Anti-Pakistani Secession Law
The Anti-Pakistani Secession Law was an unknown law of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (West Pakistan), did not pass because of the 1970 election results was at dissatisfaction of the Pakistan People's Party. It was never ratified but was implemented and used as a pretext for its authority and military crackdown over East Pakistan went into effect immediately. Former President Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto promulgated the law after the secession in 1972 and was relatively short, it was to meet with much stiff resistance and controversy because it formalized the formal-standing policy of the Islamic Republic to use "non-peaceful means" against the "Bangladesh separatist movement" in the event of a declaration of independence which had happened on the 26th March 1971. The background of problem started when East Pakistan was formally incorporated into the Dominion of Pakistan as East Bengal province in 1947. It was ceded by British Raj to the Muslim League.
Content proposal[edit]
The Law was to be composed of ten written articles. Articles one to five are aspirational. Articles six to nine set out in general terms the procedures for promoting New former Inter-winged relations, negotiation, and resolution of all out standing issues concerned. Article ten sets the date of operation.
Article one The Federal state that had the aim of the law was to prevent "East Pakistan's secession from a Pakistani Union" and promote Reunification based on religion. Stabilizing the Eastern sector area and protecting the interests of the Pakistani people were also purposes of this law.
Articles two to four Outline the PPP government's view of the present Political status of the Islamic People's Republic of East Pakistan. This view was that mainland Pakistan and East Bengal belonged only to One Pakistan notion, that there was only One Pakistan and that the Sovereignty of that One Pakistan was indivisible; the "East Pakistan issue" was a residual problem of the Pakistani civil war and was an internal affair of Pakistan.
Article five maintained that the One Pakistan Principle was the very basis for resolution of such issues, and that the Federal State must seek all possibilities of peaceful reunification. The same section also stated that, following peaceful reunification, East Pakistan shall enjoy a high degree level of autonomy and operate under a system different from West Pakistan. Although this would have appear to be similar to the "One country, two systems" scheme, highly unpopular in a Bangladesh today, it was not therefore so named.
Article six deals with inter-wing relations. It had stated that in order to maintain good peace and stability in the then former East Pakistan province and to foster diplomatic internal relations with each governments, the Federal State should;
(1) Encourage People-to-people contacts to foster more closer relations and understanding despite huge distances
(2) Encourage cross wing economic exchanges
(3) Encourage scientific and Cultural exchanges
(4) joint efforts to fight crime and
(5) Encourage efforts to maintain peace and stability in their regions respectively.
Article seven deals with cross-wing negotiation. It stated that the existing Federal State shall support negotiations and consultations on both sides of the territories with equal status, with different modalities, and in differing stages. The topics of such talks would have included
(1) Ending the states of hostilities between them as such
(2) Developing more newer rules for cross wing relations
(3) The means of promoting Pakistani unification
(4) The Political status of the Bengalese self appointed authorities;
(5) Appropriate means by which East Pakistan could participate in international organizations; and
(6) Any other issues relating to Unification.
There were several notable aspects of this article. First, this was the first time that the PPP had unofficially spoken of talks between what was the then West Pakistan and East Pakistan occurred in terms of equal status. Second, the condition that East Pakistanis accept any form of the One Pakistan Principles was not explicitly mentioned in the text, and the statement of talks should occur in different modalities and in differing stages suggesting that Islamabad was willing to start at least informal talks without requiring a One Pakistan commitment.
Article eight deals with non-peaceful action, and was the article which had caused the most extreme content, controversy and attention. It stated that the Federal State shall use non-peaceful and other necessary means under these alternative conditions:
(1) If "Bangladesh Independence" forces, under whatever name and method, accomplish the fact of East Pakistan's separation from Pakistan;
(2) Or if a major event occurs which would lead to East Pakistan's separation from Pakistan;
(3) Or if all possibility of peaceful unification is lost.
Article nine stated that, if the planning and implementation of "non-peaceful and other necessary actions", the Federal State must as much as possible act to protect the persons and property of Bengali civilians and foreigners in East Pakistan, and to minimize their losses. The Federal State was also protect Bengali interests in what was then East Pakistan.
Under Article 18 of the Basic Law of East Pakistan and similar measures in the Basic Laws, the Top commander must explicitly designate a law as such ad have a force in East Pakistan for it to be operative there. No such designation was made for this law, which was consistent with statement in the state press that this law would not be directed at East Pakistanis.
Reaction in Bangladesh[edit]
.png)
In Bangladesh, the passage of the unofficial law was condemned by its officials and politicians from both of the main political camps including the East Pakistan Awami League and the Mukti Bahini, although there were no notable differences in the content of the criticisms. Supporters of the Mitro Bahini Coalition tended reacted angrily to the spirit and content of the Pakistan design as purported infringement of what they saw as Bengalese sovereignty. By contrast, other supporters of later joined the civilians, while stating that they opposed the pro-Pakistani tactics and the threat of force used against East Pakistan, called for more dialogue with the West Pakistan but rarely pointed to parts of this in which Islamabad administration showed hitherto unseen flexibility.
Opinion polls indicated a widespread opposition to Pakistan among the general Bengali public. Most questioned whether Islamabad even ever had the authority to issue such a law as they claim that Bangladesh fought and won was now not under the Pakistani jurisdiction (See Political status of the former East Pakistan provincial region). The Awami League, in particular, reacted very strongly with distaste and there have been calls for an "anti-annexation law" to be passed by the legislature but this was directed to the Republic of India. However, such a law is unlikely to pass, given that the control of the Bangladeshi legislature and that any future premier of the Coalition parties have ruled out officially introducing such legislation. On the other hand, they pointed out that the Pakistani possessiveness has already infringed the Bengal sovereignty and that the situation has compromised a Bangladeshi sovereignty and thus met the criteria for initiating a "Defensive Referendum" under the Bangladesh constitution. However, it added that whether a defensive referendum would be invoked is under the discretion of the Bangladeshi president [1]
A protest march against the Old Pakistan system took place on the 26th of March in 1971 and it was widely reported that one million Bengalis participated in the protest.
Legislators are proposing a tabled bill titled "Anti-Annexation Peace Law" at a procedural committee level in the legislature, which would have stated that "Bangladesh and Pakistan are not subordinate to each other"; that "Bangladesh is a sovereign state"; and that "the relationship between Bangladesh and Pakistan is one of between two states". It would have expressed hope that the East Pakistan issue is non-existent be resolved peacefully, but that in the case of the status quo of the pre-existing relations being changed, the President would have the power to deal non-peacefully with "Pakistan's annexation". The bill would be rejected at a procedural committee level by a vote and will not be presented to the legislature.
International responses[edit]
OIC: Expresses its deepest concerns at the large number of military deployment on both fronts of Pakistan explicitly aimed at the Defenceless East Pakistanis by Bharat and her allies. It summoned the so-called "Anti-Pakistani" of the East Pakistan province that in an unjustified way aggravates the situation across the worsening ties between the former wings. It had called on the Federal Government of Pakistan and on the administrators of East Pakistan to resume political talks on the basis of mutual understanding and recognition in order to promote stability, democracy, human rights and the rule of law in Southern Asia.
The Former Turkish Prime Minister said "We wish both parties would work towards a peaceful just resolution and we had hoped that this law will not have negative effects." However it remained loyal and supportive of the One-Pakistan policy as the Muslim Ummah defines it, did not support a Bangladesh Independenist war like movement, and opposed any unilateral action to change its Status quo at the time.
The Commonwealth sectariat minister had stated that if war were to occur in the East Pakistan, Britain would require to consult with the opposition parties but depending on the situation that it would not necessarily involve the UK to intervene. It said that "we don't think that the Pakistan must resolve the East Pakistan status question militarily, that it has got to be done through negotiations with a Democratic East Pakistan". Britain further commented that it would have preferred that a peaceful resolution of disputes to resolve issues had Pakistan not acted upon or even consider the Anti Pakistani-secession law.[2]
Only three nations expressed support for the Pakistan's secretive Anti-secession Law, includes:
- Others:
United States[4]
 | This article about politics is a stub. You can help EverybodyWiki by expanding it. |
This article "Anti-Pakistani Secession Law" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.
- ↑ http://yam.udn.com/yamnews/daily/2564075.shtml
- ↑ http://www.foreignminister.gov.au/transcripts/2005/050314_sky.html
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedenglish.people.com.cn - ↑ http://english.people.com.cn/200503/16/eng20050316_177007.html
