Disfranchisement in Pakistan
I'm not sure whether this decision is good or bad.
This is a really tough one for me. Here are a few of my thoughts.
This is exactly the kind of judgment I don't want our Supreme Court making. "You went to Bible college, which only qualifies you to teach Sunday school, so you're unqualified to stand for public office." Not only is it bending or creating the rules to suit the court's agenda, but it tends to leave people highly disgruntled, and the last thing you want during the course of a war against terrorism is disgruntled Pakistanis, particularly when they see steps to rein them in as an extension of American imperialism or some other such nonsense.
I can't, however, disagree with the decision itself. Do I think that madrassa students/instructors have any qualifications to stand for office? Not particularly. Do I think that they understand international, or even national, politics? Not particularly. Do I think that they have the kind of business and economic skills needed to qualify them to make important decisions within the framework of elected office? Probably not. So, on that level, I think that the appraisal of the Pakistani judges is correct; however, if their government is structured in any way shape or form like ours is, it's not their jurisdiction to decide who can and can't run for office.
Even for me, it's controversial. As far as I'm concerned, judges shouldn't be making decisions like this. The decision may be correct in theory, but I can't help but wonder what the fallout from such a decision will be.
Pakistan's Supreme Court has issued a ruling that will, in effect, bar students from many religious schools (madrassas) from holding public office.
It has said that unregistered madrassas do not teach a curriculum suitable to prepare students for mainstream life.
Hundreds of successful candidates backed by religious parties in August's local elections could now face the prospect of disqualification.
More than half of Pakistan's madrassas are currently unregistered.
The court observed that most madrassas were managed by the private sector and were not affiliated with any recognised university or educational board.
And it said that these madrassas had made no efforts to include the subjects of Urdu, English and Pakistan studies in their curricula despite repeated requests by the authorities.
This left the students unfit for mainstream jobs as they could only work as teachers or researchers at the madrassas, the court ruled.
This is a really tough one for me. Here are a few of my thoughts.
This is exactly the kind of judgment I don't want our Supreme Court making. "You went to Bible college, which only qualifies you to teach Sunday school, so you're unqualified to stand for public office." Not only is it bending or creating the rules to suit the court's agenda, but it tends to leave people highly disgruntled, and the last thing you want during the course of a war against terrorism is disgruntled Pakistanis, particularly when they see steps to rein them in as an extension of American imperialism or some other such nonsense.
I can't, however, disagree with the decision itself. Do I think that madrassa students/instructors have any qualifications to stand for office? Not particularly. Do I think that they understand international, or even national, politics? Not particularly. Do I think that they have the kind of business and economic skills needed to qualify them to make important decisions within the framework of elected office? Probably not. So, on that level, I think that the appraisal of the Pakistani judges is correct; however, if their government is structured in any way shape or form like ours is, it's not their jurisdiction to decide who can and can't run for office.
Even for me, it's controversial. As far as I'm concerned, judges shouldn't be making decisions like this. The decision may be correct in theory, but I can't help but wonder what the fallout from such a decision will be.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home