Daily Times

Last week some of the local TV channels flashed a ticker wherein the Chief Election Commissioner was attributed to have made some derogatory remarks about Speaker of the National Assembly Ayaz Sadiq, while hearing a case related to the violation of the election’s code of conduct. Thankfully, this was later refuted as fake news. However, that obviously doesn’t mean the civil and military bureaucracy has always been respectful of elected representatives. In fact, we have a very sad history when it comes to how the elected representatives of the people are treated by Pakistan’s civil military bureaucracy.

Until Jinnah remained at the helm of this country’s affairs, the civil and military bureaucracy didn’t have any significant problem with the elected government. This changed after Jinnah’s death. The failure of politicians to come up with a constitution for the new country led the bureaucracy to regard every single politician as corrupt.

For instance, Jogander Nath Mandal, a Dalit leader from East Pakistan, whom Jinnah had himself assigned as Federal Minister of Law and Labour was given the charge of the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs as well. Mandal had already seen how following the passage of the ‘Objective Resolution’ in 1949, the theocratic elements within the Muslim League and other parties were influencing the constitution making process at the expense of minorities’ interests. In 1950, he realised that the Cabinet Secretary, Chaudhry Mohammad Ali, who a few years later became the Prime Minster of Pakistan, didn’t think of him as sufficiently patriotic. This proved to be too much for the pride of the self-made Dalit leader. Within months, he resigned from all ministries and left Pakistan.

Later when the likes of Ghulam Muhammad, Iskandar Mirza, Justice Munir and General Ayub Khan got at the helm of state, judiciary and military respectively, they literally used politicians like tissue paper; used the office of the prime minister to play musical chairs and treated the constitution as a dispensable luxury.

During the1950s,a dichotomy developed between the purpose of the state and the aspirations of the people. Being part of the permanent machinery of the state, the leadership of the civil and military bureaucracy assumed they had superiority over elected representatives and their governments. It goes without saying that lack of political maturity and commitment to norms and principles from this country’s politicians in the 1950s and later too only weakened the Pakistani polity further.

It goes without saying that lack of political maturity and commitment to norms and principles from this country’s politicians in the 1950s and later too only weakened this country’s polity further

Unfortunately, the relegation of this status to elected representatives the paved way for bureaucracy, especially military generals and judges, to be less and less accountable to parliament or civilian accountability mechanisms. For instance, within a year of imposing martial law, Ayub Khan brought EBDO law to disqualify certain politicians in the name of cracking down on corruption. Yahya Khan, Ziaul Haq and Musharraf all did the same. Meanwhile, the military and judiciary remained untouchable. This attitude is rooted in the same disgust against popular leaders which the earliest leadership of civil military bureaucracy encouraged. Even today, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) has no jurisdiction over the military and judiciary.

Last October, we all saw how helplessly then Federal Interior Minister Ahsan Iqbal stood outside an Accountability Court in Islamabad, where Nawaz Sharif had appeared in relation to the Panama case. The Rangers (a paramilitary force under his own ministry) had barred the entry of the media to the court to prevent them from reporting on the matter. When Ahsan Iqbal reached the court to see why Rangers were deployed there, even he was denied entry as well. To this day, we are waiting for a departmental inquiry report that he had ordered as the Interior Minister.

Everyday, the judges in the courts of this country berate and humiliate elected leaders, acting as if they have a right to browbeat and defame them. This deplorable trend emerged during Chief Justice (CJ) Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry’s days in the Supreme Court (SC). He abused Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) ministers in the courts and crippled the functioning of the elected government. Things are even worse today, during the tenure of CJ Saqib Nisar. Now even the judges of the lower trial courts have become hostile towards politicians. Our judiciary must learn that such behaviour will not strengthen the country or its institutions.

The writer is a sociologist with an interest in history and politics. He Tweets @ZulfiRao

Published in Daily Times, August 16^th 2018.