The Pakistan Institute for Peace Studies (PIPS) organized a two-day national training and orientation workshop titled “Youth Observers Cohort” on November 6–7 in Islamabad. Around 40 young participants, including students, peace activists, and emerging faith and civil society leaders from across the country, took part in the event. The training aimed to equip them with the skills to monitor and report rights violations, as well as to design and implement local peace initiatives or Social Action Plans (SAPs) that foster interfaith harmony and counter hate speech and persecution. Led by expert trainers from diverse fields, the workshop offered interactive sessions on inclusivity, constitutional values, cultural diversity, education, responsible social media use, and policy frameworks for countering radical narratives.
Key discussions highlighted that deep-seated sociocultural biases and historical radicalization fuel intolerance, which is often exacerbated by hate speech. Furthermore, a significant gap exists between constitutional rights that guarantee equality and their implementation, leading to the marginalization of minorities. Finally, fostering genuine coexistence requires community-led initiatives, promoting respect over tolerance, and actively deploying counter-narratives through education and media.
Senior journalist Imran Mukhtar delivered an insightful presentation tracing the historical evolution of Pakistan’s constitutional development. He emphasized the importance of fundamental rights and the distribution of state power. Mukhtar elaborated on the trichotomy of power among the legislature, executive, and judiciary, and explained the roles of key constitutional bodies such as the Parliamentary Standing Committees, National Finance Commission, and Public Accounts Committee. He concluded by stating that citizens of a sovereign state should be encouraged to attend parliamentary sessions. This will foster transparency and accountability.
Human rights activist and High Court advocate Dileep Doshi led a dynamic session exploring diversity through the lenses of culture, civilization, and religion. He engaged participants in interactive discussions and activities to highlight the importance of inclusivity in a pluralistic society. Stressing Pakistan’s identity as a multicultural, multilingual, and multiethnic nation, he asserted that embracing diversity is essential for sustainable development. Doshi also discussed the link between violence and societal frustration, noting that youth often lack proper guidance and counseling. “Narratives are shaped by societal perceptions and historical precedents, but dismantling stereotypes requires time and effort,” he remarked.
Safdar Sial, Research Analyst at PIPS, conducted a session on the concept of the Social Action Plans (SAPs), describing it as a small, time-bound, and community-led initiative. He outlined the key features of a SAP: it should focus on a shared community issue, ensure inclusion of all religious and ethnic groups, and foster peaceful coexistence, cooperation, and mutual respect.
Dr. Muhammad Hussain, Editor at PIPS, emphasized the importance of cultivating interest within the local community and actively engaging stakeholders to ensure the success of SAPs. Participants representing various provinces and districts were organized into groups, where they collaboratively developed social action plans tailored to their respective regions. These proposals were formally documented to capture the diverse ideas and initiatives put forward.
The next session focused on key policy documents, including the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan, Paigham-e-Pakistan, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the National Cohesion Policy, the National Prevention of Violent Extremism Policy by NACTA, and provincial amendments to Anti-Terrorism Bills. Mr. Amir Rana, President of PIPS and a security analyst, highlighted the profound impact of state and institutional policies on societal dynamics. He noted that while state policies may evolve based on strategic interests, fundamental rights must remain inviolable.
Dr. Qibla Ayaz, Former Chairman of the Council of Islamic Ideology, provided a historical overview of radicalization in Pakistan. Dr. Ayaz highlighted that the future of the nation rests in the hands of its youth. It is their responsibility to lead, foster meaningful dialogue, and strengthen social cohesion. Historically, schools, colleges, and universities have played a central role in nurturing this dialogue. However, in recent years, these institutions have become increasingly profit-driven, weakening their engagement with students, a trend he described as both dangerous and disappointing.
From the late 1980s onward, regional dynamics began to reshape Pakistan. The Afghan conflict, the presence of Russian forces, and the Islamic revolution in Iran under Imam Khomeini had profound effects on the country. This era also witnessed the rise of extremist ideologies, such as the Khawarij movement, which legitimized declaring others as non-believers. Extremism escalated, leading to attacks and bombings against the army and places of worship.
He recalled Pakistan of the late 1970s and early 1980s as a country rich not only in natural beauty but also in its social fabric. Communities were tolerant, humble, and respectful, with strong interpersonal communication and valued traditions. All national and local languages were respected, and community linkages across cities and villages were vibrant and inclusive.
The tragic Army Public School (APS) attack in 2014 marked a turning point. In its aftermath, the entire nation, including political parties and the military, united to implement the National Action Plan (NAP) against terrorism. As part of this initiative, the Paigham-e-Pakistan declaration was launched, with religious scholars affirming that only the state holds the authority to declare someone a non-believer.
The concluding panel featured Dr. Khalid Masood, former Chairman of the Council of Islamic Ideology, Dr. Pervaiz Hoodboy, renowned author and scholar, and Abdul Hameed Nayyer, intellectual and educationist.
Dr. Masood argued that societal intolerance stems from ingrained prejudices based on religion, class, and ethnicity, often perpetuated through casual communication. He advocated for informed debate and knowledge-based counter-narratives to dismantle these biases. He clarified that the issue at hand is not simply hate speech. The deeper concern lies in how we define boundaries. Exclusivity, in this context, does not mean hostility or rejection; it is about setting parameters. Problems arise when exclusion is interpreted as inferiority, leading to subtle expressions of dislike or negativity. Such attitudes, he warned, are the seeds of animosity.
Dr. Masood noted that while society engages extensively with knowledge, particularly scientific ideas, we often fail to apply rational and logical thinking in practice. Without objectivity, bias and pride distort our understanding, fueling quarrels and conflicts. Rationality, he argued, is essential for clarity and fairness in discourse.
He stressed that inclusivity and exclusivity are not inherently in conflict; the challenge lies in integrating them effectively. A balanced approach where inclusivity ensures respect and equality, and exclusivity defines necessary boundaries, creates harmony in social and intellectual life.
Mr. Nayyer emphasized that adherence to laws and regulations defines good citizenship but also acknowledged systemic flaws in majoritarian governance where minorities are frequently marginalized. Equally important is how we treat one another. A good citizen not only demands respect for their own rights but also extends the same courtesy to others. True citizenship requires us to be accommodating, empathetic, and mindful of the dignity of those around us. A fundamental duty of every responsible citizen is to uphold the laws of the state. Respecting the legal framework is not merely an obligation; it is the foundation of a well-ordered society. Our constitution enshrines the principle that all citizens are equal. Yet, the pressing question remains: do we genuinely practice equality in our daily lives? Are we embracing diversity and ensuring that every individual receives equal respect? The gap between constitutional ideals and societal behavior must be bridged if we are to progress as a nation. History offers sobering lessons. Our nation once suffered irreparable loss because of discriminatory attitudes and the failure to treat fellow citizens as equals. The tragic division of our country stands as a reminder of the consequences of exclusion and prejudice. Even today, unrest continues to grow, and the state’s reliance on force often deepens rather than resolves the crisis.
Dr. Hoodboy expanded the discourse to address the structural and philosophical roots of social conflict. He stressed that the disparity between the state and its citizens has severely undermined national cohesion. The division between “us” and “them” often stems from differences in religion, ethnicity, language, or social class. When these distinctions are framed as markers of superiority or inferiority, they cultivate intolerance and resentment. The perception that one group is inherently more legitimate or deserving than another fosters exclusion, while stereotypes and prejudices reinforce hostility. Over time, such divisions erode trust, normalize discrimination, and create fertile ground for hatred. Instead of celebrating diversity as a source of strength, societies trapped in the “us versus them” mindset risk deepening polarization and undermining social cohesion. He proposed replacing the concept of “tolerance” with “respect” to achieve genuine coexistence.