Ever since this democratic set-up took up the keys of parliament with an impression to steer the ship of democracy, there have been voices of dissent saying that the establishment is impeding the way. By establishment, we mean our army. Similar angst had been the repeated mantra of the last PPP regime where you find the Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani oddly blurting out ‘state within a state’. Thus, the dialogue ‘conspiracy against democracy’ becomes the most common cliché in our political jargon.
To reassure the phobia, COAS General Bajwa, of late, came forward and appeared before the senate to calm down the perceptions developed in the backdrop of some recent judicial verdicts. He vehemently urged the legislators to carve out foreign and defence policies and pledged that the army would follow. He was candid enough to enjoin upon the senators not to exacerbate the environment which may create an opportunity for the army to interfere.
Lately, Hamid Mir, a senior news anchor, obliquely cited that slue things had detected some clandestine meetings in London and elsewhere leading to the conspiracies against the integrity of Pakistan by the people in the parliament hailing from the party in the centre.
Confused: who conspires? The general public opinion supports the army as a credible institution of country and the same perception does not give that much weight to the credibility of the politicians.
In all circumstances, the truth is that the establishment of Pakistan has always had a central position to influence the contours of politics, and commands pivotal place in the polity of the country.
To understand the whole algebra of this phenomenon why ‘the boys’ take up the central stage, one has to go beyond the platitude of merely ‘creating opportunities for the army to interpose’.
At the time of independence, all offices of the state of affairs were in tatters except civil bureaucracy and army as these were the sole institutions which were supremely trained in matters of their field. As far as politicians were concerned, they have had little experience of ruling in contrast to the Indian National congress which had been gaining wide experience of ruling ever since 1885. The Muslim League collected itself and started a full-fledged socio-political campaign to achieve a separate homeland from 1940. From the role of a national movement to a ruling party, the Muslim League could not perform in the initial years through its unfledged politicians. Consequently, well-groomed institutions had to fill the void.
In the first phase that stretches from independence to the assassination of Liaquat Ali Khan, things moved under the command of political framework. The Army was subservient to the civilian government
In this phase, first, Quaid-e-Azam played his part to help run the tasks of the government according to the existing laws. Thereafter, Liaquat Ali Khan, who had the portfolios of Defence Minister and the Chairman of the Defence Committee of the Cabinet apart from being the Prime Minister, took charge and let the institutions work under the political fabric.
However in the second phase from 1951 to 1958, there emerged the partnership of bureaucracy with the army and then the ultimate dominance of the latter over the former. In this phase, we saw the depletion of civilian capacity by the crumbling political apparatus leaving space for the strongest one to come forward and play.
The history of this period will remain incomplete without a mention of the judiciary’s role whose rulings have engraved indelible imprints on the constitutional history of Pakistan constructing routes for the latter jurists to relax, temper and mould laws for the military-led forms of governments under the umbrella of coups. The first example was set by Justice Munir. By relying on the medieval jurist Henry de Bracton’s ‘Doctrine of Necessity’, he reversed the decision of the High Court of Sindh and upheld the decision of Governor General Ghulam Muhammad to dissolve the first constituent assembly of Pakistan in 1954.
The third phase, that lasted from 1958 to 1969 made the army even stronger as it did some successful tasks like defeating India in the war of 1965 and then lifting the tottering state of economic conditions in Pakistan. In March 1969, unrest generated by the popular protests and political feuds in the shape of tussle between Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Sheikh Mujeeb gave birth to the fourth phase of civil-military relations.
The fifth phase saw for the first time in the history of Pakistan the transfer of power to civilian leadership. The establishment reserved a back seat for the time being on the heels of Dhaka debacle leaving an open playing field for the political actors. But the blunders by the political elite created agitation in the public making the environment unstable. The simmering cinders of anger kept burning inside the common man who had high hopes from the restoration of democracy but at the end of the day, the much trumpeted democracy could not relieve him out of his constraints and pains. Consequently, he was again on the roads and the army again on the central stage and the elected leader behind the bars.
In the first phase that stretches from independence to the assassination of Liaquat Ali Khan, things moved under the command of the political framework. The Army was subservient to the civilian government
The sixth stage was the most significant phase where steps taken have left the deepest grooves on the constitutional, political, social and cultural history of Pakistan. Zia has gone but he seems to live on perpetually as his ideological meanderings could still be felt in far and wide nooks of the country.
The ripples of Zia’s constitutional amendments were quite palpable in the seventh phase after the accidental death of General Zia. 58-2(B) rendered a semi-presidential structure to the already weak facade of parliamentary form of government. This clause was used three times in 1990’s to dissolve the elected governments by the presidents in collaboration with non-democratic forces.
The eighth phase, like the sixth one, suited the designs of international players in the background of 9/11 incident. The ninth phase still continues.
This phase is perhaps the most interesting one; as here the establishment does not feel the need to stage martial-law to reign in the affairs, rather indirectly it keeps tabs over many aspects of political life. The general anxiety in the public is captured, and the disgruntled political players especially the actors from the opposition political parties are manoeuvred. The judiciary, too, participates. The instability factor is exploited. Ten to twelve anchors from media houses sharing the same views forge the public opinion. Thus, the general environment goes against the corrupted ones ensconced in the parliament and the common man again prays to get rid of the ruling echelons of society.
The bottom-line is, that if the constitution has to take up the central stage in our polity — the political parties have to grow up and show maturity and desist from dragging down the ones in the helms. If the ruling parties abide by the constitutional norms, the other institutions — be it judiciary, army, media-men, all public and private offices — shall exercise restraint in trespassing the dictates of law. The problem starts when the ruling parties violate the rules of the game and create considerable disquietude in the populace. This unrest invites other players to jump in and salvage the people in distress.
The writer is a Lecturer of English and can be contacted on [email protected]
Published in Daily Times, January 8th 2018.