On conflict course, the government fights for survival
The reported decision by the People’s Party high command not to abide by the directive of the SC and refusal to write to the Swiss authorities regarding the re-opening of the cases involving the president reflects a tragic continuation of the policy of perpetuating the growing divide between the government and the judiciary. Having realised that its end may be well nigh and with nothing to fall back on in terms of soliciting support from the people, the PPP leadership appears desperate to be ‘ousted’ from power to assume the mantle of a ‘martyr’.
The three principal institutions of the state – the executive, the judiciary and the military – appear to be on a conflict course. While the government is determined to continue affronting the judiciary as a means to save the co-chairperson of the party, its depositions regarding the memo are at a variance to those of the military and the premier intelligence agency of the country. If this divide were to escalate, as appears to be the case at present, how would it impact the functioning of the government as well as its long-term survival?
The prime minister would have us to believe that nothing is wrong in the country and all pillars of the state are on the same page. Yet, he indicts the military for having harboured Osama and demands of it to produce the visa that was given to him to enter the country. He would also have us believe that the government is in compliance of all SC adjudications. He would have us believe that the memo is only a piece of paper signifying nothing, yet he makes the former ambassador to the US resign and then confines him to the four walls of the PM house. He proclaims complete innocence in the matter of the purported conspiracy to weaken the military and the intelligence outfit, yet spearheads a vilification campaign against the constitution of the judicial commission to initiate a transparent and credible enquiry into the alleged memo. Instead, he would want the parliamentary committee to strangulate the matter to death. While the country is besieged by the energy crisis and people are on the streets, he encourages his partners-in-arms to raise relatively unimportant questions in the assemblies to divert attention from his government’s miserable failure. Is there any method to this wanton madness?
In order to treat an ailment, one has to go to the cause(s) that may have triggered it. Also, if and when it becomes a grave sickness, one may have to resort to emergency procedures. The government, caught in the act of its illegitimate birth vide the NRO, and its deceitful efforts to fight its horrific aftermath, has pushed the country to the brink of an implosion. Various organs of the state are up in arms. The economy is on a nosedive and cost of living is becoming unbearable. Corruption is rampant. National institutions have been inflicted with the death blow. Billions are being siphoned off through dubious welfare schemes. Conspiracies are being allegedly hatched to weaken the state security paradigm. Life is virtually grinding to a halt as the government treacherously preaches politics of ‘compromise’ – the principal victim of this ‘compromise’ being the state itself.
There is a growing consensus on the need to oust a government that may have compromised Pakistan’s credentials for survival, but the advocates appear besieged by the ‘constitutionality’ of the method to be followed. While the government is affronting every legitimate edict of the SC, it wants those advocating change to follow the method as prescribed. While it considers itself as being outside the domain of law, it wants every other actor to subscribe to it in letter and spirit. It is this fundamental paradox that needs to be resolved if the country were to come to grips with the severest existential threat that it confronts today.
The stakes are multifaceted. In the immediate future, the government wants a smooth sailing with the Senate elections where it hopes to gain a majority. For the long run, it wants to put in place a mechanism that would bring it back into power. This effort comprises articles both fair and foul. It hopes to exploit the weaknesses of the incumbent procedures encompassing the electoral lists, the selection of the interim government, the environment it would create on the election-day and the wanton use of the presidency and other state institutions to tip the scales in favour of the ruling party and its associates. That not being the desirable course, are the state institutions headed towards a mortal conflict?
Apparently, and notwithstanding the prime minister’s proclamations to the contrary, that is the case. The fundamental need is to enforce the rule of law on all actors of the state including the government. In this context, the president’s immunity factor needs to be looked into urgently because if the head of the state is alleged to be involved in matters pertaining to the security of the state, this immunity is rendered untenable. We have a president if there is a country. What if the country was rendered insolvent? Will we still have a president to live with? All eyes are riveted on the SC and the course it takes at this defining moment in Pakistan’s history.
The writer is a political analyst and a member of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf. He can be reached at raoofhasan@hotmail.com