Weiss, A. (1986). The Historical Debate on Islam and the State in South Asia. In Islamic Reassertion in Pakistan (21). New York: Syracuse University Press.

Even though Pakistan is a confessional state in the sense that its creation was due to religion, the three main leaders of the Muslim nationalist movement –Sayyid Ahmad Khan, Mohammad Iqbal, Mohammad Ali Jinnah – were secularitist, who wanted a secular state with a Muslim majority. They did not want to establish a theocratic state based on Islamic laws. As a matter of fact, in his inaugural address as Pakistan’s first president, Jinnah stated, “in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the state.” Clearly, he envisioned a country where everyone would have equal rights, despite their religion. So why, despite the fact that ulema (religious leaders) did not organize the independence movement, has Islamic law influenced the legal system in Pakistan so profoundly? In order to understand the role of Islam in judicial reforms and policies, I have to grasp a basic background on early political parties that played a role in creating/ shaping the constitution and then understand their stance on Islamic laws.

In the late 1800s, Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan organized a socio-educational movement, urging Muslims to participate in social and educational institutions to gain representation. He believed that Muslims would only achieve emancipation if they were willing to advance in modern education. In 1877, he founded the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental (MAO) College at Aligarh, where scientific and western philosophy was emphasized. In 1906, Agha Khan led a group of Aligarh-educated Muslims (future Muslim League, a political party) to demand separate representation in the government and three years later they were successful in most provinces. Followers of the Aligarh movement are identified as modernist as they draw a distinct line between religion and politics.

The antithesis of Aligarh movement was Deoband School, founded by Muhammad Qasim Nanawtawi in the mid-1800s. This religious institution’s philosophy stressed Islamic traditional sciences and totally cut off Western education. It is important to note that the Deobandis were opposed to modernist’s two-nations theory, i.e., Hindus and Muslims were essentially two different nations with distinct cultures, histories, and customs. Deobandis did not believe in a separate state.

In 1919, some ulema affiliated with the Deoband School founded another religious-political movement called the Jamiat-i-ulema-i-Hind. This group opposed British rule and were also against a separate state. Later, it split into Jamiat-i-ulema-i-Hind and Jamiat-i-ulema-i-Islam, which supported Pakistan.

In 1941, as a direct response to the Lahore Resolution, Maulana Maududi formed a political party called the Jama’at-i-Islami. In conjunction with eight other political parties, a collective group known as Pakistan National Alliance (PNA) firmly demanded that Islamic laws be included in the legal system. In 1977, when General Zia-ul-Haq Chief Martial Law Administrator PNA applauded his military intervention for members of PNA became cabinet members without elections. The irony of General Zia’s martial law is that it was not a legitimate move in democratic or Islamic sense. In secular view, he took over the state without any elections; in religious view, he did not come to power with the consent of the people or their leaders.