Sovereignty belongs to a sovereign and there is no sovereignty without a sovereign.
Sovereignty has its own definition an its own rules: it stays only on somebody concrete, responsive and responsible like a learned human being on the summit of a responsible and concrete institution-therefore all the chest beating about the masses being sovereign Â» is merely political noise, as wherever few hundred people get together, they create a mass but they do not embody any kind of sovereignty. The Â« masses Â», therefore, is not something concrete with reference to any rational definition of space and time. A sovereign looks after the jurisdiction of the country and nation as long as he is in good health and after that he invests another person of integrity, ability, education and responsibility with the sovereignty of the nation. A president is anybody who presides over some proceedings or some organization and by definition is not a sovereign. A prime minister is somebody who is head of a cabinet who administers a country and by definition is not a sovereign.
The sovereignty: This term has been Â« entirely misapplied and used by people who are clueless about what it means Â». When a whole people are sovereign, it means that in effect nobody is sovereign; it merely refers to their ability to elect or select a sovereign through their decisions through some sane process.
As to the sovereignty of an Allah or God; well, it is merely a religious and legal fiction: Pakistan`s constitution vests sovereignty over the entire universe in Allah Almighty without actually defining the entity, and without any authority to vest such sovereignty of the entire universe, a non-workable constitutional fiction in Pakistan`s context. While in the theory of Pakistani-style Western democracy, the people of Pakistan who form the Pakistani nation " are supposed to be the sovereign, there is a clear conflict here. Surely that must mean that the amorphous masses are subject to the will of a concept of an Almighty who according to our constitution is sovereign; a legal fiction based upon another fiction " a slippery slope, indeed.
Who knows the will of an unseen Allah/God`s will then! Who translates the Koran and who explains it, would then claim to be the a secret sharer in the sovereignty of an Allah/God, and when there are more than one such religious scholars who have the real and secret knowledge of the intent of the Allah/God, then we have more than one sovereigns and more than nation then ". And there is no way of confirming the opinion of a mullah/scholar as to what Allah/God really meant from an Ayah or Surah which were ascribed to Him some 1500 years ago !
As a Muslim and a patriot, I believe that such concepts of "sovereignty` would be nothing else but a curse. It is a question of delusions versus sanity. If the Pakistan I want is a tolerant, egalitarian and progressive nation that is respected in the comity of nations and not feared, then I have to choose a real sovereign. This business of chest thumping is the exclusive preserve of pauper nations and it is time we realised that we owe our poor much more than some fake and fleeting sense of "national sovereignty`. The real sovereign has a responsibility to his nation and people to secure for them those irreducible minimums that have been promised to them in the name of a social welfare state, which incidentally is a sovereign`s constitutional obligation
The real sovereign has always been and still is a monarch, a constitutional monarch in our age. Those who appreciate that a proud and sovereign Pakistan would be much better scenario, must think of building an institution of constitutional monarchy in Pakistan, for the survival and development of Pakistan, indeed.
By Humaniste International