Dynamics of power

The writer is a lawyer based in Islamabad. He is a Rhodes scholar and has an LL.M from Harvard Law School

Pakistan's collective moral and ethical standards took a steep plunge last week. Asif Zardari perjured himself in front of the entire nation by reneging on firm promises that had been reduced to writing. This wasn't the first time either, but it was most significant. In view of Mr Zardari's history of dishonouring his word and commitment two separate agreements had been executed by the PML-N and PPP amidst serious trust deficit between the erstwhile coalition partners to ensure that the agreed upon decisions are abided by. And as a reward for his facility in deceit Mr Zardari was congratulated by the PPP and its political allies for outwitting the gullible and artless Sharifs and rewarded with the candidature for the office of the president of Pakistan.

The PPP-PML-N coalition broke down, as it should have. In a democratic dispensation it is natural for mainstream political parties to sit on treasury and opposition benches respectively. But given the molestation of the country and its institutions by Musharraf for over eight years, there was general agreement that the transition to democracy must be augmented by a national consensus on how to address the crises of constitutionalism, security and economy threatening this nation. Given the magnitude of the challenges that imperil Pakistan, a non-partisan collective effort of political forces was deemed imperative to address our multifaceted predicaments.

But partnerships are based on trust and fair rules of engagement. In view of the alacrity with which Mr Zardari desecrated his voluntarily assumed obligations after Musharraf's ouster is proof that the Murree Declaration, the Islamabad Communiqué and the agreements of August 5 and August 7 were all rooted in bad faith. How do you trust a man who has no qualms about – very simply put – lying? How can one respect a ruling political party that abides by a no-holds-barred ideology in politics and collectively conceives uncanny deals and deceit as political artistry? After suffering eight years of dictatorial rule does this nation deserve a 'democratic' dispensation so crooked that it loses respect for its own representative choices?

The odds are that breakup of the coalition will not cause skies to cave into Pakistan. But the cause for the breakup, the justifications meted out by the PPP for its leader's duplicity, and the acquiescence of smaller parties in such prevarication (especially those known for their candour such as the ANP) threatens the country with at least three deleterious consequences.

One, it will further nurture and proliferate a culture of chicanery, cronyism and unscrupulousness in Pakistani politics. Politics is a dirty game the world over. But there are limits to its decadence. And that limit generally is that politicians make concerted efforts to hide their muck and cunning tricks, for once such information is out in the public eye, there is accountability and unpalatable consequences.

The Zardari-led PPP is forcing politics of Pakistan to graduate to a new level of depravity where broken promises are not just perceived as an integral part of politics by the cynical but the PPP is formally justifying deceitful acts on grounds of expediency. Do Farzana Raja and Fauzia Wahab believe that while telling fibs on national TV with straight faces they sound any different from the court jesters of the Musharraf era? What is more depressing is that within months of Mr Zardari's takeover of the PPP, its entire squad seems to have been recast in the same mould.

What happened to the integrity, decency and ethical values of people like Raza Rabbani – to name someone who actually inspired hope till a few months back? In proposing Mr Zardari as a presidential candidate, does Senator Rabbani honestly believe that he is "sagacious, righteous and non-profligate and honest and ameen" and thus constitutionally qualified to be head of state? Is it a coincidental misfortune or a manifestation of our state of moral bankruptcy that no one in PPP's central executive committee – except Aitzaz Ahsan – had the courage to stand up to Mr Zardari and tell him that dishonouring one's word is wrong?

After breaking his promise and his word on the issue of restoration repeatedly, Mr Zardari still had the temerity to call into Capital Talk and yet again promise (hyphenated with multiple recitals of inshAllah) that all judges will be restored including Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry. And around the same time Mr Farouk Naik, the law minister, was explaining how CJ Chaudhry return will brew a constitutional crisis and is thus undesirable. Similarly the PPP's policy vis-à-vis the security situation in the tribal areas is a continuation of the US-sponsored Musharraf era policy. Yet Maulana Fazal-ur-Rehman has announced that the PPP has agreed to halt security operation in Bajaur and Swat, and reopen Jamia Faridia in Islamabad, and in turn JUI-F will vote for Zardari as president.

Do we not know that the PPP will diligently follow the US diktat in formulating its tribal policy? And such policy will be poles apart from JUI-F's declared approach to resolving our security conundrum? Yet both the PPP and JUI-F will continue their lies and shenanigans to dupe the nation so long as their unholy alliance serves their parochial party interests. Are we turning into a nation that has scant regard for credibility and an insatiable appetite for being lied around?

Two, the break-up of the coalition threatens to drag us back to 1989 that kicked-off a decade of flawed democracy characterised by acrimony between the two mainstream parties. Disagreement and dissent strengthen and improve democracies and political parties are meant to advocate alternative viewpoints and policies. Yet such differences and disagreements must be articulated and pursued in a civil manner and there must be broad consensus that even in politics, ends do not justify loathsome means. The PPP and PML-N were meant to part ways after they had stayed together for the minimum amount of time required to drag the country out of the woods. But such natural separation would have bid farewell to an era of political witch-hunts and also left enough goodwill to enable both parties to work together on crucial issues in a bi-partisan manner.

The sudden demise of their partnership due to the senior coalition partner's dishonest conduct has taken away that promise. It is in the interest of democracy and this country that both sides apply self-restraint while drawing their daggers. For example working on plans to rule Punjab through the governor's edicts would be disastrous, as would be any attempt to get the Sharifs declared ineligible to hold public office through PCO courts. In turn, the PML-N should not try to precipitate midterm polls in Punjab or encourage the military and other state agencies to intervene in politics and oust the PPP-led elected government.

An associated reprehensible impact of the coalition's demise is that it has brought the Q-league back into play. At a time when the sun could have set on the careers of some unscrupulous political players that have been the cause of much grief for this country, PPP's unconscionable attitude has dwarfed the difference between yesterday's Q-league and today's PPP and endowed the former with renewed bargaining ability. For if the logic of self-preservation can justify all misdeeds in politics today, how does one wag a finger at the Q-leaguers for bowing before the winds of power during the Musharraf era?

And finally, the coalition breakup, the Zardari presidency and a credibility-starved judiciary threaten to keep our constitutional system of separation of powers and associated mechanism of checks and balances in the present defunct mode. Going through the motions of balloting alone does not establish democracy. In strengthening democracy, as important as the exercise of free will to elect a representative is the ability to keep him accountable. And to that end the role of an independent judiciary can never be overestimated. Despite the return of representative form to Pakistan, our constitutional system of checks and balances remains paralysed and the substance of democratic empowerment eludes us. The argument in favour of Article 58(2)(b) has always been that it provides a safety valve for extraordinary situations. But the need for such an undemocratic measure arises only because our prophets of democracy, just like our dictators, are intent on keeping all pillars of the state other than the executive feeble and dependent.

The Zardari presidency will aggravate the existing imbalance within the state power structure. In the political realm he already has complete control over the soul and voice of the largest political party in Pakistan and the support of regional and ethnic parties that wish to partake in the haymaking while the sun shines. In the context of institutions, Mr Zardari is the executive. The parliament is proving itself to be as toothless as its predecessor and in any event a majority therein comprises political forces beholden to Mr Zardari. And the PPP has left no stone unturned to keep in place a judiciary as compromised as Mr Zardari himself: the restoration policy ensures that no deposed judge will be returned to his mantle unless he renounces his principled stand and moral high-ground.

The safety mechanism conceived by our constitution includes an independent judiciary that defends the constitution and uniformly applies the law without considerations of fear or favour, a free media that empowers people with the truth and an electoral process that enables citizens to hold public representatives accountable at regular intervals. Together they can nurture a political culture that reflects our social, ethical and moral values. Only by bringing back into play all components of this constitutional mechanism can we break free from the shackles of an elite drunk on power that puts this nation to shame.



Email: sattar@post.harvard.edu