In 1993, the Supreme Court of Pakistan issued a landmark ruling prohibiting students from engaging in political activities. The decision came as part of the case M. Ismail Qureshi and others v. M. Awais Qasim, Secretary General, Islami Jamiat Tulba, Pak, and three others. The court mandated that students must sign an affidavit pledging to abstain from "indulgence in politics" as a condition for university admission. Those who didn't comply couldn't even get through the university doors, and anyone breaking this promise would be expelled immediately. This decision quieted the voices of student politics, a silence that echoes through the corridors of educational institutions even today, over thirty years later.
But let's ponder for a moment what it means to remove politics from the halls of learning. How can a society truly flourish and embrace a spectrum of ideas if its young minds are barred from engaging in political discourse? Could this not hinder the cultivation of future leaders and engaged citizens crucial for a thriving nation?
The Golden Era of Student Unions
The inception of Pakistan itself was heavily influenced by student movements. The Muslim Students' Federation (MSF), which was closely associated with the Muslim League, played an active role in achieving Pakistan. Jinnah acknowledged the essential contribution of the students towards creating Pakistan in the following words: "The thought that is naturally uppermost in my mind is the support and help that the movement for the achievement of Pakistan received from the student community." Post-independence, various other student political organizations emerged. The most prominent among them was the Islami-Jamiat-e-Talba (IJT), formed in October 1947. The 1950s saw the rise of two kinds of student organizations: left-leaning Marxist parties like the Democratic Students Federation (DSF) and religious right-wing parties like Anjuman Talba-e-Islam (ATI). Most student organizations have always been closely associated with a political party, and MSF and IJT are two such examples.
Some of the most prominent politicians in Pakistan, including Javed Hashmi, Liaquat Baloch, and Raza Rabbani, are products of student unions.
Historically, these organizations participated in union elections with enthusiasm and vigor. Union politics allowed students to organize themselves around ideologies instead of identities, fostering a culture of debates, dialogue, and competitive spirit. Participation in union elections provided valuable insights into democratic processes. Students learned to navigate through success and failure, fostering tolerance, coexistence, and the ability to collaborate with adversaries. This environment nurtured democratic norms and cultivated politically adept leaders for the nation. Some of the most prominent politicians in Pakistan, including Javed Hashmi, Liaquat Baloch, and Raza Rabbani, were products of student unions.
A significant aspect of union activities included debates, declamation contests, and music concerts, which promoted academic excellence and enhanced students' organizational, interpersonal, and communication skills. Besides, student unions were formally recognized bodies that sometimes had their own allocated budget. The office bearers were a part of university syndicate bodies, and the administration was compelled to involve them in decision-making processes. This practice allowed the advocacy and protection of students' interests and functioned as a wall against arbitrary imposition of administrative policies. An example of successful advocacy included the initiation of a shuttle service for Karachi University students with pick and drop points across the city.
Furthermore, student politics played a crucial role in national political movements. This role included the fierce opposition to the West Pakistan University Ordinance of 1962, the Tashkent Declaration with India in 1966, and the recognition of Bangladesh in 1972.
The Bhutto era saw the peak of student politics as the socialist prime minister fancied the idea of unions and student empowerment. During this period, students were integrated into the university governance bodies. Bhutto's consultation with student leaders before he left for the Simla Conference of 1972 illustrates how powerful they had become. However, this was the time when the rot began to penetrate student politics.
The Decline of Student Politics and the Supreme Court’s Intervention
Observing the significant influence wielded by student unions, mainstream political parties began patronizing various student groups to safeguard their interests. This patronage often manifested in significant financial support during elections. Some political parties went a step further by exerting influence over university administrations to favor their preferred candidates.
When the court deliberated on the matter, it extended this affidavit to universities across Pakistan through an interim order in 1992. A year later, after observing the outcomes of the new policy, the court made the affidavit requirement indefinite through its final judgment, emphasizing the positive reception it received from society at large.
Certain organizations attempted to resist this trend, leading to armed conflicts. Consequently, university campuses became arenas of polarization among students. This polarization escalated to violence with the introduction of automatic weapons following the onset of the Afghan War. The resultant violence and disruptions in academic sessions raised concerns among stakeholders, including parents and teachers, who disapproved of this new culture. Exploiting this discontent, Zia first imposed a ban on student unions in Sindh in 1979, later extending it nationwide in 1984.
A few years later, thanks to the efforts of Benazir Bhutto, the ban was lifted. However, the matter eventually came under the scrutiny of the Supreme Court. The backdrop of the Ismail Qureshi case involves the introduction of an affidavit in Balochistan by the Principal of the Law College, compelling students to abstain from political activities. When the court deliberated on the matter, it extended this affidavit to universities across Pakistan through an interim order in 1992. A year later, after observing the outcomes of the new policy, the court made the affidavit requirement indefinite through its final judgment, emphasizing the positive reception it received from society at large. Once again, the pretext was violence.
Flaws in the Apex Court’s Reasoning
The court justified its decision by asserting that while liberty and freedom of expression are fundamental rights, they do not extend to infringing upon the similar rights of others, including students, teachers, and parents. As a result, universities across Pakistan continue to incorporate the restrictive undertaking into their admissions criteria to this day. However, such a blanket ban contradicts the fundamental purpose of student unions: engagement in political activities. In this regard, the judgment does not outrightly outlaw student unions in a theoretical sense but impedes their functioning.
While addressing the fundamental rights to freedom of expression and liberty, the court failed to consider that "indulgence in politics" per se does not impede others' rights and that not all students involved in politics are violent. More importantly, the court failed to consider the centrality of Article 17 (1) of the Constitution. The right to association and form unions provided in this Article can only be restricted if the restriction is reasonable, imposed by law, and in the interest of the sovereignty or integrity of Pakistan, public order, or morality. However, all these conditions were not fulfilled when the prohibition was enacted. The imposition of the affidavit was a blatant encroachment of the court in the legislative domain.
The court justified its prohibition by pointing to the overall positive response received during the interim implementation of its proposed measures.
The Impact of Removing Politics from Education
The decision was a major blow to the students' interests across the country. For one, it has made university administrations immune from accountability, as the affidavit has become a tool to suppress and silence students, even when they bring forward legitimate and essential concerns. This impunity has resulted in the misuse of powers by administrations in numerous ways, including financial misconduct, nepotism, and harassment, especially of female students.
The lack of training and awareness manifests itself in incidents like the lynching of Mashal Khan, who was falsely accused of blasphemy by University of Mardan students, and the physical altercation involving former Prime Minister Imran Khan during the Musharraf era at Punjab University.
The leadership void in the national political landscape is a testament to the detrimental effects of banning student politics. The lack of political training and experience of ordinary students has allowed the continued dominance of privileged elites and dynastic families over national leadership. The absence of grassroots-level politics within student wings affiliated with different political parties has hindered the development of democratic values and norms within party structures, leading to a lack of genuine representation and perpetuating a disconnected political system.
Additionally, the lack of training and awareness manifests itself in incidents like the lynching of Mashal Khan, who was falsely accused of blasphemy by University of Mardan students, and the physical altercation involving former Prime Minister Imran Khan during the Musharraf era at Punjab University. Such occurrences directly result from the absence of political discourse and the culture of tolerance fostered during the era of student unions.
Ethno-nationalistic politics is also on the rise with the downfall of student unions. Previously, critical thinking and debates allowed students to form alliances across ethnicity and language. Thus, politics was centered on ideologies. Their lack has resulted in identity-based affiliations,
resulting in the growth of organizations and councils framed along ethnic lines. These include the Pakhtun Students' Federation (PkSF), the Baloch Students' Organisation (BSO), the Jiye Sindh Students' Federation, and the All-Pakistan Muhajir Students' Organization (APMSO). Such organizations are primarily active in areas where certain ethnic groups are concentrated or ethnic rivalries are more pronounced. The growth in informal ethnic politics results from diminished political maturity among students. The lack of critical thinking prevents informed choices as students tilt toward more simplistic forms of association that revolve around identity. Identity politics has devastating implications for the country as a whole because it triggers ethnic confrontation, which, in many instances, translates into violence.
In the 1990s, Karachi was filled with instances of Pashtun and Mahajir conflicts that resulted in a deteriorating law and order situation in the city. This could explain why student organizations such as IJT and Progressive Students' Collective argue that the ban on student unions has not decreased violence but exacerbated it.
Despite the ban, most mainstream political parties have always supported the restoration of student politics. In 2008, during his inaugural speech after becoming the prime minister, Yusuf Raza Gilani announced the revival of student unions. However, that never happened. Similarly, in 2017, the Senate passed a resolution calling for the same. That did not happen either. One could argue that most political parties only make such promises to appease the youth while at heart they resent student politics. However, the problem is deeper than that. The verdict from the Apex Court renders these political endeavors futile, for in the presence of this affidavit, the revival of student unions remains not more than a distant dream. Hence, the burden of resurrection falls squarely upon the entity that orchestrated its demise.
A Call for Restoring Voice
The former Chief Justice of Pakistan, Afzal Zullah, and his associates made a grave error in banning student unions, stripping the youth of their ability to think critically and silencing the voices of promising minds who were to be the future leaders of the country. In the Ismail Qureshi case, the court asserted that keeping in view the "nature of the subject matter….we have taken the decision to keep the doors of wisdom and experience open," and the final orders "assed (in individual cases) would have to be kept "under review from time" to time by the Supreme Court."
Here, the court alluded towards the implication that the prohibition was temporary and that it might reconsider its decision in the future. Given that the pretext for the ban, violence, has only intensified over the years, it is the right time for the court to rectify its error and give the students back their fundamental right to association.
It is said the judiciary wields neither purse nor sword but merely judgment. The post-2007 judiciary in Pakistan cannot plead weakness, as it draws its power from the trust of the people. Thus, it is time that it serves those people and delivers justice.