Hindu Festivals and Sectarian Nationalist Politics

Ram Puniyani | 07 Mar 2025

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

The impact of Hindutva politics on our festivals and the way some of these are being weaponised, such as the Kumbh, is worth pondering over.

Representational image of Kumbh Mela. Credit: Wikimedia Commons

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) combine’s agenda of Hindu Rashtra has been built upon narratives set in motion through multiple mechanisms. Festivals have been one such occasion for promoting its agenda. Also highlighting some deities for ‘social political messaging’ has been in the political arena in a major way.

The recently held Kumbh was a mega spectacle, which became more of a national event rather than a religious gathering. One major change in this year’s Kumbh was its heavy marketing as a cultural and developmental showcase. It was labelled as “The Greatest Show on Earth” for Hinduism. 

On such occasions, organising the stay, cleanliness, and transport for devotees is a mandatory function of the State. This time what was witnessed was that the State got fully involved in the process of organising the event itself and the associates of ruling party, like Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Dharma Sansads (Religious Parliaments) and individual saints/sadhus took the lead in propagating the components of the Hindu nationalist agenda and ‘Hate for Muslims’ at this congregation.

While the religious spiritual significance of the event is highly appreciated by the devotees, giving the Kumbh a political colour was very significant this time round. This is not the first time that Kumbh was organised. This time the occasion became the ground for enhancing the Hindutva agenda. The Uttar Pradesh government, while found inadequate in crowd management, had advertised and invited devotees in large numbers for quite some time. Crores were invested.

The event was marked by a boycott of Muslim traders from setting up shops and stalls at the venue. The reasons given were multiple, one fake one being stated by Swami Avimukteshwaranand was that Muslims spit in the food, so were kept away.  Many such misleading videos were doing the rounds in the social media. It is another matter that Muslims opened their masjids and organised food for the desperate victims of the stampede.

One recalls that during the Mughal period, to make the Kumbh more comfortable for devotees, many ghats (river banks for bathing) and toilets were built. According to historian Heramb Chaturvedi, Akbar had appointed two of his officers to look after Kumbh arrangements.

This year, the whole area was full of hoardings of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath. This time around a large area was reserved for VIPs, leading to stampedes in which a large number of deaths occurred. The arrangement for transport was poor and this got reflected in the death due to stampede at the New Delhi Railway station.

One upstart Swami, Dhirendra Shastri, whom Modi calls his younger brother, merrily said that those who died due to stampede has attained moksha (liberation). The water quality was at an abysmal low level with E. coli and high excreta content. To all the criticism about water quality and deaths, the Chief Minister commented that “pigs are seeing the dirt, and vultures are counting the dead!”

The VHP used the Kumbh as a golden opportunity for its Margdarshak Mandal meetings. Their speeches were full of venom for Muslims. The usual propaganda about Muslims relating to population increase, infiltrators from Bangladesh, cow protection was repeated at various meetings ad nauseam. The hate spreaders like Sadhvi Ritambhara, Praveen Togadia, and Yati Narsingnanand Saraswati had a field day with their speeches laced with hate. They had large audiences. The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has successfully made use of sadhus for its political agenda and got publicity at State expense.

One such saffron-clad reiterated the demand for Kashi and Mathura and claimed that 1,860 temples had been ‘researched’, and need to be “restored”. The demand for closure of madrasas and converting English schools to gurukuls to create a Hindu Rashtra was also articulated.

In a book published in 2024, Irfan Engineer and Neha Dabhade draw our attention to the use of religious festivals as occasions to instigate violence. Our festivals have been pleasant social occasions, cutting across religious lines. Now the trend is to take out a procession during Hindu festivals, pass through Muslim areas, change the green flag on the mosques to saffron flag, and dance with swords in hand. At the same time. hateful slogans against Muslims rent the air.

In this book, the author duo points out that Ram Navami festival, in particular in 2022-2023, saw violence in Howrah and Hooghly (West Bengal - 2023), Sambahji Nagar (Maharashtra- 2023), Vadodara (Gujarat- 2023), Biharsharif and Sasaram (Bihar-2023), Khargone (Madhya Pradesh - 2022), Himmat Nagar and Khambat (Gujarat- 2022) and Lohardaga (Jharkhand- 2022).

Engineer concludes “Even a small Group of Hindu nationalists masquerading as ‘religious procession’ could insist on passing through minority inhabited areas and provoke some youth using political and abusive slogans and playing violent songs and music, hoping that in reaction, a stone would be thrown at them. The state would do the rest by arresting a large number of members of a minority and demolishing their homes and properties within days without any judicial procedure.”

At another level Right-wing politics has also brought up and promoted a goddess Shabri and Lord Hanuman in adivasi areas. As anti-Christian violence picked up in the adivasi areas during the past three decades, these areas saw an intense attempt by Vanavasi Kalyan Ashram and VHP (RSS’s progeny) promoting Shabri. Shabri Kumbh was held near Dangs in Gujarat. A Shabri Temple has been erected in these areas. That time Swami Aseemanand of VHP was working in this area. He was the one; who was later accused by Maharashtra Anti-Terror Squad for being part of the bomb blast conspiracy in Malegaon, Ajmer and Mecca Masjid.

Why were Shabri and Hanuman picked up to be promoted in these areas? Shabri (in Ramayana) was a poor woman who did not have enough food to offer to Lord Ram. She offered him berries but after first checking their taste. The contrast is clear. In urban areas we have Durga, Laxmi and Sarswati to worship, while for adivasi areas it is Shabri. Similarly, Lord Hanuman (devotee of Lord Ram) has been popularised in adivasi areas.

The impact of Hindutva politics on our festivals reflects a lot about their politics. The way some of these are being weaponised, or the way the Kumbh was made a ground for anti-Muslim rhetoric or the way Shabri and Hanuman are being popularised in adivasi areas, is worth pondering over. 

The writer is a human rights activist, who taught at IIT Bombay. The views are personal.

 INDIA

Dalit, Woman, Rebel: Why Dakshayani Velayudhan still matters

Grasim Soni , Sweety Gautam |

 08 Mar 2025

• 
  
• 
  

This International Women’s Day, we recall the legacy of one of the Constituent Assembly’s only Dalit women, reflecting on her contributions towards the abolition of untouchability and the protection against bonded labour within our constitutional scheme.

Last year, as protests erupted nationwide in response to the heinous rape and murder of a resident doctor in Kolkata’s R.G. Kar hospital, one protest in Mumbai coincided with another tragic incident - the demolition of several homes of Dalit families in the Jai Bhim colony. Women from the colony who requested to join the protests and raise their issues were denied the space by upper-caste women activists who claimed the demolition to be a “different issue.” 

The “Othering” of Dalit women reduces their identity and participation to a tokenistic value within India’s progressive, yet elite spaces. Outrage and appraisal from upper-caste women’s movements in India are known to have been selective. 

Reflecting a broader historical pattern of exclusion, Dalit women are erased  not only as victims but also as achievers within Brahminical hegemonic structures.  This erasure and sanctioned marginalisation of the struggles and accomplishments of Dalit women must compel us to acknowledge, celebrate, and archive the significant contributions of Dakshyani Velayudhan, the only dalit woman and the youngest member in the Indian constituent assembly, this International Women’s Day. 

Navigating her path amidst oppressive caste and gender structures, Velayudhan relentlessly advocated for equality and meaningfully contributed to the making of the Indian Constitution. The caste system prevalent in Indian Society, operates similarly to the theatrical stage in Erving Goffman’s dramaturgy. In his much celebrated work, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (1959), Goffman paints social interactions as theatrical performance, with individuals playing roles on a stage sculpted by societal expectations. While Goffman was not writing about caste, his body of work eerily captures its essence. Caste is a theatrical play where your birth decides your role, and stepping out of character invites social ostracism and at times violence. For Velayudhan, this meant accepting a script which demanded a life of invisibility, a life at the margins of India’s social hierarchy.

But Velayudhan surely rejected this ‘assignment’. Her very name, “Dakshayani” which is a synonym for Hindu Goddess Durga, traditionally reserved for upper caste families was her family’s first act of resistance. In 1935, she became the first Dalit woman in India to graduate with a Bachelors in Science  in Chemistry. Her journey was marked by challenges. She was barred by a professor from using lab equipment. She had to observe experiments from afar. Velayudhan embodied resilience, rewriting the script of oppression. 

Velayudhan in the Constituent Assembly

At the age of thirty four,, she became one of the members of the Constituent Assembly. She strongly advocated for social justice, communal harmony, economic upliftment, and human dignity, envisioning an Indian society rooted in liberty, equality and fraternity. Velayudhan’s personal trysts with untouchability since her childhood shaped her contributions in the Assembly. In 1948, she powerfully asserted that “we cannot expect a Constitution without a clause relating to untouchability because the Chairman of the Drafting Committee himself belongs to the untouchable community”, referring to Dr B.R. Ambedkar. Velayudhan only emphasized the incorporation of the abolition of untouchability under the constitutional scheme, she also  underscored the state’s accountability in bringing about meaningful change .

Navigating her path amidst oppressive caste and gender structures, Velayudhan relentlessly advocated for equality and meaningfully contributed to the making of the Indian Constitution.

The caste system entrenched bonded labour, and the colonial regime further exacerbated and perpetuated the conditions for the system of ‘begar’. Observing these deeply entrenched societal structures, Velayudhan recognized that economic exploitation, financial burden, double colonization, and slave-like treatment contributed to the misery of the neglected communities. In her view, only holistic freedom could liberate these communities. The right to demand wages and assertion of self-respect played a vital role and would bring about a transformative revolution in their lives. This vision later found its place in Part III of the Indian Constitution. 

Velayudhan was also staunchly critical of absolutism, and the centralization of power. She proposed that India should be a sovereign republic, citing the example of Licchavi republic, where power emitted from the people and the very etymology of power was rooted in the people. She was also critical of the system of separate electorates for which she grounded her opposition in the anticipation of corruption turning democratic representation into a politics of tokenism. Instead, she believed that the amalgamation of different communities and their mutual diversification would result in collective progress. 

75 years after the Constitution’s adoption, atrocities persist

Caste atrocities persist, recurring on a daily basis across rural and urban landscapes, among the elite and non-elite, and within both he private and public sectors. Many experts argue that both the narrow judicial interpretation of 'public view' in Section 3(1)(r) and the shift from stringent to flexible bail provisions within the Prevention of SC/ST Atrocities Act, 1989, have resulted in the dilution of the legislation. This dilution, along with a high rate of withdrawal and a low conviction rate in cases registered under this Act, compel us to examine the criminal justice system through a critical lens.

Observing these deeply entrenched societal structures, Velayudhan recognized that economic exploitation, financial burden, double colonization, and slave-like treatment contributed to the misery of the neglected communities.

The majority of people engaged in manual scavenging belong to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, and Other Backward Class communities. Recent data indicates that more than 300 people died while cleaning sewers and septic tanks between 2019 and 2023. Despite the Supreme Court’s recent directions to bolster the implementation of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, the central and state governments continue to ignore its enforcement—costing the lives of innocent people who have fallen prey to systematic killings.

In the given socio-legal-political context, Dakshayani's principles and advocacy, grounded in the reformation of society, can only be realized when the state is accountable for legislating and willing to implement such policies at the ground level. The theater of caste continues to endure. Dalit students still face segregation, Dalits are still denied access to public wells and inter-caste marriages provoke violent “honor” killings. India as a country cannot shy away from this. In this context Dakshayani’s legacy is not a relic of the past but rather it serves as a blueprint for resistance. Her speeches in the Constituent Assembly—calling for social equality and political representation directly confront the systemic inequalities that persist. The marginalisation of Dakshayani’s legacy in the record-keeping of constitutional history is not an accident. 

To Remember Dakshayani today is to confront the unsettling truth that lingers around India’s democracy -that the promise of equality remains unfulfilled. Her life challenges us to look deep inside ourselves and ask us: who gets to occupy the centre stage in history and who is pushed to the backstage? Dakshayani’s defiance guides the way for people like us.

Courtesy: The Leaflet

PAKISTAN-INDIA

Reluctance to talk

Touqir Hussain 

Published March 9, 2025 

DAWN

The writer, a former ambassador, is adjunct professor Georgetown University and Visiting Senior Fellow National University of Singapore.


THE story of Pakistan-India ties in recent years revolves around India’s rise, and Pakistan’s internal challenges and diminished global status. The disparity in power and image of the two is at the centre of India’s unwillingness to talk to Pakistan.

India has broken through the South Asian ceiling and acquired a place at the global high table. US patronage has no doubt helped in raising its economic weight, military potential, and diplomatic stature. India now wants Pakistan to take cognisance of its status by being haughty, unapproachable, and reluctant to talk.

The trajectory of US-India strategic and economic relations, embracing trade, security, defence and technology cooperation, has been in the ascendant for the past 25 years. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit to Washington and his talks with Donald Trump made their own contribution to advancing the US-India relationship further, especially with America’s offer to sell F-35s, America’s most advanced military aircraft. As the Economist put it, “America is betting on India’s inexorable rise.”

India has come a long way from its embarrassing status as an unconvincing regional power to which its neighbour had the ‘pretensions’ to speak as an ‘equal’. India feels Pakistan is still living that illusion. Most of Pakistan’s strategic community keeps complaining that Washington is giving “preferential” treatment to India, as if the two relationships served the same or equal purpose and were interchangeable.

The reality is that America’s ties with India and Pakistan are totally different, serving different purposes. Each relationship rose or declined independently, neither limited nor enhanced by the other. India hopes that the refusal of dialogue would force Pakistan to know its place rather than harbour pretensions of being its rival or competitor.

Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar keeps calling Pakistan “irrelevant”, implying that India does not need Pakistan, which has lost its leverage due to the Afghanistan problem, erosion in its global standing, diminished influence in the Middle East, increased external dependence, and vulnerability to international pressure. This assessment by India no doubt figured in its calculation that its action on Aug 5, 2019 to rescind Kashmir’s special constitutional status would not evoke a serious international response.


It suits India that Pakistan remains under siege.

India thinks that by revoking its special status, it has made Kashmir an internal matter, thus removing it as a subject of a bilateral agenda with Pakistan and making the dispute a non-issue by depriving Pakistan of the opportunity to advance the cause internationally. Dialogue with Pakistan would reverse these ‘gains’, as Pakistan would focus on Kashmir at the talks. Dialogue would also attract global media coverage which Pakistan would use to publicise the Kashmir situation. India feels a muted relationship would help it create new ground realities in Kashmir which Kashmiris and Pakistan might come to accept sooner or later.

The lack of dialogue also gives India the option to continue talking about terrorism to malign Pakistan and thus disaffect Washington towards Pakistan. The terrorism issue gets highlighted in US- India joint statements, including the latest one after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit to the US. India’s role in fighting terrorism, an interest America shares, also enhances India’s value as a US ally.

India knows Islamabad is interested in the dialogue partly because it hopes it would open the way for economic ties with India that would be­­nefit Pakistan’s economy. India does not want that, and this is another reason for not talking. Meanwhile, India is sidestepping Pa­k­­-istan with its outreach to Iran and Afghanistan to create alternative transit corridors through Chabahar.

Finally, the Baloch insurgency and the TTP. Their dynamics are domestic but external support, evidently from India and the Afghan Taliban, has been critical to these outfits’ viability. India cannot continue this support and have a dialogue with Pakistan at the same time. It suits India that Pakistan remains under siege from its internal challenges. For India, the loss of benefits of a normal relationship with Pakistan is insignificant compared with the gains of hostility.

There’s no point, then, in Pakistan seeking a dialogue. The fact is that whether the two countries have been talking or not has made little difference to their relations. Pakistan’s primary challenges are domestic. A strengthened Pakistan will make Jaishankar rethink whether India with its present policies itself risks becoming irrelevant for Pakistan. Only then will India engage with Pakistan seriously.

Published in Dawn, March 9th, 2025

Trump’s controlled chaos

Abbas Nasir

Published March 9, 2025 

DAWN

HOW little it takes to please or render two insecure, nuclear-armed South Asian neighbours was evident this week when, in his State of the Union address, US President Donald Trump thanked the government of Pakistan for helping in the arrest and extradition of a man wanted for his role in the Kabul airport ‘Abbey Gate’ bombing.

The suicide bombing in August 2021, during the chaotic US withdrawal from Afghanistan just days after the capital fell to the Taliban, killed some 170 hapless Afghans trying to flee their strife-torn country, but was more ominous with regard to the killing of 13 US military personnel.

Ominous, because we all know that our lives — I mean Afghans, Pakistanis, Iraqis, Sudanese, Palestinians (you can add dozens of others to the list) — count for very little and thousands of us can be violently killed without consequences, but the world responds in a totally different manner when ‘worthier’ lives are taken.

The reason for our plight may well be found in our own attitudes. Just look at the reaction to Donald Trump thanking Pakistan. The Pakistani prime minister tweeted a long message of gratitude to POTUS. One PTI-affiliated handle claimed that the prime minister first tagged Trump but updated his tweet to drop the tag after being criticised.

Pakistan’s dependence on the US and the financial institutions it holds sway over, such as the IMF and World Bank, is not a secret. But India sees itself as a close ally of the US and central to its China-centric policy and a country that is powerful enough to deal with all nations on an even keel.

Predictably, Pakistan was pleased, relieved, and felt loved by Trump’s message.

Admittedly, India’s reaction was not articulated officially. It came in the form of a news report, quoting ‘government (read: security) sources’ which tried to water down the importance of the Abbey Gate bombing suspect’s capture because he was supposed to have played a lesser role in the mayhem. Some of this report’s contents were challenged by a keen chronicler of terrorism in the region.

A Pakistani TV channel and a former CIA official also cast doubts on the significance of this man’s arrest. On the other hand, a Pakistan-based website detailed his role in the bombing, calling him the ISK Abbey Gate bombing mastermind who is said to have planned the attack with the eventual suicide bomber while still in prison. The Taliban freed them when they captured Kabul in 2021.

In an affidavit filed in the Alexandria Court in Virginia, where Sharifullah appeared this week to face charges, the FBI agent who interrogated him spells out exactly the role the suspect was said to have played in scouting the site to be bombed, among other things.

Whatever the exact nature of the suspect’s role and the debate over how significant it was, President Trump claimed it as a big win and tha­nked the government of Pakistan for helping in the capture of this ‘monster’. Predictably, Pakis­tan was pleased, relieved, and felt loved by Tru­mp’s message. This seems to have upset India.

Generally, Trump thrives on creating (controlled?) chaos and succeeds in staying ahead of the news cycle. This week, where so much seems to have been squeezed into a mere seven days, was another example of the Trump policy.

When the news of America’s direct talks with Hamas in Egypt broke, and before questions could be asked about the change in policy whereby the US says it ‘does not negotiate with terrorists’, Trump let loose with his threat to Hamas to release all hostages or there would be “hell to pay”. This threat dominated headlines and not the US-Hamas talks.

When the Arab plan for the reconstruction and rehabilitation of Gaza was announced, Israel rejected it outright; the White House National Security Council spokesperson Brian Hughes may not have used the same words as Israel, but said the only plan workable was the Trump plan for Gaza.

Two days later, Trump’s point man on the Middle East and fellow property tycoon Steve Witkoff, who is credited with twisting Benjamin Netanyahu’s arm for the Gaza ceasefire days before the Trump inauguration, surprised journalists during a White House Press gaggle on Egypt’s plan approved by Arab leaders.

“There are a lot of compelling features to it. … We need more discussion about it, but it’s a good faith, first step from the Egyptians,” he said, adding, “The larger point is that what President Trump is now talking about in Gaza, is now encouraging other people in the Middle East to present proactive proposals for what we might consider.”

Witkoff suggested that a goal of Trump’s Gaza takeover plan was merely to push regional allies to come up with alternatives. Asked whether he accepted the Arab plan’s view that the reconstruction of Gaza can take place without displacing the Palestinians, Witkoff responded, “We’re evaluating everything there. It’s a little bit early to comment.”

Reporting on this conversation, an Israeli media organisation reminded its audience that under Trump it is not the CIA or NSC or even the State Department that calls the shots on Gaza, but Witkoff who is the most empowered envoy as he speaks for the president.

This controlled chaos unleashed by Trump continued the rest of the week with Trump withdrawing his administration’s earlier threat to expel tens of thousands of Ukrainians who arrived in the US after the war in their country.

He also seemed to suggest that ceasefire in Ukraine was ‘days away’ as, he said, both Russia and Ukraine were ready for it now. While talking up peace between Russia and Ukraine, he ratcheted up tensions with Canada by making claims over the latter’s territory on top of a trade/tariffs war.

That, in a nutshell, is Trump for you.

It would be foolish to pin hopes of much good on him. At the same time, he is so openly, blatantly transactional that you never know if the Saudi $1 trillion deal over four years that he has talked of may well make him accept the Saudi ‘two-state’ solution condition for normalisation in the Middle East.

The writer is a former editor of Dawn.

abbas.nasir@hotmail.com

Published in Dawn, March 9th, 2025

A new peace accord

Muhammad Amir Rana 

Published March 9, 2025

DAWN

PAKISTAN has paid a heavy price for terrorism, not only in terms of losing thousands of lives but also the weakening of its economy, social cohesion, and governance. The crisis has stigmatised its image, and most crucially, society is losing its confidence. While other issues, such as a fragile democracy, the dominance of security institutions in decision-making, and fractured elites, contribute to the crisis, terrorism remains the driving force behind these problems, pushing the country towards an unpredictable future.

Pakistan felt triumphant when US President Donald Trump acknowledged the country’s cooperation in arresting a terrorist responsible for the Abbey Gate attack in Kabul in August 2021, which killed 13 US soldiers. Analysts predicted that Pakistan had found a way to earn the trust of the Trump administration, signalling a desire to strengthen relations with the US. Despite the geopolitical and diplomatic constraints, such narratives created a feeling of warmth in Islamabad, which is trying to find opportunities to win Washington’s trust. However, a few American commentators also saw it as naivety on the part of Pakistan.

One can imagine the collective reaction if the US were to place Pakistan on a travel ban list, nullifying all enthusiasm sparked by Trump’s statement. Media reports would cite security concerns, with the Trump administration believing that several nations, including us, are not fit to live in a free society. It would be an insult to the nation and a failure of state institutions, highlighting the continuous destabilisation that has increased fragility in the country. Development, security, governance, economy, and social cohesion are suffering, touching the bottom of all international indexes. To underscore a statistic quoted in Tariq Khosa’s recent op-ed on these pages, “nearly 40 per cent of Pakistanis wanted to leave due mainly to economic woes, political uncertainty, lack of employment and educational opportunities, inflation, and terrorism”.

Terrorism is a curse that exacerbates other crises that nations face. The Institute for Economics & Peace’s (IEP) latest global terrorism index shows that the countries and regions most affected by terrorism are among those with poor economic and governance indicators. Pakistan stands second in the terrorism index, just slightly below Burkina Faso, which has been at the top for the last three years. Pakistan has been a constant member of the top 10 countries for the last decade and a half, with its best ranking being ninth. Several nations have appeared in the top 10 rankings but have managed to leave within a few years. Israel quickly rose to number two in just one year and now sits at eighth, while Iraq took a little more time to improve its ranking. Afghanistan is currently at ninth, and India at 14th.

There must be greater focus by the state and others on cultivating peace among citizens.

The IEP is a global think tank that measures the correlation between peace and economy, and its methodology to gauge correlation and developing indicators is rooted in the theory of social change, which explains how societies transform and evolve. The IEP has theorised that substantial economic improvements are linked to improvements in peace. The improvement in peace is not enough, as sometimes negative peace can be managed through corrective measures, as in Afghanistan or some other authoritarian regimes, but positive peace is the key, which is defined as the attitudes, institutions, and structures that create and sustain peaceful societies.

Through statistical analysis, the institute gauged that violence has adverse implications for the broader economy, both in the short and long term, as it hinders productivity and economic activity, destabilises institutions, and reduces business confidence. To be brief, violence increases both production costs and security expenditures, reducing the propensity and quality of human resources and products.

It is conceivable that a country ranked among the top 10 for terrorism over the past two decades would have experienced significant societal trauma, especially among those directly exposed to the threat and living in constant fear. Institutions dealing with these threats would have undergone severe conditioning, leading to the stereotyping and stigmatising of their own people and communities.

Psychological and social behaviour studies suggest that under such conditions, the capacity for institutions to think creatively or rethink their strategies is greatly diminished. According to statistics compiled by an Islamabad-based research institute, terrorism-related deaths in Pakistan surged by 73pc last month compared to the previous month, with nearly 62pc of the total fatalities occurring in Balochistan, highlighting the growing insurgency in the province. This pace of increase in terrorism fatalities is alarming. One cannot ignore or escape the numbers; denying them is not an option. The only way to counter these distressing statistics is through positive action to improve them.

State institutions, the clergy, and political and social elites must focus more on cultivating peace among the citizenry and developing zero tolerance for religious and racial hatred. All counterterrorism approaches need to be transformed and must be goal-oriented. For example, setting a goal for the next five years to make Pakistan free from all forms of violence and extremism can produce a solid roadmap to achieve this target.

This may include coercive measures against terrorist networks inside the country and beyond its borders. There should be zero tolerance for extremist groups in Punjab and Sindh, which demoralise societal potential by triggering faith-based hatred. A broader dialogue in Balochistan and reconsidering governance and administrative approaches for Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan are also necessary.

In sum, Pakistan needs a plan to reverse the social engineering implemented by power elites over the past several decades. If this happens, Pakistan can develop healthier, more respectful relationships with the world, and its citizens will not face travel embargoes and interact with the global community as normal citizens.

It could be termed as a new social contract or a peace accord, focusing on the collective efforts required to conceive a peaceful Pakistan, regardless of the cost. Importantly, these efforts may not be as costly as they seem, requiring a shift in perspective.

The writer is a security analyst.

Published in Dawn, March 9th, 2025

What Bezos wants

Muna Khan 

Published March 9, 2025 

DAWN

The writer is a journalism instructor.


THE Washington Post reportedly lost 75,000 digital subscribers last week after owner Jeff Bezos’ note announcing changes to his newspaper’s opinion pages. Opinions editor David Shipley immediately resigned after Bezos said he only wanted the paper to publish op-eds that promoted ‘personal liberties’ and ‘a free market’. Last year, the paper reportedly lost 300,000 subscriptions when Bezos withdrew the paper’s en­­d­orsement of Kamala Harris as president.

This is a far cry from 2016, when the paper adopted the rather cringe-worthy motto ‘Democracy Dies in Darkness’ and took an aggressive stance against Donald Trump. The paper’s opinion pages, which function separately from the news pages, took an adversarial position against Trump and profited from that. Most media commentators in the US say the paper produced stellar journalism “that illuminated the depths of Trump’s self-dealing”, wrote Slate. To be fair, Bezos profited from the paper’s then strategy.

A lot of things are unclear now, from what democracy will look like in the US under a second Trump era to the fate of left-leaning writers at the Washington Post whose owner seems to be pulling the plug on its motto.

However, what is clear is that Bezos feels differently now. Opinions that oppose “[libertarian] pillars will be left to be published by others”, he wrote. How does it serve audiences if they’re only reading opinions that adhere to Bezos’ beliefs? The billionaire believes that in the age of the internet, there’s no need for newspapers to have “broad-based opinion sections that [seek] to cover all views”.

Few are buying it. And that is because Bezos is a businessman whose interest is to make more money, even if it means moving away from the core purpose of journalism, which is to inform the public. When he bought the paper in 2013, “the Post went from hemorrhaging advertising revenue to becoming a profitable business in 2016”, wrote CNN in 2019, “and continuing to be profitable not just in 2017, but also in 2018”.


Money really will buy you influence.

However, the paper had lost 50 per cent of its audience in 2020 — ostensibly because democracy was not dying in darkness under Joe Biden — and then in 2023, losses of $77 million. It began culling jobs, which, of course, impacted the journalism the paper had come to be associated with. Bezos also made bad management decisions last year in the hope that the paper’s financial misfortunes would turn around. They did not. Early this year, New York Times reported the Post was considering changing its motto to ‘Riveting Storytelling for All of America’.

The ‘all’ is probably a nod to Trump and his supporters, who have not received favourable coverage. I don’t know if changing the motto will convince MAGA supporters that the Post is now their paper of record. It’s hard to imagine that Bezos went from championing independent journalism at his paper to suddenly writing memos on what constitutes opinion in his pages because he loves Trump. I think he knows what will happen if he doesn’t do so. Trump has been clear about how he plans to restructure the government and even the private industry. Bezos has a lot of business interests and cannot afford to lose government contracts.

One look at how Bezos has been cosying up to President Trump and you get the full picture. Trump hailed Bezos’ decision not to endorse a presidential candidate last year.

Amazon, which is owned by Bezos, gave $1m to Trump’s inaugural fund in Dece­mber last year. He, along with Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Tesla’s Elon Musk and Open AI’s Sam Altman were also reported to have don­­a­ted to that fund. It explains their prominence at his inauguration in January. A few days before his an­­no­uncement about the op­­inion pages policy, he had dinner with Trump.

Money really will buy you influence. That’s stating the obvious. And should be a reality check for those who think billionaires owning news media is a good idea. In Pakistan, businessmen invest in channels and use it to win favours — all at the cost of journalism.

None of us here believe that media owners don’t bear any influence on their papers. If you’re lucky, some exert less influence than others and you have a newspaper product that holds the powerful to account.

The award-winning cartoonist Ann Telnaes quit the Post after a critical cartoon showing powerful businessmen, including Bezos, bowing to Trump was rejected at the paper. She was right when she said: “Of course these are businesses, and I understand that. But they own a newspaper and they have an obligation, frankly, to protect the free press.”

We live in a time where fake news is rewarded, it is monetised, it is preferred. A free press is essential all over the world, especially when trust in media is on the rapid decline. The answers lie in robust public media which serves the people first.

X: @LedeingLady

Published in Dawn, March 9th, 2025

Digital Confusion Pakistan

Amber Darr 

Published March 8, 2025

DAWN

ON Jan 29, 2025, Pakistan enacted the Digital Nation Pakistan Act, 2025, with the avowed aim of transforming Pakistan into a “digital nation” by enabling a digital society, digital economy, and digital governance.

The Act was immediately hailed by sections of the Pakistani media as a “legislative milestone” and a “ground-breaking initiative”, and for laying out “a structured approach” for redefining Pakistan’s digital landscape and thereby accelerating economic development, enhancing public service efficiency, and fostering citizen well-being. These laudable aims invite a closer look at the Act, to discover the provisions that give rise to these heightened expectations of imminent progress.

While the preamble of the Act confirms these aspirations, the 30 sections that follow achieve little more than the setting up of three distinct yet overlapping regulatory bodies to bring about this digital transformation. The first of these is the National Digital Commission, which has the mandate of approving the substance and strategy for delivery of the National Digital Masterplan; to ensure coordination amongst federal, provincial and sectoral bodies; and to review cases of non-compliance.






The second is the Pakistan Digital Authority, whose task is to develop, update and implement the Masterplan; and the third is an Oversight Committee, established to independently review the performance of the Pakistan Digital Authority and to report to the Commission.

These bodies themselves are dominated by the government and the bureaucracy. The 18-member Commission is essentially a ministerial coordination body, comprising the prime minister, provincial chief ministers, and ministers in charge of IT and telecom, planning and development, commerce, interior, economic affairs, and information and broadcasting. Chairpersons of FBR, Nadra, PTA, SECP, State Bank and the proposed Pakistan Digital Authority are also permanently represented on the Commission, whilst the Commission has the power to invite others it deems necessary.

The proposed Authority appears to be the operational arm of the Commission; however, in actual fact, it seems to be an extension of the prime minister, who has the exclusive authority to appoint, and remove, its three members. The Oversight Committee, comprising mainly of secretaries from the IT, finance, and planning ministries already represented at the Commission, comes across as a subset of the Commission.


The Digital Nation Pakistan Act hides more than it reveals.

Only two points in this elaborate, and expensive, regulatory framework suggest that this structure is actually linked with digitalisation of the society and economy of the country. The first is in the inclusion of chairpersons of certain regulatory authorities in the list of permanent members of the Commission, and the second is in the requirement that members of the Authority be “eminent professionals with recognised expertise and integrity”, with at least a Bachelor’s degree and a minimum of 10 years of experience “in digital transformation, technology policy, and governance”.

However, even these two points are weak. Firstly, the failure to include the chairperson of the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) as a permanent member of the National Digital Commission suggests that the drafters are unaware of the critical need to balance competition and innovation in the digital economy. Secondly, the vague eligibility requirements for members of the Authority hints at a fundamental lack of clarity as to the specific mandate of the Authority.






This focus on bureaucracy over the substantive objectives of digitalisation is all the more surprising given that in its 2018 Digital Pakistan Policy, the IT and telecom ministry had not only clearly identified the policy objectives, laid out the legislative, infrastructure development and education strategy, and indicated the socioeconomic sectors that would be the focus of digitalisation, but had also emphasised the importance of fostering a competitive digital economy.

However, the Act seems to be motivated by the need to consolidate the government’s ownership and control of the digitalisation process rather than on building on the clarity of the 2018 policy and providing appropriate legal frameworks for implementing the digital policy goals already articulated in it.

The champions of the Act may well argue that it is only intended to establish the infrastructure for the cohesive digital transformation of the country rather than to provide granular details of how this transformation may be carried out.

However, they would be unable to explain why in the presence of a comprehensive infrastructure of state — also headed by the prime minister — it is necessary to establish a parallel set-up which is not made answerable either to the legislature or the judiciary. They would also not be able to clarify how an authority comprising only three members of unspecified expertise will have the capacity to define the strategic framework and priority areas for digital transformation, let alone monitoring compliance with the Masterplan and sanctioning non-compliance.

Most importantly, these champions will not be able to explain the shortcomings of the Act in respect of the digital economy. For instance, how, in the absence of any guidance in the Act, would the Masterplan devised by the Authority balance the competing priorities of integrating Pakistan into the international digital economy while fostering domestic innovation and protecting data privacy of Pakistani citizens?

They will also not be able to clarify what value even the most well-crafted domestic policy would have against the ever-increasing momentum of the global digital economy or dismiss the considerable regulatory burden that the slow-moving, top-down, and bureaucratic procedures prescribed in the Act would place on emerging Pakistani platforms as they try to gain a foothold in the rapidly evolving global digital space.

However, the aim of this discussion is not to argue that the Digital Nation Pakistan Act should not have been enacted but to highlight that the Act hides more than it reveals.

Therefore, even as the National Digital Commission, the Pakistan Digital Authority and the Oversight Committee enter the Pakistani regulatory landscape, which already has such well-established regulators as the SECP, Nepra, Pemra, Ogra, and CCP, not only do their activities remain opaque but also, and more worryingly, beyond legislative and judicial accountability.

The writer is a barrister, an advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and holds a PhD in law from University College London. She presently teaches competition law at the University of Manchester.

Published in Dawn, March 8th, 2025

Miles to go

Editorial 

Published March 8, 2025

DAWN

IS the state deliberately unconversant with the desolation faced by females? On International Women’s Day, global communities applaud women’s contributions in various spheres.

But for many places, this day is a reflection of the challenges that plague women’s journey towards empowerment. Take regressive societies and conflict zones — Afghanistan and Gaza — where women endure adversities that beggar description: they are made invisible through moral policing, denial of education, healthcare and employment, and experience violence, aggression, starvation and more.

On the home front, the realisation that a large part of Pakistan’s misfortunes is a consequence of women’s oppression is lost on the rulers. Pakistan’s women, largely encumbered by poverty, health risks and abuse, with scanty access to knowledge and opportunities, bear a weighty cross. Hence, the UN theme ‘For ALL women and girls: Rights. Equality. Empowerment’, which demands action that assures equal rights, prospects and a “feminist future”, particularly for young females and adolescent girls, holds particular significance for a country devoid of them.

Over the years, the reluctance shown by our leadership to liberate the country’s institutions from the visceral language and culture of patriarchy and power has turned the possibility of moving towards purposeful empathy into a tall ask.

Despite definitive movement in the form of pro-women legislation, constitutional protections and commitments to international treaties, the statistics narrate a sorry tale: in 2024, the human rights ministry said that in the last three years, 63,000 cases of violence against women were reported; most cases, sadly, do not come to light.

The Global Gender Gap Index 2023, released by the World Economic Forum, ranks Pakistan 142 out of 146 countries and as one of the worst performing countries in gender parity, with grim literacy and high school dropout rates, and an age-old climate of disdain towards women’s education. The Labour Force Survey 2020-21 shows that female participation stood at 15.5pc.

So what hope do Pakistani women have of breathing in an equitable rights environment? There is defiance aplenty alongside some glimmers of hope. Two Pakistani women became international portraits of courage under fire — Baloch rights activist Mahrang Baloch and singer Hadiqa Kiyani featured in the BBC 100 Women 2024 list, and novelist Alishba Khan Barech was a finalist for the 2025 Women Changing the World Awards.

Interestingly, Aurat March will occur on multiple dates; ‘2025: The year of the Aurat March Caravan’ states that challenging norms and accommodating varied feminist representations are central to the movement.

But the fact that a new order remains a utopian dream is a brutal indictment of the state. Patronage extended to reactionary quarters is the original sin. Without it, this struggle could have been condensed into years. We now face a moment of truth.

Published in Dawn, March 8th, 2025

Washed away

Van Nguyen 

Published March 8, 2025 

DAWN

The writer is the deputy resident representative of UNDP Pakistan.


A TROUBLING trend is emerging in Pakistan: young girls in flood-prone areas are increasingly being married off before the seasonal rains arrive. These ‘monsoon brides’ are not just victims of tradition but of poverty and the worsening effects of climate change. Pakistan has the sixth highest number of child marriages globally. The climate crisis is only exacerbating this issue. As floods devastate homes and livelihoods, families — facing economic desperation — turn to early marriage as a survival strategy. Instead of offering security, it locks girls into a vicious cycle of poverty, illiteracy, and poor health, robbing them of their futures.

A recent UNDP study on climate, politico-economic stressors, and their impact on gender equity in Pakistan found that in flood-affected areas, girls are 25 per cent more likely to drop out of school and enter early marriage. Climate-induced displacement and loss of income push families towards desperate coping mechanisms, with child marriage being one of the most harmful.

This pattern was starkly evident after the 2022 monsoon floods. In Sindh, reports of early marriages surged as families, left with no other means of survival, sought refuge in outdated customs that they believed would provide stability. Instead, these marriages led to higher rates of domestic violence, maternal health risks, and lost educational opportunities — deepening the very poverty families sought to escape.

Economic cost of child marriage: Beyond the social consequences, child marriage costs Pakistan an estimated $0.8 billion annually. Early marriage reduces women’s earning potential, increases dependency, and strains public services — especially the healthcare system — due to higher maternal and infant mortality rates. The UNDP Human Development Report underscores that women and girls bear the brunt of climate disasters, as existing gender inequalities limit their access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunities. When floods wash away agricultural land and homes, families are often left with no alternative livelihoods, making them more likely to marry off their daughters.


Climate change is forcing girls into early marriage.

Legal gaps — why laws are not enough: Despite existing laws against child marriage, enforcement remains inconsistent across provinces. The legal marriage age must be raised to 18 nationwide, with strict implementation and penalties for violations. Strengthening birth and marriage registration systems and closing legal loopholes are critical steps to protecting girls. However, laws alone are not enough. To effectively combat child marriage, we must address its root causes — climate vulnerability, poverty, and weak governance — through coordinated policies and economic reforms.

UNDP’s response: building resilience and empowering girls: At UNDP, we are actively working to tackle these challenges. Our Climate and Gender Vulnerability Index shows that districts most affected by climate shocks — including rural Sindh, Balochistan, and south Punjab — also have higher rates of child marriage. To counter this, UNDP is restoring livelihoods through cash-for-work programmes, vocational training, and enterprise development, particularly for women and youth. These efforts help alleviate financial desperation, a key driver of early marriage. Education access is being prioritised, with schools rehabilitated in KP and Balochistan, and plans are underway to restore 60 more in Sindh’s flood-affected areas.

Our disaster risk management programmes are expanding early warning networks to ensure at-risk communities receive timely information about impending climate disasters. Stren­gthening climate resilience through im­­p­ro­­ved flood forecasting, evacuation plans, and community awareness programmes can help reduce the economic devastation that fuels child marriage. Women’s participation in disaster response remains below 10pc. Increasing their representation in disaster management bodies is essential for designing crisis responses that protect girls from climate-induced vulnerabilities like child marriage.

Future of Pakistan’s daughters: The monsoon rains will continue to come. But whether they wash away the futures of young girl or whether we step in to protect them depends on the actions taken today. On this International Women’s Day, as we rally behind the theme ‘Accelerate Action’, we must recognise that addressing child marriage is not just a moral imperative but a critical step towards sustainable development. Protecting Pakistan’s daughters requires urgent investment in education, economic opportunities, legal protections, and climate resilience.

By acting now, we can break the cycle of child marriage and ensure that our daughters have the chance to build their own future — no matter the weather.

The writer is the deputy resident representative of UNDP Pakistan.

Published in Dawn, March 8th, 2025

PAKISTAN

Where are the feminists now?

Hint: they've been here all along, you just weren't looking

Dhuha Alvi
08 Mar, 2025

DAWN

Arey, March 8 is over and I barely heard about the Aurat March happening this time around. What happened — have the feminists finally gone into hiding?

Oh, it must be because of the loss of the “foreign funding” I have confidently (yet baselessly) accused them of having gotten previously, which I think the administration of my dearest Trump has rescinded recently. Or maybe they didn’t do their annual show of vulgarity on public (read: men’s) streets this time because their fathers threatened to give them a beating if they did not put their hundred per cent into doing their many unpaid, unacknowledged jobs, like serving us warm enough sehri and iftaar. Serves these sinful women right for having the audacity to chant “Khud Khaana Garam Karlo (Warm Your Own Food)” in previous years, LOL!

But wait — before we get carried away celebrating the supposed disappearance of feminists, let’s take a moment to ask: where are the feminists now?

If you have spent any time on Pakistani Twitter (now known as X), you have probably seen this question thrown around whenever a case of gender-based violence (GBV) makes the news. A woman is murdered by her brother, a girl is assaulted at the park, a workplace harassment case surfaces, and suddenly, the same people who spent the entire year ridiculing feminists and dismissing their demands now demand to know why Aurat March isn’t out on the streets protesting and issuing elaborate statements on social media against the said crimes. The irony is, of course, lost on them.
The selective outrage of “where are the feminists?”

At its core, this question is not a genuine call for accountability — it is a distraction screaming of underlying misogyny. It assumes that feminists alone are responsible for addressing gendered violence, while society at large can remain passive. More than that, it ignores the emotional and physical toll of this work; many of the issues feminists are publicly fighting against also affect them in their personal lives, making it impossible for them to react individually to every single case that surfaces.

And yet, the people who ask this question every time a GBV case goes viral conveniently forget that feminists are the only ones consistently pushing for systemic change, and it is partly thanks to their public outrage and labour that society has started to recognise these issues as criminal enough to be reported in the first place.

Feminist activists have fought for the passage of workplace harassment laws; feminist groups like the Women’s Action Forum (WAF) have led campaigns for anti-rape legislation; feminist political organisations like the Sindhiani Tehreek have led the resistance against indigenous land and water rights; feminist lawyers represent victim-survivors when no one else will; feminist journalists report on these issues despite online harassment; and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

On the other hand, the people demanding to know “where the feminists are” never ask the same of lawmakers, state officials, or religious leaders — the very people who actually have the power to prevent these crimes.

One can’t help but wonder: where were these critics when Aurat March participants were being tear-gassed, baton-charged, and met with violent counter-protests? Or when organisers received death threats simply for demanding basic rights?

The feminists have been there all along — getting attacked, getting arrested, and still showing up. You just weren’t looking.
The feminist movement is evolving — are you?

Most detractors are under the false impression that Pakistan’s feminist movement is limited to a single-day spectacle. This may be one reason why they are detractors in the first place, with the other, arguably more likely reason being that they are purely bad faith actors — because, let’s be real, what person would oppose equal rights in good faith?

Regardless of the exact reason(s) behind one believing in this misconception, it’s important to put it to rest.

As we speak, feminists are organising against the proposed construction of canals along the Indus River, which will strip Sindh of its resources. They are recovering Hindu and Christian girls who have undergone forced conversions, advocating for the restoration of student unions, and fighting for the preservation of the arts in Pakistan. They are on the frontlines — sometimes at great personal risk — fighting for labour rights, environmental justice, and against inflation. The space for these struggles is often dominated by cisgender men due to the patriarchal influences within the left wing, further relegating feminists to the more controversial “women’s issues”, but that doesn’t mean their labour in these resistances is non-existent.

Feminists are also working within their own communities, organising safe spaces for survivors of domestic violence, advocating for legal reforms, pushing back against micro and macro-level attacks on bodily autonomy, and building solidarity networks with other marginalised communities. They are demanding justice for missing persons and standing up to the growing threat of censorship and surveillance, both digital and physical.

Twenty-four hours, 365 days a year.

And the work of these women and gender minorities doesn’t end here. They are faced with the mammoth task of making their efforts sustainable enough to keep the movement going in the long run — which brings us to how they are evolving with time to shape long-term, structural change.

This year, the movement is shifting shape. Instead of a single march on March 8, Aurat March organisers in different cities planned mobilizations on various dates: Lahore on February 12, Multan on February 23, Islamabad on March 8, and Karachi and Mirpurkhas on May 11.

Alongside these, initiatives like Behnon ki Baithak (being organised by the Women Democratic Front and Aurat Azadi March) continue to create spaces for feminist organising and solidarity.

Rest assured, the movement isn’t disappearing — it’s adapting, as it always has.
Let’s get real

Instead of asking, “Where are the feminists?”, the real question should be: where is everyone else?

Where is the criminal justice system when victim-survivors of rape are forced to waste years — sometimes, their whole lives — seeking justice?

Where are the policymakers when women demand protections against domestic violence?

Where are the ‘nice’ men when their friends catcall women, make sexist jokes, or brag about getting a “doosri biwi” (second wife)?

Where are you when a woman in your life is belittled, dismissed, or controlled?

The truth is, feminists have never stopped fighting. Maybe it’s time the rest of you started.

Aurat (WOMEN'S) March in Islamabad concludes after police block major arteries

Nadir Guramani 

Published March 8, 2025 
DAWN

Marchers carry a banner at the 2025 Aurat March in Islamabad on March 8. — Photo by author


The Aurat March in Islamabad concluded on Saturday afternoon after police stopped marchers from proceeding towards D-Chowk.

Since its inception in 2018, the Aurat March has been held annually nationwide on or around International Women’s Day, symbolising a collective feminist tradition of protest and resistance.

A day before the march, the organisers of the Aurat March vowed to go ahead with their planned event in the capital and hold the rally from the National Press Club (NPC) to D-Chowk despite not receiving formal permission from the administration. “We will have our show outside the NPC as per previous years and will try to march towards D-Chowk to mark the occasion [of Inter­national Women’s Day],” rights activist Dr Farzana Bari had told Dawn.com last night.

Marchers gathered outside the NPC today with placards, banners and megaphones.

As part of the rally, empty beds were placed on the protest ground, with signs attached reading “women’s rights” and “democracy”, symbolising their absence in the country. Marchers also chanted slogans while beating drums and tambourines.

A marcher beats a drum during the 2025 Aurat March in Islamabad on March 8. — Photo by author

Simultaneously, a demonstration demanding the release of Dr Aafia Siddiqui — a Pakistani neuroscientist serving a prison sentence in the US — took place at the same location as the Aurat March.

A Dawn.com correspondent present at the scene reported that as the marchers attempted to move towards D-Chowk from the NPC, police requested reinforcements and blocked off major roads. As a result, the march was called off.

Speaking to Dawn.com, Bari said that the organisers did not get the no-objection certificate (NOC) “as usual”.

Referring to the protest for Aafia’s release, Bari added, “Those people over there have a sound system available, while the car carrying ours was taken away.

“Whenever we celebrate Women’s Day each year, we celebrate in challenging circumstances and receive many threats. We celebrate in a fearful climate,” she lamented. “It is because of the strength and courage of women that we are able to carry out this march, even in Ramazan.”

When asked if the gathering had ended, Bari replied in the affirmative and added that roads to D-Chowk had been blocked. “A lot of people went home because they could not find a path through,” she said, adding that they also did not push further because a lot of the attendees were fasting.

Marchers carry a banner during the 2025 Aurat March in Islamabad on March 8. — Photo by author

“Our demands are the same as those we’ve made over the past several years because they are never enforced,” Bari said. “This year, we have told the state that if they fail to prioritise Pakistan’s 120 million women and their health, education and safety, then they will become more disconnected from the state.

“It is therefore essential to understand that if women become independent and free, then the nation will be too.”

According to a post by the Aurat March Instagram page, this year marked the first time that the march would be held on different dates across the country.

“This year, the marches in Lahore, Multan, Karachi, and — for the first time — Mirpur Khas will take place with the same passion but on newer dates,” the post said, adding that the marches in Karachi and Mirpur Khas would take place on May 11.




On February 12, hundreds of women participated in the Aurat March in Lahore, demanding freedom and social justice for women.

The march commenced at the Lahore Press Club and culminated in front of the PIA building. Women from different walks of life participated in the march, carrying placards and banners and demanding justice and equality.

Marchers chanted slogans such as “siyasat, muzahamat aur azadi” (politics, resistance and freedom), and “ghar ka kaam, sab ka kaam” (housework is everyone’s duty).

This year’s Karachi Aurat March is being held on Mother’s Day to pay tribute to their unpaid labour

The organisers called for socioeconomic and political change in the system during a press conference on Saturday.

Images Staff

08 Mar, 2025

This year’s Aurat March in Karachi has been shifted to May 11 because many women have added responsibilities during Ramazan, the organisers said at a press conference held at the Karachi Press Club on Saturday afternoon. “Every day is Women’s Day,” they chanted.

The press conference was addressed by activist Sheema Kermani, minority rights activist Ghazala Shafique, journalist Fahmida Riaz, transgender activist Aradhiya Khan, lawyer Sara Malkani, Aisha Dharejo, and Peace and Development Organisation CEO Safina Javed, among others.

It started with the organisers stating their basic demands and manifesto. “We march because we want socioeconomic and political change of the current system, and an end to all forms of patriarchal discrimination, gender-based violence, inequality and injustice,” read a statement the organisers issued during the press conference.

Lawyer Malkani highlighted two statistics regarding women’s issues in Pakistan citing patriarchy as the underlying reason. “Twelve million girls in the country are of school-going age but remain out of school,” she said. “Even in 2025, a pregnant woman loses her life to a health-related complication every 50 minutes,” she added, which was followed by chants of “aurat ki sehat, bunyaadi haq [women’s health is a basic right]” and “aurat ki taleem, bunyaadi haq [women’s education is a basic right]”.

For the first time in eight years, the annual march is not being held in Karachi on or around International Women’s Day. This year, it is being held on May 11 in Karachi. It was held in Lahore on February 23 and held on International Women’s Day (today) in Islamabad.

The rationale behind the decision to shift the date to Mother’s Day is that May is associated with Labour Day and mothers are the biggest unpaid labourers.

“Without women’s labour, without women’s work, there would be no society,” read their statement. “Thus, every day is Women’s Day.”

Dharejo pointed out the recurring issues of honour killing, rape, and harassment in upper Sindh, highlighting that there are no medical officers available when a woman is subjected to honour killing.

Transgender rights activist Khan said the Aurat March has supported her community over the years. She pointed out an increase in hate speech against the transgender community in recent years, urging the government to take serious action and notice against it. “In 2025, it’s very easy to make a video of someone [on the internet] but the consequences of that one video are huge.”

Activist and representative of the fisherfolk community Fatima Majeed highlighted the effects of climate change on women from Thatta, Sujawal and Badin, particularly because of a lack of fresh water in the Indus Delta. “Unlike Karachi, the women have no alternative source of income,” she said.