Pakistan’s constitutional and religious framework leaves little room for ambiguity regarding the country’s Islamic identity or the illegitimacy of violence committed in the name of religion. Pakistan was established to enable Muslims to organise their collective political, social and economic life in accordance with the principles of the Qur’an and Sunnah. This foundational vision is embodied in the Objectives Resolution, which declares that sovereignty over the entire universe belongs to Almighty Allah and that the authority exercised by the people of Pakistan is a sacred trust. Consequently, Pakistan’s constitutional order is not detached from religion; rather, it derives its legitimacy from representative government, Islamic principles, justice, equality and the rule of law.
The Constitution explicitly declares Islam as the state religion and requires that laws be brought into conformity with the injunctions of the Qur’an and Sunnah. It also prevents the enactment of legislation that is repugnant to Islamic teachings. These provisions establish that Pakistan possesses a constitutionally recognised Islamic system in which religious guidance and parliamentary governance operate within an organised legal framework. Religious scholars, including Mufti Tariq Masood, have similarly observed that Pakistan qualifies as an Islamic country because its Constitution does not permit legislation contrary to the fundamental teachings of Islam.
Therefore, attempts to portray the Pakistani state as inherently un-Islamic in order to justify armed rebellion are both constitutionally false and religiously misleading
Islamic jurisprudence places enormous value on public order, legitimate authority, and the prevention of bloodshed. A government operating under a constitutional system has the responsibility to protect life, religion, property, dignity, and social stability. These objectives correspond directly with the higher purposes of Islamic law, commonly described as the Maqasid al-Shariah. Undermining state institutions through terrorism, armed rebellion or organised violence does not advance Islam; it attacks the very structures responsible for protecting society from disorder, injustice and lawlessness.
For this reason, Pakistan’s campaign against violent extremism is not merely a matter of political necessity or national security. It is also a religious responsibility. An Islamic state is required to protect its citizens from murder, intimidation, coercion, and destruction. When extremist organisations attack civilians, security personnel, mosques, markets, schools and religious institutions, the state has a moral and legal obligation to confront them.
Failure to act would expose society to fitna, lawlessness, and fasad fil-ard, or corruption and disorder on earth
The declaration of a so-called jihad against Pakistan is therefore a serious distortion of religion. Under Islamic jurisprudence, private groups cannot independently assume the powers of the state, establish parallel courts, declare war, impose punishments, or decide who is a legitimate target. Mufti Taqi Usmani has clearly maintained that Pakistan possesses legitimate state authority under an Islamic constitutional system and that rebellion against such an established government is unlawful and prohibited. Armed resistance cannot be transformed into a religious obligation merely by attaching Islamic slogans to political objectives.
This principle is reinforced by the Paigham-e-Pakistan national religious declaration, which was endorsed by more than 1,800 scholars from different schools of Islamic thought. The declaration rejected terrorism, suicide attacks, sectarian violence, armed rebellion, and the unauthorised declaration of jihad. It established a broad scholarly consensus that the activities of extremist and Khawarij-inspired groups violate the Qur’an, Sunnah and the constitutional order of Pakistan. This consensus is particularly important because it challenges the extremists’ claim that they represent religious authority. In reality, their ideology has been rejected by the country’s mainstream scholars and recognised religious institutions.
The Khawarij mentality is based on indiscriminate excommunication, political absolutism, and the misuse of jihad. Such groups routinely declare other Muslims apostates, portray lawful institutions as enemies of religion, and use selective religious references to justify murder. Islam, however, subjects jihad to strict legal, ethical, and moral limitations. It cannot be used as an instrument for gaining political power, spreading terror, or eliminating opponents. The Qur’an’s declaration in Surah al-Ma’idah that the unjust killing of one person is comparable to killing all humanity demonstrates the sanctity attached to human life.
Terrorist violence against innocent people is therefore not jihad; it is unlawful killing
The Federation of Islamic Seminaries, Wifaq-ul-Madaris al-Arabia Pakistan, has also rejected extremism and disassociated religious seminaries from violent organisations. Pakistan’s madrasas have historically been established for religious education, moral development, scholarship and social reform, not terrorism or armed rebellion. Attacks on mosques, seminaries and religious scholars expose the hypocrisy of groups claiming to act in the name of Islam. As Maulana Abdullah Khalil has argued, violence against sacred places and scholars damages Islam itself and promotes chaos rather than religious reform.
The teachings and conduct of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ provide an equally decisive standard. Even during warfare, the Prophet ﷺ prohibited the killing of women, children, elderly people, religious figures, and other non-combatants. He forbade treachery, mutilation, and unnecessary destruction. Dr Tahir-ul-Qadri has similarly emphasised that targeting civilians in the name of jihad is not only forbidden but criminal. The authority to declare and regulate armed conflict belongs to a legitimate state, not self-appointed commanders, clandestine organisations or sectarian militias.
Mufti Abdul Rahim has also affirmed that the declaration of jihad is exclusively a state responsibility. According to him, extensive discussions among religious scholars established this principle so clearly that even prominent figures associated with armed movements had acknowledged it. This further demolishes the argument that individuals or organisations may launch their own wars by describing them as religious struggles.
Terrorism in Pakistan is therefore not a legitimate jihad but a self-created, unauthorised, and un-Islamic insurgency
Islam is a religion of peace, justice, compassion, and social harmony. As Mufti Tayyab Qureshi has stressed, associating Islam with terrorism misrepresents its teachings and fuels Islamophobia internationally. Violent groups not only murder Pakistanis but also damage the global image of Islam by presenting criminal conduct as religious devotion.
Pakistan’s firm response to extremist violence is thus required by both Islamic responsibility and national sovereignty. Protecting citizens, preserving constitutional authority, defending religious institutions, and maintaining national unity are fundamental obligations of an Islamic state. Groups that spread fear, practise indiscriminate takfir and seek power through bloodshed cannot claim religious legitimacy. Their violence is rebellion, their terrorism is fasad fil-ard, and their so-called jihad is a dangerous misuse of Islam.
