Daily Times

During the hearing of the Balochistan case, the three-member bench headed by Chief Justice (CJ) of Pakistan Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry took up a suo motu case regarding the absence of local bodies in the country. The CJ also commented that the system of local bodies should be revived not only in Balochistan but also in the rest of Pakistan. On April 12, the CJ directed the provinces to give schedules for the elections on April 30, the next date of hearing.

Elections to local bodies were due by September 2009 but the provinces deferred the elections mostly with the excuse that the law and order situation was bad. Interestingly, the by-elections of national and provincial assemblies were held peacefully. It is a pity that the constitutional obligation to hold local bodies elections has not been fulfilled deliberately by the provinces.

The 18th Constitutional Amendment has made the establishment of local bodies a provincial matter. Apparently, the reason for not holding local bodies elections is explicable: the provinces are averse to devolving politico-financial powers to local bodies. Nevertheless, Article 140-A enjoins on each province to not only establish a local government system but also delegate political, administrative and financial authority to the elected representatives of local governments. The article does not permit centralisation of authority at the provincial level. Hence, the practice of not holding local bodies elections contravenes the constitution. Secondly, the article not only empowers but also enjoins on the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to hold elections to local governments in the provinces. Unfortunately, the ECP is also not fulfilling its constitutional obligations.

It is equally regrettable that people do not demand the presence of local bodies. That is the crucial reason why the country is shorn of local bodies. People seem oblivious to their importance. The same apathy is reflected in the media where no one holds discussions on the absence of local bodies. The political parties also seem unmindful of the implications of broadening their support base through these institutions. In short, the approach of all is counter-intuitive. It is only the Supreme Court that is trying to cater to the democratic needs at the grassroots level.

The concept of local bodies is anti-revolt in nature — it is pro-peace. There is a direct relationship between the absence of local bodies and the intensity of disgruntlement of people. The longer the spell of the nonexistence of local bodies, the more the level of discontent. In fact, the state of denial of participation fuels dissatisfaction. People cannot give vent to their feelings if they have no legal platform to do so. This point is applicable more to Balochistan than anywhere else. In Balochistan, owing to certain political reasons, the nationalist political parties did not participate in the general elections held in 2008. Consequently, the voice of the nationalists was muffled and that led to the current situation. Local bodies elections can offer an alternative way to let the nationalist political parties take part in elections, voice their legitimate concerns and do development work in their areas as they require. In Balochistan, local bodies can offer a medium to the nationalist political parties to perform and consequently prepare the ground for success in the next general elections.

The concept of local bodies is anti-martial law in nature — it is pro-democracy. People air their feelings through their local voice. People participate in democratic activities and attain democratic maturity. People learn to foster harmony and respect dissent. Local governments are a true learning school for people to mull over the significance of democracy and appreciate its impact on their lives. Local governments strengthen the sentiments of people in favour of democracy. The absence of local governments is anomalous and bodes ill for democracy. When people value democracy, they despise martial law or any such autocratic arrangement. Not only the people of Balochistan but also those living in the rest of Pakistan need to discover the lessons of democracy dispensed at the local level through local governments.

The perceivable reason for not holding local bodies elections is that it lays bare the popularity graph of a ruling party, both central and provincial. Unfortunately, the policy of every provincial government is to do development work at the tail end of its tenure. The apprehension is that people suffer from amnesia and they may forget the services done by a political party. That thinking needs to be changed. Political parties should repose confidence in the people and leave it up to them to vote a party in and the other out on the touchstone of performance.

In hindsight, Pakistan was not a product of the revolt of the Indian Muslims but the result of an evolution of democratic thought, which would not have been possible had the importance of democracy not been known to the Muslim masses. The Muslims clamoured for participation in the democratic system prevalent in pre-partition India. The strength of the present-day India’s democracy is not because the Indian army chose not to interfere in national political affairs but because the Indians, both leaders and followers, are fond of democratic thought bequeathed to them by history. During the colonial era, the spring of that thought was not the central government but the local (municipal) governments.

Pakistanis must also venerate the democratic heritage conferred on them by history. One of the major components of the democratic legacy is the local bodies system. In the absence of local bodies, democratic thought plunges into anarchy or unrest, for example in Balochistan, which is unfortunate for a country established when one such thought was expressed in the 1945-46 elections in united India. Democratic thought bails out a system not only from martial laws but also from the displeasure of people with the system.

The writer is a freelance columnist and can be reached at qaisarrashid@yahoo.com