by Durdana Najam in The Express Tribune, November 5th, 2020.
The writer is a public policy analyst based in Lahore
Eleven political parties (as the Pakistan Democratic Movement, PDM) are on the rampage to drag Imran Khan’s government out because they believe that this government has been “brought” into power. What they mean is that the establishment has stolen elections to put their favourite on the saddle. How much truth does this blame hold?
A popular belief is that Pakistan is a victim of a leadership vacuum, which, as is allegedly believed, goes in the interest of the establishment, which had been happily filling the space, earlier through direct intervention, and now under the new rule of hybrid democracy. Under this methodology, a political party in power is expected to play subservient to the establishment’s vision otherwise the light on the exit door turns on. This script has been used so often that almost every move is known and predictable. The question is: why could no political party pass the test of patriotism? Before we attempt to answer these questions, let’s see on the other side of the fence.
The truth is that the political parties are equally responsible for this turf war. Never had there been a sincere effort to draw citizens into a consultative process to elevate their core interests and reshape its political leadership. That explains why the elected government had been reluctant to conduct local bodies elections. Even when the elections were held, on the insistence of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the local governments were not given financial independence. For the execution of an act as small as replacing a street light, the councillors had to rush to the DC or his other teammates for approval. The uncontrolled inflation, berated with equal force by everyone, is the product of the deviation from establishing communities at the local level.
Political engineering is not only the forte of the so-called establishment but of every force reluctant to devolve and share power. It is all about power. The one who has power is the one who owns resources and determines the direction in which justice moves. It is here that the rut lies. It is here that things go wrong — badly wrong.
Two major parts of Pakistan — Karachi and Balochistan — both with the potential to turn the fate of the country around have been either turned into warzones or allowed to remain dilapidated. It is absolutely confusing that if progress is the mainstay of those pulling strings then why the MQM had been allowed to render Karachi and by extension the entire Sindh hollow. If improving quality of life necessitates the third force’s intrusion then why has Balochistan been left to squander in poverty with no development despite various economic packages announced by almost every new government?
Until recently we were being fed with the ‘intervention theory’ according to which India was behind all that went wrong in both these regions. Not that it was not true, however, this reality begs the question as to how a state that could bulldoze Indian aggression in Afghanistan and in AJK, failed in pulling the same punches in its own cities. Fishy as it may sound, smell, and feel, the problem is that we are forced to accept this theory unless we want to be blamed as one of the characters of the theory. The slur of being an agent or a traitor goes like a dagger into the heart, indeed.
Do we have to be in a problem zone forever? Or we can move on, especially now when the political circus is reduced to a bedtime story that can put to sleep even a child.
We have two options to come out of this rut. One is in play right now. Let us take a view of it. We are following the rule of justice framework wherein a dishonest or corrupt leader deserves to go. The supporter of this framework believes that having a righteous leader at the top motivates power wielders at the bottom to behave righteously, and inspires public morality. This theory of divinity incarnate has unfortunately failed. We have been banishing corrupt leaders without creating a just society.
The other option is that of the rule of law framework. The supporters of this theory believe in harnessing the propensity for excesses intrinsic in human nature. They develop laws and constitutions; balance out the power of the executive and legislator with oversight of a powerful judiciary. When everyone in society is held accountable for their actions, it stops the power wielder in their tracks, before they contemplate corruption.
Rule of law is the only way through which the world has seized true democracy and so shall Pakistan. The existing script, promoting arbitrary justice, has worn out — time to revive constitutional democracy to disperse power, so that leaders emerge naturally from within the political system.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2271050/the-long-winter-of-unconstitutional-democracy
The long winter of unconstitutional democracy
by Durdana Najam in The Express Tribune, November 5th, 2020.
The writer is a public policy analyst based in Lahore
Eleven political parties (as the Pakistan Democratic Movement, PDM) are on the rampage to drag Imran Khan’s government out because they believe that this government has been “brought” into power. What they mean is that the establishment has stolen elections to put their favourite on the saddle. How much truth does this blame hold?
A popular belief is that Pakistan is a victim of a leadership vacuum, which, as is allegedly believed, goes in the interest of the establishment, which had been happily filling the space, earlier through direct intervention, and now under the new rule of hybrid democracy. Under this methodology, a political party in power is expected to play subservient to the establishment’s vision otherwise the light on the exit door turns on. This script has been used so often that almost every move is known and predictable. The question is: why could no political party pass the test of patriotism? Before we attempt to answer these questions, let’s see on the other side of the fence.
The truth is that the political parties are equally responsible for this turf war. Never had there been a sincere effort to draw citizens into a consultative process to elevate their core interests and reshape its political leadership. That explains why the elected government had been reluctant to conduct local bodies elections. Even when the elections were held, on the insistence of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the local governments were not given financial independence. For the execution of an act as small as replacing a street light, the councillors had to rush to the DC or his other teammates for approval. The uncontrolled inflation, berated with equal force by everyone, is the product of the deviation from establishing communities at the local level.
Political engineering is not only the forte of the so-called establishment but of every force reluctant to devolve and share power. It is all about power. The one who has power is the one who owns resources and determines the direction in which justice moves. It is here that the rut lies. It is here that things go wrong — badly wrong.
Two major parts of Pakistan — Karachi and Balochistan — both with the potential to turn the fate of the country around have been either turned into warzones or allowed to remain dilapidated. It is absolutely confusing that if progress is the mainstay of those pulling strings then why the MQM had been allowed to render Karachi and by extension the entire Sindh hollow. If improving quality of life necessitates the third force’s intrusion then why has Balochistan been left to squander in poverty with no development despite various economic packages announced by almost every new government?
Until recently we were being fed with the ‘intervention theory’ according to which India was behind all that went wrong in both these regions. Not that it was not true, however, this reality begs the question as to how a state that could bulldoze Indian aggression in Afghanistan and in AJK, failed in pulling the same punches in its own cities. Fishy as it may sound, smell, and feel, the problem is that we are forced to accept this theory unless we want to be blamed as one of the characters of the theory. The slur of being an agent or a traitor goes like a dagger into the heart, indeed.
Do we have to be in a problem zone forever? Or we can move on, especially now when the political circus is reduced to a bedtime story that can put to sleep even a child.
We have two options to come out of this rut. One is in play right now. Let us take a view of it. We are following the rule of justice framework wherein a dishonest or corrupt leader deserves to go. The supporter of this framework believes that having a righteous leader at the top motivates power wielders at the bottom to behave righteously, and inspires public morality. This theory of divinity incarnate has unfortunately failed. We have been banishing corrupt leaders without creating a just society.
The other option is that of the rule of law framework. The supporters of this theory believe in harnessing the propensity for excesses intrinsic in human nature. They develop laws and constitutions; balance out the power of the executive and legislator with oversight of a powerful judiciary. When everyone in society is held accountable for their actions, it stops the power wielder in their tracks, before they contemplate corruption.
Rule of law is the only way through which the world has seized true democracy and so shall Pakistan. The existing script, promoting arbitrary justice, has worn out — time to revive constitutional democracy to disperse power, so that leaders emerge naturally from within the political system.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2271050/the-long-winter-of-unconstitutional-democracy
Published in Pak Media comment and Pakistan