FOLLOWING its ‘edict’ on DNA testing in cases of rape, sections of civil society have reacted strongly and challenged the very raison d’être of the Council of Islamic Ideology. In Karachi on Friday, speakers at a group discussion demanded the CII’s abolition, with some well-known crusaders for women’s rights accusing the council of hindering the work of other state institutions. Others claimed that various governments had exploited the body for political reasons, and demanded that it be given “improved scholarly shape”. Formed as a constitutional body under the basic law of 1962, the council went through a change in nomenclature in the 1973 Constitution and was tasked, under Article 230, to advise federal and provincial legislatures, besides the president and governors, on whether or not a given law was repugnant to Islam.
Since the council’s formation half a century ago, radical changes have occurred in state and society in Pakistan. The media and civil society today are far more vibrant and unorthodox in approach and content than ever before, and the people better informed and more conscious of their rights. Quite appropriately — because of the diversity of ideas they have access to, thanks to the greater reach of information technology and social media — the people think they do not necessarily need seminary advice to come to conclusions about matters that concern them. In fact, as the results of last month’s general elections show, the Pakistani people attach far more importance to those they can vote for rather than those that are nominated or wish to make pronouncements from claimed vantage points.
It is true that the CII is an advisory body, but — because of its dictatorial baggage since the ’80s — its pronouncements tend to acquire an air of moral authority, as if its edicts constitute the ultimate in what Islamic dos and don’ts are. In this way, the CII has appropriated a role that rightly belongs to parliament. Today, almost all mainstream religious parties are represented in the federal and provincial assemblies. This equips the legislatures with the moral authority to make and unmake all laws. As Iqbal says in his Reconstruction, it is parliament which represents ijma in modern form. As regards the functions of the CII, if such a body is at all necessary, it would be far more suitable to create a parliamentary committee consisting of members already in the house. As a speaker pointed out in the Karachi seminar, the CII is today working virtually as an office of a religious party.