Daily Times

Reportedly, the fifth meeting of 12-member committee on the Panama leaks, which was held on Saturday, remained inconclusive. The government team has rejected Terms of Reference (ToR) framed by the opposition, and has presented its own ToR, which will be discussed in the committee meeting on Tuesday. Whereas the opposition demands investigations against the Sharif family members to start with, government wishes to initiate investigations against all those who had bank loans written off and were involved in corrupt practices. The Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari, in his speeches, has been critical of the government and Sharif family, and has, more than once, demanded prime minister’s resignation. He and his aides believe that it is a great opportunity for the revival of the PPP. However, it is to be seen if the opposition could forge an alliance to put the government on the mat.

Even in the past alliances were formed, but only a few of them had been successful. On April 30, 1967 Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan had formed a five-party alliance of opposition, namely the Pakistan Democratic Movement, but later renamed as Pakistan Democratic Action Committee. It played an important role in the removal of Ayub Khan. However, the left had been the rallying force in pressurising Khan to step down, and in 1969 General Yahya Khan promulgated martial law. He held elections in 1970, and the Awami League swept the polls in the then East Pakistan getting a clear majority to form the government, but the power was not transferred to the Awami League. The events that followed resulted in disintegration of Pakistan. The PPP because of its majority in West Pakistan formed the government. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto held elections before the end of the tenure of his government in 1977.

The Pakistan National Alliance (PNA) comprising nine political parties was cobbled together before the elections. The PPP had emerged victorious, but its government was accused of rigging the elections on 35 seats. The movement launched by the PNA led to anarchy in the country. Air Marshal (Retd) Asghar Khan had reportedly written a letter to the then army chief Zia-ul-Haq to remove the Bhutto government. Zia imposed martial law, and Bhutto and many other leaders were incarcerated. Later, Bhutto was awarded death sentence by the Lahore High Court on the allegation of murder of Nawab Muhammad Ahmed Khan Kasuri, for which an FIR was registered earlier. The Supreme Court upheld the verdict of the High Court, and Bhutto was hanged on July 4, 1979. With the demise of Zia in a C-130 crash in 1988, the elections that were to be held party-less were then held on party basis.

In 1988, the Islami Jamhoori Ittehad was formed comprising nine parties, but those parties had not fared well in elections. The PPP had emerged the largest single majority party, and the president had invited Benazir Bhutto to form government. During 1990s, Benazir and Nawaz Sharif’s governments were dismissed twice under 58-2 (b). In 1997, Nawabzada Nasrullah succeeded in forming the Grand Democratic Alliance against Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz government. Since the inception of Pakistan, political parties has remained embroiled in a messy showdown that twice led to imposition of martial law, and once military dispensation by General Pervez Musharraf on October 12, 1999. On October 10, 1999, two days before Musharraf overthrew Sharif government, the Grand Democratic Alliance (GDA) in its meeting had announced it would hold anti-government rally at Nishtar Park, Karachi on October 29, 1999, to expose government’s failure in containing terrorism, both ethnic and sectarian, price hike and unemployment.

But meanwhile, Musharraf overthrew Sharif government, in what he termed a ‘countercoup’. Nasrullah and other members of the alliance wished to take PML-N in its fold, although the 19-party alliance had one-point agenda: removal of Sharif government. Nasrullah, Azam Hoti, Asfandyar Wali Khan and others were lamenting the treatment meted to Sharif in jail. This scribe was witness in the GDA’s meeting held at Imran Khan’s residence when Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf and Pakistan Awami Tehreek had opposed PML-N’s joining the alliance. PML of Hamid Nasir Chattha, Mazdoor Kissan Party, a breakaway faction of the Tehrik-e-Istaqlal and five other parties had also opposed the inclusion of PML-N in the GDA. Nasrullah deftly succeeded in bringing the PML-N and PPP under the banner of the Alliance for Restoration of Democracy, and became its chairman.

It is fresh in the minds of people that political parties and alliances have been persuading the army chiefs in the past for getting rid of elected governments. This is one of the reasons that people have become indifferent to the electoral process, and do not bother if they are to be ruled and exploited by an elected government or by any other dispensation. It should be borne in mind that in a democracy political process is not traversing the cul-de-sac, as today’s ruling party could be tomorrow’s opposition and vice versa. And tolerance to listen to dissenting views calmly and respond to them rationally is the hallmark of democracy. During the last 69 years, Pakistan has faced multi-faceted crises, and once suffered the trauma of disintegration. It was, therefore, expected that political parties and their leaderships would avoid internecine conflicts, and would not give over-riding consideration to their personal and group interests over the national interest.

It appears that in spite of three martial laws and a military dispensation no lessons were learnt. In democracies, there could be difference of opinion over methodologies of achieving targets and timeframe, but all political parties should remain steadfast in regard to the objectives of welfare of the masses and stability and security of the country. If any neutral observer or analyst were to examine the role played by civil and military bureaucracy as well as political parties in Pakistan, the obvious conclusion will be that the overall performance has been dismal. Majority of the political leaders and their parties remained absorbed in politics of power and pelf, and never tried to establish a paradigm of good governance. There is a perception that the members of the ruling elite, whether in government or in opposition, are the beneficiaries of this system, and hence they would not like to change the status quo.

The writer is a freelance columnist. He can be reached at mjamil1938@hotmail.com