Questioning the sanctity of Parliament
Earlier, when PTI along with Tahirul Qadri-led Pakistan Awami Tehreek tried to reach the gates of Parliament House during Azadi March of 2014, it was considered highly offensive as it violated the sanctity of the ‘holy’ institution but the institution of Parliament surely loses its sanctity when words like ‘gunda gardi’ (hooliganism), etc, are used
Democracy has always been dear to the politicians in Pakistan, and Parliament is the best institution to empower democracy. Every now and then, the elected members criticise each other saying that the floor of the Parliament should be used for voicing their concerns, not any other tools. But our democratic dilemma is that whenever the elected members do the ‘honours’ of attending Parliamentary proceedings (if they do), it presents a picture of a fish market, not an autonomous institution that holds great constitutional importance and whose integrity no one can dare harm.
Similar picture could be seen in Parliament this and previous week when Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), failing to win a verdict from the Supreme Court against Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif over Panama Leaks case and its attempts to dismiss the prime minister through street protests, finally decided to end Parliamentary boycott and announced to attend the National Assembly session held on 14th December. The 14th December session, which everyone had been eyeing and where the opposition was to raise the Panama Leaks issue, turned out to be a family drama with government and opposition members exchanging barbs for not getting the floor to deliver their speeches.
Earlier, when PTI along with Tahirul Qadri-led Pakistan Awami Tehreek tried to reach the gates of Parliament House during Azadi March of 2014, it was considered highly offensive as it violated the sanctity of the ‘holy’ institution but the institution of Parliament surely loses its sanctity when words like ‘gunda gardi’ (hooliganism), etc, are used.
“PTI people are hooligans. That’s all they do in politics,” said Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) MNA Khwaja Saad Rafique in his National Assembly speech on 14th December.
Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), however, always comes forward as the saviour of democracy as it often does not support the PTI in its protest walk outs from the Assembly. In the same session, referring to the PTI’s sit-in of 2014, opposition leader in the National Assembly Syed Khurshid Shah said that thePPP had come for the defense of Parliament when it was attacked from the outside and it would defend Parliament when it is being attacked from the inside.
The Parliament is always considered supreme as it represents the will of 20 million people and all other institutions are its products but its sanctity becomes questionable when the elected politicians do not appreciate it.
DNA talked to PML-N Senator Mushahidullah Khan to take his comments on the present situation in Parliamentary sessions.
“The members of Parliament fight everywhere in the world, this is a normal thing. But what happened in the National Assembly sessions this time was due to the immature attitude of PTI. This is not the ideal attitude expected from a political party,” Mushahidullah said.
The dirty game of politics should not always be played dirty. Accountability, responsibility and maturity is what our elected members need to practice. Only then can Parliament serve its purpose of strengthening democracy
Referring to Railway Minister Saad Rafique’s comments, he said Saad used these words in reply to PTI’s actions.
“The opposition members of Parliament do this in frustration as their performance has been very disappointing in the provinces where they have the government while on the other hand, Punjab and center did a lot of development work. Other provincial governments could not deliver on their promises and having little time to contest for the next general elections, they are trying to fool the people using such negative tactics as they have already lost at every step.”
The opposition itself is divided. We don’t even know which one is the real opposition party. Apart from the barbs that are exchanged in the parliamentary sessions, the government is doing more work practically while opposition has nothing else to do, he further said.
Recently at a TV talk show, former president General Pervez Musharraf claimed that General Raheel Sharif helped him in getting out of the country, which implies that there is another institution stronger than Parliament, judiciary, etc. Moreover, almost all the policy decisions had been in the hands of the establishment.
To this, Mushahidullah said institutions in Pakistan are in a transitional phase. Democracy is not that strong because of the frequent martial laws but it is still better than before. It takes hundreds of years for democracy to strengthen but Pakistan is still progressing at a fast pace.
Continuing with the blame game, PTI leader Shah Mehmood Qureshi defended himself in the Assembly by saying that it is a matter of prime minister’s credibility. He said that they wanted the leader of the House to address the members himself, not other party members like Daniyal Aziz or Khawaja Saad Rafique.
The PTI leader was, however, not available for comment.
As a matter of fact, the attendance of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in the National Assembly has itself been disappointing. In his first Parliamentary year, Nawaz Sharif attended only seven sessions which show how seriously democracy is taken by the elected leader of the House. As an excuse, the prime minister and his party claim that they have initiated many infrastructure and development projects like China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), Orange Line Metro Train and other power projects, which makes up for his absence in the sessions. Just like Yousaf Raza Gilani has been the prime minister with the highest attendance in Parliament, but it seemed like he was only active inside the Parliament and not outside it.
The pressure from PTI, however, made the prime minister return to Parliament but that too after long intervals. The question here is what is the point of having a parliamentary system of government when the elected prime minister does not stand accountable to other members of the House?
This shows nothing but the violation of sanctity of Parliament by the members themselves. A conflict of interest can be seen when outside the Parliament, everyone screams for its holy importance but when a session finally takes place and has a better attendance, it turns into a family picture. It is only the platform of Parliament that can help the dwindling-strengthening democracy of this country progress. Otherwise, there at least should not be tall claims to protect democracy. The dirty game of politics should not always be played dirty. Accountability, responsibility and maturity is what our elected members need to practice. Only then can Parliament serve its purpose of strengthening democracy in the true sense, the rest is just point scoring and political drama.