Effective checks and balances

From the proposal an impression has been created that there is a grave political crisis in the country

The recent proposal by Senate Chairman Raza Rabbani that there should be an inter-institutional dialogue among the different pillars of the state to ensure each of these institutions stick to their constitutional role and mandate is quite surprising. As the Senate chairman has reportedly taken verbal approval from the members of the upper house to give practical shape to the proposal, soon there would be invitations sent out to the judiciary, the military and the executive branches of the state in this regard.

If the inter-institutional dialogue does take place, it would be tantamount to the writing of a new chapter in the chequered political history of Pakistan. It must be pointed out that the proposal for inter-institutional dialogue from Raza Rabbani came in the wake of a debate in the Senate on the evolving political situation following the Panama Papers verdict and working out the way forward vis-a-vis the role of parliament.

The timing of the proposal is quite important. It was made soon after the disqualification of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif by the Supreme Court of Pakistan under Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution. From the proposal an impression has been created, whether intentionally or not, that there is a grave political crisis in the country. However, this seems to be only a misperception or misconception. Let us look at the facts.

The disqualification of a prime minister, who under the parliamentary form of government is ‘one among the equals’ is not tantamount to political crisis and this is very much evident from the trouble-free election of another prime minister of the same party — the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and with it the continuation of the democratic system. Instead, the disqualification of the chief executive of the country by the highest court of the state after a lengthy and exhaustive trial suggests strengthening of the state institutions so much that even a popularly-elected prime minister could be sent home if he is found involved in any wrongdoing.

The growing strength of the constitutional institutions of the country can also be gauged from the fact that the chief executive was removed by the highest court and there was no need of interference from the military at any point. Coups and takeovers by the military have been the typical method to remove elected prime ministers in Pakistan. So when there is no such strong demands in Pakistan from any quarters that all the state institutions must remain within their constitutional domain and exercise powers, as enshrined in the Constitution, proposing an inter-institutional dialogue for the same purpose is something extraordinary.

The Constitution of Pakistan very clearly delineates the mandate of each state institution and unequivocally prohibits the encroachment of the domain and powers of one state institution by other state institution(s). In the presence of the Constitution and its relevant provisions dealing with the mandate of various state institutions, the participation of the military and the judiciary in an inter-institutional dialogue regarding their domains and powers may not be forthcoming.

In case the dialogue does take place, it is likely to trigger more controversies than resolve any of those controversies. The state of the union, the structure and the nature of Pakistani federalism and the political stability in Pakistan is weak especially on account of heavy polarisation within the country’s political stratosphere. Any kind of inter-institutional dialogue is unlikely to be proceed without hurdles.

If the Constitution could not stop different state institutions from encroaching upon the domain and power of other state institution(s) then how can we expect inter-institutional dialogue to attain the same objective? In fact, such inter-institutional dialogue is something of an innovation in the constitutional history of democratic states. In order to ensure that every state institution remains within its constitutional domain and exercises powers as is enshrined in the Constitution, there is a need to strictly adhere to the time-tested formula of ‘separation of powers’ so as to guarantee the placing of a mechanism of ‘checks and balances’ in every institution.

This is clearly the way forward if we seek political stability and the continuation of democracy in the country.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 22^nd, 2017.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.