats i-e 342.
Whereas, the percentage of men’s seats with virtually the same population as women above the age of 25 is a staggering 79.2 percent. This is a very fundamental statistic showing that there is a fundamental contradiction in the way representative structures are engineered in Pakistan. Twenty percent of the total eligible men are charged with making decisions about 100 percent of the population, and since having only a meagre 20 percent representation what hope can women have of affecting policy.
Men and women are fundamentally different, in the same way that Muslims and non-Muslims are, by virtue of their belief systems. The differences between men and women are so acute that they cannot be counted as one. Women are different, primarily, anatomically from men. These differences of anatomy are then translated into differences of psychology and choices. But there is no indication that women have less brains. They can take a decision very well in the same manner as is expected from a man. And men will always take good decisions, is not always the case. Just look at male-dominated traditional Muslim societies. They are in tatters.
The respect that they deserve should be shown by giving them equal representation and allowing them to exercise their better-sense in face of a respecting male society. If men keep on disrespecting their women, they cannot expect women to exercise a better-sense.
If differences between men and women are so huge that it makes it necessary to place them in a separate category from men, then it also makes for a case that in a representative system women should be accorded representation according to their numbers. The number of men and women above the age of 25 is the same. Their representation is, however, hopelessly skewed in favour of men. Men control the parliament and all the policy that is being made, not that they are very good at it. Women should have equal representation in parliament by virtue of their eligible numbers. Since this number is equal to that of men then women should have 50 percent seats in the parliament on separate electorate basis.
The problem of representation of women is not simply a matter of getting elected into parliaments. It is a problem which excludes a sizeable proportion of the population from having a say and contribution in all walks of life, be they political, economic, social, judicial, religious, or even cultural. Exclusion of women is a negation of the idea that they are equal human beings with the ability to make equally good and sensible decisions. If they are pushed against a wall and all decision making is taken over by men, it means that men think that they are superior to women and that they know better what is best for the society.
Well, it may come as a surprise but that is not the case.
Having an overbearing conviction that men know better and that men make better decisions is a bit too arrogant. Arrogance creates rigidity. And when the reins of the state are in hands of rigid people with rigid beliefs and worldviews, that makes for a rigid state. A rigid state is unable to move forward in time since equal number of its people, in this case women, are not allowed to practice the doctrine of free choice. Their weight holds the state down as they are not allowed to carry their own weight.
As of now, Muslim women in Iran, India, Afghanistan, and some European states are fighting for their rights. In Iran they are fighting to have a choice to wear the hijab or not. In India they are fighting for a right to wear the hijab. In Afghanistan they are fighting for everything that they feel should be their choice like education, employment, travel, and speech.
In Pakistan women are in nearly as bad a shape as in these neighbouring countries. The structural persecution of women by denying them equal representation in a state system that is essentially built on a majoritarian model is a fundamental contradiction. This fundamental contradiction is taking its toll on the lives of millions of women in Pakistan by denying them a say in policy decisions that is theirs by virtue of a right.
Pushing women in isolation and denying them a chance to exercise their better-sense is a show of a lack of better-sense on the part of men. Women must be given a chance to come out freely and express themselves freely. Liberating women from the chains of patriarchal arrogance and giving them equal representation in parliaments will liberate Muslim states from rigidity and slumber. Only then we will see a gradual progress in the state of Muslim societies.
Women must be respected. The respect that they deserve should be shown by giving them equal representation and allowing them to exercise their better-sense in face of a respecting male society. If men keep on disrespecting their women, they cannot expect women to exercise a better-sense.