Law minister’s pleading in the Senate underscoring the indispensability of issuance of ordinances to run the governmental affairs may be a subtle confession of lacking the political will and requisite political acumen of parliamentary politics. Instead of relying heavily on the promulgation of series of ordinances, the political sagacity requires the culmination of the democratic practices by invoking and seeking ‘collective wisdom’ of the Parliament across the isles. That has been long overdue and still there is apparently no change of heart and mind. The paradigm shift, if embraced, may surely bring about the qualitative change in the House warranting the promulgation of ordinances only sparingly as per Article 89 of the Constitution.
Who would disagree to the basics of the functioning democracy that fundamentally hinges on the shared commitment to the legislation dedicated to serve the people? But, the ruling party is seemingly least interested in and has hardly tried to engage the Opposition in the Parliament or outside since it came to power. No rapport with the Opposition but hostility seems deliberate -- least desirable in a democratic dispensation. Unfortunately, PTI may be proving as an exception because the leadership does not feel the dire necessity of the role of the Opposition in building up robust democracy. It has sadly locked horns with the political opponents may be with mala fide intentions.
The issuance of an array of ordinances, not witnessed during the last two civilian rules of PPP and PML-N, may be the direct result of the single dimensional politicking of the ruling party at the expense of the functioning of the Parliament. The leader of the House in democracy takes initiative to seek the cooperation of the Opposition as his top priority to create enabling environment in the House in order to facilitate the legislative business to improve governance and delivery of services. But, oddly, the incumbent ‘selected’ leader of the House thinks otherwise in his wisdom believing in swimming upstream for the reason he only knows better. Leader of the Opposition, Shahbaz Sharif, PML-N and the former leader of the Opposition, Syed Khurshid Shah, (PPP), are both behind bars along with other stalwarts allegedly on the trumpet-up charges. The current political polarisation has vitiated the political environment to the lowest ebb that is detrimental to the functioning of the Parliament. More than two years may be enough to judge the suitability, or otherwise, of the strategy of combative politics of the government. It is not very impressive as per the perception hanging in the air. But, sadly, there are no signs of reviewing the policy despite the fact that all fair, impartial and enlightened political analysts have been urging in favour of engaging the political opponents to overcome the crisis that has plunged the nation deep into abyss. Such experts’ opinions are spurned with disdain implying, perhaps, containing the brief of the Opposition to discredit the government. So stand-off is continuing that has taken the hold of all the walks of national life in reverse gear.
The PTI leadership’s seemingly vindictive juggernaut in the name of controversial accountability has indeed queered the political pitch even for the below average functioning of the democracy. Admittedly, Opposition constitutes an important and integral part of any democratic dispensation that should be treated as such by the ruling party. But the ruling party does not subscribe to this linkage and has been continuing pushing the political opponents to the wall relegating the parliamentary politics to the back burner. It has pushed the political economy to a dangerous zone mired in political polarisation of grotesque proportion. Its heavy reliance on the presidential ordinances might have not arisen in the first place if it had taken the Opposition on board. The shooting out of ordinances may not be justified as per rules defined in the Constitution. This unilateral and odious approach may surely continue to caste dark shadows on the political horizon of the country. Hope against hope, the treasury benches’ fixation may give space to the optics of the democratic politics because confrontation is bound to inflict harm indiscriminately sooner than later. Better sense may prevail. If not, ‘beware ideas of March’.
It may be recalled that the PPP government, led by Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani, may be distinguished as the shining example of the functioning of parliamentary democracy in the context of the momentous legislation enacted during his watch notwithstanding that the party did not have the majority in the National Assembly.
The defining difference was that the PPP’s leadership was totally and unequivocally inclined towards the policy of reconciliation and understanding across the board, and treated the political opponents with due respect. There was not a single political prisoner. The results were extraordinarily historic ones as the most difficult and complex constitutional amendments like the 18th Amendment were passed with consensus. The amendment unfolded a new era of ownership and empowerment as it significantly increased the powers of the federating units by abolishing the Concurrent List of the Constitution, resulting in huge devolution of financial, administrative and executive powers in favour of the provinces. On the contrary, PTI politics today is apparently wrapped in exclusiveness and self-righteousness with the overtones of ‘witch-hunting’.
The apprehensions of the federating units of depriving them from the provincial autonomy along with resources are real after the promulgation of presidential ordinances to lay hands on the islands of Sindh and Balochistan. If that happens, the undertakers may surely face the backlash that would send shivers down the spine. Hopefully, the moderate leadership of the party may not let the situation come to that unfortunate pass.
Hardly surprising, the Parliament has been largely reduced to the dormant forum because its track record reflects miserable performance by any stretch of imagination. The sole responsibility lies on the shoulders of ruling party as it seemingly does not put any effort, whatsoever, to generate the required momentum to carry out parliamentary politics. The PPP leadership, during its last tenure, was committed to make the Parliament as the citadel of the country’s politics. The bringing of significant laurels during the period were the physical manifestations of the proficiency of the then parliamentary politics attributed to the leadership across the board that demonstrated remarkable vision and courage befitting the leadership of substance.
It may be heartening to share with the people that the PPP in all tabled (139) bills, out of theses 98% were adopted with consensus. So, that was the dividends of the politics of reconciliation and understanding that the leadership followed with sincerity and good intentions without malice to anyone. The restoration of the democratic, federal and parliamentary character of the Constitution was an uphill task that was not possible without bringing all the political parties on board. The consensus was the dire need to undo the legacies of the past dictators who mercilessly mutilated the democratic and federal character of the Constitution. The then PPP parliamentary leadership achieved that was unthinkable.
The people may recall that the incumbent prime minister held out an unwavering assurance, before assuming the coveted position, that if he was voted to power he would attend the Parliament session regularly without fail to respond to the Opposition criticism on his government’s performance during the question hour. But, after coming to power he seemingly has characteristically forgotten his words because he scarcely obliged the Parliament with his attendance. He did attend a few sessions of the House but preferred to leave the House without taking the questions to the frustration of the Opposition benches. It is rule of the thumb in parliamentary politics that the Leader of the House and the Leader of the Opposition make the functioning of the Parliament as per the aspirations of the people who have sent them there to represent them. But the step motherly treatment meted out to the Parliament and the Opposition benches by the treasury benches surely caused anger and frustration that was least desirable. The sessions of House are generally mired in exchange of barbs, use of incendiary words, and even came close to blow couple of times. These are common sights equating with the level of street fight causing embarrassment for the people and the country.
It is a matter of parliamentary record that former prime minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani never missed the session of the Parliament if in Pakistan. He would always ensure his presence in the House to answer the questions of the parliamentarians. His interaction with the members of the Opposition during the session and even after the session optimised the role of the Leader of House to promote better understanding on important national issues. This parliamentary style of politics as per the PPP policy guidelines resulted in epoch making legislation, starting from the 18th Amendment to 7th National Finance Award, amazing legislation for the protection and welfare of the minorities. Violence against women, both domestic and work place, was made a criminal offence. Numerous laws were enacted for the welfare of the working class. The enactment of amendments and laws during the PPP last government were significant milestones of the parliamentary politics those were brought about through ‘Consensus”. How exceptional.
muhammadshaheedi@yahoo.com
