Share this story!            

ANALYSIS: Vulnerabilities and remedies —Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi

Democracy in Pakistan will always have an uncertain future if some political leaders continue to toy with the idea of removal of the president or the federal government by means other than what has been prescribed in the constitution

Political discourse in Pakistan is never normal, routine or balanced. It is confrontational, crisis-ridden and, invariably, single-issue oriented. Competing political forces project the issues in either-or terms or use the now or never formulation. The strategy of keeping the political pot boiling may give a sense of importance to the political leaders known for hard-hitting and controversial statements. This strategy has highly detrimental implications for civilian institutions and processes. These cannot be become viable if the major political players engage in polemics on a more or less permanent basis and seem to be at war with their political adversaries.

The sound and fury of the political leaders on the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) is the latest example of how the politicians get hooked up on a single issue in a highly partisan manner, forgetting about the challenges faced by Pakistan due to its troubled economic conditions and internal insecurity caused by religious extremism and terrorism.

In 2009, single-issue confrontational politics has shifted its focus from the restoration of the chief justice and other judges to the Kerry-Lugar bill and then to the NRO. On all these occasions, the opposition left no stone unturned to paralyse the government. On the other hand, the government was equally stubborn in addressing the issues raised by the opposition.

It looks like election campaigning all year around. The contentious issues are discussed in a highly partisan manner and the political adversaries are projected in extremely negative terms. Like the election campaign there is an effort to malign the political adversaries for the ills of the society and mobilise popular support for highly subjective analyses and political perspectives. The “evil designs” of the adversaries are exposed and one’s “deeds” are highlighted. All this keeps the society in political ferment and causes anxieties among the people on the future of the political system.

The NRO debate shows the above features. Most of the debate should have cooled down with the PPP government’s decision not to seek its approval of the parliament. However, the polemical debate did not come to an end because the agenda of the opposition, especially the PMLN, went beyond the NRO. It aims at the removal of President Asif Ali Zardari and/or force mid-term elections.

The NRO controversy reflects different style of governance and political management. The ruling PPP and especially the presidency were so confident of success in obtaining the parliamentary approval for the NRO that they did not bother to take the coalition partners into confidence. Neither the MQM nor the other two partners, ANP and JUIF, were consulted on getting the NRO approved from the parliament.

The MQM and the JUIF refused to support the NRO. The ANP did not take such categorical position but its leadership indicated that it was not keen to support the NRO. This was a major setback for the PPP government. Left alone and short of the required votes, the PPP opted for pragmatic retreat by deciding that it would not seek parliamentary approval for the NRO.

When the NRO expires at the end of this month, it may cause legal problems for a large number of political leaders and activists. The Supreme Court will be approached for clarification on the expiry date of the NRO and the status of those who benefited from the NRO after it expired.

The NRO setback can be attributed to President Asif Ali Zardari and his close associates who failed to understand the ground political realities outside the presidency. They appear to be less inclined towards recognising the importance of consultation and accommodation in politics. Instead, they decided over and above the prime minister to send the NRO to the parliament and did not feel the need of consulting the coalition partners on this issue. They were trying to run the 4-party coalition like a single party (PPP) government.

This was not for the first time that the presidency functioned in an autocratic manner. It kept the coalition partners in dark on the restoration of the chief justice and other judges and the Kerry-Lugar bill. The same strategy was adopted on the NRO but, in this case, as the approval of the parliament was needed the partners got the opportunity to express their resentment by refusing to vote in favour.

The presidency’s isolation can also be attributed to its policy of not accommodating the PMLN on the Charter of Democracy and especially on reduction of powers of the presidency. Despite repeated commitments, the presidency refused to take any concrete measure to fulfil its obligation on these issues, ostensibly for not giving any concession to the PMLN.

All these factors combined to cause the NRO fiasco, intensifying uncertainties about the future of the on-going democratic experiment.

In its traditional style of using its voting bloc in the parliament maximise its gains, the MQM refused to support the NRO in order to obtain political dividends pertaining to Sindh politics. It wants more effective role for its ministers and advisers in Sindh cabinet and would like the local government system to continue till new local government elections are held. The MQM does not want to lose the control of Karachi and other cities with MQM Nazims. Therefore, it would seek at least these two concessions before it commits to support the coalition government. It will not agree to support the NRO in the present form.

The PMLN has availed of the NRO issue not only to get even with the PPP for not implementing the Charter of Democracy but also to build pressure either to knock out President Zardari from office or to force mid-term elections. The widely shared perception in the PMLN is that if mid-term elections are held in the next six months they would sweep the elections in the Punjab, giving them enough seats in the National Assembly to form a coalition government by getting support from other provinces and independent members.

Though Nawaz Sharif has talked of not being part of any extra-constitutional effort to derail democracy, his senior party leaders make no secret of their strong desire to get rid of Zardari and the PPP government at the earliest. They will continue using the NRO issue to keep the federal government under pressure. They will be happy if the Supreme Court decides to reopen all corruption cases against Zardari or the military top brass force Zardari’s resignation.

Democracy in Pakistan will always have an uncertain future if some political leaders continue to toy with the idea of removal of the president or the federal government by means other than what has been prescribed in the constitution. They should not look towards the military or the judiciary for help in their power game.

The presidency should also amend its ways. It needs to discard the false notion of its invulnerability or the use of Machiavellian methods for dealing with political forces. It should make room for the prime minister to play a more effective role who seems to have developed better rapport with the political forces.

The president is extremely vulnerable at this stage and he needs to discard his monopolistic politics that excludes others except on his terms. He should seek advice from those who have a better understanding of dynamics of politics.

Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi is a political and defence analyst

Home | Editorial

Share this story!