Respecting institutional boundaries
In the backdrop of the reports of growing tensions between the government and the army and reading too much between the lines by the more than independent media, which certain circles believed could threaten the nascent democracy in the country, the commitment made by the COAS to strengthen democracy and upholding the constitution is indeed very reassuring. Addressing the families of martyrs, high ranking civil and military officers, diplomats and people from different walks of life on the Yaum-e-Shuhada (Martyrs’ Day). He also unequivocally expressed army’s support for all efforts to eliminate terrorism and restoring peace in the country and vowed on behalf of the army not to hesitate from any sacrifice to defend the ideological and territorial frontiers of the country. That should be enough to put to rest the speculations and rumours about the growing tiff between the civilian and military leaders.
What General Raheel Sharif said was exactly what the oath taken by army officers at the time of their passing out obligates them to abide by and the role that the Quaid wanted them to play in warding off the threats to the motherland. By reiterating allegiance to the constitution and strengthening democracy, he has indeed upheld the sanctity of the oath taken by him, unlike the ones who not only violated their oath but also pushed the country into an intractable crisis with debilitating consequences.
The army as an institution is beyond any reproach. I fully subscribe to the view that army as an institution deserves unqualified respect and gratitude of the nation for the sacrifices rendered by it for thwarting the designs of the enemies of the country and in fighting against terrorism. I, and for that matter all the citizens of Pakistan, still become emotional and respectful to the army listening to the song ‘Ay watan key sajeeley jawanon meray naghmy tumharey liye hein’ by Noor Jahan. At the same time it makes me equally sad to introspect what the generals betraying their oath have done to our motherland. The nation has great respect for those generals who were not part of the coups or who did not believe in transgressing their constitutional role and duty.
It is indeed heartening to note that the mindset of disdainful patronage of the civilian leaders and their arms-twisting among the top echelons of the army has started transiting towards a respectful relationship in conformity with the constitutional obligations. The pioneer of this transition was none other than General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and it is really very reassuring that General Raheel Sharif and his colleagues remain committed to strengthen this process. One can hardly deny the existence of an ominous civil-military imbalance, brought about by repeated martial laws, which is hindering the achievement of our cherished national goals envisioned by the founding father. Peace and progress in a country, arguably, depends on the rule of law and unfortunately this cannot happen in Pakistan until the extra-legal and political role that the generals have played during the greater part of our history is ended and the civil-military imbalance is rectified. Otherwise, it would continue to hurt democracy, rule of law and across the board accountability.
Reportedly, one of the causes of stressful relations between the generals and the civilian government was the trial of former dictator General Pervez Musharraf. The permeating perception in this regard is that the proceedings against Musharraf are politically motivated to settle score with the former dictator by the incumbent prime minister. I am afraid this contention and impression is totally wrong and is being deliberately bandied around to create confusion. The case against Musharraf has been instituted in pursuance of the decision of the Supreme Court which held the former dictator solely responsible for the developments on 3 November, 2007, and it would be a travesty of the facts to say otherwise. Generals are citizens of Pakistan also and are liable to be held accountable for their illegal and unconstitutional actions, as there is no ouster clause in the constitution to this effect. The logical conclusion of the Musharraf case in conformity with the demands of justice and law is essential to make a new beginning in regards to establishing the rule of law. Opposing or trying to obstruct this process or pressurising the government to let Musharraf go out of the country to escape justice would not only be tantamount to making mockery of the SC decision but would also deliver a deadly blow to the chances of ever establishing rule of law in the country.
One can hardly take an issue with General Raheel’s contention that democracy was the only way forward to join the developed nations and that in view of the critical phase the country was passing through, all institutions were required to work in full harmony with all their strength. The harmony among the institutions that the general alluded to could only come through strict adherence to the domain and parameters set by the constitution for every state institution. This change in the mindset of army leadership is a healthy development and it is hoped that the future chiefs and their companions would continue to faithfully follow this course.
The general also praised the positive role played by the media in moulding public opinion on issues of national importance. Every person in his right mind would accept this contention ungrudgingly. Media, being the fourth pillar of the state, has a crucial role in nation building and there is no doubt our media relishing in its new-found independence has indeed contributed immensely towards strengthening democracy and educating the masses on issues of national importance. However, at the same time, it has also at times committed indiscretions in complete disregard to its social responsibilities and professional ethics by resorting to speculative reporting and comments, as in case of civil-military relations. In the current scenario, the media owes it to the nation to play its role in a positive manner by curbing its proclivities for rumour mongering and creating issues out of nothing, at the cost of objectivity and truth.
