Islamisation of laws in Pakistan
 

Check this short note

The Islamisation of laws under Zia was basically to feed his own interests,to stabilize/legitimize his power and to co operate with Muslim countries so as to get funds for propagation of Islamization and administrate the country which proved to be injurious for the country as it plunged the country into an unprecedented civil and external war.
According to Islamization laws schools were replaced by madarssas and urdu medium was taught.the degree of madarssa made equivalent to the masters degree.He created base of deobandi madaris (SSP) to support him.In this era number of madaris jumped to from 135 to 900 with 30,000 students and later on madarssas boomed to 50,000 with funds aiding by muslims countries such as Iran and Saudi arabia to sunni and shias respectively.Universities and agencies were assigned to implement Islamic transformation of society.Regular observance of prayers was made compulsory in offices and educational institutions during working hours.With the occurence of Iran revolution made Zia and Arab monarches nervous about fallout impacts,however shities were empowererd.To encounter this Zia adopted policy of strengthening anti-shia sects which gave rise to sectarianism.Zakat and Usher ordinance were base on sunni deobandi laws it enraged shias and wide scale gulf prevailed.Hudood ordinance was internationally criticized as it inflicted womens sharply in cotext of zina ordinance.
Zia encouraged religous parties to preach narrow version of Islam on the basis of sects and politically he pampered and empowered MQM to weaken the rising power of PPP which heightened sindhi muhajir tussle and strenthened ethnincity.The lashkare jahngvi grouo evolved form SSP.The encouragement and nourishment of taliban in the name of Islamisation to pursue jihadi movement and their present day activities has made hurdles for Pakistan to maintain friendly relations with the neighbouring countries.
During late 1970s Zia experimented religio politics by Islamisation,however,it cound not generate positive impact due to an ill policy and exploiting religion to gain support for another tenure.
Zia's project of Islamisation has far reaching political,religous,etnic and constitutional repurcussions on the society.wrong interpretation of Islam and governments wrong policies has long term implications on Pakistan which had cost it dearly.Since that period inconsistency and instability prevailed in Pakistan.

I Would like to say that Zia was a pure terrorist, he and Jummati Islami completely destroyed our country, both were responsible the creation of terrorism in Pakistan. There were strong supporters of the US in that time, lots of afghani came to our country which also became a big problem for our economy. the Zia Story is finished but Jummati islami is still alive. I Hope their story will also finished very soon

check this short note on Islamisation of laws in Pakistan
 

The Islamisation of laws under Zia was basically to feed his own interests,to stabilize/legitimize his power and to co operate with Muslim countries so as to get funds for propagation of Islamization and administrate the country which proved to be injurious for the country as it plunged the country into an unprecedented civil and external war.
According to Islamization laws schools were replaced by madarssas and urdu medium was taught.the degree of madarssa made equivalent to the masters degree.He created base of deobandi madaris (SSP) to support him.In this era number of madaris jumped to from 135 to 900 with 30,000 students and later on madarssas boomed to 50,000 with funds aiding by muslims countries such as Iran and Saudi arabia to sunni and shias respectively.Universities and agencies were assigned to implement Islamic transformation of society.Regular observance of prayers was made compulsory in offices and educational institutions during working hours.With the occurence of Iran revolution made Zia and Arab monarches nervous about fallout impacts,however shities were empowererd.To encounter this Zia adopted policy of strengthening anti-shia sects which gave rise to sectarianism.Zakat and Usher ordinance were base on sunni deobandi laws it enraged shias and wide scale gulf prevailed.Hudood ordinance was internationally criticized as it inflicted womens sharply in cotext of zina ordinance.
Zia encouraged religous parties to preach narrow version of Islam on the basis of sects and politically he pampered and empowered MQM to weaken the rising power of PPP which heightened sindhi muhajir tussle and strenthened ethnincity.The lashkare jahngvi grouo evolved form SSP.The encouragement and nourishment of taliban in the name of Islamisation to pursue jihadi movement and their present day activities has made hurdles for Pakistan to maintain friendly relations with the neighbouring countries.
During late 1970s Zia experimented religio politics by Islamisation,however,it cound not generate positive impact due to an ill policy and exploiting religion to gain support for another tenure.
Zia's project of Islamisation has far reaching political,religous,etnic and constitutional repurcussions on the society.wrong interpretation of Islam and governments wrong policies has long term implications on Pakistan which had cost it dearly.Since that period inconsistency and instability prevailed in Pakistan.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Almasha Alfarsi;858284]Check this short note

The Islamisation of laws under Zia was basically to feed his own interests,to stabilize/legitimize his power and to co operate with Muslim countries so as to get funds for propagation of Islamization and [COLOR="Blue"]administrate [/COLOR]the country which proved to be injurious for the country as it plunged the country into an unprecedented civil and external war. [COLOR="Blue"](Try to keep the sentences short; a long sentence tends to become incoherent)[/COLOR]
According to Islamization laws [COLOR="Blue"](there has never been a separate category of laws with a label "Islamization Laws"; this is a technical mistake. Always avoid technical mistakes, they appear 'blunders' to the eyes of the examiner)[/COLOR] schools were replaced by madarssas and urdu medium was taught [COLOR="Blue"](what is so bad about teaching in an Urdu medium? You are painting it as some kind of an obvious evil without giving any argument as to why you see it as such)[/COLOR]. the degree of madarssa made equivalent to the masters degree. He created base of deobandi madaris (SSP) to support him.In this era number of madaris jumped to from 135 to 900 with 30,000 students and later on madarssas boomed to 50,000 with funds aiding by muslims countries such as Iran and Saudi arabia to sunni and shias respectively.Universities and agencies were assigned to implement Islamic transformation of society.Regular observance of prayers was made compulsory in offices and educational institutions during working hours.With the occurence of Iran revolution made Zia and Arab monarches nervous about fallout impacts,however shities were empowererd.To encounter this Zia adopted policy of strengthening anti-shia sects which gave rise to sectarianism.Zakat and Usher ordinance were base on sunni deobandi laws it enraged shias and wide scale gulf prevailed.Hudood ordinance was internationally criticized as it inflicted womens sharply in cotext of zina ordinance.
Zia encouraged religous parties to preach narrow version of Islam on the basis of sects and politically he pampered and empowered MQM to weaken the rising power of PPP which heightened sindhi muhajir tussle and strenthened ethnincity.The lashkare jahngvi grouo evolved form SSP.The encouragement and nourishment of taliban [COLOR="Blue"](kindly read up more on the origins of Taliban; they appeared on the scene way after Zia's era. Zia funded Afghan Mujahideen groups, Taliban weren't among them)[/COLOR] in the name of Islamisation to pursue jihadi movement and their present day activities has made hurdles for Pakistan to maintain friendly relations with the neighbouring countries.
During late 1970s Zia experimented religio politics by Islamisation,however,it cound not generate positive impact due to an ill policy and exploiting religion to gain support for another tenure.
Zia's project of Islamisation has far reaching political,religous,etnic and constitutional repurcussions on the society.wrong interpretation of Islam and governments wrong policies has long term implications on Pakistan which had cost it dearly.Since that period inconsistency and instability prevailed in Pakistan.[/Quote]

There are spelling and punctuation mistakes. There are facts and figures, but proper analysis is lacking. It requires strong arguments to back your stance. Nice attempt altogether. Keep writing.

Spelling mistakes would be due to haste.I should have put elimination of english medium on place of urdu.right?well thanks alot for pointing out mistakes

Which can be argumentative points in this note?

[QUOTE=sincer khan;858309]I Would like to say that Zia was a pure terrorist, he and Jummati Islami completely destroyed our country, both were responsible the creation of terrorism in Pakistan. There were strong supporters of the US in that time, lots of afghani came to our country which also became a big problem for our economy. the Zia Story is finished but Jummati islami is still alive. I Hope their story will also finished very soon[/QUOTE]
You are css aspirant,so be moderate in your opinion against any one. You don't have to put an allegation against any group or party on basis of your own discriminatory views.

[QUOTE=ahmedkamal;858722]You are css aspirant,so be moderate in your opinion against any one. You don't have to put an allegation against any group or party on basis of your own discriminatory views.[/QUOTE]

I have no Discrimination with JI. I Just Explained the Truth. this is fact if you don't believe then please read the history, you will understand everything carefully
I am not a supporter/favor of any political party of Pakistan while strictly against all of them, Because they destroyed our country. have sold our Land, Playing with the life of Poor peoples.. above 50 lakh afghanis are living in our Country, Majority are living in KPK, Inflation is increased, terrorism is increased.

[QUOTE=Almasha Alfarsi;858473]Which can be argumentative points in this note?[/QUOTE]
If you look at the Pakistan Affairs paper of 2015, there is a question about Zia's policies. Try next time to not just write simple notes; follow question patterns of past papers.

By analysis, I mean that whatever points you have condensed into this note, expand them adequately and back them up with arguments. For example, justify the political implications you think his policies had. Discuss separately and prove how his religious policy adversely (as you think) affected the institutions of Pakistan.

By making your approach analytical, your note would stop looking merely like a conglomeration of random facts/opinions. It will be coherent, solid and marks-worthy!

I'd like to point out that your note contains glaring inaccuracies and allegations on a Zia which you cannot substantiate. This kind of an answer which paints one personality as the ultimate evil who destroyed Pakistan is not only not true but will also not go down too well with the examiner.

[B]Some points:[/B]

1. What's so wrong about having some madrassah degrees being equivalent to MA Islamiat or MA Arabic? After all, they study about 8 years for their madrassah courses and only madrassah courses approved by the HEC are granted equivalency certificates. Even Musharraf kept this going on during his reign.

2. Zia did apply laws from one school of thought for zakat deduction but after strong protest from the shia community in Islamabad they were exempted from the zakat deduction. This action did not have any long term effects on shia sunni relations.

3. Zia tried his best to bring about peace between Iran and Iraq during their war so that shia sunni divide can be closed. There is no evidence to suggest that he was against one particular school of thought.

4. If Hudood laws were sharply criticized by the international community then it means that they should not have been made? Pakistan is all the time sharply criticized by the same so called international community, so should Pakistan not have been made as well?

5. Why would Zia be at all nervous about the Iranian revolution? Iran was fighting a losing war with Iraq since 1979 and by the end of it 10 years later, Zia had already died.

6. How were shias empowered by the Iranian revolution? Check the state of Iranian economy and military in the Shah's era and now and do the math yourself.

7. If universities and agencies were really tasked with Islamic transformation of the society then what is wrong with that exactly? Wasn't the country made in the name of Islam? BTW, how were universities and agencies tasked for this goal. An explanation would be nice.

8. As mentioned before, Taliban emerged in the mid 90s. Zia had nothing to do with them.

9. Again, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi was formed in 1996. Zia had nothing to do with it either.

10. Zia did what he did to get support for another tenure? Seriously? Zia was a military ruler, his tenure ended the day he died. No one could have dislodged him from his position before that.

In the end, frankly, you shouldn't harbor this much hatred for a man who protected Pakistan's freedom from the clutches of communism. If he hadn't done what he did, we would have been having this conversation in Russian instead of English, FPSC would have been called Федеральная государственная служба комиссионной Пакистана and we would have been [B]ethnically [/B]half Russian.:0

You have to have balance in your approach.

@Almasha Alfarsi

When I said justify and expand adequately the points you have mentioned in the write-up, I meant exactly what Xing Lee above has written. I was too lazy and perhaps too careful to type all these separately, but your inadequate substantiation of these particular points is exactly what made me say that your note merely appears to be a conglomeration of random facts/opinions, devoid of proper analysis.

As for Xing Lee's idea about balanced approach, I totally endorse that too. The reason why I didn't bring that up here is because Zia-bashing has become quite fashionable nowadays (Xing Lee would agree with me on this probably). And there are chances of you escaping examiner's wrath even if you paint him as an evil--but still, at least justify your stance and not just hurl allegations.

@Xing Lee

From what I have seen of you (rather "read of you", to be accurate) on this forum, you appear to me a very strong candidate for 2015 (I am not sure if you have taken the 2015 attempt, just judging from the presence of your comment in the 2015 expectations thread that you might have appeared). I would very much like to know (in the relevant sub-forums obviously) how your attempt went! Looking forward to it, with all my professional curiosity!