In a democratic dispensation, especially a parliamentary democracy, government and opposition are two sides of the same coin. In fact, opposition is government in waiting. Both are supposed to give top priority to promoting wellbeing of the people and serving the national interests, even when pursuing the agenda of their respective parties. But unfortunately, in our country the opposition parties have invariably acted in contravention of the established and internationally recognised norms of parliamentary democracies. For them being in the opposition essentially means denigrating government policies whether good or bad, and trying to pull it down by all means to grab political power. That, unfortunately, has been the bane of democratic dispensations, interspersed by dictatorial rules.
Regrettably, there seems no end to this self-destructive phenomenon. It is said that wise people learn from the experience of others, and fools learn from their own. Our politicians have neither learned from the experience of other democracies and nations nor from their own unenviable and checkered history. Politicking remains the norm for them. Instead of focusing on reforming the system that has in-built avenues of corruption, and which encourages a culture of graft and entitlement, they are still preoccupied with their obsession of creating issues out of non-issues with the one-point agenda of having a dig at the sitting government, and see its premature exit from the corridors of power, nullifying the mandate of the people. They do not even hesitate from misleading the public to achieve their narrow political ends.
The case in point is the issue of the Panama leaks. Ironically, political parties that are demanding accountability of the prime minister and his family members with reference to the Panama leaks also have myriad skeletons in their own cupboards, and some of them are also owners of shell companies, popularly known as offshore companies. Irrespective of the fact whether the monies invested in these companies are legal or illegal, the fact remains that these investments in the offshore companies were made in the 1990s and early 2000s, and not during the present regime. No political government has ever made a serious effort to check burgeoning corruption in the echelons of government or obstructing the flight of money from the country by having a foolproof arrangement in place.
The other very pertinent and irrefutable reality is that it is very difficult to find trail of such investments due to legal impediments and non-existence of Pakistan’s agreement with the states having tax havens to cooperate in such investigations. The countries involved and legal firms that assist establishment of offshore companies are also under no international obligation to divulge necessary details about such investments. Even if a commission is set up in Pakistan, it will not have an international jurisdiction. Those who are making noise about the issue know this reality, but they would continue to use this as a punching bag to embarrass the government, and possibly stoke it into a cause for agitation against government, as is being threatened by some components of the combined opposition. Nothing is going to come out of it except wasting nation’s time, and scuttling the ability of government to tackle formidable challenges confronting the country and jeopardising opportunities that have come our way in the form of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor to change the economic profile of the country.
My take on the issue is that if political leadership, especially the opposition is sincere in eliminating corruption and improving governance in the country, it must unite with the ruling party to reform the system of governance, and set up a permanent constitutional anti-corruption body to deal with issues pertaining to corruption and misuse of power instead of indulging in typical witch-hunts that serve their narrow political interests. What they are doing is sheer politicking and not something aimed at promoting the wellbeing of the people and national interests. Let the bygones be bygones and adopt a futuristic approach.
Another example of politicking is the debate on the absence of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif due to his ailment, and running the affairs of the country. An impression is being given that his absence would affect the functioning of government, and delegation of powers to any senior minister to perform the functions of prime minister would be breach of the constitution, resulting in a constitutional crisis. The former Chief Justice-turned-politician, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, addressing a press conference contended that delegation of powers to Ishaq Dar would be unconstitutional, and therefore, a deputy prime minister should be appointed. That is quite a bizarre and interesting observation, revealing his ignorance of the constitution. Or is it that after becoming a politician he has chosen the way of politicians to mislead the public on crucial national issues? Whatever it is, it would perhaps be for the benefit of the general public to know what the constitution says on the issue.
Article 90(2) says: “In the performance of his functions under the constitution, the Prime Minister may act either directly or through the federal ministers.” Article 95(3) reads: “When the Prime Minister, by any reason of absence from Pakistan or any other cause, is unable to perform his functions, the senior Federal Minister for the time being shall perform the functions of Prime Minister until the Prime Minister returns to Pakistan or, as the case may be, resumes his functions.”
Reportedly, the prime minister is himself handling the affairs of the state during his stay in London through his secretaries. He is to preside over the NEC and cabinet meeting for the approval of the budget through a video link, and documents are to be sent to London for his signatures through the Pakistan High Commission. Making use of modern technology, it is business as usual. Even otherwise there would not have been any hiccup in running the affairs of the state as per the constitution.
Our politicians need to shun their old ways and dirty political tricks. They owe it to the nation to strengthen democracy and give the country a system that is based on economic, social and political justice, that protects fundamental rights of the people, and that establishes the rule of law and a system of indiscriminate justice. They also need to stop encouraging fissiparous and divisive tendencies. We often talk about other countries that became independent at the same time as us, but have gone far ahead and even become economic giants on global level, but we do not bother to ponder over how they achieved those successes. Take the example of China, our time-tested friend. The secret of her phenomenal rise to the dizzying heights lies in political stability, social solidarity, sound and prudent economic management and insatiable knack for continuation of reforms in the system in the light of emerging internal and external realities. Isn’t it time for us to learn from countries like China and others who also owe their progress to the same four elements?
The writer is a retired diplomat, a freelance columnist and a member of the visiting faculty of the Riphah Institute of Media Sciences, Riphah International University, Islamabad. He can be reached at [email protected]