KARACHI:
Likeminded policymakers and parliamentarians rightly lament that the security policy should not be exclusively left to officialdom and should be formed after a wider debate. However, there are several barriers and limitations that prevent a wider debate and must be considered before any single institution is blamed for garnering more power in the framing and making of policies. The first issue is that security issues, strategies and resource allocation are sensitive issues that cannot always be debated on camera. In addition, apart from a few, most parliamentarians seldom take interest in actively participating in budgets and other legislations. The majority never take the trouble to indulge in the cumbersome activity of reviewing thick budget documents and drafts of proposed bills.
Our parliamentary democracy has not matured enough to allow a modicum of independence to its legislators to openly debate and express their opinion or provide input out of the party line. It is usually the heads of the ruling or opposition parties that hold most of the authority. The members of parliament, members of the national assembly, and senators only rubber-stamp the wishes of the party leaders. Lastly, party interest is the utmost priority. We often witness ruling party legislators endorsing every government move and opposition legislators opposing every government policy. This demonstrates an imbalance of perspective and analysis on important issues such as national security policy, defence expenditure, etc. Perhaps, there is a need to reform the parliament because it appears to have failed in fulfilling its role. The parliament must understand that with rights comes responsibility, which must be fulfilled.
Gulsher Panhwer
Johi
Published in The Express Tribune, December 28th, 2021.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
