New Age Islam
Mon Sep 27 2021, 01:25 AM

Books and Documents ( 21 March 2010, NewAgeIslam.Com)

Comment | Comment

Munir Commission Report- 12: Social Boycott of the Mirzaais and collection of Rs 1 crore for anti-Ahmadiya agitation



In its issue of 3rd August, 1952, this paper criticised the foreign policy of the Pakistan Government which it described as the personal policy of Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan and alleged that Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan had failed in the Kashmir dispute. In the comments under ‘Sang-o-Khisht’, the paper taunted Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan by making to him the suggestion that instead of seeking police protection on his next visit to Lahore, he should ask ‘Hazrat Sahib’ (the head of the Ahmadiya community) to pray for his safety. The issue of 10th August again made sarcastic remarks about the reported resignation of Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan, stating that he had presumably resigned after consulting the ‘Paighambarzada’ (sarcastic reference to the head of the Ahmadiya community), because during his ministership whatever he did he always did after consulting the head of his community. In this very issue was published a statement by All Muslim Parties Convention claiming that the efforts of the convention were bearing fruit and appealing for support by extensive propaganda in the form of tabligh conferences, deputations and collection of funds. The issue also contained a news item announcing a public meeting under the auspices of the Majlis-i-Amal and the names of the speakers and appealing to the people to come in large numbers to attend that meeting.


The issue of 15th August, 1952, published Maulana Shabir Ahmad Usmani’s opinion that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad for his claim to prophethood was a murtadd. The issue of I8th August commented on the Pakistan Government’s communiqué of 14th August and alleged that Government had misunderstood the demands of the Musalmans in respect of the Ahmadis. It stated that Muslims had no fear of Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan’s efforts to convert his subordinates to the Qadiani religion but that the demand for his removal was based on the grounds (1) that he was a Mirzai, (2) that he was entirely in the hands of the Khalifa of Qadian, (3) that he could not be loyal to Pakistan, and (4) that he had no associations with the Muslims.


The issue of 1st September contained a report of Mr. Daultana’s speech in Hazuri Bagh on 30th August, in which, among other matters, he had spoken on the doctrine of khatm-i-nubuwwat, expressing his belief in that doctrine and his further belief that anyone who did not accept the Holy Prophet of Islam as the last of the prophets could not be called a Muslim.


The issue of 27th September published a poem in which the poet advised Muslims to forge a united front against kufr and the enemy to fight for the noble cause of khatm-inubuwwat. The issue of 29th September contained an account of the interview which some members of the Majlis-i-Amal had had with the Chief Minister of the Punjab, in the course of which under the leadership of Maulana Abul Hasanat they had presented a written representation complaining of the sale of land for Rabwah, indiscriminate allotments to Mirzais, their proselytising activities, their provocative literature and the use by them of Islamic technical terms which had come to be exclusively reserved for particular sacred personalities in Islam.


Mr. Daultana has claimed that from about the third week of July the ‘Afaq’, the ‘Ehsan’ and the ‘Maghribi Pakistan,’ each of which had received a large amount of money from Government, had blacked out the anti-Ahmadiya agitation, but from what we have presently said it will be quite clear that each of these papers continued to write on the subject throughout the period. When Dr. Ishtiaq Husain Qureshi, Minister for Information and Broadcasting, came to Lahore in the later half of July, 1952, it was complained to him that the Punjab Government was itself encouraging the anti-Ahmadiya agitation, and Mr. Hamid Nizami, editor of the ‘Nawa-i-Waqt’, openly charged Mir Nur Ahmad, Director, Public Relations Department, with complicity in this conspiracy. According to Mr. Nizami, Dr. Qureshi, when he came to Lahore in July or August 1952, invited the editors of some local newspapers to a private tea at which some officials, including Mir Nur Ahmad, and the editors of all important dailies of Lahore were present. In this party the subject of anti-Ahmadiya agitation happened to be discussed, and Dr. Qureshi remarked that the campaign which was being carried on in the press against Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan was detrimental to the interests of the country and was likely to lead to serious consequences. Guests present at the party expressed their own opinions in the matter. Mr. Nizami kept quiet and Dr. Qureshi asked him why he was not expressing his opinion. Mr. Nizami replied that it was futile for him to give his opinion because the campaign was being carried on by newspapers which were being subsidised by Government. On being required by the Doctor to explain what he meant, Mr. Nizami said that the entire agitation had been inspired by Government and that it could be stopped immediately if the Government so liked because the papers which were engaged in the campaign could not afford to disobey the directions of Government. Dr. Qureshi said that he had heard similar rumours before but that he had not been supplied with any concrete facts, Mr. Nizami then pointed to Mir Nur Ahmad and said that he was the arch criminal in the matter because it was he who was having all articles on the movement written. Dr. Qureshi asked Mr. Nizami if he could prove the allegation. Mr. Nizami replied that if Mir Nur Ahmad denied the allegation, he would be willing to prove it, Mir Nur Ahmad heard all this but kept quiet. Questioned by Dr. Qureshi whether he would repeat this allegation before the Prime Minister, Mr. Nizami said that he would. About a month later, Mr. Nizami went down to Karachi and met the Prime Minister who asked him if he could give a list of the articles which had been inspired by Mir Nur Ahmad. Mr. Nizami said that he would do so on his next visit to Karachi. When Mr. Nizami next visited Karachi about a month afterwards, he took with him the file of articles which, according to him, had been inspired by Mir Nur Ahmad, and handed it over to Mr. Mushtaq Ahmad Gurmani, requesting him to show it to the Prime Minister. On a later occasion, when Mr. Nizami was sent for by the Home Secretary, he repeated this allegation before him. A day or two later he did the same before Mr. Qurban Ali Khan and warned him that if things continued as they were, the Province would be ruined. The same complaint was made by Mr. Nizami before the Home Secretary when the latter called a meeting of the editors of newspapers on 27th or 28th February. Mr. Nizami also repeated his allegations before the Governor.


Mr. Nizami had a talk on the subject with Mr. Daultana in September 1952. Mr. Daultana remarked that Mir Nur Ahmad was ruining the Government and that he intended to remove him within a few days, but Mr. Nizami replied that all this was a lie and that he did not believe Mr. Daultana because what Mir Nur Ahmad was doing, was at the instance of Mr. Daultana himself.


Mr. Nizami’s evidence is fully corroborated by the evidence of Dr. Qureshi. The

Doctor says that he came to Lahore in the later half of July 1952 in connection with a meeting of the Credentials Committee of the Constituent Assembly for the purpose of hearing an election petition. As Minister for Information and Broadcasting, he always made it a point to meet the editors of newspapers in an informal and off-the-record meeting. He also had quite a number of persons coming and visiting him. One such visitor told Dr. Qureshi that the Directorate of Public Relations had been supplying newspapers with articles which were calculated, to fan the agitation against the Ahmadis. The visitor also offered to get for Dr. Qureshi from the office of some newspaper an article in the handwriting of Mr. Chishti, an officer employed in the Department of Public Relations, which would prove that Government had been supplying articles to newspapers. Dr. Qureshi was morally convinced of the truth of the information, but thought that it would not be dignified on his part to utilise his informant for the purpose of what would amount to stealing papers from the records of a newspaper. Some time after this, Mir Nur Ahmad came to see Dr. Qureshi. Dr. Qureshi told Mir Nur Ahmad that the Department of Islamiat which was working under him, had been supplying articles to newspapers relating to anti-Ahmadiya agitation, and confronted him with the fact that the ‘Afaq’ which was for all practical purposes under the Directorate of Public Relations, had been pressing in its columns the demand that Ahmadis should be declared a minority. Mir Nur Ahmad tried to parry the question, but Dr. Qureshi pressed him and Mir Nur Ahmad then admitted that efforts had been made by him to “canalize” the agitation into certain channels. Dr. Qureshi told Mir Nur Ahmad that this was not canalising but fanning the, agitation. As this was a sufficiently serious matter, Dr. Qureshi thought of mentioning it to Mr. Daultana. The latter asked Dr. Qureshi to tea on 19th July. Dr. Qureshi apprised Mr. Daultana of the complaint that he had received and told him that if the Provincial Government had decided upon a line of action, which was a departure from the previous policy in publicity, it was only fair that Mr. Daultana should have discussed the matter with the Doctor when a few days before they both were at Nathiagali. Mr. Daultana said that what had been done by Mir Nur Ahmad to canalise the agitation, had been done without his knowledge. Dr. Qureshi adds that he considered it rather strange that Mr. Daultana did not know that the Directorate of Public Relations was fanning the agitation, because cuttings of newspapers on this important question must have been placed before him and he must have known that papers which were almost directly under the control of Government, were also engaged in the controversy and had adopted a certain line of action. He was, therefore, surprised when Mr. Daultana told him that this line of action had been taken by the Directorate of Public Relations without his knowledge. Dr. Qureshi also confirms Mr. Nizami’s evidence about the incident that happened at the tea party. He deposes that Mr. Nizami alleged at that party that Mir Nur Ahmad was responsible for carrying on this campaign in the newspapers and that Mir Nur Ahmad said nothing to contradict the allegation.


When Dr. Qureshi returned to Karachi, he mentioned the incident to the Prime Minister and expressed his opinion that agitation in the Punjab was being fanned by the Directorate of Public Relations. He also mentioned the talk that he had with Mr. Daultana and expressed his surprise that a department of a Provincial Government should adopt a certain policy in such an important matter without the orders of the Central Government.


The incident was also mentioned by Dr. Qureshi to the members of the Cabinet. This evidence is confirmed by the evidence of Khwaja Nazim-ud-Din. He says that the first time that Mr. Daultana discussed the Qadiani question with him was on 4th August and that in the course of that discussion he pointed out to Mr. Daultana that according to the report he had received from the Information Minister, Mir Nur Ahmad had been supplying material to the various papers in support of the anti-Qadiani movement, Khwaja Nazim-ud-Din pointed out to Mr. Daultana that while all the opposition papers, namely, the ‘Pakistan Times’, the ‘Imroz’, the ‘Nawa-i-Waqt’ and the ‘Civil & Military Gazette’, were silent on this issue, the papers that were controlled by Government and Mr. Daultana himself were fanning the agitation, the worst culprit in this respect being the ‘Zamindar’ which could certainly be controlled by Mr. Daultana if he liked. Mr. Daultana said that the Urdu papers depended for their existence on their circulation and as that was a popular theme and meant increase in their publication, it was very difficult to stop them. He further said that the object of his publicity department was to regulate and control by advice the tempo and virulence of the campaign that was going on in the newspapers. Khwaja Nazim-ud-Din impressed upon Mr. Daultana that the best method of tackling the situation was to prevent the papers from fanning the agitation and that Mr. Daultana could easily do so as these papers depended upon him for their patronage.


Mr. Mushtaq Ahmad Gurmani deposes that on one occasion Dr. Qureshi mentioned to the members of the Cabinet that he had received complaints that the various articles appearing in the Punjab Press were being supplied through agencies which were either controlled or patronised by Government. The witness has also produced a file of newspapers containing several articles in support of the anti-Ahmadiya agitation, which, he says, was handed over to him by Mr. Nizami at Karachi.


Mr. Daultana denies his having ever admitted before Khwaja Nazim-ud-Din that the publicity department of the Punjab Government had been attempting to control the tempo of the writings in newspapers by supplying articles to them. Mr. Nur Ahmad does not specifically deny that he used the word ‘canalise’ in his conversation with Dr. Qureshi, though he denies that he ever contributed or directed any one in his department to contribute any article to the press on the subject of anti-Ahmadiya movement. For reasons which we will record in full while formulating our conclusions, we have no doubt whatsoever that Mir Nur Ahmad did attempt to canalise the movement and that Mr. Daultana could not have been unaware of this policy.


The tempo of the agitation now began rapidly to rise and it assumed alarming proportions. Government became the target of the attack, and indirect and veiled references to its corruption, inefficiency and indifference to the condition of the masses began to be made. By his D. O. letter No. 14682-BDSB., dated the 21st October 1952, the Home Secretary to the Government of Punjab sent the following account of the existing situation to the Deputy Secretary to the Ministry of the Interior:—


 “A note on the developments of the Ahrar-Ahmadi agitation in the Punjab since the 1st of August J 952, in continuation of the previous note prepared by Malik Habib Ullah on the 30th of July 1952.


“The firing incident at Multan on the 20th of July last gave a fillip to the Ahrar agitators and their supporters to intensify their agitation against the Ahmadis on the khatm-i-nubuwwat issue and their public meetings grew in frequency and number all over the Province. When the other parties, such as the Jama’at-i-Islami, the Islam League and the Shias observed that the Ahrar were stealing a march on them in winning over the public opinion in their favour on the khatm-i-nubuwwat question, they joined them in their denunciations against the Ahmadis in right earnest in the beginning of August last. The Jama’at-i-Islami added a ninth demand to their eight demands that the Mirzais should be declared a separate minority community and Sir Zafrullah Khan should be removed from his office.


The workers of the Islam League also started stressing in the course of their speeches that the Mirzais should be declared a separate minority and Sir Zafrullah Khan should be removed from his office. The Shia leaders also stressed in the course of their meetings that they agreed with the Ahrar in their demands that the Mirzais should be declared a separate community and Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan should be removed from his office.


“2. The khatibs of all important mosques in cities and towns made it a routine to repeat the usual demands against the Ahmadis in the course of their Friday sermons that the Mirzais should be declared a separate community, Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan should be removed from his office, Rabwah should be declared a town open to all Muslims and its land should be distributed among refugees. There was no important mosque in which these demands were not repeated on Friday gatherings.


“3. Maulana Abdul Hasanat Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, Sheikh Husam-ud-Din, Master Taj-ud-Din, Muzaffar Ali Shamsi and Maulana Murtaza Ahmad Khan Maikash waited on me Honourable Prime Minister at Karachi on the 16th of August and apprised him of their demands concerning the Ahmadis. On their return they held a public meeting at Multan on the 19th of August and another at Lahore on the 23rd of August and disclosed that the Prime Minister told them that the agitation against the Ahmadis was only confined to the Punjab, and the other Provinces were free from it. The All Muslim Parties Council of Action accordingly decided to collect more funds and spread their anti-Ahmadi propaganda in the North-West Frontier Province, Sind and East Bengal with the object of overwhelming the Central Government to accede to their demands. In pursuance of this decision Sayyad Ata Ullah Shah Bukhari and Qazi

Ehsan Ahmad Shujabadi toured in the North-West Frontier Province in the month of August and made a series of speeches against the Ahmadis. The result of all this heated agitation was that the Ahmadis started losing their nerve and found themselves in a somewhat difficult position. Their social and commercial boycott was also urged by the Ahrar workers and mullas in the course of their speeches and sermons. In fact, the agitation started by the Ahrar passed into the hands of the mullas and the latter found the khatm-i-nubuwwat issue a good subject for sermonising in their Friday gatherings in mosques.


“4. When the Ahrar agitation against the Ahmadis was at its height in the first fortnight of August last, secret information came to hand that some Ahmadis were forsaking their sect for fear of life and property as a result of pressure brought to bear upon them due to the Ahrar agitation and according to reports received from the districts of this Province 115 Ahmadis seemed to have forsaken their sect and reverted to Sunnism and 11 Ahmadis left their homes for Rabwah or other places during the months of July and August 1952. The number of forcible conversions of Ahmadis decreased by the end of August.


“5. According to a report submitted by the Superintendent of Police, Gujranwala, two male teachers and four female teachresses who were Ahmadis and were serving in the Municipal Board High and Middle Schools at Wazirabad were given a notice by the Wazirabad Municipality on 27th July 1952, that their services had been terminated. This was the result of the Ahrar agitation. The Deputy Commissioner of the Gujranwala district, however, suspended this resolution of the Wazirabad Municipal Committee on 4th March 1952.


“6. As a result of the Ahrar agitation against the Ahmadis a number of new bodies called ‘Majlis-i-Tahaffuz-i-Khatm-i-Nubuwwat’, ‘Majlis-i-Khuddam-i-Rasul’ and ‘All Muslim Parties Convention’ were formed at all important cities and towns to push the agitation against the Ahmadis on the khatm-i-nubuwwat issue. The object of all such bodies was side by side to collect subscriptions to finance the movement. Maulana Akhtar Ali of the ‘Zamindar’ appealed to the audience on the occasion of the last Idu’z-Zuha at Karamabad, his home, to collect one crore of rupees to make the khatm-i-nubuwwat movement a success. The All Muslim Parties Council of Action of Lahore which was set up in July last to fight the khatm-i-nubuwwat issue had a balance of Rs. 24,211-2-0 in its name in the Industrial Co-operative Bank of Lahore in September last.


“7. The Ahrar and their supporters collected a large number of skins of the animals which were slaughtered on the last Idu’z-Zuha worth Rs. 46,402 for financing their agitation against the Ahmadis from the whole of the Province. By means of other contributions they collected roughly Rs.51,107 during the last six months for carrying on the anti-Ahmadi agitation.


“8. The Ahrar and their supporters were entertaining great hopes that their agitation would bear fruit and the Honourable Prime Minister of Pakistan would proclaim in his speech on the 14th of August that their demands against the Ahmadis had been accepted but they and their followers were all greatly disappointed when the Honourable Prime Minister announced in his broadcast of the 14th of August that sectionalism and sectarianism were to be avoided in the interests of the solidarity of the Pakistan State. The Ahrar leaders and their supporters were further disappointed when the Honourable Chief Minister of the Punjab clearly stated in his speech he delivered at Lahore on the 30th of August and in another speech he delivered at Rawalpindi on the 11th of September that there was no justification for declaring the Ahmadis a separate community and that sectionalism and sectarianism led to disruption and should be suppressed.


“9. Mr. Justice Kayani’s findings on the Multan firing further disheartened the Ahrar workers and their supporters and had a very healthy effect on the general masses as well as the services.


“10. The present position is that the agitation led by the Ahrar against the Ahmadis has lost its previous force and charm among the public and the mullas who were their chief exponents are feeling rather despaired. The Ahrar are, however, at present holding a series of conferences all over the Province to keep their agitation alive and collect as much money as they can to enable them to move about and have a good time. Some of the Ahrar speakers were reported to have said in the course of their speeches that the Mirzais were murtadds and were ‘wajibu’l-qatl’ (fit to be killed) according to the tenets of Islam.


“11. Mufti Zia-ul-Hasan, a notorious Ahrar worker of Montgomery, who is a cousin of Habib-ur-Rahman of Ludhiana, filed a complaint in the A.D.M.’s Court on 30th March 1952 at Montgomery against Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, the head of the Ahmadiya sect, Roshan Din Tanvir, the editor of the daily ‘Alfazl’ and Masood Ahmad, the printer and publisher of the ‘Alfazl’, for having published in the ‘Alfazl’ of the 15th of July 1952, an article headed ‘Khooni Mulla ke akhri din,’ under sections 302/115/505, P.P.C. The case is proceeding in Court. Six prosecution witnesses have been examined so far and the last hearing of the case came off on the 8th of October 1952.


“12. The Ahrar and their supporters published a large number of pamphlets and posters during the last two months to prove that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a liar and a false prophet. In the same way, the Ahmadis published a large number of posters and pamphlets to prove that they believed in the Holy Prophet’s ‘finality of prophethood’ and that the Ahrar were the enemies of Pakistan.


“13. In the two public meetings held respectively at Lahore and Lyallpur under the auspices of the Jinnah Awami Muslim League on the 11th and 13th of September, some of the speakers found fault with the Ahmadiya sect and Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan’s unsuccessful policy as Foreign Minister and urged his removal from his office but they did not clearly favour the declaration of the Mirzais as a separate community.


“14. According to a recent secret report the active members of the All Muslim Parties Council of Action of Lahore were not unanimous on their future line of action. The group that favours taking direct action against the Government to compel it to accede to their demands consists of Sheikh Husam-ud-Din of the All Pakistan Majlis-i-Ahrar, Nasarullah Khan Aziz and Amin Ahsan Islahi of the Jama’at-i-Islami, Maulana Daud Ghaznavi of the Ahl-i-Hadith and Abdul Haleem Qasimi of the Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Islam. The other group that is in favour of carrying on the agitation in a constitutional and peaceful way consists of Master Taj-ud-Din Ansari of the All Pakistan Majlis-i-Ahrar, Maulana Abul Hasanat Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, Ghulam Muhammad Tarannum of the Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan, Maulana Muhammad Arshad Panahvi of Hizb-ul-Ahnaf, Hafiz Kifayat Husain and Muzaffar Ali Shamsi of the Shia party and Maulana Akhtar Ali, proprietor of the ‘Zamindar’. Sheikh Husam-ud-Din discussed this question with Master Taj-ud-Din on the 28th of August and informed him of the views of the members of his group. He told Master Taj-ud-Din that the members of the Jama’at-i-Islami, the Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Islam and the Anjuman-i-Ahl-i-Hadith did not approve of the present policy of the All Muslim Parties Council of Action and protested that if the All Muslim Parties Council of Action was to pursue a weak-kneed policy they would have nothing to do with it. Master Taj-ud-Din replied that if propaganda against the Ahmadis was extended to the other Provinces of Pakistan, their demands against the Ahmadis would be accepted by the Central Government. Master Taj-ud-Din also told Sheikh Husam-ud-Din that Maulana Abul Hasanat Muhammad Ahmad Qadri did not favour any direct action and possessed much influence and his views were to be respected. Master Taj-ud-Din told Sheikh Husam-ud-Din that they should not be befooled by the dictates of the Jamat-i-Islami as its policy was to create difficulties for the Government of the time. Sheikh Husam-ud-Din was of opinion that processions should be taken out and arrests courted in order to force a decision on the Government’s part. It was finally agreed that the new programme should be put up before the Council of Action for consideration. Master Taj-ud-Din commands the confidence of the majority of the members of the All Muslim Parties Council of Action. It may be added at this place that Sheikh Husam-ud-Din is a firebrand and represents a group in the Pakistan Majlis-i-Ahrar which favours secession from the Muslim League and open opposition. The activities of the elements which are in favour of direct action will be closely watched as their chief object appears to be to bring into disrepute the political party in power and thus add to their own prestige at its cost. There can be no objection to constitutional activity of any kind however futile and absurd it may be but no Government, would permit the defiance of authority and a threat of direct action. According to the present policy legal action is not being taken against those Ahrar speakers and mullas who make nasty and provocative speeches inside mosques.


The general impression at present is that the Ahrar agitation has lost its edge but its protagonists are trying to keep it alive by means of holding meetings and repeating their hackneyed arguments and demands. Maulana Akhtar Ali Khan, proprietor of the ‘Zamindar’, Master Taj-ud-Din and Sheikh Husam-ud-Din are now playing with a scheme to collect rupees one crore by means of selling small printed receipts purchasable for one rupee each for financing the khatm-i-nubuwwat agitation. The proverb that ‘money makes the mare go’ holds good in the case of the Ahrar agitation and so long as the leaders of this agitation continue to collect money from the people their agitation will not end.


“16. As directed by the All Muslim Parties Council of Action of Lahore ‘Yaumi-Ihtijaj’ (Protest Day) was observed all over the Punjab on Friday, the 3rd of October, 1952, and the khatibs of important mosques repeated in the course of their Friday sermons that Mirzais should be declared a minority community, Zafrullah Khan should be removed from his present office and should not be given any other important office, Rabwah should be declared a town open to all Muslims, the land of Rabwah should be distributed among refugees, Mirzais should be removed from high offices and the objectionable Mirzai literature should be forfeited. Similar demands were repeated in the public meetings which were held under the auspices of the All Muslim Parties Convention of Lahore on the 3rd of October.


“17. The ‘Azad’, an Ahrar organ, and the ‘Zamindar’ of Lahore are, continuing

to write vilifying articles against the Ahmadis and their sect.” On 22nd October Mr. Anwar Ali, D.I.G., C.I.D., summed up the position as follows: —


“The main features of the agitation are as follows: —


“(1) M. Akhtar All Khan is materially supporting the agitation. At his instance it has been decided to print ‘notes’ worth a crore which will be sold to the public and a fund built up for anti-Ahmadi agitation.


“(2) The tone of the speeches generally is marked by obscene, abusive and indecent references against the Ahmadis.


“(3) Social boycott and victimisation by other means have also been advocated. At Kabirwala the servants of the local Naib-Tehsildar were prevented from making their day-to-day purchases. At Wazirabad the Municipality at the instigation of the Ahrar, dismissed two female school teachers who were Ahmadis. The D. C. is taking steps to get the resolution cancelled.


“(4) A number of Ahmadis as a result of the odium aroused against their community have been forced to send their families to Rabwah and quite a number have abandoned the Ahmadi faith. It is not known to what extent the decisions were voluntary and to what extent dictated by expediency.


“(5) Ignorant and illiterate mullas in the districts have taken the cue and have begun to attack the Ahmadis even in remote places of the Province. The movement is not constitutional and objectionable methods are being used for its advancement.


“(6) A number of Ahmadi women and children have secured permanent settlement permits from the Indian Deputy High Commissioner and will leave Pakistan for good. These women and children want to join the Ahmadis who stayed behind at Qadian in spite of the post-partition riots. The Indian Government readily issued permanent settlement permits.


“(7) Anti-Government elements such as the Jama’at-i-Islami (the Jama’at has increased its eight demands to nine, the ninth being the declaration of the Ahmadis as a minority), the Islam League (it is particularly active at Rawalpindi), and individual opponents of the Government such as M. Abdus Sattar Niazi, have thrown their weight on the side of the agitators.


“(8) The significant feature is that after attacking the Ahmadis, most of the speakers run down the Government and accuse it of inefficiency, corruption, food situation, etc. This inclines one to the view that the anti-Ahmadi agitation is used as a device for mobilising public opinion with a

view to ultimately arousing contempt and hatred against Government.


This is very important to note.




“(9) At Rawalpindi much mischief was done because a secret letter in which a particular commanding officer had criticised the Ahmadis was filched from the office and published openly. One of the clerks (incidentally he belongs to the office of the D. D. M. I.) in the course of his statement made wild allegations against Ahmadi officers.


“(10) Although according to the latest information the Ahrar leaders feel a bit tired of their agitation, there has been no reduction in the number of meetings addressed in the mofussil. “2. My opinion is that the Ahrar agitation has dangerous potentialities. It has diverted the attention of the simple and ignorant masses from the essential issues which face Pakistan. It is essentially destructive and has emphasised sectarian differences at a time when all ranks should have drawn closer to each other”.


Mr. Qurban Ali Khan, Inspector-General, made some important comments on this note which will be found on the margin and forwarded it to the Governor with the remark that if the agitation were allowed to go on in that fashion, the Government would one day be faced with serious trouble and that though it was easy to control the trouble now, it might become a difficult problem later. The Governor saw this note and signed it but no further notice of it seems to have been taken.


Mr. Anwar Ali again reviewed the situation while commenting on the Lahore Daily Diary dated 15th December 1952 and pointed out that the situation described in that diary was typical of what was going on all over the country. He said:


“The Lahore Daily Diary dated 16th December 1952 has probably been seen by Government already. It is typical of what is going on all over the country. Anti-Government propaganda has been intensified of late and the food situation is being vigorously exploited. Government is being ruthlessly abused, maligned and defamed- The confidence of the public is being sedulously destroyed and confusion and panic are spreading. In all circles, business, service, etc., fierce criticism is being levelled against Government. In railway trains, private gatherings and at social functions there is one topic which arouses the deepest interest and that is anti-Government talk. Members of the League and Government servants are no exception and indulge liberally in such talks. People who return from Karachi, bring a grim picture, and say that Secretariat officers and other high-ups seem to have lost faith in the future and talk as if a collapse is imminent. The position is desperate and if the nation is to be saved from chaos and anarchy, effective measures should be taken without delay. it is These tendencies will spread and bring disaster in their wake.

The whole of our machinery will go to pieces.




True that some of the problems which face the country are stupendous but nevertheless an effort must be made. The situation is not as hopeless as some people are apt to believe.


* * * * * * * *


(3) Faith in the future—If a patient knows that his disease is curable and that everything is being done to rid him of his disease effectively and quickly, he acquires courage and puts up a better resistance. If on the other hand the patient know that his disease is not curable and that steps are not being taken for his proper treatment, he dies an earlier death. The anti-Government propaganda carried out by the opponents of the Government and other destructive elements has destroyed faith in the future. Quite a large proportion of the people are becoming pessimistic and feel that the situation is too far gone and cannot be successfully retrieved. Publicity could easily be organised and faith in the future built up.


* * * * * * * *


(6) Mullaism—There is no doubt that most of the mullas rise from a class which is without education and has an extremely narrow outlook. The mullas have been built up by politicians themselves and instead of behaving as their supporters have turned on the very forces which created them. They are out to seek power for themselves and are the enemies of progress. An intelligent and educated class of mullas should be created and in the meantime the leaders should, when making speeches, not make promises in the religious fields which they know they cannot honour.”