Our civic (non)sense

Terrorism and internal insecurity are twin threats to Pakistani state and society. There is another challenge that has equally far-reaching threatening implications. A large number of people demonstrate little sense of civic obligation. Similarly, there is a greater emphasis on rights when it comes to the relationship between the citizens and the Pakistani state is concerned. The corresponding notion of duties or obligations has weakened.

The conceptualisation of civic obligation creates an in-built mechanism in every person about not doing anything that will have injurious implications for the rest of the society. The people develop the habit of either contributing to societal development or at least not causing difficulties to others.

The obligation towards the Pakistani state means that the citizens recognise the primacy of the state and respect its laws and norms. When a person expects some services from the state machinery, the individual must also recognise the socio-economic and other problems of the state and contribute positively to addressing these problems.

A large number of people demonstrate their clout by creating problems for others. If some people develop grievances against some group or state institution or private entity, they prefer to block traffic on roads or highways in order to build pressure for the acceptance of their demands. Twenty or thirty people stand in the middle of the road, set a few tires on fire and disappear after some time. This is enough to create a traffic jam. Students use this technique quite often. The most unfortunate instance was the strike by young doctors who blocked traffic on the Mall, Lahore, more than once and their strike caused unnecessary deaths in the hospital but they were not bothered. The underlying idea of such protests is to get attention by causing inconvenience to others and disrupting normal functioning of society.

The interaction with the state is tilted in favour of the demands of the citizens. The state is expected to look after the interests of the citizens and provide all kinds of services. However, there is no talk of obligations of the citizens towards the state. The business and trading community is extremely unhappy because of electricity outage. However, when they are asked to close their markets at 8PM in order to save electricity because of shortage in production, they refuse to cooperate. They avoid paying taxes and oppose any move to raise taxes by threatening to create civic disorder.

Everyone wants to protect ones individual and group interests and wants others to make sacrifice to resolve the problems of state and society. Therefore, the commercial and business elite oppose GST but want the government to impose agriculture tax on landed elite. They demand that the government should cut back on its expenditure. A large number of people who avoid taxes for one reason or another demand that Pakistanis should bring back their funds and investments from outside of Pakistan.

The obligation towards the state has weakened partly because of the poor performance of the government and its repeated failure to address the problems of the common people and partly because the young people have been oriented to Muslim Ummah rather than Pakistan as a nation-state. The state is relevant for providing services, implementing Islam or for confrontation with India. These elements also become conscious of Pakistani independence and sovereignty when it comes to US drone attacks. However, they do not support the state effort to assert its sovereignty against the militant groups.

Another reason for internal disorder and confusion is that the traditional notion of a powerful person is linked with being above law. A person is viewed as powerful if he/she can bypass and defy a law without facing any penalty. Public defiance of law and state is considered to be the attribute of a powerful person.

Pakistans political leaders and other influential people encourage defiance against the state institutions and processes on one ground or another. Instead of addressing their problems though the parliament and the government, the out-of-power politicians often ask their followers to defy the rulers and knock them out.

As early as May 1977, Retired Air Marshal Asghar Khan, appealed to the officers of three services not to obey the wrong orders of the government against the backdrop of the PNA agitation against the civilian government of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. His letter to the officers of three services concluded; As men of honour, it is your responsibility to do your duty and the call of the duty in these trying circumstances is not the blind obedience of unlawful commands. There comes a time in the lives of nations when each man has to ask himself whether he is doing the right thing. For you, that time has come. Answer this call honestly and save Pakistan.

A defiance call was made by Nawaz Sharif when, on February 25, 2009, the Supreme Court disqualified him and Shahbaz Sharif from contesting elections and the federal government imposed Governors rule in the Punjab. He called upon the people to get out on the streets to challenge the PPP-led federal government that was responsible for hatching the conspiracy against him and Shahbaz Sharif. He also advised civil servants not to obey the orders of the government.

The media reported that Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry advised the bureaucrats on April 9, 2011 that they should not follow illegal orders of their superiors. He further said; They have to take all the decisions according to their conscience and in accordance with the rules and the law. In April 1961, Chief Justice of West Pakistan High Court, M R Kayani, gave different advice to the civil servants for protection against political pressure and criticism. He asked them to work hard because the survival of the fittest was always a law of nature, and if you think you are the fittest, then prove it.

The problems in the functioning of the Pakistani state system cannot be denied and the present civilian rulers have demonstrated little capacity for good governance. However, the chances of overcoming these problems are minimised by declining civic responsibility, a poor sense of obligation towards the state and direct and indirect advice by different quarters to challenge the civilian political order. This increases uncertainty about the future of democracy and creates the spectre of anarchy.

The writer is an independent political and defence analyst.