Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz introduced Minority Cards, boosting the minority welfare budget by 200% and offering PKR 10,500 every three months to 50,000 households. Detractors claim this approach promotes division, supporting universal welfare instead of identity-focused policies to achieve genuine inclusivity.
The Chief Minister of Punjab, Pakistan, Maryam Nawaz, during her speech at the event titled ‘Minority Card Issuance Ceremony,‘ expressed to the minorities in attendance that upon becoming Prime Minister, she declared,
“minorities are the crown of my head.”
According to the identification of minorities goes beyond being labeled non-Muslim; rather, their identification is rooted in being true Pakistanis. She expressed her satisfaction that a deserving individual, Ramesh Singh Arora, the first Pakistani Sikh minister, had received his rightful recognition.
In addition,, she conveyed that her father always advised her against using the term ‘minorities’ for these communities in Pakistan. While they may be smaller in number compared to other religions, they are not lesser in Pakistan or as human beings; they hold equality. She extended her gratitude to Sardar Ramesh Singh Arora, his team, and the Bank of Punjab for their support in creating and implementing the card.
Overview of Minority Card Distribution and Financial Assistance
Additionally, she revealed that the budget allocated for minorities has been raised by 200 percent. Upon opening applications, they received nearly 100,000 submissions from across Pakistan, leading to the issuance of Minority Cards to 50,000 families. Every three months, these families will receive 10,500 PKR to assist with their needs, and this number is expected to rise to 75,000 families in the future. She stated,
“These 10,500 PKR are not mere funds; they are a gift from Muhammad Nawaz Sharif and myself.”
Furthermore, she noted,
“Dear minorities, during your festivals in Pakistan, we not only aim to safeguard your places but also to adorn them. Due to this, we have elevated the grant from 10,000 to 15,000, with the aim of making further increases in the future.”
In her final statements, she noted, “My beloved brothers, sisters, and elders, your health, safety, and progress are incredibly significant to me. I wish for you to realize that you are just as important to Pakistan as I am and as every other citizen is. As a result, we have raised the grant from 10,000 to 15,000, with intentions for additional increments.”
In her closing remarks, she underscored, “My dear brothers, sisters, and elders, your well-being, security, and progress are of utmost importance to me. I want you to understand that you are as integral to Pakistan as I am and as all other citizens are. You are safe and secure in this nation, and I am dedicated to creating a safe environment for you.”
She wrapped up by acknowledging that events like the Jaranwala incident should never occur and reassured them that their safety is her duty.
Should Minority Cards Be Issued in Pakistan? A Comparative Analysis
As the Chief Minister of Punjab, Maryam Nawaz introduced minority cards, but does a democratic nation like Pakistan—or any democratic nation—truly require a minority card? Should minority cards even be issued at all? If the response is affirmative, then why do other democracies such as the United States, England, and Singapore not have minority cards? If these nations utilize such cards, how do they function? Conversely, if these countries lack minority cards, what rationale supports the Chief Minister of Punjab implementing them in Pakistan? Minority cards and quota systems are unnecessary—much like in several other democratic nations, including the United States, Singapore, and England, which emphasize merit-based systems rather than choices influenced by identity and affiliation.
These countries reject minority cards or quota systems as they emphasize equal opportunities over specific outcomes. They believe that all individuals should have the same opportunity to attain success. For example, nations like Sweden and Finland prioritize equal opportunity by providing universal access to top-notch education and healthcare services. In Pakistan, minority groups are systematically marginalized, yet they do not require a quota system or minority identification cards. At first, members of minority communities may view these cards as advantageous. Still, over time, they may come to feel a sense of exclusion and separateness, perpetually reminded of their “minority” status. This approach is incompatible with a democratic society. A Chief Minister should not represent just one specific community—they ought to advocate for all citizens rather than prioritize one particular group.
Inclusive Policies, Not Identity Cards
Inclusive Policies, Not Identity CardsThe issuance of minority cards by the government mirrors the colonial-era tactic of divide-and-rule, reminiscent of the Hindu-Muslim rifts from the time of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. British colonial strategies fostered such divisions, and this initiative appears to replicate that model. Minority cards are not an effective remedy. A Chief Minister is the leader of the whole state, regardless of caste or religion. The optimal approach would be to enhance facilities nationwide, making sure that Muslims, Christians, and other communities utilize the same areas for dining, healthcare, and public services, without any differentiation among them.
Genuine brotherhood can only thrive if all groups are treated uniformly, rather than implementing separate identity-based cards. For instance, when Imran Khan launched the Sahulat Cards, he did not indicate that they were intended for Muslims, Christians, or any specific religious group—he merely mentioned that they were for all deserving Pakistanis The Benazir Income Support Program was created not exclusively for Muslims; it was set up for all inhabitants of Pakistan. Initiatives like this foster social cohesion within the community. Conversely, the minority cards introduced by Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz are anticipated to incite conflict and division within society, potentially increasing tensions among different communities.
