Formal and procedural aspect of democracy in Pakistan

Election dilemmas

Author: By Dr Hasan Askari Rizvi

There is difference between procedure of democracy and substance of democracy

The election schedule has been announced and the voting will take place on May 11, 2013. The politics in Pakistan will be dominated by the election process for the next three months, involving a lot more controversies, negative propaganda, character assassination of candidates and political leaders and court cases. There will be outside runners who would question the electoral process and attempt to make it difficult to hold the elections on time in the name of free and fair elections.

It is a matter of satisfaction that the outgoing assemblies have completed their terms which has strengthened the formal and procedural aspect of democracy in Pakistan. However, the substance and quality of democracy continues to be poor. The elected governments have performed poorly and the political leadership often found it difficult to rise above their narrow, subjective and partisan mindset.

The inability, if not failure, of the two major political parties, the PPP and the PML-N, to agree on a caretaker prime minister is the latest example how the political parties take up the issues of democratic politics as an ego competition and how they can play tough with each other. This was meant to show to their supporters and voters that they had not allowed the other side to get away with its choice.

This is a good example of the difference between the procedural and performance side of democracy. The political activists of both parties are arguing that this is not a failure. After all, the nomination of the caretaker prime minister by the election commission is a constitutional procedure. Therefore, there is nothing wrong in it. From the perspective of procedures and formalities, it is constitutional for the election commission to nominate a caretaker prime minister if the political leaders fail to do that. However, from the perspective of the quality and performance of democracy, it is poor politics that the political leaders and parties cannot settle political issues and they approach non-elected institution for getting their problems resolved.

The election commission option is a conflict resolution method provided in the constitution that becomes operative when the ego-oriented politicians with feudal-tribal notion of political competition cannot solve the political problems which is their primary responsibility.

One major challenge to democracy and representative governance in Pakistan is that political leaders have a tendency to look towards non-elected institutions for settling their political scores. Political leaders and parties will not accommodate each other but would approach a non-elected state institution for helping them out or for resolving the problem. They may discreetly cultivate the military to strengthen their political bargaining position. If there is a tension between the civilian government and the military top brass, the political opposition is likely to lean towards the military or exploit the civil-military tension to its advantage at the expense of the civilian government. The Memo Issue (2011-2012) is a good example of such a political fight.

The superior judiciary, especially the Supreme Court, has become the key arena of political contestation for the competing political interests. A large number of political cases are filed in the Supreme Court or the Supreme Court (sometimes even High Courts) take notice of the matter on their own. The political issues have to be addressed at the political level by political leaders and organisations and dealt with through the elected assemblies and their committees.

Now, the election commission, a constitutional institution, nevertheless non-elected, settles the matter that the political leaders should have done it through mutual accommodation.

There was no reason to make an issue out of it because the constitution talks of the caretaker prime minister or chief minister only in the context of holding the elections. This means that caretaker prime minister or chief minister is not expected to make major policy changes. The primary objective of caretaker administration is to facilitate free and fair elections by making sure that the state institutions and officials do not adopt a partisan disposition. It also provides the necessary support to the Elections Commission for holding fair, free and transparent elections. Another important function of caretaker administration is to manage the day-to-day working of government and to maintain law and order through various state agencies performing this task, especially for the election purposes.

Another divergence between the procedures and substance of democracy will cause tension in the political circles and it is expected some of these issues will go to the courts. The election commission has given a short margin of time for filing nomination papers i.e., March 24-29.

The new nomination papers require a lot of information that places the candidates in a difficult situation. There is a widespread support for scrutinising the candidates minutely because the underlying assumption is that tough scrutiny of candidates will ensure that only angel-like people will go to the assemblies in a society were corruption is rampant. General Musharraf thought before the 2002 elections that the people with the graduation degrees will make a better parliament. He imposed that condition. How far the 20002 assemblies of academic degree holders performed better than the earlier assemblies is known to all of us. The fallout of this law is still with us as some people are facing court trials or strong propaganda barrage for making false statement about their educational qualification. It is not clear if the voters cared for the academic qualifications of the candidates.

We will soon start seeing the political and societal fallout of the new nomination papers. The political opponents are getting ready to raise objections on each other’s nomination papers. This is likely to open flood-gates of charges and counter charges. There will be more controversies and court cases this time regarding the nomination papers than ever.

Imran Khan started his election campaign with a public meeting in Lahore on March 23. His discourse (especially the initial part) comprised highly religious and nationalist statements. However, the promises he made were secular in nature. It is not clear if his close associates and policy advisers share his religious disposition. There was music and dancing for the liberals and moderates. Imran Khan is offering something to everybody, although his statements projected him more religious than the Jamaat-i-Islami.

Pakistan is on the election ride. Hopefully, the political leaders will attempt to bridge the gap between rhetoric and reality, promise and delivery as well as between the procedures and substance of democracy.

The writer is an independent political and defence analyst.

When you must deliver criticism about someone's work, it's best to be direct rather than diplomatic. Avoid the all-too-common practice of mixing positive messages with negative ones. It's confusing to the recipient. Steer clear of the classic feedback "sandwich," which goes like this: good news, followed by bad news, ending with good news. Eating a sandwich with good bread — but bad meat in the middle — isn't too enjoyable. And while giving someone feedback in a considerate, contextualized, and balanced manner is good practice, you need to be very clear on the poor performance part or your message might get lost. It is often the most important aspect of a feedback session, so don't muddle it.

New democratic opportunity

Author: By Dr Hasan Askari Rizvi

March 20, 2013 on 12:21 AM

Election is the most civilised way to elect new assemblies and new governments

March 16, 2013, is a landmark date in Pakistan’s troubled political history. The elected National Assembly and elected civilian federal government completed its full tenure and came to an end through a normal constitutional procedure. The members left the National Assembly in good mood saying goodbye to one another. The prime minister addressed the nation on radio and TV two hours before the conclusion of the tenure of the National Assembly, thanking all those who contributed to strengthening the democratic process. He also highlighted what he considered to be the achievements of the PPP government at the federal level.

The politically active circles would continue to debate the achievements and failure of the five years of democracy. Given increased political divisions in Pakistan there is a greater tendency to take a partisan position. If one is a supporter of the PPP there will be some praise for the government. The opposition members have nothing but criticism to offer. The PML-N leaders appear to be more critical of the PPP than any other party but they project the PML-N government in the Punjab as the best example of performance. Imran Khan criticises both parties.

There are those in Pakistan that trash everything. Either they are idealist or pessimist. For them no government has done anything for them; prices have increased, life has become unsafe and there is power shortage. The democratic era has not given them anything, they argue. They are not interested in the civilian governments completing their terms. Some of them think that there is no hope for democracy until an ideal society and state are created and a super human and fully pious person appears on the political scene.

Despite political failures and poor governance, peaceful and orderly completion of the term of the government marks the end of the first phase of democratic transition. This needs to be acknowledged and celebrated. The second phase starts for the selection of new assemblies and governments.

The test of the people’s commitment to democracy is the general election. It is a challenge to hold peaceful, fair, free and transparent elections. This calls for a joint official and non-official effort to hold the election in a manner that it provides an opportunity to the people to elect their representatives. It should be held in a manner that its results are acceptable to the main players in the process and the elections observers describe it as a fair chance to the people to exercise their right to vote.

It is a wrong assumption that democracy cannot exist without ideal political and societal conditions and that the people in the lead political role must be pious and angel-like. Democracy is a process that improves by practising it. The process must continue and mid-course corrections are made in the light of the experience of working of democracy. The democratic process improves over time provided there is a conscious effort to improve it and its values are adopted by the society as the standard way of dealing with social, political, cultural and economic affairs. Democracy has to become a way of life and a way to look at life as well as the strategy of dealing with other.

The leadership reflects the broad features of the society because the leaders have to deal with the people and address their problems. If corruption and favouritism are rampant in the society, do not expect that the leaders will be completely free of these weaknesses. If every leader refuses to help people who have not been able to prove that they are fully justified in their demands, the people will be unhappy and turn against such a leader. Either the leader has to solve the problems of the people or convince them that they should not demand this or suggest a better alternative.

The quality of leadership can improve if the people and societal organisations scrutinise the performance of the elected leaders through mutual dialogue and discussion on national and local problems and issues. The voters need to use their right to vote on merit. If they think that a parliamentarian has not performed his job in a fair manner or engages in corrupt practices, they should not vote for such a person. This is a more effective method of accountability than expecting someone appearing on the political scene and cleansing the society through arbitrary and brutal methods.

Election provides the people with an important opportunity to hold the parliamentarian accountable for their work. When the candidates are engaged in election campaign the voters should ask them questions about their agenda for local development work and national issues. Invariably the candidates give a rosy picture of the future or make promises that are never delivered.

When a candidate makes a promise ask him to give a plan of action. For example, a candidate can argue that if his party comes to power it will provide jobs to every young persons with high school education and others and that the problem of electricity shortages will be removed in three months. Ask such a person how would his party mobilise financial resources to achieve these objectives. What are the specific plans to produce more electricity or use the currently available electricity in an efficient manner? Which methods for power generation will be employed and how would funds and technology be made available?

Everybody should check if the vote is registered and use it on the polling day. A large voter turnout reduces the chances of manipulation of results. The party activists need to take extra security caution in the course of the election campaign and on the polling day to avoid terrorist attacks. Hold small public meetings and monitor the areas closely where election activity is taking place so that none is able to plant a bomb or engage in suicide attacks.

The forthcoming election is an important occasion for the people of Pakistan to demonstrate their commitment to democracy by getting actively involved in the electoral process. Do not listen to those who argue that nothing can change by casting vote. Election is the most civilised way to elect new assemblies and new governments provided the people vote for the people who are genuinely committed to the cause of the people. The voters and politically active people should cooperate with each other to turn the election into a genuine democratic exercise.

The writer is an independent political and defence analyst.

Analysis: Trials and errors of democracy

By M Ziauddin

Published: March 16, 2013

For the people of Pakistan generally the last five years have not been very pleasant, to say the least. With the economy in tailspin, prices of essentials spiking and power supplies plunging it had become almost impossible for most Pakistanis to make both ends meet.
The rise of militancy and widespread lawlessness had on the other hand cheapened life itself. Intolerance seemed to have taken hold of the entire society. And corruption had turned into a national pastime.
One is tempted to blame democracy for all the troubles of the last five years.  But as they say, you cannot make an omelet without breaking an egg. In the same way, you cannot have democracy without passing through a phase during which everything appears to be coming unstuck. It takes a long time for democratic institutions to be built and start functioning within the scope and limits envisaged for each one under the Constitution.
You cannot completely get rid of corruption when both democracy and market economy are functioning in unison. Both are good systems but both have some serious side effects. Corruption could of course be minimized if you have an independent judiciary, a free media and a strong parliament. It was a strong parliament which could pass the 18th, 19th and 20th amendments unanimously.  Considering the fact that every political party worth its name (except JI and PTI) were represented in the outgoing parliament and every one had its own manifesto but exhibiting remarkable maturity and settling to reach unanimity through give and take they rendered the 1973 constitution to its original form, granted the provinces their long-standing demand of autonomy and the president voluntarily transferred his powers to parliament.
The superior judiciary has asserted its independence effectively during the last five years, but unless the lower judiciary is liberated from the grip of corruption, the judiciary as a whole would remain prone to financial and other temptations. The media is free but with the right to information law still in incubation it is not logical to expect it not to deal in half truths.  Therefore, corruption continues to be a major problem facing our society.
And it is not only because of the democratic transition that the economy had gone into a tailspin. The major reason for the crisis is attributed to our escalating dependence on foreign dole since the very inception of Pakistan. We have continuously refused to live within our means and at the same time consistently rejected the idea of generating our own resources by expanding our tax base and by making all those earning taxable incomes to pay their dues.
Transitions are always accident prone, especially when a society attempts to transit from an undemocratic system to a democratic one. That we came out of the current phase of transition without being derailed by any major mishap is a matter of satisfaction.  But the transitional phase is not yet over. In our case it is likely to continue for decades considering the time lost because of military interventions.  One cannot completely rule out things going into the reverse gear while we are negotiating the next phase of transition at the time of elections or when it is time for transfer of power from one civilian set-up to the next one.  Even the next elected government would perhaps continue to remain prone to transition-related accidents.
Both the ruling coalition, led by the Pakistan Peoples’ Party and the opposition by the Pakistan Muslim League—N deserve full marks for guiding the country through a very difficult phase of transition. Hopefully, they would continue to display similar political maturity while negotiating the challenges facing them in the immediate future like setting up an interim government, contesting the elections and accepting their results. The superior judiciary and the media also performed their respective roles admirably in the last five years. And the Army also deserves praise for resisting pressures to intervene from quarters having no patience for the tribulations of democratic process.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 16^th, 2013.

Decadence of the society

Author: By Nudrrat Khawaja

March 12, 2013 on 1:07 AM

Is there a chance for a tolerant and prosperous Pakistan?

Whereas the world has moved in one direction, where safeguarding human rights, learning modern science and technology, and promoting peace and harmony are pivotal for a prosperous society, Pakistan has gone in a completely opposite direction, where there is no regard for human rights of minorities, no inclination to study and make “legitimate” scientific inventions. Take for example the Maasai tribe in Eastern Africa, which has decided to opt for modern education and abolishment of violent practices – while we run around like barbarians burning people’s houses down.

Within the Massailand, on border of Kenya and Tanzania, lies a thick jungle – a man standing on high rock, holding a radar device to track a pride of lions was not a man of science, but a tribal man – illiterate and uncivilised – helping the naturalists protect the endangered wildlife. Maasai tribe – one of the oldest tribes of the Nile Valley – is known for their warrior skills and ferocity with which they protect their cattle from lions. Now, they are willing to give up this meaningless hatred in order to conserve their environment. Another age old tradition that the women of Maasai tribe have raised their voice against is female genital mutilation (FGM) or female circumcision. In a documentary “Maasai at the crossroads”, filmmaker Teri Geriselen tells us about transition of the tribe from primitive cultural practices to modern development. They achieved this without compromising on their traditions. Keeping their simple life style intact, Maasai people now believe adapting to ways of the new world, particularly educating their children is paramount for their survival.

Humans or homo sapiens are a product of evolution spanning over thousands of years. Likewise, our world is constantly changing and the only attribute that has led to the survival and growth of human species is its ability to adapt to those changes – environmental and societal. Failing to cope with the changing trends of the world would result in gradual decline of society to the point of complete annihilation. History is witness to collapse of great empires that could not – and in most situations denied to stay abreast with changing times. Islamic world is faced with the similar dilemma. While holding on to the fundamentals of the religion, Muslims forget that over 1,400 year old teachings cannot make their society productive and fit enough to compete with the modern world.

There are few lessons that the Islamic society can learn from an age old tribe of the Nile Valley – will to survive and letting go of their inhuman, violent practices to become part of the developed world. We don’t have to go deep into our memory lane to look at the ugly picture of the Pakistani society. On 9th March, a mob of angry, religious zealots burnt down over a hundred houses belonging to the Christian community in Lahore. The reason: alleged blasphemy by a member of the minority community, who was arrested by the police three days prior to the devastation. The behaviour is similar in nature to a charged elephant bull, high on testosterone ravaging the forest and adjoining villages and trampling any unfortunate being that comes in its way. What is the solution to madness of such a magnitude? Either the beast is kept in isolation unless it comes to its senses or in extreme situations, shot down.

The civilised and developed world has already started to isolate us for our blood thirst and primitive views and practices. Pakistan’s human rights record is far from exemplary. Its democratic governments and military regimes have done equal damage to the fabric of this society by introducing “the mad elephant” into the fold. The discrimination that began from constitutionally declaring Ahmadiyya community as non-Muslims translated into violence against Shias and Christians; while our proverbial hatred towards Hindus – cause of the Partition – resulted in dehumanisation of the society at large.

Despite my desperation to believe in a tolerant and prosperous Pakistan, political environment in the country, public sympathy for the “cause” of extremist organisations like Laskar-e-Jhangvi and political protection for such organisations make me think otherwise. Therefore, the only solution to save this sinking ship is to undo past practices and teachings that inculcate hatred and intolerance in society and start afresh on a clean slate; writing with an ink of peace, love and tolerance.

The writer is a journalist and social critic based in Lahore. She can be reached at nudrratkhawaja@gmail.com, she tweets

Reality check

Reality check

Author: By Humayun Gauhar

March 10, 2013 on 1:25 AM

The hypocrisy of calling Pakistan an Islamic state must stop

My purpose is not to spread doom and gloom. Rather, it is to provide reality checks as I see them best. I haven’t lost hope and neither should you. As I said last week in ‘Children of a Lesser Evil’, if one has faith it would be impossible to lose hope because one would know that it is tantamount to denying the Creator and His munificence.

Our most important reality check without which we will not improve is that unless we know the truth about ourselves and accept that Muslims are 200 years behind the most knowledge-based societies we will never understand how our societies got crafted so badly and not know how to reform them. The world is progressing while we are regressing.

Hardly anyone understands the global dynamic, how it is changing the world and we are being mindlessly swept along with it. Those who think they do provide proof that they do not by their theorizing, narratives and rhetoric. Instant journalese, tired old theories, hearsay, superficial propaganda often unleashed by intelligence agencies and lapped up by the media, drawing room chatter and everyone trying to demonstrate that they have ‘inside information’ informs their thinking. When even those at the helm are lost, interested only in acquiring power and pelf by any means, how can the passengers of a rudderless ship know where they are headed? They tend to fall for the prima facie, the tip of the iceberg instead of trying to look at the entire iceberg and often crash into it. I don’t blame them entirely. Who has the time when at the end of each day fighting for survival people are left breathless, mindless, switch on their television sets and absorb the brainless drivel bombarded at them without let? If you wish to think then stop listening like androids to the hogwash on television and free yourselves of the tyranny of the media and the instant ‘knowledge’ and ‘information’ it disseminates and reclaim your thought process. More important than listening is thinking.

Global change is in fast-forward: the Leviathan is morphing, convulsing, shedding its old skin and acquiring a new one. Every new skin is called the ‘New World Order’. The catalyst of the Leviathan’s morph is the perpetual global dynamic that determines the forces of history that influences thinking, doctrines, strategies and policies, not the other way round, though many think that it is.

The truth is far different, sometimes horrifying, sometimes thrilling, for underlying horror and thrill are man’s innate stupidity and native intelligence. It was highly intelligent to discover atomic fusion but it was extremely stupid to use it for destruction in the name of protection. Man has always used knowledge for good and evil. That is how he is made and that is how he will remain for God has given him free will and the option to choose between right and wrong. Often man chooses wrong on the basis of some religion, ideology or belief system that has almost always been mutilated and adulterated from its pristine original in pursuit of influence, power and hegemony for control over resources and wealth. We Muslims have almost entirely lost our ability to tell between right and wrong, good and evil, because we have abdicated our understanding of God’s Word to fake men of religion as distinct from men of Faith.

As I have thought about it I am coming to the conclusion that the greatest damage to humankind has been done by men of assumed piety peddling religions and wannabe revolutionaries touting ideologies by passing themselves off as scholars and politicians. Sadly, half-baked, semi-literate scholars are in the majority while genuine scholars are becoming a decreasing majority. Because their education is by rote fake scholars have gathered information without understanding. They thus use if for selfish ends, to help countries and churches acquire illegitimate power over their own peoples and flocks and impose dominion over others. If they truly were men of knowledge they would not have religion but Faith, for Faith is God’s Word while religion is a collection of dogma, customs and ritual – often fabricated – run by bureaucrats called clerics in an institution called church or de facto churches as in Islam that recognizes no church or clergy. But Muslim ‘scholars’ turned de facto clerics have established de facto churches that go by the name of movements and sects, each with its own Sharia or roadmap of the correct path. They wage war on one another and divide Muslims, just as many churches have divided Christianity.

True scholars would know that in the next life there is no religion, only God, no body or gender, just heightened consciousness that we call spirit or soul – ‘Nafs’ in Quranic Arabic. Real scholars would also know that since there is no intermediary between man and God there is no room for clerics for they have made religion into politics and business for power and pelf. Its not just Muslims: look at the shenanigans of the Vatican and you will understand what I say. So too with mystics and their graves: they can give you nothing nor can they intercede on your behalf with the Almighty. And their often-craven progeny most certainly cannot for piety does not come with the genes. Perhaps it was to discourage the heredity of piety that God did not give sons to any Prophet except Adam and Abraham. If the rest had any they died. This should tell you at the very least that dynasticism of any kind if abhorrent to God.

Muslims should also know that the only politics in Islam is revolutionary politics. The beneficiaries of an iniquitous status quo are predators: to protect it through western electoral politics it was natural for them to give revolution a bad name for self-preservation. Revolution is not about killing and maiming but perpetually changing the status quo for the better, keeping it dynamic and constantly improving the human condition. Else what else is the purpose of societies and states, politics and power?

They would also know that secularism is inherent in Islam, but the fakes have deliberately mistranslated ‘secular’ as ‘La Deeniyat’ or ‘faithlessness’ whereas secular means temporal, worldly and has to do with man’s behaviour and the laws he lives under in this world. The Quran is full of secular injunctions that were mostly revealed after the Prophet’s (pbuh) migration to Medina because then Muslims had a state of their own (not a necessity in Islam, by the way) and the Prophet (pbuh) was its head and military commander apart from being its spiritual head and guide. Islamic secularism is wide and has to do with how to live our lives, about etiquette, behaviour, laws etc. The Christian concept of secularism is narrow – separation of church and state – and cannot thus be imposed on Muslims there being no church in Islam. But what the fake scholar fears is separation between state and mullah and his misinterpretations of God’s Word.

Others say that true secularism is separation of state from the spiritual. But that is impossible: even those states that say that they are secular are not entirely so, else why would the US dollar say, ‘In God We Trust’ and the Queen of England also call herself ‘Commander of the Faith’ – very close to ‘Ameer ul Momineen’. Even communist societies have had to give way to the spiritual and sadly to organized religion. When spiritualism and secularism have a symbiotic relationship how can one separate them? Those that have tried have fallen flat on their faces. When you cannot take the spiritual out of man how can you take it out of his state and society? Without man the concept of state and society becomes meaningless and with man spiritualism is inherent.

If you don’t like what I say stop hypocritically calling Pakistan as an Islamic republic because by so doing you have laid such a heavy responsibility on yourself that you don’t have the capacity to meet because mentally you are still enslaved to western political and social constructs and behave like Black Minstrels. However, so long as you keep describing Pakistan as an Islamic state you will be judged by the measure of your Islamicity as a state. This and this measure alone is the measure of an Islamic state as enjoined in the Quran. We have been measured and weighed and found wanting. In 65 years we have amply proved that we have neither honesty, nor understanding or capacity to be an Islamic republic. In most respects except in public morality western societies are more Islamic in their treatment of their own people than any Muslim state. If we don’t hypocritically call ourselves an Islamic state, we the people will not stop being accidental Muslims by birth and will continue with our rituals and customs, our spiritual thought process hostage to mullahs of mind-bending hues in which the essence and spirit of Islam is nowhere to be found while our political thought processes remain hostage to western political constructs. Or take religion, not Faith, out of statecraft as 54 out of 57 Muslim majority countries have done and lessen your burden. A donkey cannot carry what an elephant can.
The writer is a political analyst. He can be contacted at humayun.gauhar786@gmail.com

The lost half of a decade

S Iftikhar Murshed Sunday, February 17, 2013

The ruling coalition in Pakistan ceaselessly brags that it is the first "democratically elected" government that will be completing its term. As the curtain rings down on its five-year tenure, it expects the world to applaud. Providence has been kind to the PPP-led dispensation, which has escaped being scorched by the vicious fires that it has been largely responsible for igniting. Three interlocking reasons are immediately identifiable for its survival.

The first, and most important, is the decision of the military establishment to stand aloof from the foibles of the inept and corrupt civilian government. The chief of the army staff, Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, adopted a policy of ‘splendid isolation’, a concept that was crafted by Benjamin Disraeli and the Marquis of Salisbury in respect of 19th century Europe. In the context of Pakistani politics, Kayani, a realist par excellence, understood only too well that there was no alternative to a hands-off approach.

The people of Pakistan had had enough of military rule and yearned for a civilian dispensation. Bitter memories of the past come stealing into the mind like a dreaded phantom. It seems only the other day when, on October 7, 1958, President Iskander Mirza abrogated the 1956 constitution – which had taken nine years to be drafted – and imposed martial law.

His justification was: “It is said that the constitution is sacred, but more sacred is the country and welfare and happiness of the people.” It is strangely ironical that a day after the Supreme Court, under Justice Muhammad Munir, validated Iskander Mirza’s action citing the doctrine of necessity in its verdict on the Dosso case, he was ousted and sent into exile by Gen Ayub Khan.

Nineteen years later, after toppling the Bhutto government on July 5, 1977, Gen Ziaul Haq declared: “The constitution is just a scrap of paper which can be thrown in the dustbin at any time.” Three decades on, nothing had changed. On November 3, 2007, the chief of the army staff and president, Pervez Musharraf, imposed emergency, suspended the 1973 Constitution and issued the Provisional Constitutional Order. With insufferable self-assurance he proclaimed: “The country is more important than the constitution or democracy.”

These men, mounted on sturdy stallions, thought themselves the saviours of the country. Yet they had all pledged: “I do solemnly swear that I will bear true faith and allegiance to Pakistan and uphold the constitution...I will not engage myself in any political activities...” Gen Kayani, however, was not contaminated by the messiah complex that had infected his predecessors.

He reckoned correctly that military intervention, under any pretext, would have resulted in Pakistan being quarantined and isolated as a pariah state. This would have had terrible consequences for the country, which is heavily dependent on external assistance. Gen Kayani readily concedes that the core ingredient for national security is a robust economy. On April 18 last year he told the media: “You cannot be spending on defence alone and forgetting about development.” In a perverse sense, the incompetent ruling coalition, by rendering the country hugely reliant on foreign aid, has unwittingly ensured that there will be no military takeover!

The second reason for the survival of the PPP-led government is the decision of the Supreme Court to never again validate any abrogation of, or deviation from, the constitution. Yet the track record of the judiciary has not been entirely aboveboard. Besides the controversial judgement in the Dosso case, some of the other decisions of the apex court show that, in the past, it has been influenced by extraneous factors.

In the Maulvi Tamizuddin case in 1955, for instance, the Federal Court under Justice Munir upheld the dismissal of the Constituent Assembly. In the Asma Jilani case of 1972, the Supreme Court declared Yahya Khan a usurper, though barely three years earlier, it had validated his assumption of power. Some of the same judges later endorsed Ziaul Haq’s coup, and subsequently sent the ousted Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to the gallows.

Similarly, Musharraf’s toppling of the Nawaz Sharif government was rubberstamped by the Supreme Court which included the present chief justice. Later, the court validated the 17th Amendment of December 2003 which confirmed Musharraf as president and allowed him to continue as army chief.

After six tumultuous decades, the judiciary has finally come into its own. The process started with Musharraf’s sacking of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry on March 9, 2007. This set in motion an unprecedented tidal wave of popular support for the ousted chief justice and resulted in his reinstatement by a Supreme Court bench headed by Justice Khalilur Rahman Ramday on July 20, 2007.

But the high drama continued. Emergency was imposed by Musharraf and judges who refused to take oath under the Provisional Constitutional Order of November 3, 2007, which included the chief justice and Ramday, were ousted and placed under virtual house arrest. Thus, in a mere eight months, Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry had been treacherously dismissed twice by an army dictator.

This convinced him after he was reinstated for a second time to never validate any ‘constitutional deviation’ again. Thus, on July 31, 2009, a 14-member bench of the Supreme Court declared the November 2007 emergency “unconstitutional, unauthorised and without any legal basis...” The immediate reaction of the Presidency was that the judgement was “a triumph for democratic principles, a stinging negation of dictatorship and is most welcome.”

Several months ago, Justice Ramday said that the new-found independence of the judiciary is derived entirely from popular support. “The courts,” he added, “are not equipped with tanks, guns and fighter planes. Their strength lies in the people... if anybody plays around with the judiciary the people will not accept it. Military coups are no longer possible and the government should therefore be able to complete its term. The rest depends on the internal political dynamics of the country within the parameters of the constitution.”

Here again the ruling coalition was singularly fortunate because the main opposition leader, Nawaz Sharif, who heads his own faction of the Muslim League, had also been humiliatingly ousted by the military. He was, therefore, as determined as the chief justice not to allow the derailment of the elected government. In the process Sharif’s reputation, perhaps unfairly, was tarnished as the leader of the ‘friendly opposition’. This restraint was the last of the three interlocking factors that has enabled the ruling coalition to muddle through its inglorious innings.

In this period, the currency has plummeted to an all-time low of Rs100 to the dollar. As of January 31 foreign exchange reserves stood at $8.7 billion – way below the minimum level of $10 billion recommended by the IMF. In addition, the country has to repay the IMF $3.4 billion in 2012-13, $3.43 billion in 2013-14 and $1.35 billion in 2014-15.

The desperate economic situation has impacted on ordinary people, who measure time by throbs of pain and anguish. Loadshedding, and consequently burgeoning unemployment, accompanied by spiralling inflation, have taken their toll. Last month, 45-year-old Muhammad Qasim of Faisalabad shot his wife and five children in their sleep and then killed himself after losing his job because of the power crisis. On average, three such heart-rending tragedies occur every single day.

For the last 65 years, Pakistan has limped on from crisis to crisis. On Wednesday the Supreme Court snuffed out an attempt by Tahirul Qadri, the self-righteous leader of the Tehreek-e-Minhajul-Quran, to replace the existing Election Commission of Pakistan with a new one. Had his petition not been rejected, it could have resulted in the postponement of the coming elections. It is not possible to predict what will happen in the weeks ahead.

The only certainty is that the government will continue to project the completion of its five-year term as a triumph for democracy. But these years have been shameful and are, undoubtedly, the lost half-decade in the country’s history.

The writer is the publisher of Criterion Quarterly. Email: iftimurshed @gmail.com