Politics of amorality

The Machiavellian principle of "the ends justify the means" has infected the very core of our political system. Many politicians have succumbed to the seductive allure of Machiavellian politics, adopting a cynical approach where morality takes a backseat to the pursuit of power.

In this realm of amoral politics, unscrupulous actions rooted in deceit, treachery and violence are considered necessary tools for achieving and maintaining power. This mindset, deeply ingrained in our power politics, reflects a grossly immoral conduct that prioritises personal or group interests over national interest and the strengthening of institutions.

From a psychological perspective, Machiavellianism is one of the "dark triad" of negative personality traits, along with narcissism and psychopathy. Characterised by grandiosity, pride, egotism, a lack of empathy, manipulation, exploitation of others, indifference to morality and a calculated focus on self-interest, Machiavellian individuals are willing to go to any lengths to achieve their desired results.

Unfortunately, Pakistan's political and constitutional history is littered with examples of Machiavellian politics. The frequent changes of government, characterised by shifting loyalties, alliances' formation at the drop of a hat, and the installation and deposing of prime ministers, have become a recurring theme in our political landscape.

The game of musical chairs in politics has eroded the moral compass of our politicians, who have shown no qualms about switching sides for personal gain. This rampant change of loyalties has not only fostered corruption but has also weakened the institutions essential for a functioning democracy.

Politicians have continued to jump from one bandwagon to another, providing opportunities for both the military and the civil bureaucracy to strike deals at the expense of constitutional and democratic norms.

The sad saga of dissolved assemblies, dismissed PMs, abrogated constitutions, and even the execution of an elected PM has continued to disrupt the political landscape. Driven by self-interest, those at the helm have disregarded all rules of the game, resorting to deceit, intrigues, corruption, usurpation, intimidation, and other means to achieve and maintain power.

Once again, the federal government and its allies are using all means fair and foul to bulldoze through the Amendment, despite falling short of the necessary two-thirds majority in parliament. Even, if they maneuver, the amendment bringing vital change in the basic structure will lack consensus. The intent is to make the Supreme Court ineffective by creating a Constitutional Court, giving the PM the authority to appoint its chief justice. This would undermine the principle of the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary.

The media is abuzz with reports of arm-twisting, bribery and offers of ministries to secure the required votes, but the 63A clause, which prohibits voting against the party line, remains a hurdle. The government has now promulgated an ordinance to amend the Practice and Procedure Act, paving the way for a like-minded bench of the Supreme Court to strike down the clause and facilitate changes of loyalty.

The ugly and pessimistic situation of the past and present points to the selfish nature of humans and their moral philosophy. Many among us have surpassed even Machiavelli in their amorality, muddying the political waters and demonstrating the sway of Machiavellian politics over our political landscape.

We have failed to learn from the negative politics of the 80s and 90s.

A system devoid of morality and sound political conventions cannot function smoothly and is soon discredited. It often leads to controlled regimes, hybrid systems, or other forms of governance that fail to meet the expectations of the people.

To conclude, the government should refrain from pursuing the intended Amendment, as any amendment that changes the basic structure of the Constitution without consensus can have disastrous consequences for the polity. Politics of amoralism must be rejected, and we must strive for a more ethical and principled political landscape.