It is common knowledge that a government is supported by three pillars. These pillars also provide a counter balance against each other to prevent concentration of power in any one pillar. These three pillars are legislative assemblies, executive branch and judicial branch. It is interesting to note that military is not considered as a pillar of government. In Pakistan two of these pillars, that is legislative and judicial, have been hammered repeatedly by the executive to gain extraordinary powers. Ironically for most of Pakistan’s history military rulers have retained the executive powers through extra-judicial acts of abrogating the constitution and imposition of martial law. After gaining power these same rulers have erected legislative assemblies composed of their cronies.
President General Musharraf is no different than any military ruler who can allow an individual or an entity to take power away from him. Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhary has presided over many controversial decisions that gave a semblance of the rising independence of the apex court. This shift in power may not be welcomed by a military ruler. First it was the decision to upturn the privatization of the Steel Mills, then came the decision to allow celebration of the traditional festival of basant. But the most embarrassing situation for the government was about ordering intelligence agencies to present information about mysterious disappearance of citizens. It is also quite possible that Musharraf feared the courts to give decision against his desire to be elected by the present assemblies. It is also becoming apparent that it is in the interest of the General to create a situation of uncertainty in the country to find reasons to postpone the general elections for one year.
In the current crisis of removal of a sitting chief Justice it is once again obvious that we lack democratic and constitutional traditions which helps define a situation more than the wording of an article. Due to lack of any tradition all parties interpret the constitutional position according to their own understanding. The office of the President, whether civilian or military, has become source of all crises because the person assuming that office acts only when it is in their advantage.
According to the media reports the President of Pakistan acted according to article 209 of the Constitution to suspend the CJ in response to the allegations presented in an open letter written by a media personality Naeem Bokhari, who is also a lawyer. There might be some truth in the miss use of office by the CJ but it should not come as a surprise to a nation where abuse of office is a norm rather than an exception. From a small clerk in a city council office to the highest office of the country corruption and abuse of power is normal. General Musharraf stepped over his power when he removed an elected Prime Minister from his office who exercised his authority to replace a Chief of Army Staff. The argument presented for marshal law by general Musharraf was that in removing the COAS the Prime Minister did not follow the constitution as well as risked lives of civilians by not allowing his PIA plane to land at Karachi airport. Much later General Musharraf broke his word to the nation by not giving up his military uniform at the end of 2004 as promised. As a uniformed officer General Musharraf can not assume the civilian title of President of Pakistan. But everything is possible as long as the 13 corps commanders are standing behind the General giving unconditional support to his military rule.
The politicians can not blame the General for removing a CJ as they themselves have done the same when it suited them. Power hungry politicians are using this event to inspire an uprising against the military rule so that they can return to power. These self centered politicians are not motivated to strengthen judicial institutions in the country. They are only acting as opportunist to regain the popular support that they repeatedly lose to the military generals.
As a nation we can not progress unless we strengthen all three pillars of stable government. It is important that we have a strong judiciary supplemented by a police force which is qualified and capable to enforce the will of the law as summoned by the decisions of the court. Can anyone imagine that a police officer can arrest a military general for the abrogation of the constitution? Unless we give powers to the civilian institutions military will continue to rule us for the foreseeable future.
As a nation we are failing in all aspects of a civilian society. As individuals we are inspired, motivated, energetic and ambitious people but as a community we lose sight of our social, communal, civil and political responsibilities. Unless we can align our individual qualities with our communal responsibilities we can not become a progressive nation. To achieve that we would need selfless and enlightened leadership but that is not visible on the horizon so far.
Can a government stand on two pillars?
March 11, 2007 at 10:26 pm · Filed under Political Commentary
It is common knowledge that a government is supported by three pillars. These pillars also provide a counter balance against each other to prevent concentration of power in any one pillar. These three pillars are legislative assemblies, executive branch and judicial branch. It is interesting to note that military is not considered as a pillar of government. In Pakistan two of these pillars, that is legislative and judicial, have been hammered repeatedly by the executive to gain extraordinary powers. Ironically for most of Pakistan’s history military rulers have retained the executive powers through extra-judicial acts of abrogating the constitution and imposition of martial law. After gaining power these same rulers have erected legislative assemblies composed of their cronies.
President General Musharraf is no different than any military ruler who can allow an individual or an entity to take power away from him. Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhary has presided over many controversial decisions that gave a semblance of the rising independence of the apex court. This shift in power may not be welcomed by a military ruler. First it was the decision to upturn the privatization of the Steel Mills, then came the decision to allow celebration of the traditional festival of basant. But the most embarrassing situation for the government was about ordering intelligence agencies to present information about mysterious disappearance of citizens. It is also quite possible that Musharraf feared the courts to give decision against his desire to be elected by the present assemblies. It is also becoming apparent that it is in the interest of the General to create a situation of uncertainty in the country to find reasons to postpone the general elections for one year.
In the current crisis of removal of a sitting chief Justice it is once again obvious that we lack democratic and constitutional traditions which helps define a situation more than the wording of an article. Due to lack of any tradition all parties interpret the constitutional position according to their own understanding. The office of the President, whether civilian or military, has become source of all crises because the person assuming that office acts only when it is in their advantage.
According to the media reports the President of Pakistan acted according to article 209 of the Constitution to suspend the CJ in response to the allegations presented in an open letter written by a media personality Naeem Bokhari, who is also a lawyer. There might be some truth in the miss use of office by the CJ but it should not come as a surprise to a nation where abuse of office is a norm rather than an exception. From a small clerk in a city council office to the highest office of the country corruption and abuse of power is normal. General Musharraf stepped over his power when he removed an elected Prime Minister from his office who exercised his authority to replace a Chief of Army Staff. The argument presented for marshal law by general Musharraf was that in removing the COAS the Prime Minister did not follow the constitution as well as risked lives of civilians by not allowing his PIA plane to land at Karachi airport. Much later General Musharraf broke his word to the nation by not giving up his military uniform at the end of 2004 as promised. As a uniformed officer General Musharraf can not assume the civilian title of President of Pakistan. But everything is possible as long as the 13 corps commanders are standing behind the General giving unconditional support to his military rule.
The politicians can not blame the General for removing a CJ as they themselves have done the same when it suited them. Power hungry politicians are using this event to inspire an uprising against the military rule so that they can return to power. These self centered politicians are not motivated to strengthen judicial institutions in the country. They are only acting as opportunist to regain the popular support that they repeatedly lose to the military generals.
As a nation we can not progress unless we strengthen all three pillars of stable government. It is important that we have a strong judiciary supplemented by a police force which is qualified and capable to enforce the will of the law as summoned by the decisions of the court. Can anyone imagine that a police officer can arrest a military general for the abrogation of the constitution? Unless we give powers to the civilian institutions military will continue to rule us for the foreseeable future.
As a nation we are failing in all aspects of a civilian society. As individuals we are inspired, motivated, energetic and ambitious people but as a community we lose sight of our social, communal, civil and political responsibilities. Unless we can align our individual qualities with our communal responsibilities we can not become a progressive nation. To achieve that we would need selfless and enlightened leadership but that is not visible on the horizon so far.
Permalink