Followers

Tuesday 17 May 2011

Democracy; A Pakistani Version

Democracy, if you are living in Pakistan, then you had heard this word many times from the politicians, anchor persons, civil society, lawyers and many others, I don’t know about others but I am damn sure our politicians(with exclusions) are not familiar with the actual concept of democracy.  There concept of democracy is to facilitate each others on there wrong doings for power sharing. Democracy should be addressed at the grass root level. Every political party in Pakistan have there own definitions of democracy, peoples party believes that power should be shared with all for limited time, so that we can enjoy power for five years. PML (N) understands that by showing week opposition in the houses and supporting the government through its all means, they are really playing a great role towards democratizing Pakistan; PML (Q) defines democracy as to be in power at any cost, with any means without any moral values. JUI wants partner of every govt. and needs three to four ministries, Jamat Islami thinks that the only agenda for democracy is to appose America at any cost and MQM needs power in Karachi and its adjacent localities to serve democracy in Pakistan at its best. 

Musharraf is considered and called a dictator in Pakistan by our politicians and our media, without out having or I should say without ample knowledge of democracy. According to the definitions of our political parties and politicians, Musharraf is a more democratic person than these so called democratic leaders. May be I am wrong, but in my own opinion Musharraf practiced best democracy in Pakistan than these. How? Let me explain…
The very generic definition of democracy is “Government of the people, for the people and by the people.The definition of democracy considered in Pakistan is Government of people having dual nationalities, for the people of there own caste and family to maximize there assets and by their family members to make a monarchy cum democracy. What kind of democracy is that? 

I have a particular question from PML (N) and PPP, Ch. Nisar Ali Khan and Makhdoom Amin Fahim; both are very senior politicians and representing their parties respectively. Could they become the party president or chairman in their life time? Have they carries enough courage to oppose the senior management on any issue? Is this democracy or Dictatorship? The dictator Musharraf, had given power to the gross root level through local governments. He empowers minorities and women in the country. He made a policy that there should be election process with in the party to choose the leadership. At least he tried to achieve democracy properly. And I must say that only Jamat Islami has an election process with in the party to choose its leadership, which should be admired.

If we recall the history for a while, Pakistan adopted the Govt. of India Act, 1935 with some changes as the interim Constitution, 1947. Unfortunately, Quaid-e-Azam Passed away early after the independence, he didn’t pay enough attention to democratization of Pakistan’s political system and it’s Parliament, because at early stages of a new born country; Quaid’s major focus was to ensure the survival of Pakistan from internal and external challenges. As we all Pakistanis know well; what were the circumstances at the time of independence. 

Pakistan inherited institutional imbalance right after the time of independence, bureaucracy {at that time Indian Civil Service (ICS)} and military were more organized and developed as compared to the political parties. All India Muslim League was the biggest party of the country, which led the independence movement successfully, but after separation, Muslim League was directionless, many of its senior leaders are at the other part of the region. The political decay and political derivation of Muslim League starts soon after separation. A huge percentage of Muslim League Leaders had feudal background and were motivated by feudal system rather than organizing the party for a direction and political awareness for the nation.
Besides this there are so many variations among different thoughts, direct democracy and indirect democracy are the two major methods for the democracy, furthermore there are a lot of changes and variations among different people and regions. If a state picks up any successful model implemented at any part of the world, with out customization to its local needs and traditions, model will definitely fail. Pakistan should use the blend of direct and indirect democracy; Direct in form of effective and efficient local governments and indirect in form of Parliament.

As far as Pakistan is concerned, I have some suggestions, 1) there should be a party elections for choosing the party leaders. 2) If a person wins from a particular area, there should be an accountability procedure for him, means after wining he hasn’t concern with the desires and wishes of the people of the said constituency, he should have to take the vote of confidence every year from the people of that area as well. 3) A person who has a dual nationality should be declared ineligible for the election process. 4) If a person or his immediate family has foreign assets, he will also disqualify from the election. 5) Local Government procedure should be adopted again for power sharing and involving people in decision making. 6) The role of state ministers should be eliminated from the cabinet and number of cabinet should also be reduced. 7) There is a huge need of think tanks, in this regard, every university should create a think tank which contains bright students and faculty members, who may take the review about the performance of ministries and ministers quarterly and the minister should have to clear the doubts and reservations of the think tanks. 

Now, I want suggestions from your side that how we can make best practices through proper democracy.

35 comments:

  1. I think you forget the one more real meaning of democracy that is exchange of heating argumets on their democarcy agenda for the welfare of peoples in front of screen and after the show they shows their unity for democracy in a buffet night at the dinner tables.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Can you explain the modlaities of confidence vote?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agreed,,and plz write your name with your comment

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree on blending of local values to democratic system, and no country in the world has purist form of democracy!

    And the postpartum of the parties democracy flavors discussed contains the real crux of this article. Without having democratic values inside the party cannot yield democratic leaders and values as well, so agreed on party election.

    The frequent bulldozing of parliament by military have also contributed alot to the present state of democratic system. So by the norms of the nature, everything in this world goes through evolution, and this did not happen to democracy in Pakistan. Had we had continues process of democracy, we might be discussing something else.

    I am in strong support of local government system, without good and working local government, we cannot have functional parliament.

    I disagree with point 3 and 4, we should not put restrictions on person having dual nationality and possessing foreign assets but there should be strong check and balance system. If someone having dual nationality and assets abroad with good education and experience and wants to give back to the country, he should not be penalized but rewarded instead, by giving him a fair chance.

    And I think its good to indulge youth in the country's socio-political environment. However, universities think tank should not be overseeing authority on our parliament but just to give their opinions and let each institution do their work.

    As a whole i think its good effort and hope you'll not mind blunt criticism.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I really appreciate your feedback, but I strongly disagree with your comment regarding dual nationalities,,,if a person wants to contribute towards his country,,first he must be loyal to the country by leaving the other nationality.

    ReplyDelete
  6. :)
    uper sa guzar giya,hehehehehe

    ReplyDelete
  7. Still waiting reply

    ReplyDelete
  8. Models are simple,,,I mean when a person had been elected from a particular constituency,,he never returned to his people for their problems. the people of the constituency has the right to re-choose the person if they think that the previous man hasn't represent them honestly.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Agreed but which procedure will be followed for re-choosing other person whether it will be the re-election process or else?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Definitely it will be through elections, or if this model is approved. we can make more precised procedure for it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. good effort to describe the democracy and its imprtance... political parties have the same attitude which u explained.. musharaf did the good things e.g the devolution of power.. but we consider all of his good acts as wrong becoz he came ibto regime in an illegitimate way by toppling the democratic govt of nawaz sharif at that time.. any way keep it

    ReplyDelete
  12. Ashar, i am very happy ,,,u are taking a critical view of all happenings in Pakistan

    ReplyDelete
  13. I am really happy with present democracy situation. Pakistan Khappay !!!! Geo Zardari

    ReplyDelete
  14. lun bhenchod

    ReplyDelete
  15. Why do people think we don’t have democracy, when we have held elections, have representative governments at the centre and in the provinces, and Pervez Musharraf is no longer our president?

    The answer we get is in the form of more questions, about everything that is wrong with our society, policies, education, the economy etc. People ask: what has really changed; is this government not following the same policies as its predecessor; don’t the same people get elected every time elections are held; is it democracy when the same ruling families return to power again and again?

    There are other questions, too, that raise doubts about the relevance of democracy to the socio-economic conditions of Pakistan. Some literate urbanites wonder in their conversations about democracy how a poor and illiterate population can make sensible decisions in the electoral process. They ask: is this why the same lot is elected again and again; why aren’t the poor or even the middle class represented in the provincial and national assemblies?

    These are the kind of questions that we need to discuss and debate as we reflect on the quality of democracy in our country, so that we can make it better by putting greater effort into our democratic project. Interestingly, the people who raise doubts about the quality of democracy would not welcome dictatorship, they also don’t believe there is a better alternative to democracy.

    Let us address some of these doubts and questions. But before that, some general remarks about democracy:

    First, democracy in its simplest and basic form is about giving people the right to elect their government. Second, through this system, the aim is to create stability and certainty in society by establishing a system under which a government can be created and changed peacefully. Third, public approval of a political party to form government gives it political legitimacy and social support to manage public affairs, and formulate and implement policies. At the centre of this system is the idea of fundamental rights, political equality and individual freedoms.

    These are some of the underlying assumptions about the goodness of democracy and its relevance to all cultures and civilisations. Why, then, do some societies have democracy and others don’t; why is it that the quality of democracy in some countries is better than others; and why are some societies better candidates for a transition to democracy?

    The answers to these questions lie in the history of political development in a society, the nature of its elites and the political consensus among them, and how long democracy, even it its procedural, basic form, has been practiced.pakistan khappay.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Please first disclose your name, and you have good ideas, but after reading your comment, I understands u are also confused about democracy.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Nice Asad

    I hope Its very good but need is to Concentration on this topic by all political partners and members too.

    I wish u again for nice look

    Regards
    Abdul Salam
    Sr Wash Officer

    ReplyDelete
  18. History has shown us experimenting with various different forms of government, with none of them being successful. The primary cause of failure of democracy in Pakistan is that democratically elected governments have not been allowed to function and to serve out their tenures, which in turn leads to a lack of strong democratic institutions. Another cause may be low literacy rates amongst the masses. However, given that the situation will not change dramatically in the near future, we should also analyze another important factor that contributes to the failure of democracy, that being the parliamentary form of government.

    Under a parliamentary form of government, the masses vote for their representatives, who are then elected to the various provincial and the national assemblies. The parliamentarians from the majority party then nominate an individual, usually the party leader, as the leader of the house in the assembly. The nomination of these individuals is then ratified by a simple majority vote in the assembly and then they are elected Prime Minister and Chief Ministers. The respective chief ministers and the Prime Minister have the authority to appoint ministers to their respective cabinets from within the elected members of the different houses. A non-elected member may also be appointed a minister or even a Chief or Prime Minister, but he/she will have to get elected to the assembly within a specified period of time in order to maintain his/her position. The Prime Minister essentially appoints the President.

    The major issue with the parliamentary form of government is that even though the Prime Minister is the Chief Executive of the country, a President who is appointed by the Prime Minister is the official Head of State. The same holds true of the provincial governors. Hence we see that even though the President and the Governors are heads of the country and the provinces, they are appointed and not elected. At the same time the people do not directly elect the Prime Minister who is the Chief Executive, either. A fallacy here is that a President who is appointed by the Prime Minister or a Governor who is appointed by a Chief Minister can throw them out of office and can unilaterally dissolve the elected assemblies. Another problem that comes up is the power sharing between the troika of the President, the Prime Minister and the Chief of Army Staff, thereby lending credence to the maxim "Too many cooks spoil the broth".


    In the case of Pakistan we see that most political parties have no manifestos and in many cases the elected representatives routinely switch political parties, depending on which side their bread is buttered. At the same time the public votes for Bhutto’s party or Nawaz Sharif’s party and in the absence of a clear manifesto, the success or failure of a party depends upon the charisma of its leader or the individual influence of the candidates.

    Looking at the above analysis, why should we not revisit the issue of the form of government for Pakistan? In my opinion, the presidential form of government is a truer form of democracy and is more suited to the Pakistan environment rather than the parliamentary form, which is not only cumbersome but also very expensive.
    PAKISTAN KHAPPAY ZARDARI SUB PAY BHARI

    ReplyDelete
  19. I really Appreciate your comments,,,,,I also suggest presidential system with some necessary modification according to the need of Pakistan.....the important point in the system which we are lacking currently,,,,A system for accountability,,,,,Without this,,,,believe me,,,,we will not succeed,,,and develop our democratic system....again wonderful comments from ur side,,,plz disclose your name,,,if u like

    ReplyDelete
  20. one more thing If u read my previous article with title BEWAKOOF KON? that will also suggest Zardari sab pe bhari

    ReplyDelete
  21. I didn't recognize you,,,,but its good atleast girls are also taking interest in Pakistan and its politics........

    ReplyDelete
  22. Pakistan is faced with multi-dimensional threats pregnant with ominous repercussions. Most worrisome is also the fact that there is no political leader on the horizon who can steer the country out of the quagmire. We hear big time rhetoric but no action that can even remotely match that rhetoric. Nothing seems to be moving in the right direction so as to give hope to the 180 million downtrodden but extremely patriotic people of Pakistan. An incoherent parliamentary system of governance is in place which is truly neither parliamentary nor presidential and the ensuing political instability in the country is actually a result of this confusion and our obstinate persistent efforts aimed at making an unworkable system of governance work for Pakistan – an exercise that will always be in futility. Its time for Pakistan to have a directly elected ruler (President) around which the rest of the system must be laid out – more in line with the US model with all its effective checks and balances. What we have at present is absolutely rotten and no one will ever be able to make it work efficiently.

    The much trumpeted so-called democratic process of the post Musharraf era has made no difference at all because it was never meant or designed to make the difference that the people of Pakistan had unsuspectingly expected. Too much had been manipulated over the heads of the people of Pakistan by exceptionally powerful international and national political players with the then incumbent President Musharraf who, at that time, ruled Pakistan as his fiefdom. These manipulations and compromises have let Pakistan down once more and its people have been left marooned on an island of deprivations and hopelessness.

    ReplyDelete
  23. brilliant post Asad, but i agree with wat huma is upto....her arguments are quite logical

    ReplyDelete
  24. Thanks
    huma Urooj

    ReplyDelete
  25. Asad we are waiting for some more exciting posts from you.
    fazal karim

    ReplyDelete
  26. yes i am also waiting
    majid malik

    ReplyDelete
  27. Thanks all for nice comments,,,,but plz disclose ur name in the comment....and fazal Karim its really amazing to get you on board after a long time.....I am posting a new one today,,,,plz read.

    ReplyDelete
  28. miss you
    Fazal Karim

    ReplyDelete
  29. Good Job!

    Emran

    ReplyDelete
  30. Society has to change, but the political powers we have at the moment are not enough to effect this change. The whole democratic system would have to be rethought,..


    (Hina Faiz)

    ReplyDelete