Role reversal

The disqualification of Mian Nawaz Sharif (MNS) at the hands of the Supreme Court has given rise to both laudatory and caustic remarks. At all events, the definitive interpretation of the law and the constitution is the exclusive domain of the apex court. The rest, from a legal standpoint, is no more than wit and gossip.

At the same time, a lot can be read into the unceremonious exit of an elected prime minister in political terms, not the least of which is the reversal of the roles of two of the key players in Pakistani politics: the PML-N and the PPP.

The 19th century German philosopher, Georg Hegel, is credited with applying a revolutionary method to the study of history and its allied disciplines. Referred to as dialectics, this method views social and political phenomena as driven essentially by conflict. An idea or an event – called a thesis – begets its opposite or antithesis. In the course of time, both thesis and antithesis combine to form a synthesis. The decimation of a position or a view in a conflict is never complete. Instead, it survives in the triumph of its antagonist. The next situation partakes of both adversaries.

One of the implications of the dialectical interpretation of history is that actors on the stage of politics keep changing their roles. Today’s revolutionaries may cast themselves as tomorrow’s staunch defenders of the status quo. Diehard supporters of despotism can change into the most vehement advocates of democracy. Today’s mortal foe may have been yesterday’s best friend. An arch rival at present may become a close collaborator in the days to come.

MNS set off his political career under the wings of military dictator General Ziaul Haq. The general had pulled down a popularly-elected government and made no bones about his distrust of democracy. His preferred form of government – which he actually put in place – was untrammelled despotism. To impart to it a veneer of credibility, he convened a nominated consultative assembly called the Majlis-e-Shura.

In 1985, when the general was forced to hold national elections and restore the fundamental law of the land, he saw to it, through constitutional amendments, that elected institutions were completely under the thumb of the establishment under the new arrangement.

Two of these amendments stand out above the rest. One of them– which was introduced by inserting the infamous Article 58 (2)(b) into the constitution – empowered the president to dissolve the popularly-elected National Assembly and dismiss the prime minister. The other – in the shape of Article 62 and Article 63 – made parliamentarians subject to disqualification at the drop of a hat. Ironically, both these amendments would later be instrumental in deposing the general’s favourite protege.

MNS’s politics shot up under Ziaul Haq. The general made him Punjab’s chief minister in 1985 and thus set the stage for his rise to the country’s most powerful office five years down the road. In 1988, when the general sacked his own handpicked premier by invoking Article 58 (2)(b), one of the beneficiaries of that fateful move was MNS. From then on, he was to be the man on whom the powers that be would put their money. On his part, Sharif would pride himself on being the heir to his mentor’s legacy.

As a rule, a politician – as opposed to a general – gets two, or even more, bites at the cherry. Alive to the far-reaching stakes that even a fragile democracy offered him, MNS switched gears and began pulling himself apart from Zia’s legacy. His electoral exploits, which established him as a leader in his own right, made it easier for him to secure his future through popular politics.

The year 1993 was a turning point in MNS’s political voyage. The irresistible impulse to break free made him bite the hand that had so far fed him. He was forced to vacate the prime minister’s office. It was the beginning of the end of his role as a blue-eyed boy of the establishment.

Four years later, he swept back to power. But he was never to enjoy the same confidence of the powers behind the throne again. The second stint as prime minister saw MNS fall out with the president, the chief justice and the army chief. Although he forced all three to step down on the trot, he was doomed to bite the dust. In 1999, by a freak of fate, another general apparently brought down the curtains on his sparkling political career.

Be that as it may, MNS, the politician, was resurrected within a decade before being sworn in as prime minister for an unprecedented third term. From the outset, he appeared to be in a tight spot and was on the brink of being booted out upon the completion of his first year in office. He dug in but was eventually given the push for not being truthful and honest under Article 62 of the constitution – a gift of his erstwhile mentor’s legacy.

Z A Bhutto, the PPP’s founder, was also brought up in the lap of a military despot before breaking ranks with him and forcing him to quit. The removal of Bhutto on July 5, 1977 in Pakistan’s third military coup set the PPP up as an anti-establishment party. From then on, it was to be the strongest voice of democracy in the country, for which it paid no small price. Bhutto was executed following a trial that is widely believed to be fatally flawed.

With Benazir Bhutto at the helm, the PPP returned to power in 1988. But Benazir was dismissed in less than two years on corruption charges. The dismissal was upheld by the court. But Benazir was back in the saddle in 1993 but was again shown the door in 1996 on similar grounds. Her dismissal was once again upheld by the judiciary. Between these events, MNS’s 1993 sacking was overturned by the apex court. All this made the PPP fulminate against the courts for allegedly being biased and showing a lack of respect for the popular mandate.

The PPP’s anti-establishment credentials received the first serious jolt when it struck a deal with the military regime of Gen Pervez Musharraf in the form of the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) that washed away corruption charges against the party’s top leadership. There is little doubt that in the absence of the NRO neither the PPP would have formed its government in 2008 nor Asif Zardari, the party’s supreme leader, would have made it to the highest office of the land. Not only that, both the PPP government and former president Zardari completed their five-year terms. Neither feat could have been accomplished without the blessings of the powers that be.

Fast forward to the present: by a twist of fate, the PML-N – which, in the past, has been a beneficiary of judicial decisions as well as a supporter of Articles 62 and 63 – finds itself at the receiving end of the Supreme Court’s verdict of July 28 as well as the alleged conspiracies against democracy. The PPP, making a break with its past, has not only hailed the same verdict but has also dismissed the conspiracy theory as an old wives’ tale.

Amid this role reversal, a new blue-eyed boy and a new king’s party are set to shine on the political horizon.

The writer is a freelance contributor.

Email: hussainhzaidi@gmail.com