Politics and due process of law

For the good of the system

It is true that corruption must be eradicated and the state must have a zero tolerance for this social evil. The concept of better governance will also fail to strengthen until a certain level of transparency is ensured in all government departments and projects initiated by the state

The political history of Pakistan is replete with precedents of elected prime ministers being removed on allegations of corruption. Every time non-political elements had a major, though subtle and clandestine, share in such adventures. The masses were assured that the political set-up would be purged of malpractices and financial embezzlement–apparently a narrative for legalising coups–but the situation persisted and national exchequer was looted mercilessly.

This time around, Nawaz Sharif was removed on allegations of ‘corruption’, which is yet to be established, however, the procedure for his removal was different. The Supreme Court removed him from his office under Article 62 (1)(f) of the constitution for not being sadiqand ameen. During this episode, neither the PML-N nor the PPP could exactly figure out the element of ‘conspiracy’ that had always been there in other cases. Political parties in parliament also did not help Nawaz, blaming Sharif for opposing the constitutional amendment introduced by his ‘mentor’ General Zia-ul-Haq. Resultantly, the PML-N chief stood disqualified for life and no more eligible to even head his party.

Apprehending an unintelligible ‘conspiracy’, Kh Saad Rafique’s repeated advice to Imran Khan seemed a bit logical in the backdrop of the present political uncertainty in the country. In public rallies and talk shows, the minister made all attempts to persuade the PTI that politics must be conducted in the political battlefield only. Taking it to courts or apolitical actors may strengthen those who either hate the civilians or consider them ineligible to formulate policies regarding state affairs. Perhaps the PTI was more desirous of victory, no matter how show-term it may prove for democracy, and continued fighting legal battle culminating in PM Nawaz’s ouster. Since general elections are approaching fast, each party created its own narrative on corruption and is now exploiting the same for electioneering and canvassing.

In a rebuttal, the PML-N adopted the same way for damaging the PTI and moved the Supreme Court for disqualification of Imran Khan. If the political elite and other top civil and military men are made to pass through the test of sadiq and ameen, the final result will not be very encouraging. In a country like ours, things must not be idealised on academic measurements or arrangements without considering their imminent background, especially in politics. This also does not mean that refinement should not be brought to the system, it only means considering material for political evolution. And this all could be made possible by adopting democratic approach from within and without, the prime responsibility lying with the political parties themselves.

As far as the due process of law is concerned, it is blind and cruel. It shows no leniency nor should it as it hardly compromises on facts and controversies and comes up with the final result only. Hence, political understanding or reconciliation must not be confused with legal course.

Hardly would anyone disagree that political parties in Pakistan enjoy democracy with a few exceptions. Primarily, they are known by the persons who head them or in whose name they are registered. The business of politics has always remained a family enterprise and in future too there seems no end to ‘dynastic business.’ As ill luck would have it, the voters have few choices to bring change to this hereditary stronghold of the power elite. Nevertheless, the process must go on as other options practiced in the past have proved more disastrous than ‘corrupt’ democracy.

The existence of political parties, though hereditary or self centered, is indispensable for the intuitional development of democracy. After disqualification of Nawaz Shairf, rumor mills are churning out all prospects of differences between the Sharifs and some hawks are also foreseeing the end of politics by the PML-N. Likewise, some political pundits are predicting disqualification of Imran Khan by the courts with no one left to lead the party the way the captain is supposed to. Yet there are others, who are after PPP co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari, including the PTI chief, to teach him a lesson like the one imparted to Nawaz Shairf.

With the heads of all political parties removed, more dissident factions are likely to appear in their ranks and files with more conspiracies against the process of democracy. No clear majority by a single party may result into a hung parliament which, in most cases, becomes a hurdle in the implementations of state policies. It also causes horse trading and floor crossing giving rise to bargaining and managing legislators for creating majority. The menace of corruption, for which elected prime minister has been removed from their offices, is likely to multiply, and the agenda of bringing transparency and cleanliness to the process of democracy will be destined to fail.

It is true that corruption must be eradicated and the state must have a zero tolerance for this social evil. The concept of better governance will also fail to strengthen until a certain level of transparency is ensured in all government departments and projects initiated by the state. The Supreme Court may ensure that the prime minister should be sadiq and ameen but can never help eradicate corruption. Even former military regimes made tall claims but failed to tackle corruption. When laws are there with all the national and provincial assemblies in working conditions, the focus must be on creating independence of state functionaries instead of maligning or discrediting them. There must be due process of law and free and fair trials of all accused if corruption is to be really curbed at the micro-level. Otherwise, if military dictators by abrogating and putting in abeyance constitutions could not bring anything good to the state, how can the disqualification of elected chief executives do it?

Political parties should hold their horses and settle their disputes through the parliament only, otherwise a good number of political minds will be axed through judicial system with no sadiq and ameenleft in the parliament. And, obviously, the ‘beneficiaries’ must be happy with the civilian set-up going to the dogs.