Honourable dignitaries and esteemed listeners!

The subject of my brief remarks is the author of the book, the “Book Sahib” (the book itself), and the holders of power.

The author of the book, Mr. Hussain Naqi, is a name that fully reflects its meaning.

The courage of refusal of Imam Hussain (RA) and the patience and forbearance of Imam Naqi (RA) can be seen reflected in his personality.

Whether it was the Umayyads or the Abbasids, the Imams always held high the banner of truth and righteousness.

Hussain Naqi is a journalist, yet in today’s times he has remained a resisting voice against the People’s Party, the military, and religious parties — and as a result of this “crime,” he endured and kissed the gallows and the whip with patience.

Comparison is not always appropriate, but for the sake of understanding, let me say that Hussain Naqi is the Minhaj Barna and Nisar Usmani of today — whatever is principle, democracy, or truth, he never hesitates to speak it.

To interrupt Bhutto during the full force of his rule is a living tradition of his self-respect.

Had he been in France, he would have earned the stature of Jean-Paul Sartre, who supported truth during the Algerian civil war and before whom President de Gaulle had to bow.

Had Hussain Naqi been a woman, he would have received honour equal to Simone de Beauvoir, who played an immortal and unforgettable role for women’s freedom and equality.

Had he been in Britain, he would have been called Bertrand Russell for his ideas — just as Russell had to go into exile for his philosophy, Hussain Naqi, for his views, had to be banished from Karachi.

In today’s age, Hussain Naqi is a blessing, for now only a few symbols of the sanctity of the word and freedom of expression remain.

The “Book Sahib,” “Mujh Se Jo Ho Saka,” is a beautiful blend of his birthplace Lucknow and his adopted home Punjab — in it, the delicacy and subtlety of Lucknow’s Urdu and the purity of Punjab merge charmingly.

In this book, through modern expression and critique, Hussain Naqi has presented an evaluation of history, politics, and society.

From the life of Lucknow, his ancestors, and their impressions, many new dimensions regarding the causes of Pakistan’s creation have emerged.

The “Book Sahib,” “Mujh Se Jo Ho Saka,” is his prose-diwan, each sentence of which is itself a complete ghazal, and every word of that ghazal is an encyclopedia of personalities, events, and tragedies of India and Pakistan.

This book truly deserves to be called “Book Sahib,” for it is the account of a truthful, honest, and enlightened man — in which there is both the courage to disagree with the policies of his respectable and beloved father, and the strength to take to the streets against tyrannical dictators.

After the author and the book, let us speak of the “Mr. Power.”

Hussain Naqi and all the people seated on this stage have always preached democratic freedoms, democratic attitudes, human liberties, and noble conduct.

In today’s delicate circumstances, it is necessary to examine the changing situation in the context of history.

Exactly 116 years ago, when India was under British rule, in 1909 the first promise was made to the native population that they would no longer remain slaves and that their own representative government would govern them.

This historic announcement is known as the Minto–Morley Reforms.

As a result of these reforms, the Secretary of State, Montagu, issued a clear official declaration in 1917 — eight years later — that now elected local governments would be formed in India.

Thus, 108 years ago, this region was given a taste of democracy.

In 1919, to crush the desire for freedom, the Rowlatt Act was imposed, commonly known as the Black Law.

Upon its enforcement, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah resigned from the Legislative Council, calling it a black law.

Quaid-e-Azam believed in peaceful constitutional struggle, therefore he used resignation as a tool of protest — whereas Mahatma Gandhi launched the Satyagraha, or non-cooperation movement.

Ten-six years ago (i.e., in 1919), upon the enforcement of this law, intense protest erupted in Punjab.

From Lahore’s Bradlaugh Hall, a procession led by Congress President Satyapal was taken out, upon which the police carried out a lathi charge, and Satyapal was martyred.

(Remember that Satyapal built the TB hospital “Gulab Devi” on Ferozepur Road in memory of his mother, Gulab Devi; its foundation stone was laid by Mahatma Gandhi, and the commemorative plaque still exists in the hospital.)

Upon Satyapal’s martyrdom, Congress leader Saifuddin Kitchlew in Amritsar gave a call for protest, and to suppress this, the historic tragedy of Jallianwala Bagh occurred, in which more than three hundred and fifty people were shot dead in broad daylight.

After the tragedies of Lahore and Amritsar, when a wave of anger surged across Punjab, Gojranwala city was bombed to instill more fear.

This black law and the protests against it ignited the flame of freedom in Bhagat Singh and his comrades, who carried out resistance actions in Lahore, Delhi, and even London — carving the spirit of India’s freedom into history.

The Rowlatt Act imposed 106 years ago gave the police the right to arrest without warrant, abolished the right to a lawyer, allowed two years of imprisonment without trial, and permitted secret trials instead of open court.

Despite slavery and limited freedoms, protests burst forth in Punjab, forcing the British government to gradually grant rights — this resistance led to the Government of India Act 1935, and ultimately, in reaction to the black laws of 1919, the sun of August 1947 rose, granting freedom to both India and Pakistan.

Ladies and gentlemen!

The purpose of narrating this history is that if, 106 years ago, in enslaved India, restrictions on democratic freedoms triggered such protest, then in today’s free and informed world, curbs on human liberties will have severe and destructive consequences.

For 116 years, the people of this region have lived within a democratic dream.

They take two steps forward, then must take two steps back.

Now it seems this dream is shattering — political leaderships in power are surrendering democracy step by step.

The amendments being made are against the spirit of the 1973 consensus Constitution.

The 1973 Constitution is the name of national, religious, political, and non-political consensus.

Was national consensus obtained on the 26th or 27th Amendment?

After 106 years of struggle, are we returning to 1919?

Are the Rowlatt Acts returning?

Is a new circular journey beginning?

Do the PML-N and the PPP not realize that judicial independence, parliamentary sovereignty, and civilian rights are being gradually surrendered?

Whatever the political game of Imran, Asif Zardari, or Nawaz Sharif may be, the real result of these changes is that the freedoms of the common person are being eroded.

Imran Khan’s era was dangerous for civil liberties — he surrendered his democratic space — but despite disagreement with Imran, it must be remembered that the execution of a political leader and the reaction to it consumed 46 years of this country and its democracy.

May a similar tragedy not gather dark clouds over us forever…

(This speech was delivered at Alhamra Hall on the launch of renowned Lahore journalist Hussain Naqi’s book. On stage were Senator Pervaiz Rasheed, Senator Far

hatullah Babar, Farrukh Sohail Goindi, Rabia Bajwa, and Salman Abid.)