The failure of governance is being increasingly attributed to the shortcomings of the system and the inadequacies of the people who get elected. There being little awareness of these limitations among those who have the constitutional powers to initiate remedial measures, the predilection to perpetuate further authority in the hands of individuals in preference to institutions is being increasingly pursued a trait that is in direct conflict with the spirit of democracy.
There is also a tendency to interfere in the affairs of other state institutions. This contravenes the principle of independence of institutions as enshrined in the constitution. The moment judiciary achieved its much desired independence as a result of a prolonged struggle spearheaded by the legal fraternity, the civil society and some political forces, efforts were unleashed to bring it back within the fold of manipulation. The setting up of a parliamentary commission to oversee, even interfere in the appointment of judges is a major component of this effort. More than it being an initiative to streamline governmental working in consonance with established parliamentary principles, it smacks of an undemocratic mindset that believes in controlling rather than devolving authority. This hasnt contributed to improving the working of the state institutions. Instead, it has created doubts and misgivings about the political leaderships intentions.
If, today, there is a general perception that the system has failed, no one can be blamed for it more than the political leadership itself. Instead of directing their energies towards consolidating the principles of democracy, they have been more engaged in restraining and strangulating other institutions of the state in the performance of their constitutional duties. While the judiciary has been the principal target of this campaign, there are various others on the list including the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and Higher Education Commission (HEC). Countless instances have come to the fore where governmental pressure has been unremittingly applied to restrain these institutions from performing their duties while judicial injunctions have been blatantly flouted and directives ignored.
The long-outstanding implementation of the SC injunction with regard to the NRO is a crude ploy to save the top beneficiaries of the immoral and unconstitutional bargain between the PPP leadership and the sitting dictator. Justice (R) Deedar Shahs appointment as Chairman NAB was inherently mala fide which has now been declared null and void and he has been directed by the SC to vacate his charge immediately. PPP leadership has proceeded forthwith to condemn the injunction announcing a shutter-down strike in Sindh for March 11 an ominous sign of what may follow. The Lahore High Court (LHC) has reserved judgement on the petition challenging the two offices that Mr. Zardari holds concurrently. He is the president of the country and the co-chairman of the PPP at the same time. This manifests a deep-set conflict of interest as one office demands of him to be completely impartial while the other expects of him to safeguard the interests of his party. There are other cases pending against him in the SC awaiting adjudication. It is, by now, vividly clear that the government is in perpetual conflict with the constitution and the rule of law. This entails a dangerous pursuit that may sow the seeds of its derailment.
With the erosion of legitimacy, authority and relevance of the political forces, alternate centres of power automatically begin to emerge. This is a stark reality now and there is no escaping its consequences in a matter of time. Advocating a meeting of the three pillars of the state authority the executive, the army and the judiciary to sit and cobble together a stratagem to save the country from the chaos that it seems fast heading towards is an indication of the failure of the political dispensation in its existing form and structure and with its excessively poor deliverables.
While the credibility of the political leadership has been on the decline, for some because of rampant corruption and utter lack of delivery and for others because of their inability to come up with viable alternative plans, that of the army and the judiciary has shown a marked improvement. In fact, the army seems to have come out of the nightmarish turmoil that its former commander had thrown it into and the judiciary has earned enormous respect on account of its independent mindset and quintessential recent conduct.
The political leadership on the one hand and the judiciary-army combine on the other hand present the two extremes of the delicate balance that, with each passing day, is becoming increasingly precarious. How long would it be that the former can save itself from the natural intrusion from the other two is a matter of speculation. It could be pieced together at a joint session of the powers that be, or it could come about through a credible judicial intervention in response to scores of petitions that are pending adjudication before the apex court. In case there is a clash between institutions, as some believe the PPP is desirous of, the powers that are on the right side of the law are likely to emerge fully secured with moral and constitutional authority.
This is the emerging and inescapable reality – a reality that Pakistan and its people may have to contend with soon.
The writer is a media consultant to the Chief Minister, Punjab.
