Daily Times

“Leadership is a potent combination of strategy and character. But if you must be without one, be without strategy.” H Norman Schwarzkopf

“How do we know who to chose?” was a question posed to great Greek philosopher and a political sage Plato; He answered that rulers should be chosen according to their character — their honesty, reliability, probity, disinterestedness, sense of justice, and moral uprightness. “The community suffers nothing very terrible if its cobblers are bad and become degenerate and pretentious,” he wrote in The Republic. “But if the guardians of the laws and the state, who alone have the opportunity to bring it good government and prosperity, became a mere sham, then clearly the community is completely ruined.”

“It is our character that supports the promise of future,” wrote another famous writer, William Bennet, the author of the bestselling Book of Virtues.“Far more than particular government programs or policies. The president is the symbol of who the people of the United States are. He is the person who stands for us in the eyes of the world and the eyes of our children.”

Peggy Noonan, in her assessment of Ronald Reagan, wrote, “In a president, character is everything. A president does not have to be brilliant. Henry Truman was not brilliant but he helped save Western Europe from Stalin. He does not have to be clever, you can hire clever, but you cannot rent a strong moral sense. You can’t acquire it in the presidency. You carry it with you”.

Moreover, our religion also places great emphasis on mastering good character. Our beloved prophet (PBUH) earned the title of Sadiq (truthful) and Ameen (trustworthy) due to his exemplary code of conduct. He was reported to have said, “Allah, the sublime has sent me as an apostle so that I may demonstrate perfection of character, refinement of manners and superiority of behaviour.” In another narration, he said: “The best among you are those who have the best manners and character.”

Furthermore, the clauses enshrined in the constitution pertaining to the qualification of a candidate aspiring to be a legislator also requires them to be a person of good character.

There is a special phrase for political turncoats in the Serbian language. Such people are called “tumbling pigeons”, named after a breed of pigeons that perform dazzling flips and somersaults in flight. The pigeons can’t help themselves. But when our politicians defect, they know exactly what they are doing and why

The constitution serve as a prime tool to purge the politics of evil forces and debar the corrupt, unscrupulous, unprincipled, and characterless people from our sacred parliament.

Sadly, having a good character seems to have no value in Pakistani politics. Our self-centred politicians have made it a non-issue. The current general election run vividly suggests that character is no longer a requirement here in Pakistan, if one aims to become a member of a legislative assembly.

It is a really heart wrenching experience to observe the mechanism of awarding tickets adopted by almost all mainstream political parties of Pakistan. In this process of paramount importance, the character of the candidate did not come under any question, only the ability to win the polls, no matter through fair or unfair means, became the sole standard of selection for nomination.

Consequently, the same clique of ugly and tainted faces begrimed with corruption and moral decadence have ganged up to occupy their positions in the parliament again.

Surprisingly, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), a party that claims to be the flag bearer of change, arch rival of the parties of status quo and the hope of desperate and underprivileged people, is now following the footsteps of its predecessors. It has also surrendered to the electables.

There is a special phrase for these political turncoats in the Serbian language. Such people are called “tumbling pigeons”, named after a breed of pigeons that perform dazzling flips and somersaults in flight. The pigeons can’t help themselves. They have been raised with this kind of behaviour over many generations.

But when our politicians defect, they know exactly what they are doing and why they are doing it. Unfortunately, we as a nation, have accepted this defection as a norm.  No stigma is attached to it. That’s why there is hardly any hullabaloo on this shift of loyalties in our country.

Imran khan, the supremo of PTI, when questioned about his tilt towards the electables replied that it was his compulsion. His detractors now ask that if he had to carry this trash with him then why did he stage a mammoth sit-in in capital city of the country; why did he deliver lengthy sermons in order to sensitise the people about the importance of character in politics?

They believe that Imran Khan has reneged his words and like his all other erstwhile moves, has taken a u-turn on his own policy once again.

Moreover, his critics also question how dirt can be cleansed with dirt. Suppose, if PTI rules the day on July 25 and holds the reins of the country, Imran Khan would have no option other than to carve out his cabinet from the available pool of so-called electables that are characterised as the manipulators of the ballot, and practitioners of the art of grand larceny and plunder.

In addition, Imran Khan while embracing the electables also failed to realise the repercussions at the constituency level. People viewed Khan as a messiah who will help them get rid of the chronic rule of their local feudal lords, pirs, and tribal chieftains, who kept them under their oppressive rule. But they can forget about it now, it seems.

Furthermore, the voting turnout has never been impressive in the history of Pakistan. The average voter turnout between the 1970 and 2013 elections has been 47 per cent. The highest average voter turnout of 64 per cent was recorded during the inaugural 1970 elections. This reflects that nearly half of the eligible voters don’t turn up on polling day to exercise their right of enfranchisement.

The principal reason behind this absenteeism is that the absentees regard casting their vote a futile exercise; because of the belief that one person’s vote cannot make a considerable enough difference to the electoral outcome.

One can conclude that in forthcoming election, for parties, the strategy to win by hook or crook seems to be more important than the character of the candidate.

Change is coming… but only in name.

The writer is an Advocate at the Balochistan High Court

Published in Daily Times, July 8^th 2018.