Power politics

A number of factors have hampered the PTI-led coalition government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa to deliver results as was expected by the electorate. The lack of experience of the PTI as a ruling party led them to miss the nuances of a well-entrenched bureaucracy, which is known for its conservatism and preference for the red tape.
The inclination of the PTI chairman to rely on the chief secretary, instead of his own elected party members, led to a deadlock between the latter and the KP chief minister. Another senior bureaucrat was made chief secretary but with little improvement in relations between the civil servants and the elected representatives.
Another important lesson that the PTI didn’t take stock of is that no provincial government, especially in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, can successfully manage its affairs without the support of the federal and the Punjab governments.
The release of funds from the divisible pool and NFC awards by the federal government depend on a certain degree on the goodwill between the provincial and federal governments. A mere ban on inter-provincial movement of wheat by Punjab can cripple the provincial government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
The mass protests by the PTI against alleged rigging in the 2013 general elections led to tensions between the PML-N-led federal government and the PTI-led government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
The over-emphasis of the PTI on a good governance legislative framework diverted its attention from spending its development budget. The Right to Information Act, the Right to Public Services Act, and the Ehtisab Commission Act are some good achievements; however, there is no dearth of already existing laws that are rarely implemented.
The real challenge is the implementation of public policy, which is the sole responsibility of the civil servants. There is no public oversight of the implementation of these policies. Initially, the PTI formed working groups for each department to involve a broader spectrum of stakeholders and specialists in setting up departmental targets but little is now known about the fate of those working groups.
The PTI leadership had a clear stand on the development budget being spent by the elected representatives. It was considered the root of political corruption but gradually those noises drowned in the expediency of power politics. Corruption is not a symptom. It is systemic and can’t be rooted out by harsh laws and punishments alone.
The lack of discipline and reports of internal groupings in the ranks of PTI MPAs in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa have led to an inconsistent attitude towards its coalition partners. Apart from the JI, the Qaumi Watan Party (QWP) was the most experienced coalition partner, but the partnership with the QWP broke after a drastic action by the PTI leadership. The strained relations with the JI and the Awami Jahmoori Itihad, coupled with the unreliability of some of its own MPAs, compelled the chief minister to go back to the QWP for joining the government.
While the arrest of a PTI minister by the Ehtisab Commission on charges of corruption is a laudable step, it is evident that the PTI can’t go after several others of its own ministers who are also allegedly involved in malpractices. Any further action against the PTI’s own MPAs or ministers will deprive it of a majority in the house.
Coalition governments are a slippery slope. It’s all a game of give and take and compromises – hardly affordable for a party that claims to effect substantive change in the governance system. The best political course for the PTI in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is to sit on the opposition benches rather than compromise its appeal to the electorate.
The writer is an Islamabad-based Fulbright scholar with abackground in law, politics and human rights.
Email: mr352@georgetown.edu