Daily Times

The democracy has treaded a long evolutionary path spanning over centuries to acquire the present form of representative governance. Though far from perfection, it is yet considered far reflective of the consent of the people and inherent social contract between the rulers and the ruled. In western societies where democracy has taken strong roots and become a way of life, it has helped develop a body of just laws and regulations for administration of the state affairs and arbitration within the society ensuring rule of law; equality before law; safety of the weak; protection of the constitutional, legal and fundamental human rights; guarantee of economic equity and social justice being the universal norms of representative rule.

In established democracies, heavy mandate, or thin majority is inconsequential. What is mandatory is the legislators’ positive approach to democracy and political stability. In a Western democracy, governments with the majority of a few votes complete their tenures with record development and legislative work. In those countries, deviation from law, corruption and corrupt practices are viewed as vulgar crimes against the state and society. There is zero tolerance for violation of law or an established norm. The national watchdogs have leverage to take cognizance of the crime and bring the perpetrators to book. In such countries, no political leader is indispensable where a political party will have no qualms in disowning its leader charged with corruption, or tainted by allegations of corrupt practice and abuse of power. A leader loses his or her political career as soon as corruption charges surface against him or her. The third world countries follow the opposite course trying to defend their corrupt and discredit leaders wrapping them in a saint’s perfumed robe – may be to reduce the stench of their misdeeds.

Over the past seven decades, we have experienced many a disruption of democracy in our country. Therefore, we have as yet not been able to develop a democratic mindset. We lack a mutually tolerant approach in politics. Leaders identify themselves with the country entertaining the illusion of their indispensability for the very existence of it. While in power, they abuse their authority, amass wealth, and indulge in nepotism even unprecedented in the medieval monarchies or the utilitarian states of the past, and blatantly neglect the constitutional rights of the masses to education, healthcare, safety of life and living. They start crying foul about the impending dangers to the country, democracy, and decency as and when kicked out of power by the electorate. The clergy waxes lyrical on dangers to Islam branding their opponents as foreign agents to undermine the land of pure and the flourishing Islamic polity in it. The ‘Jewish agenda’ is their favorite drum beat that strikes a harmonious chord with their madarasah-tutored followers. Once on the streets, they indulge in all the ‘Islamic practices’ of creating traffic jams, beating police men, burning vehicles of fellow citizens, destroying national properties.

In democracy, the opposition as mandated by the public is duty-bound to debate issues confronting the country, pinpoint wrong steps of rulers and to help them arrive at correct decisions for legislation and formulation of national policies

What our short and chequered history tells us is that there has always been a danger to democracy from within. The Sharifs and Bhuttos in the post Zia era marred their two-two terms by picking up unnecessary fights with the powerful Presidents, Chief Justices of the Supreme Court and their Chiefs of Army and indulging in brazen attempts to slit each other’s throat. General Zia ul Haq outfoxed the fiercely contending PPP and PNA leaders. Locked in a bitter and self-destroying antagonism, they plunged the country in an atrocious dictatorship. The situation in the post-Musharraf years has not been different from the early 1990s. The political climate of the country has been marred by a number of consequential political events sparking unending political hostility and antagonism.

The present opposition has come up with a long list of charges against the ruling party accusing Prime Minister Imran Khan for collusion with the National Accountability Bureau, witch-hunting the opposition with his uni-dimensional accountability, ruination of the economy and imperiling democracy and mishandling the chovid-19 catastrophe. These bitter feelings of hostility and antagonism are carryovers from the tense political atmosphere in which the general election of 2018 were held. The political acrimony that preceded the elections by a year or so has continued unabated killing any likelihood of political reconciliation.

With this intense political squabble and the growing insinuations and undue references in social media about the security establishment’s support to the PTI rule, the common people as well as the conscious citizens of this country have a genuine cause for despair and disillusionment. The third elected government has been muddling through two years of its mandate without tangibly delivering on the election promises of the party. The opposition has been adamant to force the government to bite the bullet and accept their cooperation on their terms which would certainly include relaxation in the ongoing accountability cases filed against their stalwarts.

In democracy, the opposition as mandated by the public is duty-bound to debate issues confronting the country, pinpoint wrong steps of rulers and to help them arrive at correct decisions for legislation and formulation of national policies. Any deviation from this democratic course because of narrow personal or party interests is, by all means, a breach of public trust. One should not be oblivious to the fact that the ruling party of today would be the opposition of tomorrow and would get the same shabby treatment from the rulers that it had set as a precedent. This vicious cycle would go on. The working relationship between rulers and opposition should be governed by rules and regulations and universal democratic norms.

What the poor people of the country want is simply that the political leaders across the aisle should display the much-needed understanding for measured and matured opposition and democratic norms and the prudent exercise of executive powers, and wage a combined endeavour for rule of law and the protection of their constitutional right to good living.

There is no harm in hoping for a better political atmosphere but the odds are seemingly insurmountable.

The author was a member of the Foreign Service of Pakistan and he has authored two books