Dual Nationality and Conflict of Interest

InsafianPTI

Minister (2k+ posts)


images

Dual Nationality and Conflict of Interest




Rai Muhammad Saleh Azam

The issue of dual nationality, which has been brought to the forefront of national debate by the Pakistan Supreme Court’s recent disqualification of a few civil servants and elected representatives holding dual nationality and the PPP government’s countering move to pass a law allowing dual nationality holders to hold public office, has raised important and fundamental questions that need to be debated and understood.

Three principal arguments are being put forth by the advocates of dual nationality: (i) firstly, that overseas Pakistanis contribute to Pakistan’s economy through remittances and, therefore, should have the right to seek and hold public office in Pakistan; (ii) secondly, if it is desirable that overseas Pakistanis should be allowed to vote in Pakistan’s general elections, they should also be allowed to hold public office in Pakistan; and (iii) thirdly, holding of dual nationality does not affect the loyalty of a Pakistani citizen to the Pakistani State.

Let us consider all three arguments individually.

The argument that overseas Pakistanis contribute to Pakistan’s economy through remittances and, therefore, should be permitted to hold public office in Pakistan is self-defeating. Firstly, not all overseas Pakistanis are foreign nationals or even dual nationals. According to the Overseas Pakistanis Foundation, of the approximately 6.8 million overseas Pakistanis, more than 3 million are working in the Middle East on work visas with Pakistani passports in countries that do not permit dual nationality. According to the State Bank of Pakistan, of the approximately $12 billion remitted by overseas Pakistanis in 2011, the bulk, approximately $7.2 billion (or 60%), was remitted by overseas Pakistanis in the Middle East who do not hold dual nationality. First and second-generation overseas Pakistanis who are permanently settled Europe and the North America and hold either foreign nationality or dual nationality are unlikely to seek public office in Pakistan. In fact, to do so would entail them abandoning their foreign jobs and foreign lives, which they fought long and hard to secure, and coming to Pakistan for at least the medium term in order to seek public office. This would mean that they would no longer be in a position to contribute to the Pakistani economy through foreign remittances and, therefore, their foreign nationality would be of no use to them or Pakistan. Third generation overseas Pakistanis have only a distant interest in Pakistan and are unlikely to ever seek public office in Pakistan. In India, for example, non-resident Indians do not have the right to vote or hold public office. Israel, which depends on the support of the Jewish lobby in the Unites States for its survival, does not permit anyone who is not an Israeli citizen to vote or hold public office, even if they are pro-Israeli American Jews.

Secondly, those overseas Pakistanis who are passionate enough to sacrifice their lucrative careers, higher standards of living, comfortable lifestyles and greater security, and migrate to Pakistan in order to seek public office and serve Pakistan, would have enough passion to renounce their foreign nationality if it prevented them from holding public office in Pakistan. And if they are unwilling to renounce their foreign nationality, then would not a suspecting Pakistani public be justified in questioning their intentions of seeking public office in Pakistan in the first instance?

The second argument is that if it is desirable to give overseas Pakistanis the right to vote, why should they not then be allowed to hold public office in Pakistan? Again, as previously stated, not all overseas Pakistanis hold foreign nationality. So giving overseas Pakistani the right to vote means, first and foremost, those overseas Pakistanis who only hold Pakistani citizenship and who, for whatever reason, cannot return to Pakistan to cast their votes in general elections. Secondly, extending the right to vote to those overseas Pakistanis holding dual nationality may also be desirable but it cannot and should not be linked to the right to hold public office. The right to cast a vote and the right to hold public office are two separate things. Millions of young Pakistanis between the ages of 18 and 25 can vote but are barred by the Pakistani Constitution from being elected to the National or Provincial Assemblies until they reach the age of 25. Likewise, millions of Pakistanis under the age of 35 vote in general elections but are themselves constitutionally disqualified from becoming Prime Minister until they reach the age of 35. In the Unites States, millions of Americans vote in the Presidential elections but only those American citizens can become President who were born in the United States. In Pakistan, like elsewhere in the world, nationality and age are the only criteria for casting votes but the criteria for holding public office is much higher and anyone seeking it must conform to greater standards of propriety and conduct. In Pakistan, as is elsewhere in the world, a convicted person undergoing a jail term may cast his vote but is constitutionally barred from holding public office. So the right to vote has nothing to do whatsoever with the right to hold public office.

Now to the final argument given by the proponents of dual nationality: that holding of dual nationality is not a test of loyalty to Pakistan. Before dual nationality can even be put through the litmus test of loyalty to the State, it fails an even lesser test, which is widely practiced in the corporate sector: that of “conflict of interest.” A conflict of interest is said to exist when an individual has multiple, often competing, interests, one or more of which could potentially corrupt and compromise the individual’s ability to act in the best interests of one as opposed to the other. Conflicts of interest are not permitted in the business world. The vast majority of employers don’t permit employees to hold dual jobs. Indeed most non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements even forbid ex-employees from joining rival companies for a specified period after leaving employment. A major law firm in Karachi once dismissed a female associate on the ground of conflict of interest because she married the partner of a rival law firm. If such is the case with matters of business, it should be more so with matters of State.

In most countries, acquiring nationality entails taking an oath of allegiance and loyalty to that state. This is particularly true of the United States and the United Kingdom, which are among the few countries that allow dual nationality, and where the majority of Pakistani dual nationality holders are from. The US Oath of Allegiance, for example, requires the oath taker to, inter alia, “renounce... all allegiance to any…foreign state” and to “bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law.” There is an inherent conflict of interest in pledging allegiance to two countries at the same time. If the national interests of the two countries are at cross-purposes to each other: as Pakistan and the United States are vis--vis the Afghanistan conflict, drone attacks, cross-border raids, NATO supplies, then whose interests does a dual national serve? What if two countries of which a person is a dual national of go to war with each other and introduce the draft? Whose side would such dual national fight? It may have less of an affect if the dual national holds no public office, but if the dual national is a Parliamentarian, the Interior Minister or Ambassador of one country, the conflict of interest becomes amplified and may compromise national security and national interests.

We don’t need to look very far for examples of conflict of interest in state affairs that resulted in undermining national security and national interests. Pakistan’s founder, Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, refused to allow Lord Mountbatten to become Governor-General of both India and Pakistan, which Mountbatten desired, because Jinnah felt that Mountbatten could not and would not protect the interests of Pakistan if he was also protecting the interests of India. This was due to the fact that both countries were at cross-purposes to each other on a number of critical issues, including Kashmir and the division of resources. Indeed, Pakistan lost the opportunity to take Kashmir in 1948 due to an inherent conflict of interest situation at the hands of its then Commander-in-Chief, General Douglas Gracey. Despite being the Pakistan Army’s C-in-C, Gracey was first and foremost a British Army officer and owed his allegiance to the British Crown. In 1948, he did not send Pakistani troops to Kashmir and refused to obey a direct order given in this regard by his superior, Quaid-e-Azam, then Governor-General of Pakistan. Indeed, Gracey went further and reported Jinnah’s intentions to the British Crown, which passed on the information to Mountbatten who, in turn, informed Nehru, who ordered Indian troops into Kashmir and pre-empted the Pakistan Army by landing troops in Srinagar by air. Had this not happened, Pakistan would have taken Kashmir Valley. So this was the grave price Pakistan paid and is paying to this day, for having a foreigner, who owed his allegiance to a foreign state, in a position of power and trust, who abused that power and betrayed that trust due to a conflict of interest.

All public officeholders – be they elected representatives, civil servants, armed forces personnel or judges – must have all their stakes in the country in which they hold positions of power, privilege and trust. We want our leaders to have their livelihoods, children and properties in Pakistan. Only then will they have the will to make Pakistan a place worth living for themselves, for their children and us. So when Pakistan wins, they win; when Pakistan loses, they lose; when Pakistan prospers, they prosper; and when Pakistan suffers, they suffer. Only then can they serve Pakistan with sincerity. Sadly, the extent of loyalty to the Pakistani State of dual nationality holders in Pakistan’s Parliament may be gauged by their insistence on retaining their dual nationalities at all costs. Clearly, for these dual nationals, the citizenship of a foreign state is more valuable than the privilege of being a member of Pakistan’s Parliament. So much so that they are willing to enact a law, even attempt to amend the Constitution, to preserve their allegiance to foreign states. This indicates where their true loyalty and interests lie.

A study carried out by one air force revealed that fighter pilots who had parachutes and the option of ejecting were less likely to fight to the last to save their planes than bomber pilots who did not have parachutes or ejection seats. The study also revealed that many fighter pilots, who encountered technical malfunctions in the air, could have saved their aircraft if they had spent a few more seconds trying to resolve the problems but didn’t exercise that option because they had the safer option of ejecting. Indeed, a proposal to install escape hatches, ejection seats and parachutes in the cockpits of passenger airliners was rejected because it was felt that airline pilots would not fight to the last to save their aircraft and the lives of their passengers, who neither have ejections seats or parachutes. In the context of the State, dual nationality is like a bail-out option for those at the helm of the State. Giving dual nationality to leaders and public officeholders is akin to giving ejection seats to airline pilots. Would you feel safer in an airliner in which the pilots have ejection seats but the passengers do not? Or would you rather have the pilots in the same boat as yourself? In the latter case, at least they would fight to the last to save themselves, the plane, your fellow passengers, and you. (the best part):)

http://www.thepakistaninationalist.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/dual-nationality-and-conflict-of.html
 
Last edited:

United4Pak

Minister (2k+ posts)
I personally feel that dual nationality shouldn't be allowed to people who have authority in Pakistan as it really is conflict of interest.
 

Wajdan

MPA (400+ posts)
I've been to OLDHAM MELA today in UK (08 JULY 2012). Ibrar ul HAQ was invited to perform there. Before starting performance, He mentioned FEW things, ONE of them is that He supports Dual Nationality BILL. His words must have been recorded by ARY tv (ARY TV was giving media coverage). These can be his personal views and MUST not represent PTI policies.

I personally oppose this bill.
 
Last edited:

InsafianPTI

Minister (2k+ posts)
yes he is wrong, definitely wrong, maybe he is trying to make his foreign friends happy.
Although I like him, I think he is wrong.
IK has clarified this in one of his interview, PTI is against this.

so what was the response of the people on that?
did they like his stance?
I've been to OLDHAM MELA today in UK (08 JULY 2012). Ibrar ul HAQ was invited to perform there. Before starting performance, He mentioned FEW things, ONE of them is that He supports Dual Nationality BILL. His words must have been recorded by ARY tv (ARY TV was giving media coverage). These can be his personal views and MUST not represent PTI policies.

I personally oppose this bill.
 

M javed

Banned
It must be admitted that a dual national in a public office will be like a pilot who will prefer to save his own life rather than to protect the lives of his fellow passengers and the aeroplane.

It will be better and advisable that dual nationality be banned for all as it raises many other national issues such as plight of capital and skilled labour and professionals from the country. It is universally recognisable a principle that the parent country deserves more to the services and wealth which originally generated it from its soil and indigenous resources.You are naturally disloyal to the womb who gave you your natural birth just for more money and better facilities and at the same time ignoring the fact that you are going to become a second class citizen on the other end where the eyes will see you as an alien. If you so endeavour, you must bear the consequences whatsoever bad or good and you must not be allowed to juggle back and forth with your shaky, whimsical, dreadful or diabolic attitude.

The most painful fact is: this is used as a safety tactic not by simple duals but by those who by design would plunder the mother-land , violate its laws and then fly out to a safe heaven in a foreign land. This spoilt and illegitimate child must not be allowed a space to foul play neither against its own nor against any other nation or land.
 
Last edited:
IK speaks against bill already
I've been to OLDHAM MELA today in UK (08 JULY 2012). Ibrar ul HAQ was invited to perform there. Before starting performance, He mentioned FEW things, ONE of them is that He supports Dual Nationality BILL. His words must have been recorded by ARY tv (ARY TV was giving media coverage). These can be his personal views and MUST not represent PTI policies.

I personally oppose this bill.
 

UKPakistani

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
At the risk of sounding like a parrot, as a dual national, I strongly feel that there should be NO dual nationals in Public Office, Higher Ranks in the Military, Civil Service, or any position where Pakistan's interests COULD be compromised.

Pakistan must come first and if someone loves Pakistan enough, let them renounce their "ejection" seat, burn ALL their boats abroad and go serve Pakistan.

For others like myself and countless millions who love Pakistan, but have no desire to get into politics, there are ways to serve Pakistan far more accessable open and honest. The majority of us prefer to "help" in other ways
 

Wajdan

MPA (400+ posts)
yes he is wrong, definitely wrong, maybe he is trying to make his foreign friends happy.
Although I like him, I think he is wrong.
IK has clarified this in one of his interview, PTI is against this.

so what was the response of the people on that?
did they like his stance?

He was between DUAL NATIONALISTS, this is the reason people clapped. I guess, that was an entertainment SHOW and no 1 was interested in responding in either for or against.
 

mehwish_ali

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Although I am not entirely against this Bill , .... but I am sick of the arguments and half TRUTH of these Columnists.


1. Conflict of interests is good enough reason to ban the oversees Pakistanies for holding important seats. But what should be those important seats? I will come to it later.

2. This writer gives the example of Israel.... but why they are presenting only the half truth?

Reality is this Only few countries in world allow Dual Nationality. (Even US also not allowed the Dual nationality in the Past).

And British is a country which is really OPEN one and allows the Dual Nationality to Pakistani Passport holders.

And British also allows the Pakistani Dual Nationality holders to become member of their Parliament.

Remember, Dual Nationality brings a lot of benefits to the Pakistani Origin people. It would only bring disadvantages if we discourage the Dual Nationality system.


3. What if the people of certain area still choose that oversees Pakistani as their representative?


4. And it is a fact that in one way or another, still the Oversees Pakistanies are praised for their love for Pakistan and they are always requested to bring more and more investment to Pakistan, to keep their ties strong with Pakistan ........ etc. and etc.

You could have strong Ties with oversees Pakistanies if you also give them the right to have their say in the Pakistani affairs.

Therefore, we advocate to give them (the oversees Pakistanies) the right of Vote ..... but then why not the seats in the Parliament?


The Middle Path

May be very important seats should not be allowed for Oversees Pakistanies, like President, Prime Minister, Defence & Foreign affairs.

But normal seats in Parliament should be allowed to them, as they have been chosen by the group of people who are Pakistanies and have single citizenship.
 

gazoomartian

Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
Although I am not entirely against this Bill , .... but I am sick of the arguments and half TRUTH of these Columnists.


1. Conflict of interests is good enough reason to ban the oversees Pakistanies for holding important seats. But what should be those important seats? I will come to it later.

2. This writer gives the example of Israel.... but why they are presenting only the half truth?

Reality is this Only few countries in world allow Dual Nationality. (Even US also not allowed the Dual nationality in the Past).

And British is a country which is really OPEN one and allows the Dual Nationality to Pakistani Passport holders.

And British also allows the Pakistani Dual Nationality holders to become member of their Parliament.

Remember, Dual Nationality brings a lot of benefits to the Pakistani Origin people. It would only bring disadvantages if we discourage the Dual Nationality system.


3. What if the people of certain area still choose that oversees Pakistani as their representative?


4. And it is a fact that in one way or another, still the Oversees Pakistanies are praised for their love for Pakistan and they are always requested to bring more and more investment to Pakistan, to keep their ties strong with Pakistan ........ etc. and etc.

You could have strong Ties with oversees Pakistanies if you also give them the right to have their say in the Pakistani affairs.

Therefore, we advocate to give them (the oversees Pakistanies) the right of Vote ..... but then why not the seats in the Parliament?


The Middle Path

May be very important seats should not be allowed for Oversees Pakistanies, like President, Prime Minister, Defence & Foreign affairs.

But normal seats in Parliament should be allowed to them, as they have been chosen by the group of people who are Pakistanies and have single citizenship.


واللہ بی بی !

آج تو تم بڑا ہی انگریزی جھاڑ رہی ہو !!!

کس نے تمھیں یہ لکھ کر دیا ہے جی؟ چلو اب تم جلدی سے گزو انکل
کو سچ سچ بتاؤ کس نے لکھا ہے یہ


No Pakistani with dual nationality should be given even the local counselor seats.

My proposal is that a person must be a resident of Pakistan for continuous 5 years before contesting any elections, be it for local counselor or for MPA, NA, President, PM and any minister.

There must not be any gap in that 5 year period, meaning he/she must not have left Pakistan for any personal reasons. They must renounce their foreign nationality before taking any oath.

PPP is going thru all illegal and other things just to protect one guy, that is Zardari

You are wasting all this time and effort to protect only one man, that is Altaf Hussein

Zameer use karo, just to suit one person, Zardari or Altaf or anybody else, laws must not be amended.

One amendment that new elect prime minister in next elections, should be passed. Law should be changed by which a mafroor (absconder) CAN BE tried for crimes committed while either he was in Pakistan before fleeing, or played a major role in committing a crime or directed a crime in Pakistan while he was outside Pakistan.

This would be the most comprehensive laws to prevent crime in future.
 

TruPakistani

Minister (2k+ posts)

No Pakistani with dual nationality should be given even the local counselor seats.

My proposal is that a person must be a resident of Pakistan for continuous 5 years before contesting any elections, be it for local counselor or for MPA, NA, President, PM and any minister.

There must not be any gap in that 5 year period, meaning he/she must not have left Pakistan for any personal reasons. They must renounce their foreign nationality before taking any oath.

I fully agree with these suggestions.
Any public office holder has a national obligation to work only for the interests of Pakistan.
 

mehwish_ali

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
آپ لوگوں کی آراء کا شکریہ۔

میرا پوائنٹ یہ ہے کہ آپ کی رائے پر چلتے ہوئے بداعتمادی کی بہت بڑی فضا پیدا ہو گی۔

مثلا پھر برطانیہ میں کسی پاکستانی اوریجن کے حامل برطانوی شہری کو یہ حق حاصل نہیں ہو گا کہ:۔


پہلا: وہ برطانوی پارلیمنٹ کا ممبر بن سکے۔


دوسرا: وہ کونسلر یا کوئی چھوٹا سا بھی عہدہ لے سکے۔


تیسرا: وہ برطانوی پولیس میں بھرتی ہو سکے کیونکہ اس پر الزام لگ جائے گا کہ وہ اپنے ہموطنوں کے جرائم کو چھپا سکتا ہے۔


چوتھا: وہ محکہ داخلہ میں کوئی جاب لے سکے۔


۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔ ایک طویل فہرست ہے ان حساس نوکریوں کی جو کہ علاقے کے کونسلر سے کہیں زیادہ اہمیت کی حامل ہیں۔


اور اگر برطانیہ یہ سب کچھ کرے گا، تو مجھے انتہائی انتہائی ڈر ہے کہ ہماری قوم کے بہت سے سرپھرے پھر برطانیہ کو نسل پرست اور پتا نہیں کیا کیا کچھ رہے ہوں گے (معذرت کہ سخت الفاظ ہیں، مگر اجازت دیں کہ میں اپنے خدشات کا اظہار کھل کر کروں)۔

میں انسانیت پر یقین رکھنے کی قائل ہوں اور چیزوں کو ہندو، مسلم، عیسائی، قادیانی یا یہودی ۔۔۔۔ یا پھر پاکستانی برطانوی، امریکی وغیرہ کی نسبت سب سے پہلے انسانی نقطہ نگاہ سے دیکھنے کی قائل ہوں۔

اسی وجہ سے میرا اس معاملے میں اختلاف رہے گا ۔

 

nasirzaman

Senator (1k+ posts)
yeh log sirf is waja se is ki mukhalfat ker rahe hen kio ke mqm is bil ko paish ker rahi hai mqm fobia meh yeh log apne hi bhayoon ko bhi nuqsan ponhchane se bhi nahi daren ge in ko sirf rehman malik nazer aaraha hai lekin over sease pakistanion meh her koi us jaisa nahi hai.or jitne over sease pakistani pakistan se muhabbat kerte hen or koi un ki brabri nahi ker sakta ALLAH humare polititions ko her faisle mulk ke mufad meh kerne ki tofiq ata ferma or pakistan ko tarraqui aur khushali ata ferma.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

gazoomartian

Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
آپ لوگوں کی آراء کا شکریہ۔

میرا پوائنٹ یہ ہے کہ آپ کی رائے پر چلتے ہوئے بداعتمادی کی بہت بڑی فضا پیدا ہو گی۔

مثلا پھر برطانیہ میں کسی پاکستانی اوریجن کے حامل برطانوی شہری کو یہ حق حاصل نہیں ہو گا کہ:۔


پہلا: وہ برطانوی پارلیمنٹ کا ممبر بن سکے۔


I am a Pakistani and I would care about Pakistan only. whether a person can become a member of the British parliament or not, has absolutely no bearing on my thoughts. If the Pakistanis are citizen of the UK, they can participate in the local elections but not at the expense of Pakistan.



دوسرا: وہ کونسلر یا کوئی چھوٹا سا بھی عہدہ لے سکے۔


تیسرا: وہ برطانوی پولیس میں بھرتی ہو سکے کیونکہ اس پر الزام لگ جائے گا کہ وہ اپنے ہموطنوں کے جرائم کو چھپا سکتا ہے۔
is it really important for a Pakistani, his country man in UK gets admitted in UK police? Why do we need to cater our policies to meet the requirements of the UK citizens? May be that's where the problems lie that we are 'serving' the British masters for very long. Its about time to kick the ball. Also, not to mention, Pakistanis do not commission into Police to serve the local Pakistanis. They do it to have a secure job and prestige (don't know how much 'bobbies' have prestige though lol). they take oath to uphold the law and be loyal to the queen/king.



چوتھا: وہ محکہ داخلہ میں کوئی جاب لے سکے۔
interior of Pakistan or UK?
If UK, so just so that a Pakistani can get a job with the interior, we Pakistanis have to bend of constitution and law? Sorry dear Mehwish, this is the stupidest excuse i have ever heard. Would the British reciprocate for us?


۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔ ایک طویل فہرست ہے ان حساس نوکریوں کی جو کہ علاقے کے کونسلر سے کہیں زیادہ اہمیت کی حامل ہیں۔






اور اگر برطانیہ یہ سب کچھ کرے گا، تو مجھے انتہائی انتہائی ڈر ہے کہ ہماری قوم کے بہت سے سرپھرے پھر برطانیہ کو نسل پرست اور پتا نہیں کیا کیا کچھ رہے ہوں گے (معذرت کہ سخت الفاظ ہیں، مگر اجازت دیں کہ میں اپنے خدشات کا اظہار کھل کر کروں)۔

I am amazed at you Mehwish. And why does it bother you if some Pakistani calls them nasal parast?

Better yet, if a Pakistani calls UK a nasal parast, why should he be labelled sar phira?
Sorry baby dear, your leader Altaf Hussein has brainwashed you all thinking in his favor for his benefit because the 'Mr. Blunder' is a resident of the UK and enjoying the hefty benefit and also the donations (some call it bhatta) from Pakistan.


میں انسانیت پر یقین رکھنے کی قائل ہوں اور چیزوں کو ہندو، مسلم، عیسائی، قادیانی یا یہودی ۔۔۔۔ یا پھر پاکستانی برطانوی، امریکی وغیرہ کی نسبت سب سے پہلے انسانی نقطہ نگاہ سے دیکھنے کی قائل ہوں۔

wah wah wah mehwish, apney deen ko ilahda karkey insaniat ka parcham bland kar lya. wah kya teer mara hai tum ney. Jub farishtey qabar mein poochein

من دینکم و ربکم ؟

to kahna key: neither, sirf
انسانکم

:astagh:


Altaf Qadiani hai kya? tumhari baaton sey aisa hi lagta hai and also he has at numerous times, sympathized with Qadianis.


اسی وجہ سے میرا اس معاملے میں اختلاف رہے گا
۔

hua karey
:lol:

.................................
 

gazoomartian

Prime Minister (20k+ posts)


میں انسانیت پر یقین رکھنے کی قائل ہوں اور چیزوں کو ہندو، مسلم، عیسائی، قادیانی یا یہودی ۔۔۔۔ یا پھر پاکستانی برطانوی، امریکی وغیرہ کی نسبت سب سے پہلے انسانی نقطہ نگاہ سے دیکھنے کی قائل ہوں۔




justa quick question. Will you endorse a Qadiani as a PM or Pres of Pakistan?
 

UKPakistani

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
justa quick question. Will you endorse a Qadiani as a PM or Pres of Pakistan?
[MENTION=8825]gazoomartian[/MENTION]

If he is MQM of course
 

InsafianPTI

Minister (2k+ posts)
totally disagreew ith you on UK example.

How pathetic to distort facts.

Those pakistanis who in higher positions are living in UK and dedicated to this countris for decades,

They don't go back and live in pakistan.
whereas these PPP,and MQM guys are living abroad and ruling people back home.
New colonialism.


آپ لوگوں کی آراء کا شکریہ۔

میرا پوائنٹ یہ ہے کہ آپ کی رائے پر چلتے ہوئے بداعتمادی کی بہت بڑی فضا پیدا ہو گی۔

مثلا پھر برطانیہ میں کسی پاکستانی اوریجن کے حامل برطانوی شہری کو یہ حق حاصل نہیں ہو گا کہ:۔


پہلا: وہ برطانوی پارلیمنٹ کا ممبر بن سکے۔


دوسرا: وہ کونسلر یا کوئی چھوٹا سا بھی عہدہ لے سکے۔


تیسرا: وہ برطانوی پولیس میں بھرتی ہو سکے کیونکہ اس پر الزام لگ جائے گا کہ وہ اپنے ہموطنوں کے جرائم کو چھپا سکتا ہے۔


چوتھا: وہ محکہ داخلہ میں کوئی جاب لے سکے۔


۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔ ایک طویل فہرست ہے ان حساس نوکریوں کی جو کہ علاقے کے کونسلر سے کہیں زیادہ اہمیت کی حامل ہیں۔


اور اگر برطانیہ یہ سب کچھ کرے گا، تو مجھے انتہائی انتہائی ڈر ہے کہ ہماری قوم کے بہت سے سرپھرے پھر برطانیہ کو نسل پرست اور پتا نہیں کیا کیا کچھ رہے ہوں گے (معذرت کہ سخت الفاظ ہیں، مگر اجازت دیں کہ میں اپنے خدشات کا اظہار کھل کر کروں)۔

میں انسانیت پر یقین رکھنے کی قائل ہوں اور چیزوں کو ہندو، مسلم، عیسائی، قادیانی یا یہودی ۔۔۔۔ یا پھر پاکستانی برطانوی، امریکی وغیرہ کی نسبت سب سے پہلے انسانی نقطہ نگاہ سے دیکھنے کی قائل ہوں۔

اسی وجہ سے میرا اس معاملے میں اختلاف رہے گا ۔

 

mehwish_ali

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
ایک مرتبہ پھر آپ کی آراء کا شکریہ۔

مگر میں آپ سے متفق نہیں ہو سکیں ہوں اور آپ مجھے اُس راہ پر چلتنے نظر آ رہے ہیں جو انٹیگریشن کی طرف نہیں بلکہ محاذ آرائی پر جا کر ٹوٹے گا۔

میں یہ بات قطعی یقین سے کہہ سکتی ہوں کہ بات فقط پولیس تک بھرتی میں ہی نہیں ٹہرے گی، جواب میں دوسری طرف سے بھی کہے گا کہ ان تمام پاکستانیوں کو واپس انکے ملک بھیجو کہ ہمیں پولیس کے ساتھ ساتھ دیگر محکموں میں بھی انکی سروسز کی ضرورت نہیں ہے۔ اور اگر ضرورت ہو بھی تو وسطی یورپ اور لاطینی امریکا وغیرہ کی عیسائی اور غیر مسلم لوگوں کو شہریت دے کر بلاؤ وگرنہ یہ پاکستانی اور مسلمان تو یہاں اپنے ساتھ دہشتگردی ساتھ لاتے ہیں وغیرہ وغیرہ ۔۔۔۔۔۔

اب یہ الفاظ یہاں بیان کرنے پر میرے پیچھے نہ پڑ جائیے گا، بلکہ یہ ایک "حقیقت" ہے اور یہ وہ آواز ہے جو کہ بہت عرصے سے مغرب میں بلند ہو رہی ہے، مگر اللہ کا شکر ہے کہ یہاں کی اکثریت ابھی تک پاکستانیوں اور مسلمانوں کے خلاف تعصب کی اس حد تک نہیں پہنچی ہے اور یہ اکثریت اس کا رد کر رہی ہے۔

مجھے ڈر ہے کہ آپ کو اس وقت میری بات سمجھ نہیں آئے گی ۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔



justa quick question. Will you endorse a Qadiani as a PM or Pres of Pakistan?

کیا ہم اس بات پر متفق نہیں تھے کہ پرائم منسٹر اور صدر وغیرہ جیسے حساس عہدوں کو استثنی حاصل ہے؟

اسکے علاوہ ہندو شخص پاکستانی سپریم کورٹ کا چیف جسٹس بن سکتا ہے، اور قادیانی حضرات کو بھی بقیہ ہر ہر شعبہ زندگی میں کسی قسم کے مذہبی تعصب اور نفرت کا نشانہ نہیں ہونا چاہیے۔

 

UKPakistani

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
@mehwish_ali

Is Your Governor of Sindh a Dual National?


Yes OR No will be fine

No Essay or thesis please

Doubt you will provide a straightforward answer
 
Last edited:

Back
Top