Both Articles 62 and 63 cover qualification and disqualification of members of parliament. Common sense tells me that Dr Qadri is probably not gung-ho about implementation of its clauses on age and nationality, but is concerned with sections ‘d’ to ‘g’ of Article 62 especially, which cover the ‘moral’ dimension of the parliamentarians. While, ideally, it might be good to have a parliamentarian who is “of good character and is not commonly known as one who violates Islamic Injunctions”, has “adequate knowledge of Islamic teachings and practises obligatory duties prescribed by Islam as well as abstains from major sins”, “is sagacious, righteous and non-profligate, honest and amin” and “has not, after the establishment of Pakistan, worked against the integrity of the country or opposed the ideology of Pakistan” — in practice — it is almost impossible to find a person who fulfils all (or even most) of the injunctions above. Simply, how can one practically measure the moral character of anyone? How can one even quantify concepts like ‘sagacious’, ‘righteous’, ‘honest and amin’ to begin with? A person might be wise in some dealings and not in others and a person might follow some Islamic injunctions closely while being lukewarm about others, for example. Literal implementation of these clauses can, therefore, only bring confusion and rifts and ultimately, violence, since people who think they fulfil all these clauses will inevitably launch an attack — first a verbal and then a physical one — on parliamentarians who are not fulfilling these requirements.
The insertion of sections ‘d’ to ‘g’ in the Constitution by PO No 14 of General Ziaul Haq in 1985 and the current insistence of implementing the same by Dr Qadri, has the same main reason behind it: deep distrust of the institution of democracy itself.
From its inception, various rulers in Pakistan have had distrust of what they called ‘the Western model of democracy’. Wary of giving the uneducated and ill-informed populace the right to choose representatives who might also be uneducated and ill-informed, and worse still, not ‘good’ Muslims (in whosoever’s definition) was something they wanted to prevent. Major General Iskandar Mirza, our last governor-general and first president was vocal that modern democracy was unsuited to Pakistan and, therefore, refused to call general elections. General Ayub Khan, too, did not think that Pakistanis were ready for full democracy and so basic democracy, guided by the military and bureaucracy, was a pre-requisite. General Ziaul Haq followed suit and initially even did away with any form of elections and simply appointed his ‘council of the learned’ — the Majlis-e-Shoora. Zia was so distrustful of democracy that he even officially renamed parliament Majlis-e-Shoora, so that even conceptually, the election of the house might become optional.
Despite all its problems, and there are many, democracy remains the best form of representative government in the modern world. Democracy ensures that people are ruled over by their peers, not by some super humans or angels, but by people who are the same as the electorate. So, the elected representatives reflect the good and bad aspects of the society they represent — all struggle to make things better together. Only in a dictatorship and monarchy do the rulers claim to be ‘better’ than the population, and hence, justify their usurpation of power.
Pakistan’s democracy is still fragile and we are only just about to complete one full term of a democratic government. Let us not derail that process in search of a utopia, which has been sought many times unsuccessfully and has further destroyed Pakistan in the process. Let us put our trust in democracy and make it work.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 15th, 2013.
COMMENTS (35)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@ Ricky You only proved my point,Sir.All the persons U mentioned were Pakistanis, were they not? Pakistan would be a better place to live, if every citizen made it a goal to be honest and ameen, instead of waiting for the other person to improve first. Even @ p.r. sharma makes sense.
He seems inspired by Anna Hazare and Ramdev.
In the US a similar situation was improved when Progressive Era reforms were implemented. Pakistan needs something like what happened in US to stabilize democracy for the long term..
Right now democracy is being being given a bad name by the conduct of elected leaders in developing and developed countries. The reason is that it seem to favor elites over the masses.
That is not what a democratic outcome should be. The major problem here it appears is campaign finance. Dr Tahirul Qadri seems to not understand the role campaign finance plays in corruption.
@Pir Bulleh Shah:
",,,,, Pakistan’s solutions lie in Islam alone.,,"
Bulle Shah will not agree with you, Sir.
@Mirza:
If the article 62 with clauses d to g does not fit our elite / political people...why was this not changed when 18th amendment was being added ? & then having un-necessary argument over such qualification as per our own constitution does not auger well amongst our educated class.....or should we say...our un-educated political class.
@Hasnain: In Turkey the politicians have never been accused of corruption, nor there are any dynastic political parties...& high literacy rate due to which " democracy has taken root....
@Ammar: Hope you are living up to these standards in YOUR daily life too.
Are we now going to give up Islam so we are not accused of chasing 'Utopias'? I will never. Islam forever. Pakistan's solutions lie in Islam alone.
YKB has written a very realistic opinion. The establishment (civil & military beuraucracy) is too anxious to indulge in government. First they were doing through Military dictators (Pakistan has lost over 30 years in dictatorships) and now they want to indulge through their proxy puppets.
These "sage" establishment people consider themselves as the most smart, capable & pios species and create hurdles in democracy. It suits their interest to make Pakistan a banana republic. Ayub's long-spelled Martial Law was responsible for breaking East Pakistan and Musharraf's fisted Martial Law is responsible for the disgruntle in Balochistan.
Pakistan's democratic government should follow the Turkish Model where 300 Generals & Admirals have been arrested, trialed and punished on coup plot-Ergenekon. Now the Turkish establishment cannot ever dare to conspire overthrowing a democratic government.
Many comments are a reflect to criticize the democracy ( which is a system of rule) rather than the bad representatives chosen by the people in general.. Are they not aware as to who is good or who is bad.. If it is not known please devise a system in which the candidate has to reveal every thing about himself/ herself including earnings/ expenses of self & family, tax returns, wealth. I mean total transparency under oath and any wrong declaration liable for imprisonment for 20 years. Section d to g of article 62 of the constitution , inserted by Zia hul Haque are very subjective and whose certificate shall be acceptable to comply with the clauses. Constitution is the sacred document which reflects the wishes and hopes for governance and any modification made by a dictator does not reflect the wished of public in general and rest is to be understood !!! There will be chaos and anarchy and the rule of necessity will come haunting. Of course this too will be a change . People in general may exercise their opinion as to how they wish to change their lives?
@Riaz Haq: How much time do you need....another 50 years???????????
Democracy has nothing to do with merit or finding honest people. Its about electing a ruler for the people by the people. He can be a rogue or a person with low moral character. Bring on the 20th ammendent and abolish the stupid 62 and 63 clauses.
@pmbm: "Surprised to know that out of 180 million Pakistanis, we cannot find 300+ MNAs who could be honest and Ameen." When you could not have one general out of all the Pakistan who fits this standard how can you talk about 300 plus? Gen Yehya was a known drunk womanizer who surrendered half of the country. Gen Mush was a known smoker and drinker like Jinnah was, and the list goes on and on. Gen Zia was a proven liar and God has said "curse on the liars" and lies are the parent of all other sins. In addition some of the rightwing politicians had colorful lives. However, we only want to see these standards when there is democracy. The Parliament only represents the actual people of Pakistan not imported from haven. Have you ever heard "the first stone be thrown by a man who never committed those crimes himself".
Surprised to know that out of 180 million pakistanis, we cannot find 300+ MNAs who could be honest and Ameen.
Whatever maybe the comments, democracy is the best.
The title of the article is a bit confusing..
Thanks to the author for highlighting that these gracious statements were added to the constitution by Zia ul Haque.. I never knew the General was that capable a person..
We are analysing all these statements in today's context, however in a good society these statemements will easily hold water. And I completely disagree that you can never find a person like that! Where are you living man? You need to change your companions!
May be you ignored the 'Commonly know by people" bit.. so from that perspective, how do you think Ghaddari is commonly known? how about The Great Qawwal?.. Un Sharif?
Better to not have a nation if you need to be governed by such nincompoops...!
@gp65 .: you have brought out an interesting point about the eligibility of the very founder of Pakistan himself as per Maulana Qadri's eligibility norms.
These phenomena of Imran Khan and Qaqdri attracting millions to their rallies are a manifestation of average Pakistanis deep dissatisfaction with the ruling and self-serving PPP and PML politicians who care little for Pakistan or its people. It's time that Zardari and Sharifs improve their deeply flawed governance and deliver for the people.
Most of all, lets no give this Government the gift of political martyrdom which they are so eager for. Let them be disposed off via democratic means.
Millions of Pakistanis are supporting Dr Tahir ul Qadri, Awami Muslim League is supporting, Shia Parties who are protesting in Quetta and all over Pakistan are supporting him. You need to watch their statements and stop falling for the government propaganda. Majority Pakistanis always complain against this worlds most corrupt government, but now someone wants to bring a chane but many people are complaining. Seriously think about it, do you want a corrupt political mafia ruling you or want to be ruled by new leadership ie PTI, DR QADEER KHAN, THOUSANDS OF EDUCATED YOUTHS who cant afford a party ticket.
So faar in Pakistan 60Billion of dollars damage has been caused by terrorism but gov has no answer, 40,000 plus people have been killed, 5000 plus soliders have been killed, no security everywhere and you people are still backing the government and dont want change. No wonder PAKISTAN is in this state already
It seems Qadri's fate is sealed and eventulally mullahs in Pakistan.
Prof Yaqoob Khan, a good article that ends suddenly, somewhat prematurely.
Ch Allahdad, i can clearly see ur personal frustration as shareefs are the biggest losers in this all..........alas i can only wish you more tears, both PMLN and PPP have shown common pakistabnis their true "democratic colours"
Is it really "searching for utopia" to demand change? Yes if you get into the nitty gritty of article 62 and 63 it leaves much open to interpretation but are we all not sick to death (no pun intended) of the substandard, to say the least, candidates the same political parties are churning over and over again? Is democracy not threatened by this culture of corruption that these very parties thrive on? Parties that in their essence exist solely on the basis of blood lineage are expected to provide us with democracy? Does that not in and of its self scream failure? This is not to say that I support Qadri, rather that this article is supremely one sided. Its about time to do away with these openly dishonest, selfserving corrupt leaders that we have to 'choose' from in the upcoming elections and bring in some fresh blood. Frankly it can't be much worse than this.
@Ammar:
Based on your quick refresher for Bangash, All Generals and most current politicians and Moulanas (including Qadri) himself are out. We now cannot have Marshal Law,(Long term Caretaker government is form of Marshal Law) or Democracy. Wondering who should we IMPORT to rule us. Any suggestions for what system or ruler should we have and who should run that system.
Democracy only works if u let it continuously work. The problem with us is that we stop the democratic process and it has to restart!
Spirit of democracy requires that we allow Mr. Qadri to speak, if he wishes to hold a Jalsa he is free to do so, if he wants to do a sit in that too is his right. Principles of Democracy would also require Mr. Qadri to honor the rights of other people to choose otherwise and more importantly in this situation not violate constitutional rights of those who disagree with his message. Yes,last five years have been the worst, but lets not forget that roots of extremism and religious terrorism was laid in the era of Zia ul Haq, army dictator who not only changed the course of this country but also distorted our constitution. Qadri Sahib, enjoy your two minutes of fame may be you manage to bring some positive change such as elimination of sections ‘d’ to ‘g’ of Article 62 which cover the ‘moral’ dimension of the parliamentarians, remember democracy means electing representatives from within peer groups, honestly ask yourself how many in Pakistan would qualify? None, unless we allow another dictator to rule.
A balanced and factual Op Ed by ET. YKB has given the facts and how the worst usurper Gen Zia mutilated the constitution. According to the conditions "practises obligatory duties prescribed by Islam as well as abstains from major sins”, even IK a man of repute would not be eligible and cannot contest election. This decision is between a man God and no human can decide it. I do not need to repeat but Gen Mirza, Gen Ayub, Gen Zia, Gen Mush all had extreme hatred toward the masses and their choices. The poor masses never elected any general or mullah and they both do not want to give them the right to vote. Qadri was a man of Gen Mush who cannot come to Pakistan but sent his sidekick.
basically, dr. qadri wants to guarantee that a neutral caretaker govt will be appointed so that free and fair elections can be conducted. otherwise, there is no point in conducting rigged elections under a partial election commission again and again so that the same corrupt politicians come back to haunt pakistan for the next 5 years and worse so might even break up pakistan because of their evil intentions and dictation from their foreign masters.
Yaqoob, since you are having a lot of trouble understanding the meaning of "honest" and "righteous", let me help to refresh your memory.
It means someone who puts the interest of the people before their own.
It means someone who does not steal from the public.
It means someone who can work for egalitarianism and social justice.
It means someone who can refrain from harbouring terrorists on behest of foreign powers.
It means someone who cares about the development of the country, instead of his bank account(s).
It's not fair to blame all those problems on democracy itself. You can blame the current government, you can blame the politicians in power and out - but to blame democracy as a whole? What would you rather have, another military dictator? That's never gone very well has it?
Democracy means a system of rule of the people, by the people for the people.
What you are proposing is to strengthen something being labelled as democracy which in fact is a system of rule by the few, for the few in the name of the many.
This Sir is a charade being thrust on the people and is not acceptable.
The question that Pakistanis should ask themselves is would Jinnah have qualfiied under the definition particularyly "not commonly known as one who violates Islamic Injunctions”, has “adequate knowledge of Islamic teachings and practises obligatory duties prescribed by Islam as well as abstains from major sins”? What about Iqbal?
"Let us not derail that process in search of a utopia, which has been sought many times unsuccessfully and has further destroyed Pakistan in the process. "
If only the cost to make this democracy stable, by not derailing it, is by sacrificing 25,000+ people we have lost in five years, then I spit on what we call democracy.
If only the cost to make this democracy stable is by frustrating the poor people so much that they commit suicide by not affording the basic needs then I "shit" on what we call democracy.
If only the cost to make this democracy stable is by not giving justice to those thousands of people for years, who spend days outside the court for a positive outcome then I certainly would want this word "Democracy" removed from dictionary.