ABSTRACT
The constitutional question of how religion would be institutionalized was of comparatively less importance than the question of how the people were to be represented. It was evident that in both countries some sort of federalist arrangement would have to be made. In Pakistan, this issue was tackled in the Constituent Assembly, but proved to be so difficult that it was a major factor in the inordinate delay in drafting the constitution. In India, a critically important part of the solution to the problem – rearranging the states on a linguistic basis – was arrived at after the constitution was implemented. We also examine other crucial pillars of an institutionalized democracy – elections, and the associated freedoms of association and of the press – that are necessary also to ensure that political leaders govern with the consent of the citizenry. That consent is at the core of their ability to command the state apparatus, because they can then claim to act as legitimate representatives of the people. The rule of law requires the judicial system, which had been integrated with the colonial state apparatus, to develop a degree of autonomy sufficient to hold politicians, bureaucrats, and the security forces (military and police) accountable.
