By Mohammad Gill, Detroit, MI
Fifty-four years after the creation of Pakistan, we are still groping in the dark and are not sure what form of government is suitable for us. The opinion is swinging like a pendulum; on one extremity of its swing is democracy and at the other is the army government. Both of these extremes are unstable and the pendulum is in perpetual oscillation. The pendulum is never allowed to stop because its stationary state is blank; nothing is situated there. Once a so-called democratic form of government is instituted in Pakistan, the elected leaders expend all their energies, without license, in devising methods to perpetuate their office tenure for life. To achieve their nefarious objectives, they resort to all kinds of ill-advised practices, seek to bypass the Constitution when and if it becomes a hindrance in achieving their goals, and exploit religion shamelessly whenever an opportunity comes to them, for personal greed and goals. The time is then ripe for the army to step in, ostensibly to end the malpractices of the politicians. This is the end of the pendulum swing in one direction. Now the back swing sets in.
The army usurps the government and starts ruling by ordnances and edicts. The Constitution is suspended, if it becomes a hurdle for the rulers to do what they believe is in the best interest of the country. They dole out the public offices to the army personnel and bribe and graft flourish although probably not so blatantly as in the term of the politicians. Bribe and graft are the ills, which the army sets out to eliminate, to start with. Now the pendulum has started swinging to the other extreme where it cannot stop and has to swing back again. It is now time for the deposed democratic leaders to protest the unconstitutionality of the army rule and demand a return to democracy. For this purpose, they do not refrain from seeking support and approval from other countries of the world, particularly the super-powers without whose economic support, survival is difficult if not altogether impossible. In time, the international pressure combined with the public disaffection in the country becomes unbearable and it is time for the army to call it ‘quits’ and the tango begins afresh.
For the sake of stability, the pendulum has to stop in its equilibrium position. We have to place a form of government at the equilibrium position of the pendulum to allow it to stop oscillating to and fro, and let the political condition become stable. The big question is: What form of government should we place at the equilibrium position of the pendulum? What kind of government is really suitable for the country? There is no easy answer to this question; no body has probably seriously considered all the available options and reduced them to one optimal choice. There are several ill-defined alternatives that can be considered. Some of them are as follows.
Islamic Government
Although Islamic form of government should be most suitable psychologically and ideologically for Pakistan, nobody has ever produced any workable formula for it. Nonetheless, a vocal minority led by the religious parties wants an Islamic form of Government in Pakistan. If this option is to be seriously considered, the leadership that demands this form of government should develop the basic outlines of their constitution and demonstrate that it is practical. There are some insurmountable difficulties in this proposal. For one thing, the Islamic community is factious. The Sunnis are in majority but other sects, Shias, for example, cannot be ignored altogether. At the same time, Sunnis are divided among themselves; there are those who want to set the clock back and revert to the conditions that were prevalent in the hey days of Islam, then there are Wahabis, there are moderates and liberals, so on and so forth. Will they ever agree on one common formula, is an open question. No religious party has ever won a significant popular vote in the previous elections. But if they do come to some mutual agreement and develop a workable constitution, an Islamic form of government deserves to be considered.
Democratic government
Pakistan has experimented with the Parliamentary form of government, which has been so successful in England for hundreds of years. For one reason or the other, it failed in Pakistan. It may arguably be suggested that it was not allowed to function by the army and the other vested interests. Recently, a blend of the American Presidential form of government and the parliamentary government was tried. Pervaiz Musharaff, who deposed the ex- Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif, in October 1999, scuttled it. Musharaff’s action should have been considered a colossal unconstitutional step, which indeed it was, but Sharif was so unpopular for his autocratic attitude and corrupt practices that not many people wept for him. There was a greater deal of opposition to Musharaff’s action in the international press and forums than at home. The deposed leaders and their henchmen put up protests but not many people paid any serious attention to them in Pakistan.
History shows that although the western form of democracy is regarded more desirable than the army government in Pakistan, not many people cherish this form of imported democracy. It will be more palatable to them, if it is somehow Islamicized. To illustrate this point, consider Dr Riffat Hassan’s (Professor of Religious Studies, University of Kentucky, Louisville) response to a question asked her by Salman Zaidi in an interview (The Friday Times, December 7 - 13, 2001): “At the popular level, there seems to be a myth that Islam and democracy are not compatible; can you comment?” She responded, “I think that is absolute nonsense. The way we look at democracy is one man - one vote; this is not the essence of democracy….Benazir Bhutto’s government was not democratic, neither was Nawaz Sharif’s….. I’m quite happy that President Musharaff has started this democratization process, even with all its flaws…he (Musharaff) kept stressing how we have to break these columns of feudal power, without which a democratic, socially just form of government will never materialize. Islam has put an enormous emphasis on social justice and equality, and giving rights to the disadvantaged. This is the essence of democracy, and to say that Islam and democracy are not compatible is simply wrong.” Although Dr Riffat may not be an un-reproachable authority on defining what can be considered as a democratic government, she is a highly educated and well-informed person. It was generally believed that both Benazir and Sharif were democratically elected Heads of State, albeit both of them were corrupt, Dr Riffat asserts that theirs was not a democratic government. If one man - one vote is not the method to elect a democratic government, then how should it be elected? There is an intellectual confusion widely pervading our society.
Army Government
Although this form of government has been in force for the longest period of time in Pakistan, it is unpopular and undesirable. It is inharmonious with the international polity and it is not suitable for the national temperament and needs. The army, by training and education, is not versed in the art of political governance.
There are other forms of government also which may be considered but by and large, they are not suitable for Pakistan, e.g., Socialist Government and its various other versions, or a suitable hybrid of more than one form of government, among others.
It is an urgent need of the country that a commission is constituted and entrusted with the charge to review, determine, formulate, and develop a suitable form of government for the country. Some experienced and knowledgeable observers (experts) from other countries may also be hired to observe, critique, and advise, if necessary, the commission in its work. Such a commission will not have to do a whole lot of work in this regard because it will not be working wholly in a vacuum. Much of the related information already exists. It may need to be reviewed and re-evaluated, and supplemented with new information, if necessary.
Once an appropriate and viable form of government is selected, it should be adopted diligently and without reservation. We have to make a start somewhere. Our neighborly country, India, has a parliamentary form of government ever since it gained independence from the British government. The Indian government may not be one of the best, but at least it is popularly elected. It has the potential to reform itself over a period of time. We have yet to make a start. We are oscillating like a pendulum as I said at the beginning; the vacillations and oscillations must stop. Whatever form of government we choose to have, will not be completely free of problems, in the beginning. Let us put it into practice, debug it, and give it time for seeding and self-reforming.
Before closing, I would like to make a comment on the western democracy. Western democracy and the creed of Islam are not incompatible as remarked by Dr Riffat. The democracy in vogue in the western countries does provide social justice to the common people, as best as is humanly possible, and in this sense, it is closer to the spirit of Islam than many of us care to realize. This may still be one of the best and the most pragmatic option for Pakistan.