• Home
• Video
• Books by Ikram Sehgal
• About

A growing crisis The system in trouble

Seventeen years after July 5, 1977 it is easy to dismiss Martial Law as the brainchild of one ambitious general. Military rule came about because the democratic system failed to address its own shortcomings, thereafter circumstances created a domino effect that saw political power slip into the hands of soldiers much before the actual day of the military coup. It seems that while those at the helm of military affairs at that time seem to have been certainly nursing their own ambitions, professional soldiers down the line sincerely believed that the political polarisation would lead to civil war and a cooling-off period was necessary to prevent anarchy and bloodshed. The main reason why the late Dictator was able to carry the Army beyond the 90-day initial period was his promises that the entire system would be overhauled and accountability made an institutional part of the process so that the nation would not continue to be in peril in the future due to internal strife. In effect, the late Dictator played a confidence trick in fooling the Army into going along with his ambitions while repeatedly promising change in the system. By the time late Ziaul Haq inadvertently left the national stage in Aug 1988, he had not done anything to reform the system except tinker with it in order to perpetuate his rule. His only saving grace was to stand upto the Soviets in the decade long Afghan war. Over the years accountability became an endangered species along with a handful of honest, motivated persons dedicated to a truly democratic system. In the earlier Bhutto regime some such people were his closest aides like J A Rahim, Mairaj Mohammad Khan, Shaikh Rasheed, etc.

One may disagree with Ms Benazir on any number of counts but on one issue there is no disagreement, she has acted as a force-multiplier in the process of democratization in Pakistan. Though she would like to project otherwise her father short-circuited the system to perpetuate a democratic form of dictatorship on the pattern in vogue in the world of socialistic democracies of the 60s and 70s. As his closest advisors became disenchanted with him and his autocratic rule, the antipathy became mutual, till ultimately he became what he had set out to overcome, a dictator but in civilian clothing. There is a fallacy that dictators cannot be popular, in the mould of populist leaders like Zulfikar Ali Bhutto they certainly can be! Even late Ziaul Haq had his measure of mass popularity that continues after his death despite the aberration of martial rule. Having brought unfettered democracy to Pakistan, Ms Benazir Bhutto was fettered by the remnants of the forces that had emasculated democratic norm over the years. However, despite bad advice to the contrary, Ms Bhutto took the one very important step to sustain democracy by insisting upon and ensuring Press freedom. A free Press is necessary for safeguarding democracy because it provides a medium for accountability, that being the cornerstone for controlling excess of any kind. This freedom of the Press ensured that the Fourth Estate, more particularly the English language Press, gave Ms Bhutto massive support during the interim period in the cold and in the run-up to the 1993 Elections.

A chastened Ms Bhutto returned to the PM’s chair convinced that in order to ensure the success of her agenda she had to come to terms with the system. As much as she was a breath of fresh air in the stale atmosphere of repression when she took power in 1988, in 1993 she was burdened with too many IOUs to too many people of the wrong kind. In essence a non-conformist, she has looked ill at ease in having to compromise. Can we imagine the 1988 vintage Ms Bhutto compromising with the likes of Wile E Wattoo? At the same time, she hardly has any choice to pick her team. In the system that is presently prevalent, her options are limited to special interests of individuals in preference over “special interest groups” which by themselves are bad enough. Within her inner circle she certainly has professionals but they are too few in number to solve too many problems. In a Panel Interview to THE NATION recently she had to defend Shahid Hasan Khan and Ms Naheed Khan, when in fact both are assets to her. Belatedly, she also legalized the de-facto position of Hussain Haqqani as Secretary Information when she realized that though he was carrying all the information burden (and using his initiative anyway), he did not have the official authority which he needed to make GOP’s media policy effective. On the modus operandi of his old mentor late Ziaul Haq, former Secretary Information Dr Tanvir Ahmad had a roomful of pending files stored away. What is refreshing is that with the shedding of this retired bureaucrat, she has turned away from bureaucracy to form the core of her inner circle!

As brilliant or dedicated they may be, the dynamics of nations make it too vast a corporate complex to be successfully governed by a handful of burdened people. Necessarily this core has to be expanded and decision-making decentralized. In some cases it may not be necessary, eg. Sherpao’s NWFP where he is very much his own boss and political trouble-shooter rolled into one. However, the paucity of a competent and honest political executive cadre is very apparent in the PPP regime as it was in the Nawaz Sharif regime before her. On the other hand, both the political parties are overflowing with individuals who seem to think that the only reason they have been elected to office is to give the nation a chance to serve them rather than the other way around. There is a facelessness about the legislators’ greed that is sickening, instead of selflessness there is crass selfishness. The tragedy is that our present system is so geared that certain legislators are automatic choices for election rather than the dedicated and selfless political workers who are awash in all the political parties but cannot be elected because they lack a hard core in each constituency to give them at least a base of which will see them as good a chance as any to be “first past the post” with only 15-18% of the votes cast. Given such statistics, the party leaders turn to “electable” people, some of whom happily change sides at the drop of a hat. With such individuals in the make-up of the political system, so wonder the system is in deep trouble.

Our political leadership is afraid to take tough decisions concerning its own favourite individuals. Mian Nawaz Sharif’s call for the President to resign has doubtful credibility in the face of retaining Syed Ghous Ali Shah as President PML (N) Sindh. Thoroughly corrupt and incapable, Ghous Ali Shah has singlehandedly neutralized Mian Nawaz Sharif’s increasing popularity in Sindh. Despite pointed requests about replacing this gentleman, Mian Sahib seems to shy away from the process. Eventually this man will be replaced but at what cost. He exists as a constant reminder that the PML (N) is as comfortable as the PPP in allowing corrupt individuals to worm themselves into the upper reaches of the political hierarchy because they are “loyal”. This is a case of misplaced judgment in mutual loyalty. People should be promoted and appointed on merit and requirement, not to reward loyalty alone. There is a fallacy and misconception that if one fills every crucial post with loyal people, political security is ensured. What it really does is that it makes the effectiveness of crucial posts inconsistent. That in turn effects governance of the nation. On the other hand, promoting/appointing people on merit ensures loyalty to the system, that in turns almost guarantees political security.

Patronage has to be replaced with merit. Persons who have been upwardly mobile based on merit and suitability buffer the chief executive against nepotism and corruption. Honesty and integrity are the real qualities that will excite mass popularity. There are too many Ghous Ali Shah examples in Pakistan, they have corrupted the system and brought it to their knees. For Special Assistants, Mian Nawaz Sharif turned to sitting MNA Ch Nisar Ali and Mushahid Hussain. One echelon up, Senator Sartaj Aziz has been an invaluable asset to him, particularly because at least two are elected representatives. Hussain Haqqani, Shahid Hasan Khan and Ms Naheed Khan, have been effective executives, confident and decisive because they remained incorruptible, in a system full of political cronyism they could be more effective as elected legislators. The tragedy is that such people are few and far between, unless we change the mechanism to a more pragmatic form, the system will continue to bring such people to the fore only occasionally. There is an urgent need to revamp the process and develop a system that excludes the “professional” politicians but brings dedicated professional persons into the upper reaches of the political hierarchy. In theory the democratic system is meant to bring to the fore such persons who have the majority will of the people on their side, we have to implement this cardinal principle in letter and spirit. Unless such reforms are carried out in a systematic manner, the system will continue to be in trouble till a terminal breakdown occurs which would be detrimental to the continued integrity and survival of the nation.

Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.