Daily Times

Article 63(1)(c) of the Constitution of Pakistan disqualifies a person from being elected as or holding an office as a member of the National Assembly or Senate if he or she acquires the citizenship of a foreign state. One of the biggest supporters of this clause was none other than our current Prime Minister. However it seems that on Friday, he had a sudden change of heart and wants to allow dual nationals to participate in elections.

The reason for this seems to be simple enough. Already surrounded by several advisors who are dual citizens of US, Britain or Canada, the Prime Minister was buoyed by the overwhelmingly positive response he got at Capital One Arena in DC. His party put up the number of Pakistanis to be between 30,000 and 50,000. That the Arena could fit only 20356 and the security officials said there were at most 9500 attendees was conveniently dismissed as a Zionist conspiracy against Pakistan’s latter day Sallahuddin Ayubi reborn.

Imran Khan does have overwhelming support amongst the diaspora just as General Musharraf did in the early 2000s. Before Musharraf, believe it or not, it was Nawaz Sharif who was the firm favourite amongst the expatriates. Much like the non-resident Indians, Pakistanis living abroad also seem to idolize authoritarian strongmen. The reason for this is that General Musharraf earlier and Imran Khan hold the promise of accountability for the “corrupt” and “inefficient” political class represented by the PPP and the Muslim League. Modi in India is such a strongman himself and most NRIs are likely to support him rather than the Congress. The idea of a outsider disrupting the established order has popular appeal amongst the middle classes everywhere. Most of the people who end up abroad are from the middle class and are likely to exhibit those trends – i.e. of a better motherland. Nostalgia and homesickness are powerful motivations when mixed with a toxic brew of self-righteousness that often accompanies permanent residence abroad.

Giving the dual nationals representation in the parliament will only give political expression to what it means to be a footloose Pakistani. No party should have any reservations about extending this special concession to our brethren living abroad

Yet it is for this precise reason why we should support the idea of expatriate Pakistanis being allowed to sit in the Pakistani parliament. It is true that they do contribute a fair bit to Pakistan’s economy and as such they should have some measure of participation in forming the government of the country. The problem with this of course is that they cannot logically represent the interests of local constituencies in Pakistan. Therefore them representing say the constituents of NA 1 or NA 122 is out of the question. The only solution, therefore, is for them to be allocated separate seats of their own, elected on the basis of adult franchise worldwide. There are approximately 9 million Pakistani expatriates who can be allocated 18 seats to be elected according to their geographical and demographic distribution around the world, without the right to vote in Senate elections. For avoidance of doubt, they should not be given representation in the Senate as they do not form a constituent unit of the Federation.

The amendment required would then be in the number of seats of the National Assembly and it an exemption from 63(1)(c) can be granted. By keeping the office of the Prime Minister subject to 63(1) (c), we will foreclose the option of an expatriate Pakistani holding executive power in the country. This will allow Pakistanis living abroad a chance to get involved in the making of government. However unless they agree to reside permanently in Pakistan, they would not be able to hold Cabinet portfolios. Certain portfolios such as Defence, Foreign Affairs and Interior can be reserved for non-expats by law. Otherwise the expatriate Pakistanis would be allowed to participate in all parliamentary activities including legislation and government making.

It will also take away the sting from their frustration. Once in the National Assembly, the representatives of the expatriates would obviously have to become part of the mainstream political trends. Their angle of vision will shift and they will be held accountable for they do and say not just in Pakistan but their own countries of residence or citizenship. Once in the parliament they will help bring best practices and a new outside perspective on the state of affairs themselves instead of depending on the new strong man of choice.

The idea of national identity has become very fluid in the modern world. We must remember that the idea of passports is not that old either. Passports are an idea of recent origin and when it was introduced first in the subcontinent in the 1920s, amongst those who opposed the idea was Pakistan’s own founding father because it affected freedom of movement. Passport in the modern age is not as much a symbol of loyalty and national identity as it is a travel document. Just holding a foreign passport is not enough for someone to doubt that person’s allegiance. So all of Imran Khan’s earlier arguments against allowing dual nationals in parliament did not hold water. His change of heart is most welcome.

The scheme that I propose will make Pakistan something more than a geographical entity. It would turn Pakistan into a global political union of people, helping it integrate further in the global world. Our identity wherever we go, whatever religion we belong to, whatever country’s citizenship we acquire remains hyphenated as Pakistani-American or Pakistani-Brit or Pakistani-Canadian. Giving the dual nationals representation in the parliament will only give political expression to what it means to be a footloose Pakistani. No party should have any reservations about extending this special concession to our brethren living abroad.

The writer is an Advocate of the High Courts of Pakistan and a member of the Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn in London