A HANDFUL of naysayers have forced the government to rescind Atif Mian`s appointment on the Economic Advisory Council. We claim to follow the Quaid-iAzam but lack the temerity to say no to persecution.

The Quaid, requested by `scholars` to kick out Sir Zafarullah, asked, `do we have a substitute?` Likewise in the Ayub era, M.M. Ahmed could not be removed from the Planning Commission.

Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui of the Islamabad High Court pronounced a landmark judgment about declaration of f aith before joining service. Lest his judgment be misconstrued, he, at the outset emphasised the minorities` constitutional rights to religious freedom and protection of life and property. It is unfortunate that some unscrupulous elements exploit religion to persecute minorities.

Some of these elements were exposed in the 1954 Justice Munir-Kiani Commission Report on the Anti-Ahmedi Riots of Punjab in 1953. This report, inter alia, elucidates Jinnah`s vision of an Islamic state.

In his address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan on Aug 11, 1947, the Quaid stated that the state shall make no distinction between the citizens on the grounds of f aith.

In 1925, while discussing the Indian Finance Bill 1925, he declared on the Legislative Assembly floor: `Whether you are a Muslim or a Hindu, for God`s sake do not import the discussion of communal matters into this House, and degrade this Assembly, which we desire should become a real national parliament. Set an example to the outside world and our people.

The Quaid visualised the creation of an Islamic republic, but not a theocracy. A K Brohi in his book, The Fundamental Law of Pakistan discussed at length what a theocracy is. The Munir-Kiani Report makes some poignant observations. It says: `Most important of the parties who are clamouring for enforcement of the three anti-Ahmedi demands on religious grounds waere all against the idea of an Islamic state.

We mix religion with politics. Our constitution has a long list of Islamic rights.

But they are circumscribed with the proviso that they are not enforceable through courts. Our law of evidence lays down conditions to qualify as a competent witness but a proviso makes any witness acceptable if a competent one is not available.

Ali Zulfikar Bhullo Larkana