The system can be saved only if it is seen to be delivering
The political consensus that led to the unopposed election of the Chairman Senate is being interpreted as a sign of the system’s maturity. Hopes are being expressed that this would strengthen the parliament and the system.
The claim is only partly true. Much more needs to be done before it can be justified.
A clash over the election of the Chairman between the PML-N and PPP, it is claimed, would have pitted them against one another, encouraging people like Imran Khan to again create a crisis through marches and sit-ins. The PTI chief has already announced protests in Lahore in case the government fails to appoint a judicial commission to probe charges into poll-rigging. Khan has also repeatedly claimed that the year 2015 is going to be the year of the elections.
It is maintained that with Tahirul Qadri waiting in the wings to launch yet another “revolutionary march”, the joining of the two forces could release a synergy sufficient to pose another serious threat to the system.
With Parliament united over the continuation of the system the possible threat, it is claimed, has been neutralised. Thus, in the short term at least, the consensus in Parliament would deter the PTI and PAT to launch another agitation.
So far, so good. But how far does it go? There a number of issues that can upset the apple cart if not tackled with maturity.
To start with, Parliament faces a serious internal threat. PML-N’s attitude towards Parliament is undemocratic. There is a tendency in Nawaz Sharif to treat the institution as a handmaiden. This is what he did during his earlier tenures and has tried to do this time again.
With Parliament united over the continuation of the system the possible threat, it is claimed, has been neutralised. Thus, in the short term at least, the consensus in Parliament would deter the PTI and PAT to launch another agitation
Failing to turn the institution into a handmaiden Sharif tends to subject it with disregard. This is what he did to Senate after being inducted into office in June 2013.
Sharif had hoped to see a PML-N-dominated and docile Upper House after the recent elections. What he has got is a Senate still controlled by the opposition, with a strong Chairman and an assertive leader of opposition belonging to PPP. Unless the prime minister changes his attitude, there is every likelihood of a clash.
The PML-N is unhappy with the 18th amendment. The new chairman and the majority of the senators stand firmly by it. The amendment provides assurance to the smaller provinces that their resources belong to them. This was pointed out by Senator Hasil Bizenjo as a reason for smaller provinces supporting Raza Rabbani.
Devolution of power is a new thing for Pakistan, where federal governments have traditionally enjoyed vast powers. The PML-N leadership is particularly keen to amass all powers into its hands.
Among the issues Raza Rabbani has repeatedly pressed in the Senate during the last few years is that of the way privatisation of state enterprises is being undertaken. He maintains, and rightly so, that after devolution of power under the 18th amendment, provinces have to be taken on board before disposing off any state owned enterprise. The PML-N, which is in a hurry, finds the restriction unpalatable. It is all more unhappy because two of the four provinces are ruled by the opposition and the third, where the PML-N is a part of the coalition, the nationalist chief minister is particularly keen to enforce devolution of power in accordance with the 18th amendment.
Article 172 of the constitution has so far been violated as 50 per cent ownership of oil and gas companies, which had been shifted to the provinces, still remains to be implemented. Unless the PML-N led federal government acts with maturity, a crisis is likely to be on the cards in days to come.
The PML-N is unhappy with the 18th amendment. The new chairman and the majority of the senators stand firmly by it. The amendment provides assurance to the smaller provinces that their resources belong to them
The ministries of education and health in the federal government are another violation of the constitution after the abolition of the Concurrent List. Parliament will have to act to do away with the anomalies sooner rather than later.
The CCI will have to meet more than desired by Nawaz Sharif. According to Article 154 (3), it is mandatory for the Prime Minister to hold the meeting of the interprovincial body at least once in ninety days. Nawaz Sharif has not followed the requirement, holding only three meetings after assuming office.
The army’s increasing role in the affairs of the state has come under discussion at a number of times in the Senate. The military leadership’s meetings with foreign politicians has particularly been taken up by Senators. Raza Rabbani has himself been one of the foremost critics of the role. A number of his observations have been widely reported in the media. Not long ago he told the Senate, “The army surely has its own views regarding national security, but these can be exchanged with military officials of other countries, not with civilians. The military should speak through the civilian leadership with foreign civilian leaders.”
The army has not taken note of observations. This could become a possible bone of contention in days to come between the military and Parliament.
There are, however, limits to the capacity of Parliament to save the system. That in 1999 it could not save Nawaz Sharif is the most prominent example. In the ultimate analysis the system can be saved only if it is seen to be delivering.
Any of the issues like irresponsiveness of the government to people’s problems , attempts by ruling parties to cling to power through foul means, a big incident of government’s high-handedness can at times create a wave that no parliament can hope to resist. Apathy towards issues like poverty, unemployment, etc, has shaken military rulers, let aside unarmed politicians.
Maintaining that they stand for democracy is not enough. The only sure way to save Parliament and the system is the ability on the part of the political parties to prove themselves to be better rulers, much more able to handle economy and foreign affairs, and making the country prosperous and bringing it good name in the comity of nations.
