Pakistani Rulers and Council of Islamic Ideology

In states based on religious nationalism, guiding religious discourse and decisions is extremely important for the state. As national identity is based on religion, religious decisions have widespread implications, affecting the economy, social relations and political set-up.

Looking at Iran and Saudi Arabia, we see a religious establishment closely aligned with the state, safeguarding its interests. In Iran, religious establishment controls the state so state interests are well-protected. Since the Revolution, Iranian religious establishment has changed its religious preferences many times keeping in view state needs. Religious establishment has even rejected marjas and Imam Khomeini's own family to protect what it perceives as interests of the state (See Khamenei vs. Khomeini).

Family planning is just one example of prioritization of state needs over religious rules. After Revolution, Imam Khomeini called for more children so that there is a bigger Islamic nation. However, by the end of the 1980s, the state had realized that it cannot cope with the population explosion resulting from this policy. So, the religious establishment changed its stance and started propagating family planning and this resulted in the most successful family planning project in human history.

The election of current Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was another example of how loyalty to the state was preferred over religious credentials. Ali Khamenei was not a Marja or Grand Ayatullah at the time of his election as Supreme Leader and Iranian constitution required the Supreme Leader to be one. The religious establishment had the option of electing a Marja or Grand Ayatollah but it elected Khamenei and went for the more problematic course of amending the constitution to make Khamenei's lesser religious credentials acceptable/legal. 

In Saudi Arabian religious establishment has been so close to the monarchical state that members of the establishment have been called bureaucrats. In the 1990s, when there were protest and misgiving in Saudi Arabia about the presence of the US forces, religious establishment supported the state wholeheartedly. This was the main reason why the state was able to defeat the opposition to its rule and policies. Previously, religious establishment supported state against puritanical Ikhwans in the 1920s despite Ikhwans being very religious. Again, in the 1960s, it supported state when television was first introduced in the kingdom, despite its own misgivings and protests in the kingdom, in which even a prince (nephew of the king) was killed. 

Pakistan is perhaps the only state based on religious nationalism that does not have a religious establishment. There is only one body, Council of Islamic Ideology (CII), of less than twenty members that can be termed as state's representative on matters pertaining to religion. As in the case of the countries discussed above, the purpose of this small religious establishment/CII  is to advise the government on religious injunctions and to vet laws passed by the Parliament. However, as is clear from above, one of the unwritten purposes of the religious establishments is to defend the state policies from an attack from the right. Like in other states based on religious nationalism, CII has largely supported state's decisions, However, more recently, CII  has been ambiguous in supporting state policies. In the last one year, it has given three decisions that are completely at odds with the vision of the state. Following are the decisions in brief:

1. In September, CII decided the DNA cannot be the primary evidence in rape cases (See CII rules out DNA as primary evidence in rape cases). This was completely out of tune with international practice and with the trend of increased protection of women. 
2. In March, CII decided that first wife's permission is not necessary for second marriage. This was a major concession won by Pakistani women back in the 1960s (See First wife's nod for 2nd marriage un-Islamic: Council of Islamic Ideology). No major political party supports this decision. In fact, this issue was not even on the radar of religious parties.
3. Again in March, CII decided that there is no minimum age for marriage. Children can be married at any age. The only issue is the consummation of marriage and that should be delayed until puberty of both parties (See Laws prohibiting underage marriage not Islamic: Council of Islamic Ideology ). This is again a major step backwards. According to CII decision, children can be married in their cribs and marriage can be consummated in early teens. 

Why this is so? And what is the solution?

The recent decisions of the CII can be seen in terms of short-term politics. The CII is currently chaired by Maulana Sherani, who is also the provincial head of Jamiat Ulema Islam-Fazal-ur-Rehman Group (JUI-F) (See CII Chairman Profile). Since the May 2013 elections, JUI-F pressure was rejected by the Federal Government headed by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in at least three areas. First, JUI-F wanted Nawaz Sharif to form a coalition government with them in the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province. Nawaz Sharif rejected their overtures and allowed the majority party, Tehreek-e-Insaf, to form a government in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa. Second, JUI-F wanted to join both the central/federal and Balochistan government. While Nawaz Sharif invited them to join federal government, he accepted the request of Baloch nationalists (heading the coalition government in Balochistan) not to be forced to accept JUI-F as a coalition partner. Finally, Nawaz Sharif didn't give importance to JUI-F chief Fazal-ur-Rehman in his negotiations with Taliban. All these factors might have forced JUI-F to make life difficult for Nawaz Sharif by coming up with such decisions. However, this theory flounders when we take into consideration the fact that three JUI-F members joined the federal cabinet just a month ago (See JUI-F Represented: Three new ministers take oath).

Source: Slice of cake: JUI-F demands share in Balochistan cabinet

A more plausible explanation of what is happening is the change in the chairman's education. Maulana Sherani is only the second person appointed as chairman CII, who does not have a Western styWestern-style Earlier Maulana Kasur Niazi remained chairman CII for only four months in the mid-1990s. However, Maulana Niazi had a much more pluralist outlook and criticized conservative ulema all his life and was in turn criticized by them. So, from 1962 to 2010, when Maulana Sherani became chairman CII was headed by men who were not only scholars of Islam but also had  knowledge of the modern world and requirements of the state. Maulana Sherani was first one to break this trend. 

The next logical question is how Maulana was able to break the trend. The answer lies in the ineptness of the last government. while chairmanship of CII had been used as political largesse to be distributed to supporters before, it was never given before to traditional ulema. This was the first time a traditional alim was made chairman CII and the state and the people of Pakistan will suffer the consequences. 

It's time Pakistani rulers realize that chairman CII is not like the chairman of a steel mill or president of a university. It is a much more important position. Without a religious establishment, this is the only institution that protects the state from any attack from the right or the left. When national identity of  a state is based on religion, it's better for that state and its rulers to give importance to religious institutions. 

Even before these decisions, there were calls to abolish the CII (See DNA Controversy: Abolition of Council of Islamic Ideology demanded). However, as discussed above, state needs CII. A far more easier step and the right step is to appoint such members and chairmen who have a more anti-traditional and pluralist outlook. More women members will definitely decrease the bias and misogyny that one can see in the latest decisions of CII. It is worthwhile to mention that the constitution stipulates that there should be at least one woman member of CII and the only member of present CII died in August last year. So, these decisions are illegal as CII is incomplete according to the Constitution of Pakistan.