Official discourse in conflict-stricken societies often returns to one word: loyalty to the state. In Pakistan, loyalty to the state is presented almost as an automatic duty of every citizen. Serving and retired officials, often speaking from secure and comfortable spaces, tend to equate loyalty with unquestioning compliance with Article 5 of the Constitution. That article says loyalty to the State is the basic duty of every citizen, and obedience to the Constitution and law is an inviolable obligation.

The phrase is repeated in lectures, round-tables and official meetings. Resource persons remind the "wayward" or "misguided" youth of these provinces that Article 5 is non-negotiable. But the question is rarely asked in reverse.

Can the state demand blind loyalty from citizens while failing to fulfil its own obligations to them - the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 8 to 28?

These articles contain the state's promise to protect individual liberties, ensure equality before the law, prohibit discrimination and uphold human dignity. Article 14, in particular, declares the dignity of man and the privacy of the home to be inviolable, and bars torture for extracting evidence. The Constitution, then, is not a one-way sermon. It is a compact. It carries an unmistakable quid pro quo: the state's obligations on one side, the citizen's rights on the other.

Let us consider the following........

© The Express Tribune