Syed Afzal Haider has been involved in active politics in the country, and his recent book is an insider’s account of the various shapes and forms that politics has taken in the country since its inception.
Actually it is an account of the political history and the shape that struggle took resulting in various developments in the constitutions of the land. It is to be more precise the constitutional history of the subcontinent, for the account begins way back with the gradual setting up of the East India Company’s authority, even before the Crown Rule was formally announced in the subcontinent.
So it is a fascinating read as the people and the various forces representing those people then strode towards guaranteeing some kind of a constitutional framework for themselves in an age when the paradigm of politics had totally changed. People were struggling to get rid of the medieval concepts of monarchy, extra territorial concepts of Islamic caliphate and the relationship of the ruler and the ruled that resulted from it. They were positioning themselves to embark on a journey that was to thrust them into modern times resting on principles like human rights, constitutional guarantees and democratic freedoms.
But the constitutional history of Pakistan has been fraught with problems right from the beginning. The political relationships were not defined or if defined were not lasting enough to form the status of an institution. Repeatedly, the peaceful democratic order was disrupted and unconstitutional authoritarian order imposed that spelled disaster for the country and its presence among the comity of nations in the twentieth century.
Syed Afzal Haider hails from a family that was more politically aware than the general public and his interest in politics heightened that interest and made him to think and ponder over the political issues facing the country. He was a college student at the time of partition and saw the vicissitudes the political history of the country went through. He saw the formation and then dissolution or dismissals of various governments, the framings of constitutions one after the other, and the various phases, one more disastrous than beneficial that the country went through.
It resulted in the separation of the Eastern wing. But as Pakistan tried to emerge, yet another effort was made as the first constitution that was framed and approved by the people’s representatives was promulgated but was then annulled only after five years by the military dictator Ziaul Haq. Politics started gathering momentum after the so called suspension of the constitution and the Movement for the Restoration of Democracy was launched which the author called the biggest collection of political forces in the country’s history. Since the author himself took a leading part in the movement, the main thrust of the book is actually a first hand experience of this effort at the restoration of democracy against the brutal dictatorship of Ziaul Haq.
Usually books are written about an event or a phase in the history of a nation to place that particular event in a proper perspective. One basic aim should have been on what the political struggle gained from the MRD movement, or what was the impact of the biggest political movement of political forces if sketched on the curve of political developments in the country. The author has been assessing the significance of the movement and its impact, now thirty years later and he seems not very hopeful about the state of politics in the country.
He despairs of what the politicians have made out of the past struggles and does not appear to be very hopeful about the steady progression of political achievements and goals. The politicians in their conduct and behaviour as well as style of governance have not really been able to make a mark; if anything, their image has suffered with all kinds of rumours and accusations flying around about their competence, style of governance and personal integrity.
The gain which was made by non-democratic forces, the rise of the religious parties and the changes made in the constitutions that are too difficult to reverse or roll back have been the disappointing features which have not really been able to put back the course of democracy firmly on the right track.
Never was a country founded that had two parts separated by a thousand miles and a hostile country in between. In its territorial separateness lay a devil and, since the beginning, the efforts were thwarted to find an adequate expression in the constitution of this oddity that implied disparity, lopsidedness and unevenness. It appears that the author, despite a lifetime spent struggling for democracy or democratic rights, has given up all hopes.
He admired and appreciated Husain Shaheed Suhrawardy, especially his constitutional provision of parity between the two wings of the country. He is firmly of the opinion that this provision of parity should not have been abolished and the elections in 1970, the first adult franchise in Pakistan, should not have been held on the basis of one man one vote. The election results made it clear that the East Pakistanis were dissatisfied with the countrymen in the western wing and from there it was difficult to go back and reverse the order. If parity had been maintained, this stage would not have been reached where the majority wanted a decisive change not acceptable to the other provinces.
There seems to be too much in the book. It is a mixture of a narrative of a political activist, a constitutional history, and biographical sketches of various political leaders, the personal experiences and the many anecdotes from that active struggle itself. Perhaps more editing and a focused gleaning of material could have streamlined chapters that do not flow into one another. Some stand out as individual and episodic in character.