Religious identity and politics: Exploring the causes of the political persecution of religious minorities in Kohat District,Pakistan

Abstract

Religious minorities are victims of political isolation and persecution in societies, where they are subject to violence and discrimination. This study was undertaken in a terrorism-affected area to explore those elements that subjugate and suppress religious minorities’ political participation and representation. To conduct an in-depth analysis, a qualitative inquiry was used for data collection and analysis. The researcher interviewed 13 Christians, seven Hindus, and six Sikhs, using a purposive sampling technique and a semi-structured interview guide. The primary data were analyzed using the thematic analysis technique. The researcher found that some of the underlying factors behind the political persecution are leadership vacuum, political neglect, post-election negligence, vote dislocation, political ignorance, and political subordination. This study presented a framework for policymakers to solve minorities’ political problems, and for researchers to better understand the minorities’ political oppression on local and international levels.

Keywords

leadership vacuum political persecution poor representation religious minorities

Introduction

Every citizen, including religious minorities, must be given an equal chance to express their political freedom. However, in some societies, it is found that not every citizen or group equally participates in political processes such as candidature, electoral, and voter registration (Leighley and Nagler, 2013). Similarly, the discrimination, bias, and violence that religious minorities face in their societies can push them into seclusion and marginalization. Thus, they are unable to develop themselves politically, socio-culturally, financially, or academically (Alam et al., 2020; Bartels, 2016; Saiya, 2016). They are living in a subordinate political position and are subject to unfavorable laws that cause them fear and anxiety (Saiya, 2014). Therefore, freedom of expression at a political forum can become difficult for them.

Likewise, religious minorities in Pakistan live as a politically weaker class at the district, provincial and national levels, as they lack leaders who can speak for their rights at societal and legal forums of the state. Since they are living in a vulnerable condition along with political isolation, it is necessary to explore those elements that hamper their political development and participation in the political affairs of the state, especially the law-making process (Gregory and Valentine, 2009). To gain a better understanding, the researcher used a research inquiry, namely transformative world view, associating class oppression with politics and the agenda of political change that occurs at any level/class, as mentioned by Mertens (2010). In this type of inquiry, the researcher presents an action schema for reforms that can change the lives of the masses (here, religious minorities), as revealed by (Charmaz, 2014). Considering this research paradigm, the researcher used an emic approach, observing and interviewing the minorities in the field to answer the following questions:

Research question 1: What are the factors of religious minorities’ political persecution in Kohat, Pakistan?

Research question 2: How can their political pursuit be reorganized to reclaim them in the majority-dominated society?

Literature

Minority groups in some societies like India, Pakistan, China, France, and the USA are politically weaker (Fuchs and Fuchs, 2020; Gregory and Valentine, 2009; Malik, 2020; Siaya, 2016), as they do not effectively participate in the political arenas in societies because they are subject to violence and ignorance by the majority (Majid, 2015). Their political vulnerabilities include a smaller number of registered voters, political ignorance, threats, leadership deficit, and political disorganization (Malik, 2020), thus making them a weaker political class. Verba et al. (1993) reported that, if allowed, US minorities can demonstrate themselves not only through voting but through other opportunities to influence politics and political leadership, e.g. public demonstrations. Moreover, it is also found that minorities’ representation is influential in local politics or at the district level because they can better organize themselves around a single manifesto due to commonality.

To give a chance to every group, the political system of every state must be a “neutral umpire,” which always aims to maintain a balance between different groups within that state. Moreover, it must be able to prove itself to a forceful, centralized, and hegemonic system. It must be free of any form of favoritism based on ethnic, religious, linguistic, caste, regional, or social minority status. Along with this, the constitutions of every state must ensure basic human rights to minorities; they must be granted special community rights and autonomy, to protect them from any form of discrimination and violence (Ispahani, 2017; Manchanda, 2009). The progress in life satisfaction can better be ensured if they are provided with freedom of expression and participation in society (Alam, 2020).

Similarly, it is also reported that in a reaction to any repressive action, minorities can organize themselves and raise their manifesto in any public demonstration to resist that repression. Vermeersch (2006) found that minority groups in central Europe are more likely to protest when they feel discrimination or other socio-economic disparities such as poverty and social deprivation. There is an intolerance of belief-based differences in Belgium, Norway (the burning of the Holy Quran), and France (the ban on the hijab/veil), as reported by Wah (2002). The economic conditions of Bangladeshi, Pakistani, and Black people in Europe are worse than those of others (Platt, 2007).

All citizens are equal before the law; thus, citizenship covers a person’s association to any political network or community and the connection between central rights, obligations, investment, and identity. For example, certain minorities like Uighur Muslims and Tibetans are perceived as a threat to the People’s Republic of China. The recent policies are harsh and based on oppression to isolate them from the mainstream (Little, 2002). Moreover, some countries like Indonesia have not declared any official religion; still, there are religious impacts on the social and political aspects of society. Thus, some laws in Indonesia are biased in making policies that favor the majority by excluding some minority groups like Hindus, Christians, and Buddhists, and their freedom of expression (Ichwan et al., 2020).

Toft et al. (2011) observed a societal pressure in Pakistan that is directed to eradicating religious freedom and participation in politics, creating instability between groups (Pew Research Center, 2014). Therefore, minorities are unable to organize themselves as a politically organized group/class to influence state politics, and are excluded and discriminated against to live as a repressed class of society (Hanif, 2017). They are also unable to raise their voices and organize public demonstrations to tackle their illiteracy, poverty, lack of health services, blasphemy accusations, and targeted killings. They are living in fear and anxiety due to repeated attacks on their places of worship (Christian Solidarity Worldwide, 2019; Hafeez, 2003). Consequently, only those citizens who belong to the majority are considered to be good citizens, and so they enjoy more human rights than others. The rest, such as Hindus, Sikhs, and Christians, are viewed to be traitors, infidels, and a threat to society (Fuchs and Fuchs, 2020; Malik, 2020). In line with this, Saiya (2016) has also reported that states who cannot control the pressure from the majority become unfavorable for minorities.

In some societies, the extremism and violence against religious minorities further increased after 9/11 because many terrorist groups targeted minorities (Alam et al., 2020) and their political and social activists. Religious minorities thus suffered attacks over their places of worship, schools, and other community places. They were also unable to represent themselves or to leave their houses for conducting business, gaining an education, or casting votes. The overall societal environment against Christian and Hindus is based on extremism, violence, threats, and distrust among majority and minority religious groups in India and Pakistan (Christian Solidarity Worldwide, 2019; Lall, 2008; Majid, 2015). In this way, the representation of minorities also became weaker and they could not express themselves in political campaigns to increase understanding of their communities or make proper laws and policies for their development by joining the Pakistan national and provincial assemblies (Faruqi, 2011; HRCP, 2014a).

Besley et al. (2004) and Duflo (2005) found that the delivery of services to minority groups and their welfare are strongly associated with the quality of leadership and political representation, demonstrated in the district and provincial governments, and their affiliation with political parties. However, in the separate electoral system, minority groups were denied the right to vote for Muslim candidates during the 1990s (Ispahani, 2017). Thus, they were unable to vote for their favorite candidate.

The Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI, 2014) reported that minorities are politically weak, and their leaders are unable to perform their roles as efficiently as the majority’s leaders. It is also important to mention that minorities’ politicians face politically demanding situations and are thus discouraged from participating in socio-cultural and political activities. So, they are unable to better represent their groups at the national or provincial level. Likewise, Isphani (2017), HRCP (2014a), and Faruqi (2011) reported that minorities in Pakistan are hampered from casting their votes, for many reasons such as harassment at the polling stations, failures in voter registration, and allocation of electoral area. Alongside this, they are unable to register important events such as birth, marriage, or death, or to acquire a National Identification Card (Church World Service, 2012; Shaikh, 2009).

Moreover, some political parties take little interest in minority groups because they are excluded and powerless and have less impact on the state’s politics, thus their voting and electoral candidature is ignored. In some countries, they are also unable to compete electorally due to certain legal standards mentioned in the laws of these states mainly based on cultural, racial, or belief variations. For example, in Cambodia, the candidate for communal council election is required to be able to study and write in Khmer, thus excluding a majority of the country’s tribal and native population (Tomei, 2005). Similarly, candidates for the president or prime minister of Pakistan must be Muslim (Gregory and Valentine, 2009).

It is worth mentioning that the legislation process is very important for all groups within any state. Laws and policies can have both positive and negative impacts on different groups. They are also helpful in bringing social control and protection of the weaker class from prejudice and discrimination. However, it is found that the law-making processes and policies are discriminatory, hampering the freedom of expression of religious minorities. In some cases, political ignorance and discrimination or the failure of legislation and the judiciary also stop religious minorities from expressing their beliefs and establishing their places of religion. It is also reported that religious minorities are unaware of their due political rights in Central Asia (Ghanea et al., 2010). Due to such conditions, minorities in some states are unable to participate in the political arena and to express their political freedom. Their voice is also weak on the floor of the upper and lower houses of the states.

In contemporary societies, involving a minority group in the political arena of the state can solve many issues related to them. For example, the issue of the hijab that stemmed from regulations based on the politics of difference (Cooper, 2004) is an example of gender and religious-based stereotyping in Europe. Høstmælingen (2004) reported that the increase in the use of the hijab has occasionally created problems for Muslim women in Norway. It is also observed that the politics of differences are mainly connected with the politics of religion, which suppress any minority group’s freedom of expression. It is found that non-Christian belief groups and ideologies also play a significant role in states’ affairs in Europe, hence their political concerns need to be understood to address their problems (Skeie, 2006). In such a way, the politics of religion meets the politics of culture, identity, and citizenship (Cooper, 2004).

The condition of religious minorities in Pakistan

The idea of Pakistan was based on the creation of a state where everyone could live freely, and where freedom of expression would be given to everyone irrespective of race, religion, culture, or citizenship (Jalal, 2009). However, the religious minority population is decreasing day by day in Pakistan due to militancy and violence against them (Fuchs and Fuchs, 2020). Furthermore, they are also victims of blasphemy accusations by certain groups who target them for their likes and dislikes (Ispahani, 2017). Thus, certain laws are not favorable to them as they create fear among them and there is increasing extremism and hatred by the majority due to such laws (Akbarzadeh and Mansouri, 2010; Lall, 2008). Alam (2020) found that religious minorities feel insecure because of belief-based differences, and hence require legal protection.

According to the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (2017), the population of Pakistan comprised 96 percent Muslims, and the remaining four percent are people of other beliefs such as Hindus, Christians, and Sikhs, etc. It is reported that these belief groups are facing discrimination, persecution, violence, and intimidation. They are vulnerable to attacks by certain extremist groups in the form of targeting their places of worship, assault, bullying, and execution (Malik, 2002). In such a situation, religious minorities such as Christians, Hindus, and Sikhs are feeling uncertain and insecure. For example, the extremist attack on the Saint Churches in Peshawar on September 22, 2013, in which 127 people were killed and 250 injured, created fear among Christians (Shafiq and Rehman, 2018). It is also found that they are targeted at their places of worship, while a Christian couple was thrown in Brickkiln in Punjab (Tahira and Mushtaq, 2018).

In Pakistan, religious minorities only share 10 seats in the lower house of the Pakistani parliament – four seats are reserved for Hindus, four for Christians, and two for other minorities (Ispahani, 2017). The representation of minorities in the national and provincial assemblies is the least and thus they cannot influence the politics of Pakistan. One important reason could be poverty, as some minority candidates are unable to afford the election expenses for campaigns and party funds and expenditures. Hence, after election or selection on a minority seat of any party, they are dominated by the majority, and thus cannot go against the party interest. Henceforth, the political process in this way is dominated by the majority (Gregory and Valentine, 2009).

Minorities in Pakistan are granted their fundamental rights in the Constitution of 1973, including freedom of religion and of establishing religious institutions (Article 20), safeguarding of minorities against undue taxation (Article 21), freedom of religious education (Article 22), freedom to enter a public place irrespective of one’s tribal or religious identity (Article 26), protection against discrimination in the selection of the Public Service Commission (Article 27), and the representation of minorities in provincial and federal services selection (Article 36) (National Assembly of Pakistan, 2012). All these articles are designed to ensure the adequate provision of belief-based practices and participation in political processes such as political candidature and voter registration (Kahlid and Anwar, 2018).

According to Gregory and Valentine (2009), besides the protection granted by the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan, there seems to be a failure to ensure the complete and real application and implementation of the law that guarantees protection of the rights of religious minorities. There is also a lack of trust in the judicial system due to the misuse of profanity laws by the general population without any witnesses or evidence, thus heightening the vulnerability of religious minorities (Christian Solidarity Worldwide, 2019). The Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (2013) also reported that the overall attitude of the Muslim community is negative towards Christians as they consider them untouchables and backward due to their low social and economic status.

As reported by Ispahani (2017) and Gregory and Valentine (2009), minorities have less interest and participation in the political system of Pakistan. Their interest could not be expressed in the legal system of the state, especially law and policymaking, because their representation is less and thus considered unimportant. Therefore, they are unable to pass a bill or to make/plan or change any law for their communities. Besides, their political leaders cannot get enough funds for housing, sanitation, schooling, health, and numerous other development projects. Moreover, some scholars are not able to address the political barriers, since there is no complete recorded/available data to identify the inequalities.

Methodology

This research study was conducted in the Kohat District of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. The study area is a hub for minorities (Christians, Hindus, and Sikhs) located in the northwest region of Pakistan. The incidence of 9/11 has made them vulnerable to violence, along with feelings of fear and isolation (Alam et al., 2020); hence, the researcher took the opportunity to highlight the factors of their political persecution. Creswell (2014) defined three components for a researcher to design his/her research framework: the paradigm, the research strategy, and the research methods.

The paradigm of this research is based on a transformative worldview, which claims that a research inquiry that explores the social oppression of any class must be intertwined with politics and a political change agenda within that society. Thus, such a philosophical worldview emphasizes the desired needs of a group or individual in society that is marginalized, alienated, or subjugated (Mertens, 2010). Moreover, Cresswell (2014) expressed that specific issues need to be addressed through this approach related to any existing social issues like oppression, persecution, and empowerment. Considering this definition, the researcher interviewed and observed the participants in the field to obtain an insight into the factors of political persecution. He applied the emic approach to interacting and communicating with the participants, to better understand their experiences of political participation and political campaigns.

This research study used a qualitative strategy because the objectives were exploratory and needed in-depth analysis. To explore in depth the political condition of minorities, a qualitative methodology was adopted. Marin and Marin (1991) also suggested that qualitative research methodologies are more appropriate for studying minorities.

A purposive sampling method was adopted to select and approach the participants from the 32 union councils of Kohat District. Cresswell (2014) stated that a suitable sample range for qualitative research is between 20 and 30, so the researcher selected 26 participants for this study. Among religious minority groups, only those members were interviewed who were able to understand and express their views on the political persecution faced by them in the study area, as suggested by Oppong (2013). Among the targeted population, the researcher interviewed 13 Christians, seven Hindus, and six Sikhs. These belonged to different segments of society, such as social activists, political representatives, church staff, and employees in the public and private sectors. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with all participants by using a semi-structured interview guide, as per the analogy designed by Cresswell (2014) and Charmaz (2006).

The participants were involved in a one-to-one interview session, which lasted for approximately 40 to 50 minutes. They were asked the following questions:

What is the current position of your group regarding participation in the political processes, such as election campaigns, voting, and performance in political parties, etc.?

How do your political representatives respond to you as members of a minority group?

What are the chances for minorities to participate in the political process?

Which factor most affects the political participation of your group?

How can these factors be controlled to ensure the desirable participation of minorities and their leadership?

What, if any, are the points where you find discriminatory treatment from the state in terms of recognition of religious communities, i.e. the system of state rules and regulations?

With what type of political party do members of your group normally affiliate themselves? Which political party do you think is friendlier towards minorities?

Is there only one leader or are there different leaders within the same group?

Do any leaders/candidates visit your community, other than ones from the minority?

What is the nature of their visit during the election?

Apart from interviews, field-notes and memo-writing were also used to collect the data. All interviews were recorded on a tape-recorder. For those participants who felt uneasy with tape-recording, their responses were noted down in written form. After completion of this phase, one-to-one meetings were conducted with the participants to clarify the answers in written form and crossmatch their response without using a tape-recorder.

Thematic analysis technique was used for data analysis, completed in several steps, such as transcribing the primary data and formulating the interviews, initial coding, and modification of the coding schemes, as per the practice recommended by Braun and Clarke (2006). All interviews were transcribed and then elucidated in English language sentence by sentence, carefully checked for accurateness by re-listening to each recording. A total of 15 codes, six categories, and one theme were developed. The overall coding procedure was as follows:

Transcription → generating codes → selecting codes → categories → theme

Research ethics

The researcher thoroughly observed the research ethics suggested by Dooly et al. (2017). The study topic is a sensitive one as it includes people from different belief backgrounds, thus interviewing them was not an easy task especially in areas like Pakistan. The researcher faced different challenges but overcame these by introducing himself, the study topic, objectives, and academic purposes. Permission was granted by all participants and they were informed about the field visit before each interview session. A consent form was given to every participant to read and sign. To make the interviews clearer and more understandable, they were conducted in the local languages, i.e. Urdu and Pashto. Along with this, all the questions were simple, free of ambiguities, and unbiased. The identity of every participant was kept confidential by assigning them pseudonyms during data analysis.

Discussion

The role of political institutions, and the participation of the various groups in them, including religious minorities, determine the welfare and freedom of every state. A political institution has various roles to play, including the devising of laws and policies and the selection of leaders who can work for the uplift of their communities. It also indicates the distribution of power and the opportunities given to different groups to participate in state affairs, especially the law-making process. However, this study reveals that the situation for minorities is not favorable in the study area. The minorities of the study area are politically isolated and are a weak political segment of the society at the district and provincial levels. Religious minorities are unable to develop politically or to participate in the political process for several reasons. These are examined below.

Leadership vacuum

The protection against violence and discrimination against any group is associated with leadership abilities. However, the leadership such as political leaders have not effectively worked for their community development or successfully coordinated with them. Thus, there exists a gap between the leadership and the community in the sense that they are unable to understand each other. There is a leadership vacuum, and the able leaders are unable to represent their community as there is no consensus to select a common leader because minorities themselves are alienated into different political groups, even though they are the least in number. Thus, they have failed to set forth an efficient and true leadership.

One participant called Daniel argued:

I would say, for a long time we are unable to choose an able leader who could speak for us and represent us on every forum. Our political representation is weak due to many reasons; one could be that we are divided over the leadership selection. We need such a leader who can unite us and relieve our grievances.

Another respondent, Kumar, disclosed:

I have observed that we are politicized and divided by the politicians who use our group for their benefit. We do not understand the actual worth of our votes, because many people do not caste it in favor of the actual candidate, who can support and represent us in a better way on the floor of the national or provincial assemblies. I would suggest we must choose and support a common leader to develop our community.

The above findings of this article are novel in the sense that they add the issue of a leadership vacuum to the existing literature about minorities’ participation in the political processes. In the previous literature, Ispahani (2017), HRCP (2014b), and Manchanda (2009) showed that many states have assured political freedom to everyone, accompanied by certain fundamental and special minority rights in their constitution, but in reality these are dominated by the majority to enforce their beliefs and values over the minority in the name of ‘public order’.

Political subordination

The political leadership of the minority group is subjugated by the majority group’s politicians since they are lesser in number and weaker in their political position. Therefore, they contribute very little to state affairs and law-making processes. Some of them are selected against the vacant minority’s seats of the ruling and opposition parties, thus are mainly bound/inclined towards their party’s decisions, irrespective of whether such policy interests might counter their own groups’ welfare. They also fail to work as a pressure group and influence the district administration, the way the majority group does. Thus, they hold a subordinate position in the political arena of the study area.

Masih stated that:

The autonomy of our leader is very important for our political development. I would recommend a separate election and not selection so that our leaders become independent and express their political views, not under the subordination of any party; such elections would solve many of our political issues.

Kumar also expressed that:

We must be allocated separate a constituency; thus we will be able to vote our favorable candidate, they will respect us more due to our vote power, as compared to a single collective candidate (i.e. all minorities including Hindus, Christians, and Sikhs have a single seat/constituency). Moreover, their political leadership is subdued by the ruling parties and cannot work independently.

Joel reported that:

A politician selected from minority constituency is sold; they fail to work for the development of minorities. Even minorities quotas in different sectors are abolished, and there is no one to re-establish them. We are always confident about our leaders, but they do not represent us truly, since they are dominated by the governing party or the party which has selected them.

The above results align with those of Besley et al. (2004) and Duflo (2005), who found that the delivery of services and welfare funds for minorities is associated with the nature of their political leadership in the local governments and other elected bodies. However, religious minorities’ political representation is the least in number, both in the national and provincial assemblies. Furthermore, most of the minority politicians are talented but poor; they cannot afford the election dues or money for election campaigns, thus they are mostly subdued by the mainstream party. Due to this, they are less able to express their genuine opinions (Gregory and Valentine, 2009).

Post-election negligence

The present study also explored some novel findings of the election campaigns, which have remained crucial for the majority and minority groups. Some political parties and their leaders express their greater concerns before the election, to get the voters’ support. They arrange meetings to convince and motivate minorities’ voters to cast votes in their favor by giving them high hopes, especially in connection to addressing and solving minorities’ housing and employment issues. However, once the election is over, many groups including religious minorities are neglected. Meetings with the elected candidates also become difficult, and even the leaders and social activists of minority groups fail to meet them.

A participant named Yashwant disclosed:

You know, the politicians of our area do not concentrate on us after the elections are over. They just beat about the bush and betray our people. They forget all their promises and do not allow us to meet them. In short, I would say that no political party is serious about our problems. They only exploit us for their votes and do not pay attention to us after elections.

The above are novel findings, which have not been given by any other study.

Political indifference

Some members of religious minorities are unaware of their political rights and responsibilities. Besides, they are illiterate and face extreme poverty, thus they take little interest in the political process or cast votes in favor of those who give them high hopes. It is also observed that some people do not even know the names of their political leaders, parties, or political candidates. However, they cast votes in their favor, while ignorant of their vote and the purpose of polling. Also, many men do not allow women family members to register or cast their votes due to insecurity and ignorance.

Gill related that:

Religious minorities are suffering politically due to many reasons. One major reason is that many of us do not know the value of our votes and the purpose of the election. During the election campaigns, such voters are easily betrayed by the political party workers and their representatives.

Mukesh further added that:

It is very important for minorities to educate themselves about their political rights and involve themselves in political processes and campaigns. This will enable them to choose the right leader or the one who can truly express their interest on the floor of the assembly. The ignorance of voters has caused serious political damage to us in previous elections.

In line with these research findings, Tomei (2005) reported that religious minorities are politically weaker and ignored by the majority. They are unable to express their due political freedom and rights as some of them are mainly unaware of the value and purpose of the vote. Alongside this, due to their weak representation, many political parties take little interest in them (SDPI, 2014).

Vote agitation

Proper voter registration is a vital element for gaining political strength and solidarity. It is also the right of every citizen to place or locate their vote in the same constituency to which they belong. This study has found that many votes of minority groups were in far off areas or those areas where they did not have their favorite candidate. Moreover, these localities were not accessible to them, thus many minority votes were abolished, and they could not express their political will.

Singh reported that:

Another issue during the previous election was that a number of our group members were unable to cast their votes because they were not properly listed. During voter registration, proper time was not given to them to register their votes, and neither were electoral lists shared with us before the election to correct and place/locate our votes.

Noel also confirmed that:

One important reason for our political weakness is that we could not vote because our votes were placed in a far-flung area where we cannot go freely since it may not be safe for us. Moreover, there was no favorable candidate for us.

Similar to the above findings, Ispahani (2017) reported that some minorities in Pakistan could vote for people of their religious groups. They are mainly restricted to exercising their right to vote or hold public office. Moreover, there is also a differential treatment by some states which includes the restriction and implementation of such laws, under which minority communities are banned from organizing or running a campaign for benefits or privileges (Stahnke, 2002).

Political neglect

Some political parties disregard the minorities’ membership and their role in political processes. They are mostly neglected due to their lesser number and weaker political impact on the country’s politics. Political candidates pay fewer or even no visits to minorities’ communities after the election. Such neglect functions as a hurdle for minorities to address their welfare and concerns to the local and national governments.

Marques opined:

For a long period, I have observed that the politicians do not visit or meet us after elections. We have now decided that we must not expect anything from them; rather we must cooperate and help each other because no politician asks our problems after the election, nor do they work for our welfare.

According to Johnson:

You know! We are a weak political class because we are not engaged in the political process. We cannot meet our elected leaders; they forget us after the elections. They can only be watched on social media after the election. They do not allocate time for us to listen and solve our problems.

A participant named Frank disclosed that:

We have many times asked our leaders for a residential colony; these reforms can be made by the government in the form of a Housing Scheme for us, even on an instalment basis. It is only possible if the leaders [i.e. politicians] pay visits to our area or allow us to arrange a meeting with them. They only make false promises with us during election campaigns; thus we are now disappointed with all the political parties.

Thus, the above findings indicate that religious minorities are neglected due to their weaker political affiliation to and impact on the state’s politics. Their political weaknesses are embedded in many elements, one of which is the political neglect that does not provide a fertile ground for them to express their political will effectively.

Conclusion

This study aimed to address the political weaknesses faced by religious minorities in a terrorism-affected area of Pakistan. To explore the major barriers, the author placed novel findings of minorities’ political participation through the transformative world view approach. These are in the form of leadership deficit, political ignorance, political indifference, vote agitation, and political neglect. This study has found that two major points of minorities’ political weakness can modify their political persecution. The first is the leadership deficit, as the minority representation in the study area is weaker and subjugated by the majority. Secondly, due to their weaker political position minorities are neglected on the national and provincial levels because of their poor voting and political ignorance.

To better understand the political persecution of religious minorities, this research study presents the existing elements about it. It also presents a model that can be better applicable in overcoming this issue and ensuring the political empowerment of religious minority groups not only in the study area but throughout Pakistan. It also opens new paths for those scholars and researchers who are interested in studying the minorities’ condition, especially the political participation of religious minorities in Pakistan.

Considering the findings of this study, it is recommended that political dominion and participation in politics are important aspects of the citizenship status of each group. However, minorities in the study area are politically persecuted. To develop these groups, they must be given a chance of free and reasonable political support, so they may connect themselves with the political circle of the state. Their vote assignment might be checked, and the enrollment of their votes must be done before elections. Their political leaders must be enabled and empowered so that they can raise their voice on the floor of the assembly regardless of any subjugation. Moreover, the political leaders of both segments, the majority and minority, must visit marginalized communities and organize meetings with them, to involve all stakeholders and get a true picture of their life situations.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Jan Alam

References

Akbarzadeh

Mansouri

(2010) Islam and Political Violence: Muslim Diaspora and Radicalism in the West. London: Tauris Academic Studies.

Alam

(2020) 7P’s of life satisfaction: A social constructionist model for the life satisfaction of religious minority groups in Kohat, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (Pakistan). Humanities and Social Sciences Communication 7(147): 1–8.

Alam

Shujaat

Niaz

(2020) Religious minorities as victims to terrorism: Socio-linguistic and social bonds for reclaiming them in District Kohat, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Criminology 12(1): 128–150.

Bartels

(2016) Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Besley

Pande

Rahman

, et al. (2004) The politics of public goods provision evidence from Indian local government. Journal of the European Economic Association 2(2): 416–426.

Braun

Clarke

(2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101.

Charmaz

(2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Charmaz

(2014) Constructing Grounded Theory. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Christian Solidarity Worldwide (2019) Pakistan: Religious freedom under attack. Available at: https://www.sadf.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2019-12-pakistan-religious-freedom-under-attack-final-compressed-single-pages-1.pdf (accessed 15 March 2020).

10.

Church World Service (2012) Religious Minorities in Pakistan Election. Karachi: Church World Service of Pakistan.

11.

Cooper

(2004) Challenging Diversity: Rethinking Equality and the Value of Difference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

12.

Creswell

(2014) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. California: SAGE Publications.

13.

Dooly

Moore

Vallejo

(2017) Research ethics. Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED573618.pdf (accessed 9 February 2020).

14.

Duflo

(2005) Why political reservations? Journal of the European Economic Association 3(2): 668–678.

15.

Faruqi

(2011) A Question of Faith. Islamabad: Jinnah Institute.

16.

Fuchs

(2020) Religious minorities in Pakistan: Identities, citizenship and social belonging. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies 43(1): 52–67.

17.

Ghanea

Goldston

Taneja

(2010). Focus on Religious Minorities: State of the World’s Minorities and Indigenous Peoples. London: Minority Rights Group International.

18.

Gregory

Valentine

(2009) Pakistan: The Situation of Religious Minorities. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Islamabad: Status Determination and Protection Information Section.

19.

Hafeez

(2003) Why Muslims Rebel: Repression and Resistance in the Islamic World. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

20.

Hanif

(2017) Pakistan: Land of the intolerant. The New York Times, 19 October. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/19/opinion/pakistan-muslims-ahmadis.html (accessed 15 November 2019).

21.

Høstmælingen

(2004) Hijab in Norway: A Threat or a Question of Human Rights? Oslo: Abstrakt Forlag.

22.

HRCP (2014a) State of Human Rights in 2013, Lahore, 2014; Hassan SY Pakistan’s Hindus, other minorities face surge of violence. Reuters, 5 May 2014; interviews conducted with activists in 2014. Report, HRCP, Islamabad.

23.

HRCP (2014b) Minorities under Attack: Faith based discrimination in Pakistan. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/57fb91e54.pdf.

24.

Ichwan

Salim

Srimulyani

(2020) Islam and dormant citizenship: Soft religious ethno-nationalism and minorities in Aceh, Indonesia. Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 31(2): 215–240.

25.

Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (2013) Situation of Christians in Pakistan, social and government attitudes, treatment and rights during 2010–2012. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/510f8dbd2.html (accessed 10 August 2019).

26.

Ispahani

(2017) Purifying the Land of the Pure: A History of Pakistan’s Religious Minorities. New York: Oxford University Press.

27.

Jalal

(2009) Partisans of Allah: Jihad in South Asia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

28.

Kahlid

Anwar

(2018) Minorities under constitution(s) of Pakistan. Journal of the Research Society of Pakistan 55(2): 51–62.

29.

Lall

(2008) Educate to hate: The use of education in the creation of antagonistic national identities in India and Pakistan. A Journal of Comparative and International Education 38(1): 103–119.

30.

Leighley

Nagler

(2013) Who Votes Now? Demographics, Issues, Inequality and Turnout in the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

31.

Little

(2002) Religious Minorities and Religious Freedom: An Overview. New York: Columbia University Press.

32.

Majid

(2015) Indian secularism and religious minorities in India. A Research Journal of South Asian Studies 30(2): 107–116.

33.

Malik

(2020) Narrating Christians in Pakistan through times of war and conflict. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies 43(1): 68–83.

34.

Malik

(2002) Religious Minorities in Pakistan. London: Minority Rights Group International.

35.

Manchanda

(2009) Living on the margins: Minorities in South Asia. The South Asian Forum for Human Rights. Kathmandu: European Commission.

36.

Marin

(1991) Research with Hispanic Populations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

37.

Mertens

(2010) Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

38.

National Assembly of Pakistan (2012) The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Available at: http://www.na.gov.pk/uploads/documents/1333523681_951.pdf (accessed 15 November 2019).

39.

Oppong

(2013) The problem of sampling in qualitative research. Asian Journal of Management Science & Education 2: 202–210.

40.

Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (2017) Census: Population distribution by religion. Available at: www.pbs.gov.pk/content/population-religion (accessed 15 March 2019).

41.

Pew Research Center (2014) Religious hostilities reach six-year high. Available at: http://www.pewforum.org/2014/01/14/religious-hostilities-reach-six-year-high/.

42.

Platt

(2007) Migration and Social Mobility: The Life Chances of Britain’s Minority Ethnic Communities. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

43.

Saiya

(2014) Explaining Religious Violence Across Countries: An Institutional Perspective in Mediating Religion and Government: Political Institutions and the Policy Process. New York: Palgrave.

44.

Saiya

(2016) Religion, state, and terrorism, a global analysis. Terrorism and Political Violence 31(2): 204–223.

45.

Shafiq

Rehman

(2018) Land, conflict and traditional institutions in the north-west Pakistan: An appraisal of Hazarkhwani, Peshawar. Journal of the Punjab University Historical Society 31(1): 235–246.

46.

Shaikh

(2009) Status of minorities in Pakistan in 2009. Islamabad: South Asian for Human Rights.

47.

Skeie

(2006) Diversity and the political function of religious education. British Journal of Religious Education 28(1): 19–32.

48.

Stahnke

(2002) Equality and Religious Preferences: Theoretical, International and Religious Perspectives. New York: Columbia University Press.

49.

Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI) (2014) Searching for security: The rising marginalization of religious communities in Pakistan. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands and Minority Rights Group International.

50.

Tahira

Mushtaq

(2018) Protection of minority rights: An analysis of implementation of statutes, policies and illegalities in Pakistan. Journal of the Punjab University Historical Society 31(1): 73–81.

51.

Toft

Philpott

Shah

(2011) God’s Century: Resurgent Religion and Global Politics. New York: W.W. Norton.

52.

Tomei

(2005) Indigenous and Tribal Peoples: An Ethnic Audit of Selected Poverty Reduction. Geneva: ILO Strategy Papers.

53.

Verba

Schlozman

Brady

, et al. (1993) Citizen activity: Who participates? What do they say? The American Political Science Review 87: 303–318.

54.

Vermeersch

(2006) The Romani Movement: Minority Politics and Ethnic Mobilization in Contemporary Central Europe. New York: Berghahn.

55.

Wah

(2002) European Parliamentary Enquete Commissions: Justification of a Two-Tiered System of Religious Freedoms. New York: Columbia University Press.