In any society there are four agents of change: political leadership that infuses thoughts and ideas which can impact and change a society; a parliament which can debate and offer thoughts and ideas to the executive to improve the lot of the people or propose policies and enact legislation which can impact a society favourably; the people, who can seek a change by voicing their rights and needs, which if forestalled can be run over by the mass of a movement forcing major sociopolitical upheaval; and finally the judiciary which though acts as an arbiter can also at times be the activist to defend the constitution and keep the society moving along on an even keel, while protecting fundamental rights of the people and the rights of the minority against the tyranny of the majority. Pakistan has one more force of change, its military which has disproportionate effect on policy and management of this execution and has formally retained direct control of the state and its functioning for at least three decades of its existence.
Of these the Parliament is half-eaten and fragmented with at least 150 constituencies unrepresented. Those still in the Parliament are all government members with a nominated token opposition — most are PTI renegades and hope to receive a PMLN membership in the next general elections. Any parliament which is incomplete and seriously deficient in its composition has an ineffective and deficient voice which does not qualify to be the voice of all the people with half the country unrepresented.
Rather than act as a force of change and progress the government has become a force of regression and status quo. It wishes to hold on to power in contravention of its constitutional obligation of holding elections denying people their fundamental right to elect their representatives. It has put to question government’s credibility, capacity and intent to lead the nation and resolve its predicaments. It is in violation of the constitution as it seeks a fig cover and a ruse to win reprieve and revised interpretation of the laws and articles of the constitution to its benefit. It assumes a cart blanche with audacity to impose its will in denial of the obligations regulating its functioning in a democracy. It is barely democratic and violates the tenets of the constitution with impunity.
The judiciary stands effectively neutralised through infused division based on resident sentiment over rules administering the SC. That such sentiment deems a revision must be right and members of the judiciary in the last few weeks have openly spoken about it, but it remains a patently internal matter for the SC and the CJ to remedy the shortcomings. But to use the disquiet to implant externally imposed division for political benefit undermines the strength, independence and cohesion of the judiciary. It also impacts SC’s credibility to administer law and interpret the constitution. Prima facie the force of the judiciary as a repository of rights of the people has been seriously curtailed. The government and the parliament, which are cohorts and compose of the same political denomination in the current arrangement, are in direct confrontation with the judiciary making it look listless, even if the CJ fights hard to retain SC’s credibility and independence.
A weakened judiciary that is fragmented and divided becomes easily manipulable. The politicians have carved this cleavage to their political benefit. It has unfortunately found support from within the bench. In a 1993 and 1997 redux the SC is under assault of a sitting government. The PDM is clearly the violator here.
That leaves only two other agents of change in a country that is at its lowest ebb in all aspects of its existence as a nation-state which can change the course of events and bring back promise to a hopeless populace reeling under crushing adversity: the people and the military. Both are quiet and sit idly by as total ruin beckons. The people are the most helpless. Rampant poverty, joblessness, galloping inflation, an empty treasury and a heartless government means they are in their own battle for survival. Whether a final push before extinction will be there calling to rise against such exploitation of the elites or will the system drip-feed them to survive without ever getting their oomph to stand up in defiance against such adversity is to be seen.
By the historicity of how this region has reacted over centuries to outside occupation or domination the chance of the people ever touching that level of desperation seems remote. (The people then were devoid of political association in a culture of repeated foreign occupations but always sufficiently provided from their own lands and sources to survive the forays. Over time they turned immune to whoever claimed to be their master). If someone like IK — if he has it in him and is willing to take on the system, he desperately wants to be a part of — can shake them out of a state of political submission and head them into a rebellion it can pose the greatest challenge of existential definition for this country. We, as a nation, happen to be at that precise moment in our journey. How might the only contending force to such a rebellion/revolution (the Iran moment), the military, react will be the final act laden with unfortunate consequences, if so.
No amount of political wizardry can camouflage the immensity of how and where this politics and its practitioners are leading us to. If the end-state of this script is the ultimate catastrophe it remains too insidiously crafted. Or are we sleepwalking into visible disaster? Patent political interests, dynastic and familial ends, and hugely disproportioned egos are at the heart of this unfortunate journey. Maybe some want the military to ultimately clash with the people at large — and IK (two in one) — and bring upon itself the misfortune of forever losing the trust of the people; and possibly never recover to its hallowed perception among the masses — keeping the military forever out of the power-stakes. If so, it is patently insidious, myopically self-serving and disastrously reckless. An unfortunate end to a nation which had begun as an unremitting promise.
There are only two ways to avoid this unfortunate culmination: one, that political forces on both sides wake up to the explosive consequence of what may only be a gameplay for them but calamitous for the country, and resort to a dialogue which can find a way out of the current morass and dysfunction. And two, the military rises to its unfortunate role of intervening when poor politics has derailed a whole nation. It could help start a dialogue between the warring politicos or resort to what it has done over decades, even if a bitter pill, to get the country back on track.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 14th, 2023.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (1)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ