Pakistan under Musharaf

Pakistan under Musharaf

Lecture by Prof. Kalim Bahadur
Conference Room no II, School of International Studies, JNU

Ever since Pakistan became independent 58 years ago, the country was under the direct military regime for more than half the time and the rest of the period it was under indirect military control. India as we know is and has been a flourishing democratic country with viable democratic set up. In contrast, Pakistan is struggling in itself to build its own secular stable democratic system.

It is important to note the development post II world war period, where in most of the newly independent countries could not build a viable democratic system of government. Be it in Africa, Latin America or in South Asia. It is also pertinent to ask as to why the military intervention in the political system is common in the third world countries? If we take the sum and substance of the various political systems in the third world countries, we come to a view that the military had intruded and dominated the political set up. Many scholars have written on ‘military intervention in politics’; notable among them are Samuel Huntington, Schlesinger and Hamsa Alvi. An intriguing question is why do some militaries dominate the state or continue to exercise considerable political influence while others have abstained from or terminated their political role?

The common theory is that where the democratic system is weak, the army is the only organized and cohesive structure that can modernize the society. There are others who argue that the problem of the legitimacy of the system, the control of the armed forces etc may also be responsible. In cases of tribal society, where there is a lack of democratic set up, military intervention is possible.

According to Hamsa Alvi, the third world countries do not fall in to the category of classical Marxist interpretation. The traditional Marxist conception is not right in many newly independent countries for the simple reason that they are above such classical interpretation.

It is imperative to note that in Muslim countries democracy is not or has not been successful. There are hardly three Muslim countries that are under democratic setup.

Type of Pakistani Society:

Pakistan is composed of provinces, such as Baluchistan, Sindh, NWFP and Punjab, which had tribal society than a middle class. Baluchistan is still a tribal society. So is NWFP. At that time, there was relatively strong middle class in East Pakistan. The influence of Pakistan Movement was not strong West Pakistan. In the 1946 election, Muslim League was not elected. In NWFP Congress government won.

When Pakistan came in to being, mostly the Indian migrant held the power Eg. Jinnah and Liaqut Ali Khan. It is only later the dominant Punjabi’s took the power in the Pakistan politics. There were general slogans on religious lines ‘ased on Islam’, ‘based on Quran’. No clear view on democracy and system of government was observed. This had possibly led to the rise of four military rulers in the history of Pakistan. In 1948, after the first of its four wars with India, Pakistan plunged into political instability, culminating in military rule dominated by Ayub Khan (1958), Yahya Khan (1969) , Zia-ul-Haq (1977), and more recently Musharraf (1999). This early militarization of Pakistani society shaped the Pakistani nation-state for the past 55 years.

For 50 years, the generals alternated with political leaders. Jinnah’s most prominent political successor, Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan, was assassinated in 1951 and was eventually followed by the rule of Generals Ayub Khan and Yahya Khan. Later, the populist Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, tried to impose an “Islamic socialist” regime that was neither religious nor leftist. The military hung him in 1979, leading to Zia ul-Haq’s 10-year interregnum, which ended in a still-mysterious 1988 plane crash. Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif then alternated as prime minister in the 1980s and 1990s. Nawaz overreached himself, and the military deposed him in another of Pakistan’s bloodless coups. It must be remembered that the earlier 3 coups were a result of a political crisis where as the recent military coup was not under any political crisis. This coup violated all the basic principles of the Pakistani constitution. There was no reason for Nawaz Sharif to get deposed by a coup. However, unlike other coups, the constitution was not abrogated, but it was suspended for a brief period. Also Martial law was not declared. Another interesting feature of this coup is that it did not ban any political parties.

This political instability also manifested itself in Pakistan’s failed efforts to establish a functioning constitution or hold regular and consequential elections. In 55 years, Pakistan has had three constitutions—created in 1956, 1962, and 1973—and in 1985 Zia ul-Haq fundamentally altered the constitution with his introduction of the Eighth Amendment establishing a president-dominated executive. Then, in 1998 Nawaz Sharif repealed this amendment. Musharraf and his military colleagues (backed by legal advisors skilled in such endeavors) appear ready to undertake a fresh attempt to create a new constitutional order. National elections in recent years were held in 1985, 1988, 1990, 1993, and 1997, but no elected Pakistani government has succeeded another in 55 years—all have been deposed by the military or dismissed by presidential fiat.

Dr. Kalim Bahadur then briefly outlined the parameters of his speech. He intended to examine the impact of Musharaf’s coup on the National Assembly, Political Parties and the Judiciary.

National Assembly:

On October 15, 1999, General Musharaf assumed the position of Chief Executive, declared a nation wide state of emergency and suspended the constitution, national assembly, the senate, the 4 provincial legislatures and all the political officials, except the President and the Judiciary.

In November 1999, Nawaz Sharif and six other senior officials (including Mohammed Shahbaz sharif, the brother of the ousted PM and the former Punjab CM) were arrested on the charges of criminal conspiracy and attemped murder in relation to the alleged refusal of landing rights to the commercial aircraft carrying Gen.Musharaf from Sri Lanka to Karachi on 12 October.

During early 2002 Musharaf reiterated his commitment to returning the country to democracy, beginning with the parliamentary elections scheduled for October. According to the 2002 Legal Framework Order and the 2003 17th Constitutional Amendment Act, the number of seats in the lower house of the Federal Legislature, called the National Assembly , was increased from 217 to 342. In this 60 seats were reserved for Women and 10 for non-muslims. Musharaf however insisted that a formal role for the military in governing the country was necessary to ensure a stable transition to democracy and to forestall a potential military coup.

Political Parties:

There are about 73 parties in Pakistan. However in the 2002 elections three alliances contested : the Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy (Chair: Makhdom Hashmi; includes the PML-N and PPPParliamentarians), the National Alliance ( Chair: Ghulam Jatoi; NPP, Sindh National Party, the National Awami Party) and the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (Chair: Qazi Hussain; Jamait-e-Islami Pakistan, JeUePak, JeUeI(S), JeUeI(F) etc). Surprisingly MMA won by securing 45 seats, PML(Q) won 77 seats. On 21 November the PML (Q) candidate Zafarullah Khan Jamali was elected PM by the National Assembly. Meanwhile Musharaf agreed to transfer power to the elected government, but emphasized that he would continue to carry out his ‘important role’.

Recently he announced that he would renounce his uniform. In exchange the MMA agreed the amendments the Pakistan military wanted. Finally after the amendments, Musharaf denied to renounce his uniform.

Judiciary:

Pakistan has a poor Judiciary record. Let me provide two points to strengthen my point.

1. In March 1996, the Supreme Court in Karachi ruled that the government no longer had the exclusive mandate to appoint judges to the higher courts; these appointments would, in future be required to have the consent of the Chief Justices of High Courts and the Chief Justice of Pakistan. This ruling aroused considerable controversy since it deprived the executive of substantial authority within the national judicial system.

2. In late Jan 2000, Gen Musharaf was accused of undemocratic conduct and of attempting to erode the independence of the judiciary when he dismissed the country’s Chief Justice, Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, together with 5 other judges of the Supreme Court, following their refusal to swear allegiance to the military regime under a new boat. In May Gen. Musharaf’s regime was strengthened by a unanimous decision by the pro-military Supreme Court to validate the October 1999 coup as having been necessary to spare the country from chaos and bankruptcy.

Future of Pakistan

The future of Pakistan lies in the strength of the public support, President Musharaf is wielding. As a saying goes, ‘ It is easy to mount a tiger ,but it is difficult to dismount it’, so is the politics of Pakistan. Even Musharaf is in a state of complex crux from which he is trying to come out safely, but the reality is that, he could not.