True merit comes above party affiliations

Popularity among the people isn't the criteria of being a lawmaker; it is the criteria of being a fundraiser.

We think merit is the number of years you have worked loyally for a party and that it is defined through the “amount” of work done instead of the “quality” or “category” of the work done.

What kind of merit is ideal for a lawmaker? Obviously for starters, one would want them to have education in politics and know the laws inside out. Afterwards, it would be expected of them to have the capabilities to draft laws, defence strategies, international relation strategies, debate drafted laws, so on and so forth.

An example of merit, working in real life politics, would be the appointment of a prominent Republican chief executive officer as an adviser to a Democratic president in the US.

In February 2009, Jeffrey Immelt was appointed as a member to the president’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board to provide the Obama Administration with advice on fixing America’s economic downturn, since it was felt that Immelt had attributions in knowing what would help the global economy. Obama has reported that he has emerged as one of his top economic advisers with regard to trying to rebuild America’s economy. This is merit. In intelligent government bodies, true merit comes above party affiliations.

Someone tried to compare MNA positions with an awards programme. The MNA seats aren’t rewards; they are positions of huge responsibility, which require merit-based appointments, especially on reserved seats. Pakistanis must stop viewing such pivotal positions as rewards for being loyal. Until they don’t do so, the condition of Pakistan isn’t going to change anytime soon.

In National Assembly appointments, especially on the reserved seats, one must make sure that the true merit of education, experience and capabilities as a lawmaker prevail above everything else. We do not necessarily need good campaigners and fundraisers in parliament — their work is best done outside of parliament.

Watching the many political shows, the capabilities of Dr Shireen Mazari as a lawmaker, debater and political strategist are very evident. She knows the intricate details of the conflicts existing in different areas of Pakistan and is able to provide sound opinions and criticism on such conflicts, as well as their proposed solutions. While Mrs Kasuri has been an amazing campaigner and fundraiser, in spite of being popular, she does not have the capabilities of being a prominent and influential lawmaker.

I am not saying that Mrs Kasuri completely lacks the capability of being a lawmaker. She, after all, is an educated woman, who has an MBA, as well as a degree in international affairs. However, she has never done any work in those fields. Moreover, she was considered for the reserved seats and was placed fourth, as was proper to do so. Mrs Kasuri has defined herself as a social worker rather than a politician. She should know that she does not need to be an MNA to provide clean drinking water.

The women appointed in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) have been demeaned for being distant relatives of the chief minister of K-P. These women are entrepreneurs, educationists, social workers and were very active in the political circles of their constituencies. They aren’t well known because they weren’t in the media. They were, however, working on ground, door to door.

The bottom line is that we must stop equating merit with the number of years worked, or the amount of work done for a party.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 9^th, 2013.

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