Is it really a problem?

[saiyan0321]

save for the burgers of Large cities...the ultra rich land lords of Rural areas and some lost folks

Want me to tell you a funny event... We were studying Audit in our classes and we had about 15 students in our class of F8 audit of acca. Discussion was came on Islamic implementation of Audit and our sir just for kicks asked our class the five pillars of islam saying we all must know and he asked. Apart from me and my friend, An elder student, a maulvi kid and a student at the front . Nobody had any idea about them.

You see they all named the four pillars Namaz,Roza,Hajj,Zakat but they failed at the fifth pillar and the most important pillar which is the first pillar. I hope everybody over here knows .... Our sir was shocked at finding out most of the class ddint know the fifth pillar and he joked well i am glad to see so many of the minority is in our class. He named the fifth.











By the way its Shahadat If someone got it wrong over there.

 

[Jango]

In order to think about this, let us first start with two basic definitions:

1. What is "awareness" of Islamic teachings, and does it automatically imply actively practicing those teachings? As a crude example, I may be "aware" that a muslim prays five times a day, but does it mean that I must be seen in the masjid five times a day to stand in an election? What if I pray at home, or not at all? How much awareness must be practiced and why?

2. What is "good moral character", and how can it be judged with or without the use of #1 above? Morality is different than the practice of a religion, and in this context we need to be sure whether we mean this requirement to be in addition to #1, and if so, why? After all, a good Muslim would be moral by definition too. So what is the difference that needs good morals as an added requirement?

Exactly why I think that this law has no place in our society. There is no specific benchmark that what levels are required for a candidate to be considered as adequately equipped with Islamic knowledge. A candidate might ask me Surah Bakra and it's translation etc, while he might ask the other guy Surah Ikhlas. So even though I might be a truthful and honest person, I would not be supposedly equipped with adequate Islamic knowledge.

But this is all about the pros and cons of the law itself, the thinking behind the law etc.

What I am more concerned about is how to implement that law.

But we can continue the pros and cons of the law itself if you wish.

Look, is a TB who has behead and skinned Pakistani soldiers, also of "good moral character" based on the fact that he or she can recite some Ayat?? Yes or NO, please - it will help you, it will clarify the issue - Are LeJ then not of "good moral character" ????? And those who attack and burn Churches????

Moral character is not dependent upon knowledge of Islam or some SUrahs. Those are two separate things to be fulfilled for contesting elections. So even though he maybe adequately equipped with knowledge, he won't be of good moral character.

So why is this test been placed in the law? The same reason blasphemy laws are in place, because they form the foundations of an exclusivist idea of a religion based state - because it is fundamental to building a state in which the confession of the citizen is the primary criteria for that citizenship -- In Afghanistan, the TB made beards mandatory for adult males, this too was a religious test, and of course if you could not grow a full beard you were not really a Muslim, was it a good idea?? It was the law and what it did was marginalize the Hazara, was that a good idea??

See reply to Argus Panoptes.

Let peoples relationship with their confession be one in which the state does not interfere in.

Agreed, tell this to Ansar Abbasi!

 

[Emmie]

Let us see this development from two different angles. Candidates are being asked verses and stuff now is it justified? Well yes, quite justified for article 62 is in place. Are some of the clauses of article 62 vindicated? Well, now it's a debate.

Article 62 of the constitution basically illuminates the minimum qualifications for the membership of the parliament, it sets certain criteria for the members. Some of the disqualification points in my opinion are poorly defined - for example a Muslim candidate must possess adequate knowledge of Islamic teachings, now how will you define adequate here? Who will judge that adequate knowledge? What is that minimum/adequate one should know? It also says the candidate must practice obligatory duties prescribed by Islam and must abstain from major sins - now how will returning officer ascertain that the candidate offers Namaz five times a day? The candidate observes fast in Ramadan? The candidate abstains from major sins? Sadiq and Ameen clause is also complicated, sadiq (truthful) part can be judged in few cases but how would one judge the trustworthiness of the candidate?

Anyways, I agree with @nuclearpak, the article is in place so it must be implemented. However legislature must define some of the points of the article properly, stuff which cannot be ascertain must be replaced.

 

[Jango]

Let us see this development from two different angles. Candidates are being asked verses and stuff now is it justified? Well yes, quite justified for article 62 is in place. Are some of the clauses of article 62 vindicated? Well, now it's a debate.

Article 62 of the constitution basically illuminates the minimum qualifications for the membership of the parliament, it sets certain criteria for the members. Some of the disqualification points in my opinion are poorly defined - for example a Muslim candidate must possess adequate knowledge of Islamic teachings, now how will you define adequate here? Who will judge that adequate knowledge? What is that minimum/adequate one should know? It also says the candidate must practice obligatory duties prescribed by Islam and must abstain from major sins - now how will returning officer ascertain that the candidate offers Namaz five times a day? The candidate observes fast in Ramadan? The candidate abstains from major sins? Sadiq and Ameen clause is also complicated, sadiq (truthful) part can be judged in few cases but how would one judge trustworthiness?

Anyways, I agree with @nuclearpak, the article is in place so it must be implemented. However legislature must define some of the points of the article properly, stuff which cannot be ascertain must be replaced.

ANother article in the constitution that is very vague is:

'Anybody who opposes the ideology of Pakistan is disqualified'

Now who ascertains that what is the ideology of Pakistan. Is there any proper ideology defined by the Parliament or the ECP or Supreme Court? Ansar Abbasi's ideology is 'La ilaha illalah' while another person maybe secular or liberal in his views. So first define the parameters, then judge.

As you reiterate my point, if the article is there, then implementation is right. But who judges the article in the first place?

 

[A1Kaid]

Best we look at people's education, work experience, record, and other things about their background. If remembering Islamic verses is a factor Politicians can simply study up on it and memorize it but not know the meaning of any of it. Though factors such as education, work experience, record, and background are far more important in selecting a leader to head the country.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

Exactly why I think that this law has no place in our society. There is no specific benchmark that what levels are required for a candidate to be considered as adequately equipped with Islamic knowledge. A candidate might ask me Surah Bakra and it's translation etc, while he might ask the other guy Surah Ikhlas. So even though I might be a truthful and honest person, I would not be supposedly equipped with adequate Islamic knowledge.

But this is all about the pros and cons of the law itself, the thinking behind the law etc.

What I am more concerned about is how to implement that law.

But we can continue the pros and cons of the law itself if you wish.

..............

Let us see this development from two different angles. Candidates are being asked verses and stuff now is it justified? Well yes, quite justified for article 62 is in place. Are some of the clauses of article 62 vindicated? Well, now it's a debate.

Article 62 of the constitution basically illuminates the minimum qualifications for the membership of the parliament, it sets certain criteria for the members. Some of the disqualification points in my opinion are poorly defined - for example a Muslim candidate must possess adequate knowledge of Islamic teachings, now how will you define adequate here? Who will judge that adequate knowledge? What is that minimum/adequate one should know? It also says the candidate must practice obligatory duties prescribed by Islam and must abstain from major sins - now how will returning officer ascertain that the candidate offers Namaz five times a day? The candidate observes fast in Ramadan? The candidate abstains from major sins? Sadiq and Ameen clause is also complicated, sadiq (truthful) part can be judged in few cases but how would one judge the trustworthiness of the candidate?

Anyways, I agree with @nuclearpak, the article is in place so it must be implemented. However legislature must define some of the points of the article properly, stuff which cannot be ascertain must be replaced.

Given that we are dealing with a poorly worded law, it is important that the Supreme Court (or ECP) clearly define out the tests which would be applicable in determining how is adequacy and character going to be judged. Those definitions must be specific, judgeable according to presentable evidence, and not be applicable in retrospect.

 

[saiyan0321]

Ok i am looking at news channel and i will let you know some questions....

One was asked the first kalma and he failed at it. He literally couldnt recite it and looked like a deer in head lights.

one was asked when was When was our great leader Quaid e azam was born and who wrote the Qoumi tarana?

Want to know his answer. He answered," Jinnah was born on 23 march No date and our National anthem was written by Allama Iqbal".

One was asked to recite the second Kalma and where people failed to recite the first one the second wasnt going to be heard anytime soon.


Ok Islamic questions aside but if you dont even know who created the country you want to run and Who wrote the national anthem you sing everyday in school and of the very country you are applying to be its leader then there is something terribly wrong with you?

No wonder these people have no degree. They dont know anything.

Best we look at people's education, work experience, record, and other things about their background. If remembering Islamic verses is a factor Politicians can simply study up on it and memorize it but not know the meaning of any of it. Though factors such as education, work experience, record, and background are far more important in selecting a leader to head the country.

They are failing at every question. Historic question of our country was asked too and believe me the easiest one and he failed at it....

I wonder what do these people think Quaid day is.

 

[saiyan0321]

Given that we are dealing with a poorly worded law, it is important that the Supreme Court (or ECP) clearly define out the tests which would be applicable in determining how is adequacy and character going to be judged. Those definitions must be specific, judgeable according to presentable evidence, and not be applicable in retrospect.

I think giev teh democracy a run and these problems will be found and rectified. This si being highlighted and it might get amended and Could be justified with detail. When this happens on a run mistakes and lack of explanations will be found themselves. It takes time to make a perfect constitution which is why the amendment law exists. Although i agree. Fields must be named in which a candidate needs to have information and you can have islamic information in it too. Not just for muslims but for non muslims candidate too as they will be running an area full of muslims.

You can have subjects like economical information, World information,current events,Islamic education,Pak history E.T.C Not too mention their own personal questions. These questions will give a good jist of ones education and i think plus there hsould be a psychiatrist over there like they have in the CSS exams. To know ones reaction and ones mind. These things are important as one of these jokers could become the next PM and the president.

 

[Emmie]

ANother article in the constitution that is very vague is:

'Anybody who opposes the ideology of Pakistan is disqualified'

Now who ascertains that what is the ideology of Pakistan. Is there any proper ideology defined by the Parliament or the ECP or Supreme Court? Ansar Abbasi's ideology is 'La ilaha illalah' while another person maybe secular or liberal in his views. So first define the parameters, then judge.

As you reiterate my point, if the article is there, then implementation is right. But who judges the article in the first place?

I deliberately skipped the point pertaining ideology for it's very sensitive and kinda ceremonial too, I am sure nobody will ever go to apex court for its elaboration. The only authority that can interpret the constitution is the apex court, neither the parliament nor the ECP can explicate the articles. But the problem for the apex court is that it needs grounds & interestingly half the matter of the said article is unfounded.

What I find more funny is the politicians who leave no stone unturned to pick apart the article do not dare to amend it while being in the parliament. I think now it's the high time to rectify all the odds and re-legislate what which was legislated on the basis of expediency.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

I deliberately skipped the point pertaining ideology for it's very sensitive and kinda ceremonial too, I am sure nobody will ever go to apex court for its elaboration. The only authority that can interpret the constitution is the apex court, neither the parliament nor the ECP can explicate the articles. But the problem for the apex court is that it needs grounds & interestingly half the matter of the said article is unfounded.

What I find more funny is the politicians who leave no stone unturned to pick apart the article do not dare to amend it while being in the parliament. I think now it's the high time to rectify all the odds and re-legislate what which was legislated on the basis of expediency.

Although a new constitution or massive amendments would be a good start, even if it were somehow possible, our system is such that the eternally damned doctrine of necessity will make rolls of toilet paper out of any such document, on the desirable basis of expediency. We just will not learn.

 

[Emmie]

They are failing at every question. Historic question of our country was asked too and believe me the easiest one and he failed at it....

I wonder what do these people think Quaid day is.

Look you can't complain, your constitution allows people to context who haven't been to School. Inst it ironical that you allow uneducated people to context and at the very same time expect them to know this all?

 

[Emmie]

Although a new constitution or massive amendments would be a good start, even if it were somehow possible, our system is such that the eternally damned doctrine of necessity will make rolls of toilet paper out of any such document, on the desirable basis of expediency. We just will not learn.

Considering our past record I reckon you are right, we just will never learn. But amid piles of issues a little step towards betterment can be regarded as good development. I don't know why and how but deep down I have a feel that we will be on track sooner than later.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

Considering our past record I reckon you are right, we just will never learn. But amid piles of issues a little step towards betterment can be regarded as good development. I don't know why and how but deep down I have a feel that we will be on track sooner than later.

"Past performance is no guarantee of future results"? Or may be it is, in this case? I just do not know, Sir.

 

[Jango]

These people can make stupid amendments by getting majority vote, can pass bills to get lifelong government benefits, but cant rectify more pressing problems?

Its all a case of will.

 

[Karachiite]

As long as he/she knows ayat al kursi it shows me he is of good character. He/She can be a mass murderer, rapist, thief and a corrupt person but as long they know ayat al kursi they are good in my books. Remember kids, knowing religious verses will steer the country towards development. Education, experience and all that other crap is bs.

Is Malik Ishaq running for office? According to this, he seems like a great person to contest elections.