Politics of reconciliation?

Newly appointed Special Assistant on Information and Broadcasting Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan while briefing the media after the meeting of the spokespersons with the prime minister, Islamabad, confessed that Parliament could not function without the Opposition. In the same breath, she also underscored the importance of reconciliation in the country’s politics. She also reportedly sought the proposals form the other side of the political divide destined to address the problems facing the masses. On the other hand, PPP senior leader Senator Raza Rabbani is also reported in the media as having stated that the opposition was ready to assist the government if it agreed to immediately slashing down the tariff on electricity, gas and reduces prices on medicines and daily commodities. Both statements may be deemed as breath of fresh air in the current political atmosphere that has been otherwise mired in witch-hunting, incendiary allegations, counter allegations sprawling anger and frustration among the people who wanted the political leadership to focus on to solve their problems of day-to-life instead of getting to each other throats. Hopefully, the government may walk the talk.

It is wishfully hoped that the special assistant’s words of reconciliation represent the paradigm shift on the part of the government’s top leadership that ironically had left no stone unturned in making the politics of the country as the blood sport grotesquely contrary to the democratic ethos. The policy of brinkmanship in politics has given nothing but multiplied the predicaments of the people and indeed exposed the shenanigans of the government attributed to its incompetence and myopic vision rooted in the skewed-up mindset. The policy of reconciliation, if so, is the welcoming change because Pakistan cannot afford politics of confrontation in the face of grim economic situation that is further exacerbated as the economic indicators are projecting long haul. The reported single value added tax regime agreed with the (IMF) may surely make the lives of the common people miserable to the collective chagrin of the nation. In such circumstances, the need for political understanding between the political divide may not be overemphasized.

The PTI government should have been grateful to the opposition parties those declared in no unequivocal terms to favour parliamentary politics over the street politics soon after the elections of 2018. The PTI leadership should have taken this offer in good stride to get on to the business of overcoming the challenges facing the country with the political consensus. Unfortunately, the good offer was turned down by the leadership with disdain. The role of PPP was particularly very crucial at that time for not only standing to the side of the parliamentary politics but also successfully convinced the PML-N and the MMA (religious parties) to become part of the Parliament in the interest of the federation and democracy. Who would not agree that the post-election days were ideal to launch movement against the election rigging when the allegations were flying thick and high right across the country that needed proverbial ignition? But the opposition parties stood for parliamentary politics and assured the PTI leadership of its cooperation in the largest interest of democracy and the constitutional rule. Ironically, the PTI leaders and its government decided to excel in witch-hunting and negative politics by resorting to browbeating the opposition into submission without realising this negativity would pave the way to their political oblivion sooner than later. This mode of politics of confrontation has not benefitted anyone except the enemies of the country those want the country spew its own soup. The eight months politics of PTI government may constitute another black spot in party’s history. Sit-in politics may be deemed so that recklessly delegitimised the civilian democratic institutions and almost invited the intervention of “Third Empire” against the rules of succession as visualised in the constitution.

In democratic dispensation, opposition is the second equally important wheel to move forward on the trajectory of development, progress, security and overall upward social mobility. It may be surely easy to constitute government without the cooperation of the opposition but to run the government smoothly without the cooperation of opposition is indeed impossible in democracy. The composition of the incumbent Parliament further confirms that the government may remain struck in a rut in the face of formidable strength of the opposition in the Parliament clearly suggesting the legislative business cannot be carried out. The eight months miserable rule of the PTI government proves the point without the apprehension of contradiction. The problems facing the country and its people remained unresolved mainly in the absence of the meaningful legislative business. The Parliament is no more a center of gravity of country’s politics. The PTI leadership‘s step-motherly treatment meted out to the Parliament have shown no signs of abating unfortunately. The leader of the House is least interested in the Parliament which is not good omen. He may lead the House in his capacity but his abdication is beyond comprehension.

It may be recalled that the PPP Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gillani always ensured his presence in the Parliament that really constituted the shining example of the leader of the House within the Parliament. The dividends for the nation were heart-warming as the Parliament passed historic 18th Amendment with consensus, gave identity to KPK, and empowered the Parliament including other host of landmark legislations, notwithstanding the fact that the PPP had not majority in the Parliament. But its parliamentary performance was exceptional simply because it took along the opposition in building consensus on all legislative businesses The PTI leadership may take page from the parliamentary successes of the PPP to rectify its mode of politics hitherto not worthy of any credit.

A lame man who keeps the right road outstrips the runner who takes the wrong one, wrote Francis Bacon in his well- known essays Collection. Now, it may be prudent to left to the imagination of the readers as to judge who is the runner keeping the wrong path and who was the one who was keeping the right one.

The people of Pakistan, international financial institutions including the world at large must have been taken by surprise over the all of sudden cabinet reshuffle by the prime minister of Pakistan. The showing of the exit door to Asad Umar, the former finance minister, was difficult to digest as he had just returned from Washington after finalising the financial support programme with the top echelons of the (IMF). His sudden falling from the favour of the prime minister had triggered a cascade of speculations right across. The conspiracy theories are already making rounds. The prime minister while addressing the public meeting in tribal areas last week did speak on the subject asserting that such reshuffling and order of placement of the ministers would be undertaken in future as well keeping in view the performance of the respective ministers. The explanation still had information gaps and therefore hardly came around convincing. The timing of the reshuffle undoubtedly signified all was not well in the corridors of power. The country’s economy was teetering on the brink of the looming crisis of grotesque proportion. Such apparently knee-jerk and authoritarian decision may not represent the narrative of acute sense of proportion.

At present, the composition of the cabinet after the reshuffle unfolds the heavy presence of the unelected experts/professionals undermining the narrative of Cabinet government that consists of elected members of the Parliament. With the substantial induction of the unelected members in the cabinet the apprehension are being raised that the ground for the transition of the parliamentary system of government to the presidential form of government may be underway for which the prime minister was supposedly favourably inclined to. The Railway Minister Sheikh Rashid’s categorical statement rejecting the presidential system in Pakistan is very reassuring that may settle the dust being kicked on the face of country’s politics for quite some time? But, KPK Governor’s TV talk last week in favour of the presidential system of government is keeping the issue alive feeding the uncertainty in perpetuity. It may be considered urgently to end the confusion. The prime minister may issue instructions stopping the government ministers and the party rank and file not to issue statements in this regard if he is not inclined to the discourse.

The controversy also refuses to die down as the composition of the cabinet after the reshuffle looks like the Cabinet of the president rather than of the prime minister of Pakistan. The prime minister may not peruse any thing over and above the 1973 Constitution because such fiddling may cause irreparable damages to the federation. The presidents with all executive powers in the past had caused havoc with the collective destiny of the nation and the country was still struggling to find its moorings. The presidents eras might be described as the eras of secession, sectarianism, terrorism and war within and without because their depredations were their embarrassing legacies those inflicted humiliation and indignities of staggering proportion on the nation. Those who may be advising the prime minister to tread on the presidential form of governance were not the friends of the country and the people of Pakistan. Make no mistake.

muhammadshaheedi@yahoo.com