With five advisers and 18 special assistants to Prime Minister (SAPM), all of whom are unelected, in addition to 27 elected ministers, the PTI’s federal cabinet is no doubt a little overcrowded. Although there is no restriction as such on the PM appointing his advisers and special assistants, it can be frowned upon when the number almost equals that of elected members. The inclusion of three advisers in the Cabinet Committee on Privatisation (CCoP) was perhaps pushing it, forcing the IHC to take notice and deem the appointments illegal; stating in a short order that unelected advisers and special assistants could not interfere into the executive’s domain. The order highlights an important distinction between unelected advisers and elected ministers who are representatives of the people in that the former is “not responsible to the Parliament in terms of Article 91 (6) of the constitution” while the latter is. As such, advisers cannot be sitting in important positions such as heading the CCoP, as privatization is a national issue and therefore should be handled by an elected member of Parliament. Speeding up the process of privatizing public sector enterprises is an IMF condition under its $6 Billion Extended Fund Facility (EFF). Had the government not been so reliant on advisers that it had to install them into a position where they would be performing executive functions, an unnecessary delay in the proceedings of the CCoP would have been avoided.
It is not as if the government has not been warned before. Back in August, IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah, disposing of a petition filed against the appointment of Adviser to the Prime Minister on Interior Mirza Shahzad Akbar, had ruled that unelected advisers and SAPMs could not exercise executive or administrative powers. Elected members of the PTI also do not support this ‘hybrid system’ of government, as evidenced by Federal Aviation Minister Ghulam Sarwar Khan’s statement earlier this year that the running of the government through unelected special assistants and advisors was anathema to a parliamentary system. It would have been best if the government had not overstepped constitutional boundaries. Yet again, the judiciary has had to step in and remind it of its
limits.https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/12/08/unelected-advisers/
Unelected advisers: Editorial in Pakistan Today, 09 Dec 2020
With five advisers and 18 special assistants to Prime Minister (SAPM), all of whom are unelected, in addition to 27 elected ministers, the PTI’s federal cabinet is no doubt a little overcrowded. Although there is no restriction as such on the PM appointing his advisers and special assistants, it can be frowned upon when the number almost equals that of elected members. The inclusion of three advisers in the Cabinet Committee on Privatisation (CCoP) was perhaps pushing it, forcing the IHC to take notice and deem the appointments illegal; stating in a short order that unelected advisers and special assistants could not interfere into the executive’s domain. The order highlights an important distinction between unelected advisers and elected ministers who are representatives of the people in that the former is “not responsible to the Parliament in terms of Article 91 (6) of the constitution” while the latter is. As such, advisers cannot be sitting in important positions such as heading the CCoP, as privatization is a national issue and therefore should be handled by an elected member of Parliament. Speeding up the process of privatizing public sector enterprises is an IMF condition under its $6 Billion Extended Fund Facility (EFF). Had the government not been so reliant on advisers that it had to install them into a position where they would be performing executive functions, an unnecessary delay in the proceedings of the CCoP would have been avoided.
It is not as if the government has not been warned before. Back in August, IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah, disposing of a petition filed against the appointment of Adviser to the Prime Minister on Interior Mirza Shahzad Akbar, had ruled that unelected advisers and SAPMs could not exercise executive or administrative powers. Elected members of the PTI also do not support this ‘hybrid system’ of government, as evidenced by Federal Aviation Minister Ghulam Sarwar Khan’s statement earlier this year that the running of the government through unelected special assistants and advisors was anathema to a parliamentary system. It would have been best if the government had not overstepped constitutional boundaries. Yet again, the judiciary has had to step in and remind it of its
limits.https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/12/08/unelected-advisers/
Published in Pak Media comment and Pakistan