Jamaat-e-Islami and Democratic Values

For Jamaat-e-Islami, democracy is not merely the periodic casting of votes. It is a system of consultation, accountability, lawful authority, public consent and peaceful transfer of responsibility. Jamaat’s democratic outlook is rooted in the Islamic principle of shura and the understanding that power is an amanah rather than private property.

This commitment is visible first within Jamaat itself. The organisation is not owned by a family, personality or hereditary political household. Its Ameer is elected for a defined term, its Majlis-e-Shura participates in policy formation, and organisational offices are subject to rules, consultation and accountability.

Since its establishment, Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan has been led by six elected Ameers: Maulana Maududi, Mian Tufail Muhammad, Qazi Hussain Ahmad, Syed Munawar Hasan, Siraj-ul-Haq and Hafiz Naeem ur Rehman. Leadership has passed peacefully between individuals from different regions and social backgrounds. Even the founder stepped down when his health no longer allowed him to carry the responsibility.

Jamaat’s political method was decisively clarified at the Machhi Goth convention in 1957. After detailed internal debate, it affirmed that social and political transformation would be pursued through peaceful, constitutional and democratic means. Electoral participation would remain connected with da‘wah, education, character-building and social reform.

Jamaat has never accepted indefinite martial law, whether imposed directly by the military or exercised through a civilian ruler who suspended constitutional government. It has repeatedly suffered because of this position.

When General Ayub Khan imposed martial law, Jamaat faced bans, closure of offices, confiscation of resources and the imprisonment of its leaders. Maulana Maududi was repeatedly detained, while state authorities attempted to prevent Jamaat’s public gatherings. Despite these pressures, Jamaat supported Madar-e-Millat Fatima Jinnah against Ayub Khan in the 1965 presidential election. This decision placed the restoration of representative government above political convenience.

Jamaat simultaneously demonstrated that opposition to dictatorship did not mean opposition to the state. During the 1965 war, Maulana Maududi publicly supported Pakistan’s defence and addressed the nation through Radio Pakistan. This distinction has remained central to Jamaat’s democratic politics: governments and rulers may be opposed, but the country and its people must be defended.

After the 1971 crisis, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto initially governed as a civilian Chief Martial Law Administrator. Jamaat opposed the continuation of extra-constitutional rule and later resisted the authoritarian practices of his government. Its workers and the cadres of Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba faced arrests, violence and restrictions.

At the same time, Jamaat did not adopt permanent obstruction. Professor Abdul Ghafoor Ahmad worked within Parliament to help produce the consensus Constitution of 1973. This reflected Jamaat’s democratic method: resist authoritarianism, but cooperate in every serious effort to strengthen constitutional institutions.

Following the disputed elections of 1977, Jamaat became an important part of the Pakistan National Alliance and the movement for fresh, fair elections. The Bhutto government responded with arrests, force and political repression. Jamaat’s demand remained the restoration of the people’s mandate through constitutional means.

When General Zia-ul-Haq seized power, he promised elections within 90 days. Jamaat and other opposition forces initially trusted this commitment. Jamaat representatives later entered a limited federal cabinet, believing that elections, Islamisation, education and public reform would follow.

This participation lasted only from August 1978 until April 1979, approximately nine months. When the promised democratic transition failed to materialise, Jamaat withdrew. Zia remained in power for eleven years, but Jamaat was not part of his government for that period.

Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba also remained active against anti-democratic measures during the Zia era, particularly restrictions upon student unions and representative campus politics. Its leaders and student activists faced arrests, imprisonment, expulsions and punitive action. Jamaat’s experience during this period was complex, but its limited cooperation cannot honestly be presented as endorsement of permanent military rule.

Jamaat has also maintained that political engineering and the encouragement of ethnic politics in urban Sindh during the Zia period weakened established democratic forces, especially Jamaat’s broad urban support. The rise of violent ethnic competition in Karachi damaged the city’s political culture and replaced issue-based organisation with fear and division.

The East Pakistan crisis requires similarly careful historical treatment. Jamaat opposed the breakup of Pakistan and believed that the country’s two wings should remain united through Islam, justice and constitutional brotherhood. Once Indian involvement and armed separation intensified, students associated with Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba joined Al-Badr and supported Pakistan’s forces.

Jamaat understands their decision as an attempt to defend the unity of a country they regarded as a mosque and an Islamic trust. It rejects collective accusations against all such volunteers and maintains that allegations against any person must be decided individually through credible evidence and due process. It would, however, be historically unsafe to claim that no allegation or contested account exists.

Under General Pervez Musharraf, Jamaat again became a major force against military domination. Although the 1999 coup initially produced relief among several opposition groups frustrated with the preceding civilian government, Jamaat did not accept military authority as a substitute for democracy. Under Qazi Hussain Ahmad, it developed into one of the regime’s most persistent political opponents.

Jamaat opposed Musharraf’s concentration of power, constitutional amendments, external subordination after 2001 and retention of the offices of President and Army Chief. It participated in political mobilisation for civilian government and played an active part in the movement for judicial restoration and independence.

Jamaat’s representatives have also defended democracy through elected office. Whether in Parliament, provincial government or Karachi’s local bodies, its public representatives have generally maintained a reputation for accessibility, financial integrity and respect for institutional procedure.

The movement believes that Pakistan’s consecutive governments have always failed to govern democratically. Civilian authority can also become authoritarian through rigged elections, political police, suppression of opponents, dynastic control and refusal to devolve power. Jamaat therefore opposes both military and civilian forms of authoritarianism.

Its current democratic programme includes an autonomous Election Commission, proportional representation, empowered local governments, constitutional protection for local elections, judicial independence, parliamentary approval of major international agreements and an end to political manipulation of state institutions.

Jamaat-e-Islami’s democratic tradition rests on a simple principle: no individual, family, party, military ruler or institution stands above the Constitution. Authority belongs to the people as a trust under Allah’s sovereignty, and it must be exercised through law, consultation and accountability.

For Jamaat, democracy is not separate from Islam. Shura, justice, public consent, rule of law and accountability are among the means through which Islamic political morality becomes visible in collective life.