It must go to the lasting discredit of our political parties and their leaders that within two years of a credible election the centre of state power and public interest has shifted once again from parliament to the Supreme Court and GHQ.
The politicians may allege conspiracies by outsiders but have only their own shenanigans to blame. In pursuing personal and factional interests they have been violating almost every rule and convention of parliamentary democracy. In the absence of a single-party majority in the National Assembly, the obvious course for the two major parties — the PPP, PML-N — to follow was that one should lead a coalition government and the other a united opposition. Instead, Mr Zardari’s incessantly talked of ‘taking everybody on board’ and Mr Nawaz Sharif assured ‘not to destabilise the system’. They couldn’t, however, bring themselves round to forming a national government.
Resultantly, the governments at the centre and in the provinces have been no more than ragbags of ministers, advisers, special assistants, ambassadors at large, you name it, drawn from a variety of parties — some with shady backgrounds. Particularly comical was the position in Balochistan where, at one time, every assembly member joined the government but for one who was also the leader of his own one-man opposition.
The worse, and fatal, blow to the parliamentary system, however, came when Mr Asif Zardari chose to be the president of the country and the PPP in Punjab preferred to be an unwelcome, sulking partner in Shahbaz Sharif’s government rather than sit in the opposition. Mr Kamal Azfar should not have been blaming the CIA and GHQ, nor Babar Awan, the Jews and Qadianis for conspiring against the government. Conspiracies brewed in its own ranks. The Supreme Court’s order now leaves no choice for the political leaders but to agree to hold elections afresh.
If the Supreme Court’s order points towards immediate elections, the NFC award announced a week earlier provides a rudimentary basis for a new compact between the federation and the provinces. For the first time the award has recognised that (i) the provinces deserve a larger share in the national income; (ii) population should not be the only basis; (iii) the tax jurisdiction of the provinces needs to be enlarged; and (iv) the provinces should have greater control over their natural resources.
Punjab had been traditionally resisting any departure from the set formula. This time round Shahbaz Sharif pioneered the change and his province has been the only loser. Balochistan, justifiably the most aggrieved, has gained the most. Admittedly, the award is no substitute for provincial autonomy but it is certainly a small step in that direction.
The problems confronting the country are too many and too formidable for the present shattered institutions and demoralised leadership to comprehend and resolve. Topping the list are: constitutional structures, provincial autonomy, jurisdiction of local councils and reorganisation of civil services. Violence may subside but discontent will continue to simmer till the representatives of the people from all regions elected now find some equitable and enduring solutions.
That the form of government will be parliamentary and the prime minister the chief executive is by now a settled question. But how the prime minister should be restrained from abusing his authority remains a worrisome issue. The recent appointments of secretaries and ambassadors are a case in point.
A solution that instantly suggests itself is that all such appointments should be subject to the approval of a committee of the Senate. Presently Ben Bernanke is being grilled by a US Senate committee for his second tenure as head of the Federal Reserve. Here the president/prime minister pick up whosoever they want as governor of the State Bank. The public accounts committee headed by Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan has shown that abuse of financial authority can be checked but long after it has taken place. For appointments the committee’s approval must come beforehand.
In legislative institutions the reform most needed is direct elections to the Senate. In the present system the Senate just mirrors the position of parties in the National Assembly.
The aspirations for provincial autonomy range from near-independence to mere abolition of the concurrent list. In the prevailing regional situation, which threatens the country overall as much as its various parts, it should be possible to meet the extremists halfway. The new parliament — with a directly elected Senate — would be the best forum to debate and settle this question which has never really been seriously considered as the ‘nationalists’ are viewed either as cranks or secessionists.
Local councils should be protected in the constitution but each province must have its own law defining its functions. The underlying principle should be that the council must earn its keep. An independent commission should determine the subsidy each council must get depending on the income it can raise and the service it is expected to provide.
The civil service (that is all career public servants) to put it curtly has become an extension of the political party in power. Politicians expect civil servants to carry out their orders. The people have been fast losing faith in the ability of the civil servants to be just and impartial. Today their trust is at an all-time low. No commission has been able to reverse this trend nor will another if it were to be constituted. The police was politicised more when Musharraf’s law put it under independent commissions. The only remedy left to be tried is to go back to the laws and systems that governed the civil servants before Z.A. Bhutto signified the advent of the people’s regime by dismissing 1,300 of them.
Much may not be achieved but an effort must be made to reform the legal and administrative systems before the optimism generated by the Supreme Court’s judgment fades away. ‘There is a tide in the affairs of men, which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat. And we must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures.’—Shakespeare.
No comments:
Post a Comment