|
|
|
|
 |
 |
   |
The
democratic agenda federation ppp war on
terror economy governance image
Editorial There were serious concerns regarding Mr Asif Ali Zardari's candidature as president of the country. And these had nothing to do with his negative media image or NRO. These were only structural, nay commonsense, questions rightfully raised in the wake of this decision of the Co-chairperson Pakistan People's Party, who also happens to be the most powerful man in the country. Why, on earth, will a
man as powerful as him opt for a ceremonial office, because that is what
the With no clear answers to these questions coming from the party or the co-chairperson himself, should we be blamed if we start thinking that the Pakistan People's Party government is going for a systemic change in the country, in favour of a presidential system. Another commonsense view is that Mr Zardari was perhaps looking for personal immunity which no other office in Pakistan, least of all a prime minister's, offers. Presidents are eased out, even if utterly defamed, but never hand-cuffed or hanged, only threatened with impeachment but offered resignations instead. The commonsense view is clearly skeptical that Mr Zaradari as president will, indeed, enjoy that kind of immunity. Workers gate-crashing into the presidency may not be tolerated for long, is the commonsense view. To come back to the strong institutions that PPP has always been advocating. A lot of it vanished into thin air as the new president took oath from a chief justice who owes his office to an unconstitutional act of Nov 3, 2007. Days before this auspcious occasion, which followed every constitutional requirement we were told, the issue of restoration of judiciary was laid to rest after being mutilated in a manner worse than ever before. Independence of judiciary was more important than restoration, Nov 3 was perhaps not so unconstitutional, and institutional strength only meant the supremacy of the parliament over all other institutions and not alongside them. The strangest logic is being constantly fed through our television screens, in the name of democracy. Commonsense tells us this issue of restoration of judiciary is going to return and haunt all those who mishandled it. As for parliament, it is yet to be consulted on the most important issue of US attacks within the Pakistani territory, the most recent face of war on terror. We have tried to address these commonsense concerns in our Special Report today. This is the post-Zardari democratic agenda, though we do not necessarily favour the president as setting the agenda. The president may tell us as he did in the press conference that he will do as told by the parliament but the truth is exactly the opposite. So, whatever role he decides to acquire as president, he will certainly be in a position to give a direction to our polity. The democratic agenda should include the state of federation as a priority of the government. It should focus on the economy and the war on terror and not the least the party itself as well as the 'Zardari' image.
Considering Musharraf's legacy of polarisation, extremism, chaos and a cross-suspicious federation that he conjured in his position as the all-powerful president, Zardari must reverse the tide By Adnan Rehmat Asif Zardari -- after his landmark election as president -- is being cast as the focal person in Pakistan who can resolve all the country's myriad problems and set and roll out new national policies that will bring peace and prosperity. Not just all mainstream leaders in Pakistan want him to play alchemist, even key international leaders expect him to conjure up miracles and have made expressions of their intent to work with Zardari. Why should all these national and international leaders demand so much of Zardari? He commands no executive authority, has no powers to set policies and certainly does not head the government! This captures the heart of today's conundrum that is Pakistan -- a parliamentary democracy on paper but a presidential polity in practice. A hybrid system that pays lip service to people's empowerment while maintaining and nourishing autocracy by retaining incredible powers in persons. The implication of the constitution, as it stands today, thanks to the Eighth and Seventeenth amendments, practically nullifies popular will by concentrating godly powers in the hands of persons -- whether soldiers or civilians. No wonder while the hearts of Pakistani citizens want an accountable government elected by them to serve them, their minds remind them that it would be folly to ignore the presidency, which is the public face of the establishment and hence the fount of power. Accountability, Not Blame When Zardari walked into the presidency last week, it was but natural that he, not the prime minister and his cabinet, would be the focus of popular expectations. The government has been able to do nothing in six months except raise the prices of oil, gas and electricity and facilitating the attendant hike in prices of everything. Zardari has become president in the shadow of a near universal consensus that he will help undo the distortions in the constitution that has nourished a neither-fish-nor-foul system and left no one to hold accountable (both Shaukat Aziz and Pervez Musharraf have been let off scot-free) -- plenty of blame flying around for the state of the country but no one to hold accountable! Now that the Pakistan People's Party's remarkable comeback to power after 12 years in the political wilderness -- least because it came at the cost of Benazir Bhutto -- and of the meteoric rehabilitation and the rise and rise of Zardari is complete, the key question to ponder is: what will the new president do now that all his party's and personal scores, real and imagined, have been settled and democracy has 'avenged' dictatorship? The minimum consensus of all mainstream parties, including Nawaz Sharif's PML-N, Asfandyar Wali's ANP, Shujaat Hussain's PML-Q, Altaf Hussain's MQM, Fazlur Rehman's JUI, and outside the parliament Qazi Hussain Ahmed's JI, Imran Khan's TI and that of all nationalist parties in Balochistan and Sindh is that the sovereignty of parliament be re-established through, at a minimum, reverting to the spirit of the 1973 constitution. Even PPP itself professes this, its political struggle hinging on this movement. Obligation of the Presidency If this were to happen, policymaking, implementation and governance would fall into the domain of the government chosen by the parliament and leave the president with the larger task of representing and strengthening the federation. If this were to happen, Zardari would be doing justice to the obligation of the presidency. Is this what Zardari wants? Is he up to the task? There are no two ways about it: if Zardari's legacy is to be a stronger, united Pakistan with him for five years at the helm, not allegations of corruption and nepotism that refuse to go away, he must concentrate on a new 'PPP' -- the Presidency, the Parliament and the People's Party, not just the PPP he leads as a proxy Bhutto until Bilawal is old enough to relieve him of an admittedly historic task. Zardari's task is cut out -- heal a bruised federation. Concentrating on representing Pakistan abroad (rather than letting an elected government and an elected prime minister do it), holding regular meetings with his party colleagues (who happen to be in key government positions) and operating as a single-province president (Sindh), single-party president (PPP) and a single-family president (the Bhuttos) in apparent conflict of interest with his august position, is not the right way to go about it. Doing all this sends out the message that all government policies are being dictated by a president who, being the head of the ruling party, has stakes in giving precedence to PPP interests across the country. Hence Punjab, half of Pakistan by virtue of the number of its citizens, sees him with active suspicion despite the general sense of goodwill about him. Friend of the Federation Considering former military ruler Pervez Musharraf's legacy of polarisation, extremism, chaos and a cross-suspicious federation that he conjured in his position as the all-powerful president, Zardari must reverse the tide. For this he will have to remove structural imbalances in the power paradigm by voluntarily surrendering executive authority to the parliament to be exercised by the federal cabinet, leave policymaking and governance to the people and, as an active 'friend of the federation', assume charge of facilitating a dialogue and consensus amongst the stakeholders on issues that relate to equality, equity and fairplay for the federation. Since any government's default reflexes are likely to be in tune with the interests of parties in power, the position of the president is the guarantor of parliamentary sovereignty, judicial independence and equal rights for all citizens. To fit into this role, Zardari will have to do a number of things. For starters, he can restore the practice of beginning the parliamentary year by addressing the joint parliament every year. A one-time inaugural address, as is being planned now, will not do. The federating units need to be a visual part of the federal exercise of comity and amity. He needs to become a non-partisan facilitator of inter-provincial dialogue. The presidency should have no executive authority -- it should wield moral, not executive power. It should serve as a neutral platform for national issues. In a country of 170 million people, there will always be tens of millions of citizens whose favourite party will not be in power and the president could be the representative that bridges the gap in bipartisan representation and embody a national vision. Unlike Musharraf and his predecessor military rulers, Zardari should act as the 'Elder Number One', not the top policeman with executive powers. It's time to establish the presidency as a moral stronghold and save the federation. Agenda for President Zardari •Become a patron of the Council of Common Interests whose meetings need to be held at least twice a year without fail. Be its convener if not also a participant. Become the focal point that collects agenda items for CCI meetings and send meeting recommendations to the federal and provincial governments for feedback on desired outcomes and anticipated impacts •Become a guarantor of the rights of the federating units by chairing at least twice-a-year meetings with governors that can recommend measures (that serve as guideline 'nudges' rather than be mandatory) that promote fairplay on such thorny issues as distribution of national resources (the National Finance Commission Award), reduction and abolition of the concurrent list and can review the pace of development on these issues by the government •Promote the 'federal family feeling' by hosting an annual goodwill summit of chief ministers (as they can be from different parties and the prime minister from a different one and hence tensions can be an everyday reality). The summits can also be attended by the provincial governors, the speakers of provincial assemblies and leaders of opposition in the provincial legislatures, as well as the prime minister. The president can, thus, promote cohesion and fraternity by keeping everyone's focus on larger issues that otherwise get lost in the tedium of daily governance. The summit can serve as an annual effort to retain focus on core national issues and provide recommendations on policy corrections and rationalisations that can be presented before the parliament for debate •Generate a feeling of greater belonging and promote alternative ideas to resolve issues of common concern through parliament by hosting an annual meeting of leaders of parties represented in National Assembly and Senate. This can serve as a platform for offering alternative solutions and to officially acknowledge every province's right in expressing their opinions on issues that concern the federation. An additional session of the summit can be interaction between parties represented in parliament and those outside it -- those registered with Election Commission so that grievances aired need not be violent for want of a lack of forum where alternative views are acknowledged •Become a guarantor for future fairness of the electoral expression by strengthening the Election Commission and facilitating measures that will ensure independence and transparency of the exercise of adult franchise •Become a guarantor of professionalisation and modernisation of the armed forces as its commander-in-chief and, in keeping with Pakistan's experiences, ensure that there is no communication breakdown between the armed forces and the government and parliamentary sovereignty is not compromised •Set out larger federal issues for a national and provincial legislative debate, reform and development. With one issue each year, the president can propose five issues in five years (e.g., poverty, education, health, energy, technology/modernisation, terrorism/militancy, etc.) -- an annual invitation for parties represented in legislative assemblies to discuss and offer alternative solutions. Yearlong consultations amongst all stakeholders, led by national and provincial legislatures will build national consensus on national issues and turn up charters of reforms. -- Adnan Rehmat Although convention requires that the president of Pakistan -- being a symbol of the federation -- should be neutral and not represent any political party, Zardari is likely to retain both offices By Aoun Sahi In 2004, after his
release from prison, Asif Ali Zardari left for America -- away from his
family as well As per Benazir's will, Zardari was supposed to take her place. But instead he nominated his son, Bilawal, as the party chairman and chose to become PPP's co-chairman. While his 19-year-old went off to UK to complete his education, Zardari ended up becoming the most influential -- and powerful -- person in the party. It was Zardari who took all the important decisions -- post-Dec 27, 2007. And, so far, he has proved himself to be one sharp and clever politician who was able to lead PPP into the corridors of power. Zardari is the official head of the state now. His political opponents and even his friends are of the view that he should quit the office of the PPP co-chairmanship. Convention requires that the president of Pakistan, being a symbol of the federation, should be a neutral person and not be a representative of any political party. Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani also expressed the same views recently. However, well-placed sources within the PPP inform TNS that the party CEC (Central Executive Committee) is likely to allow Asif Zardari to retain both offices. Interestingly, PPP has always criticised former Musharraf for holding the official meetings of the PML-Q which, according to the PPP, was not becoming of the president of the country. PPP spokesman Farhatullah Babar maintains, "Though the Constitution is silent on the political neutrality of the President, the decision in Zardari's case will have to be discussed by the party CEC." Sources confide that PPP is not considering choosing its new leader. The name of Faryal Talpur, Asif Zardari's younger sibling, recently came up as a prospective party co-chairperson, but there are strong reservations (in the party) against her nomination. Her contribution to the party is being questioned, in addition to the fact that Faryal is not even a member of the party CEC. According to eminent PPP leader Makhdoom Amin Fahim, "No decision has so far been taken with regard to Asif Ali Zardari's quitting the office of the party co-chairmanship. It will be decided by the CEC." He was talking exclusively to TNS. Fahim was quick to add, "If the committee allows him to head the party as well as the State, it may not be good for the future of democracy in the country." After his swearing in, President Zardari has also reiterated the fact that (as president) he was subservient to the parliament. But so far he has not spilt the beans on the issue of the president's neutrality. Many PPP leaders believe that Zardari should carry on with both the offices as the nomination of any other leader for the party co-chairmanship could only lead to chaos. "The decision will be taken by the party CEC, but there is a strong feeling that Asif Zardari should remain the party head," says Chaudhry Ghulam Abbas, Secretary General, PPP, Punjab chapter. According to him, Zardari will not be the first person in Pakistan to hold the party office as well as the office of the president, "In the past, Muhammad Ali Jinnah had simultaneously kept the position of the president of Pakistan Muslim League and that of the governor general of the country. After him, President Ayub Khan also held the office of the president of Convention Muslim League while Zulfikar Ali Bhutto held both offices at the same time." But it is also a fact that in the past, PPP's Fazal Elahi Chaudhry and Farooq Khan Leghari both served as presidents after resigning from the party membership. Political pundits are already calling it the best time to strengthen the institutions. If PPP really means to restore the 1973 Constitution, the centre of power will have to be parliament and not the presidency. They think this is the time to raise the bar for the party -- beyond a listing of its martyrs and Sindh. The time is ripe for Zardari to resign from the office of the party and come up with an illustrated programme rather than depend on the legacy of the Bhuttos. "The party should not provide room to its political opponents to create problems for the government. Otherwise, given any excuse to restore stability in the country, the army will not flinch from ousting the new president." According to Ghulam Abbas, at present, Zardari is the only "undisputed person" in PPP who can run the party affairs smoothly. "It will not be easy for a new person to establish such a good working relationship within the party." Ghulam Abbas does not think that "a strong president" is a bad notion. "He has not usurped power; it is the people of Pakistan who have made him this powerful. Others should respect the mandate given to him." It's the parliament that will decide the fate of the 17th amendment, he says. Considering the composition of the National Assembly, it is unimaginable that the PPP would support the withdrawal of presidential powers to "weaken" their co-chairman. Noted political analyst Sohail Warraich believes that the powerful PPP co-chairman in presidency means system of governance in Pakistan is going to switch from the parliamentary form to the presidential form. "Asif Zardari should learn from history because the establishment cannot tolerate a strong civilian president -- for long. Mian Nawaf Sharif was also very powerful, back in 1999, when he was forced to leave. Therefore, it is most suitable that Zardari tries to empower the parliament as well as the party (PPP) rather than try to make himself the centre of all powers." He suggests that if All India Congress can find replacements of the Gandhis and the Nehrus, the PPP should also take a chance. "It is time to democratise the party." But Makhdoom Amin Fahim does not think that the party needs to reconsider its approach to run its affairs. "The party is already being run in a democratic way. We should give at least some time to Asif Zardari before commenting on the issue!"
It is going to be tight-rope walk for the President as he tries to take into account the US concern but also come up to the expectations of the Pakistani people suffering from host of problems By Rahimullah Yusufzai In the run-up to the
presidential election and even after Asif Ali Zardari's election as the
President This was the kind of hostile reception that Zardari received from the Americans, supposedly his backers, on becoming the President. And this single issue -- the so-called 'war on terror' and Pakistan's role in it as a somewhat reluctant ally of the US -- would haunt his presidency more than any other problem confronting Pakistan. Sections of the Pakistani press criticised President Zardari's performance in his first news conference in which he refused to condemn the recent US ground forces' raid in South Waziristan. He has time and again said he was aware of the danger posed by terrorism to Pakistan and the region, but was unwilling to criticise the US so soon after taking office as Pakistan's 12th President. Public opinion, however, is stridently anti-US in Pakistan and common people would have applauded if Zardari, widely perceived to be pro-America, had condemned the military operation in Pakistani territory by the US Special Forces. There have already been more than a dozen unilateral US military strikes in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) in 2008 compared to three only in 2007. Such has been the intensity of the cross-border US attacks that four took place in one month, i.e. August 2008. The intensification of these attacks made one think that there was now greater cross-border infiltration from Afghanistan into Pakistan rather than the other way round. The US and its allies, as we know, have been critical of Pakistan for its failure to stop infiltration of fighters across the Pak-Afghan border into Afghanistan. Now Pakistan is at the receiving end as cross-border infiltration is also taking place from the Afghan side. The most serious infiltration happened on Sep 4 when the US and, according to some reports, even the Afghan National Army troops crossed the Durand Line and conducted a military operation in the Pakistani village, Zolalai, near the border towns of Musa Neeka and Angoor Adda in South Waziristan. The US Special Forces were flown in two to three Chinook helicopters into Pakistani territory as jet-fighters and gunship helicopters gave air cover and then stormed three houses to fire at anyone in sight. Half an hour later, every inmate of those homes was killed or injured and the death toll totalled 17, all civilians and among them five women and four children. This was the first US ground forces' operation of its kind on Pakistani soil. In an earlier attack, about two years ago, a small number of US troops had landed near the Pakistani border village of Saidgi in North Waziristan, attacked a house to abduct a couple of Pakistanis and fly them to Afghanistan. The US Special Forces' raid in South Waziristan was without doubt due to the faulty intelligence but the Americans are not in the habit of admitting their mistake or apologising for killing innocent people. And, in dealing with Pakistan, the US has consistently justified its unilateral attacks in FATA by simply claiming that someone important in the al-Qaeda hierarchy was the target. In case of the latest attack as well, in South Waziristan, some Western media reports suggested that the al-Qaeda deputy leader Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri may have been the target of this botched attempt. This is not the first time that "reckless" attacks, the word used by Pakistan's Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani while condemning the unilateral US grounds forces assault in South Waziristan, were justified by claiming that an intelligence tip indicated Zawahiri's presence at the targetted place. The two missile strikes in recent years in Bajaur at Damadola and Chingai in which a total of 95 mostly religious students lost their lives were also meant to kill Zawahiri, even though there was no credible evidence that he was present there. It seems the US has decided to go for the kill with all its might without bothering about civilian casualties whenever there is 'actionable intelligence' about Osama bin Laden's or Zawahiri's presence anywhere in Afghanistan, Pakistan and beyond. It is another matter that all instances of 'actionable intelligence' until now have proved wrong or inadequate in getting some high-value target as Zawahiri. What choices does President Zardari have in these dire circumstances? He made a cautious start by refraining from criticising the US for repeatedly violating Pakistan's airspace and even sending ground troops to South Waziristan. To reassure the Americans and prove his credentials as someone committed to fighting terrorism, Zardari even got an article published in The Washington Post before the presidential election. In the piece, he pledged to combat terrorism at home and in the region and defeat the Taliban. One argument that he and his Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza Gilani never forget to make is that their leader Benazir Bhutto fell victim to terrorism and it was, therefore, their duty to fight terrorists. The original policy of the PPP-headed coalition government comprising the PML-N, ANP and JUI-F to resolve the conflict in NWFP and FATA through dialogue instead of the use of force is now in tatters. This government since the February 18 general elections has ordered fresh military operations in four places ranging from Bajaur to Darra Adamkhel and Hangu to Swat. The peace talks have all but ended and full-fledged military action is now underway. Such is the unpopularity of the US-led 'war on terror' that the ruling coalition under Zardari's leadership sometime back voluntarily gave authority to the Army chief to take decisions about launching military operations in the tribal areas. General Kayani has expressed his wish that the popularly-elected government should take ownership of the policy concerning the conflict in tribal areas but it seems the politicians are in no mood to handle this unpopular subject. All their talk during General Pervez Musharraf's rule about running an effective anti-terror policy with support from the people is now largely forgotten. President Zardari could also find himself at loggerheads with the military if he chooses to closely align with the US in the latter's 'war on terror'. Compared to his pro-US tilt evidenced in his recent utterances, General Kayani came down hard on the Americans a day after President Zardari's inauguration for intruding into Pakistani territory in South Waziristan. Using unusually strong language, he said his forces would not tolerate such incursions and would defend at all cost Pakistan's sovereignty. He made it clear that external forces would not be allowed to operate in Pakistan and denied the existence of any agreement or understanding allowing US-led coalition troops to conduct operations in Pakistani territory. General Kayani's statement came the day Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared that the US was looking for a more comprehensive strategy for the region that would cover both sides of the Pak-Afghan border. Last month, the two had met in the presence of their army commanders on the US aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln to discuss the security situation in the region. The intensity of the recent unilateral US military operations in Pakistani territory had given rise to speculation that the two sides may have agreed upon such strikes. By alluding to that meeting and strongly condemning the US attacks on Pakistan's soil, General Kayani not only dispelled those speculations but also set the limits of the cooperation between the armies of the two countries. The tone of General Kayani's statement would certainly have surprised the American government officials, who until recently had spoken highly of him and considered him a worthy successor to President General Musharraf, who remained a US favourite until he stepped down as Army chief in 2007 and lost the power to be of any service to Washington. General Kayani also made it clear that public support was necessary to finding a solution to the conflict and winning the war against extremism. It was obviously meant to remind the Americans that only military means cannot succeed in such a complex conflict. The US until now is in no mood to give up the military option. It was hoping that Benazir Bhutto and, after her assassination, Zardari as head of a popular political party would form a winning combination with General Musharraf, or in case of his downfall, his chosen successor, General Kayani. That may not happen in the changed circumstances. President Zardari, even if he wanted to, would not be able to do much in helping the Americans without taking the military and General Kayani on board. It is going to be tight-rope walk for the President as he tries to balance the equation and not only take into account US concerns but also come up to the expectations of the Pakistani people suffering from host of problems ranging from lawlessness, insecurity, inflation and unemployment. Instead of bringing in the much needed financial discipline, cutting down governmental expenditure, Zardari is tipped to follow in the footsteps of his predecessor and make the key financial decisions while the government under the PM is left doing the micro management By Nadeem Iqbal It seems Asif Ali Zardari has acquired all the powers of the former Army ruler Pervez Musharraf including being a trustworthy American ally, with the difference that the process which took him to the presidency was legitimate. Therefore, no change in the economic and foreign policies which are interlinked. The invitation of Afghan President Hamid Karzai to the oath-taking ceremony and later his joint press conference with President Zardari was a well-calculated move. In the press conference, nothing much was discussed about domestic politics. Either the questions were evaded or left unanswered. The intention was -- or so it seemed -- to send the message to the world that the government's commitment to the war on terror is unflinching and, hence, the government is going to have a much proactive approach in fighting terrorism and coordinating with the Afghan government. For Pakistanis, the message going out from the presidency is simple: the government will continue to depend on the US support to end the common man's financial woes. The main budgetary support is a result of Pakistan's support in the war on terror. Pakistan's immediate financial requirements are to the tune of US $8 billion to $10 billion. It has about $9 billion of reserves, enough to pay for two months' imports. The oil import bill, which surged to $11.38 billion or almost 30 percent of total imports of about $40 billion in 2007-08, was more than 55 percent higher than $7.33 billion a year ago, mainly because of higher international prices and increased consumption. The official recipe is to have two weekly holidays and closure of petrol pumps for one day in a week to reduce oil consumption. At the same time, the stock market has fallen to a 28-month low by registering over 42 percent decline since April 2008. In the process, the stock market capitalisation has almost halved to $39 billion from a peak in April because political instability has distracted the investors away. The budget deficit had increased to a record Rs777.2 billion or 7.4 percent of the GDP during 2007-08 that was met through the highest ever bank borrowing of Rs625 billion and over Rs75 billion cut in development expenditure. The most depressing feature was a massive reduction in revenue receipts that declined to 14.3 percent of GDP compared to 14.9 per cent in 2006-07, despite higher revenues in absolute terms. In contrast, the total expenditure in 2007-08 increased substantially to 21.7 percent compared to 19.2 percent the year before. But getting money from the US is crucial. Besides, it is a pragmatic approach as almost all the military dictators had longer stints in the office because of the American support -- from setting macro economic targets to providing staple food to the people. American blessings also mean multilateral and bilateral donors are opening their hearts to Pakistan. If this is done, the government does not need to have economic managers but bankers to maintain the accounts who, in turn, promote the consumer economy, which is beneficial to the corporate sector but does not ensure food for all. This is the result of Musharraf's economic policies that ultimately resulted in the worst food and energy crisis and the sky-rocketing inflation rate that has aggravated the already poor whose number is over 50 million. Instead of bringing in the much needed financial discipline, cutting down governmental expenditure, Zardari is all set to follow in the footsteps of his predecessor, making the key financial decisions while the government under the prime minister is doing the micro management. The PPP-led government began in the office with the criticism of the Musharraf policy of value-added development and announced that their stress would be on agriculture. Its economic packages for the poor are not new. These lopsided interventions were done by the PML-Q and previous caretaker government to no success. Increasing the support price of the crops such as wheat is not going to change the situation for good. Similarly, providing cheaper essential commodities in the utility stores does not cater to the needs of the common man. The six-month track record of the government shows that its approach is more reactive than proactive. It has not xet evolved a policy to rectify factors that are behind the financial crisis. The need is to have a new and competent team of financial advisors and not turn a makeshift finance minister into a high profile financial manager, and also to give the country its new economic policy with short, medium and long term target. The nation is fed up of the trickledown theory. Musharraf promoted the theory that the common man's suffering would be alleviated once macro economic targets are met. But ironically, at a time when GDP growth rate was on the higher level, poverty kept on increasing. And the common man has had to pay dearly for the mobile phone glamour and the corporate deception. It is only pertinent that the Zardari-led government ensures the people that they will get benefits of a resurrected economy. Relinquishing controversial powers is something President Zardari can do to further strengthen democracy and create a balance of power By Shahzada Irfan Ahmed The election of PPP co-chairperson Asif Ali Zardari as the president of Pakistan on Sep 6, 2008, has been termed an event leading to the completion of the democratic process in the country. After the holding of by and large fair elections in the country, formation of PPP government and the long awaited exit of Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf, it was the election of a new president through a purely democratic process that was needed the most. There is hardly any disagreement over the fact that these presidential elections were non-controversial and free of any undue influence exerted by undemocratic forces. The only influence on most of the members of the electoral college was that of Zardari himself. Having emerged as a phenomenally strong political figure after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto on Dec 27, 2008, he could easily humble the designs of his competitors. While Zardari has emerged as a strong president wielding unmatched powers, the demands from different quarters to create a balance between the powers of the president and the prime minister are getting louder and louder. The point raised by them is that full democracy would only be restored when all those constitutional changes or amendments which limit the sovereignty of the Parliament, especially Article 58-2 (b), are removed. Soon after his election as president, Zardari said, "I reiterate that the Parliament is sovereign and the president would be subservient to the house of the people's representatives." But at the same time he also said that it's up to the Parliament to curtail my powers as president." The fact that he has been passing on the responsibility to restore deposed judges to the same parliament in the past has disturbed his critics to a great extent. Whenever he gives a diplomatic answer like this the outcome is mostly opposite to what is desired. What if the parliament, comprising mostly his loyalists, decides in the favour of his retaining sweeping powers in the interest of democracy? The fears seem justified when seen in the context of Zardari's track record of renegading on major commitments over the last couple of months. For example, it was only three days after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto that Zardari had hinted at fielding Makhdoom Amin Fahim as PPP's prime ministerial candidate in case the party came to power. Similarly, he had said that the deposed judges would be restored through a simple National Assembly resolution within 30 days of the formation of the federal government. How far has he been able to fulfil this promise is everybody's knowledge. Despite these apprehensions, there are strong chances that he lets go of all the powers concentrated in the office of the president by the likes of Gen Zia and Musharraf to prolong their undemocratic rules. In fact, he does not need the powers like those of sending democratically elected governments home as it's his very own party that is in power. After Senate elections in March 2009, the PPP government is likely to become even stronger. Being the party co-chairperson and the man who took it (the party) to its present heights, Zardari can call his shots even if he parts with the phenomenal powers that he enjoys as President of Pakistan. However, he can have problems in the provinces like those involved in dealing with Punjab led by the PML-N government. But even this does not call for his retention of powers that enable him to exert influence through governors and tilt the game in his party's favour. A look at the country's political and constitutional history reveals that nothing else than a parliamentary form of government had been envisaged for its governance since its inception. It was Field Marshal Ayub Khan who replaced parliamentary democracy with the presidential system under the 1962 constitution. His entire political philosophy was based on the renunciation of parliamentary democracy as a "recipe for political instability, economic slowdown and disintegration of the country". Under the 1973 constitution, the prime minister again became powerful but General Zia introduced eighth amendment and usurped the powers to dismiss the parliament under Article 58-2(b), in 1985. It was Nawaz Sharif who tilted power in favour of the prime minister through 13th Constitutional Amendment in 1997 but General Musharraf undid this development in 2002 through the 17th Constitutional Amendment. Right now the president enjoys the constitutional powers to dissolve the assemblies and dismiss the government under Article 58-2 (b), appoint Services Chiefs, Chairman Joint Chief of Army Staff, the Provincial Governors, Attorney General of Pakistan, and Chairman National Security Council and head of the Command of Control System of the nuclear assets. He also has the power to grant pardon, reprieve and respite, and to remit, suspend or commute any sentence passed by any court, tribunal or other authority. It is hoped that President Zardari will relinquish the controversial powers previously used to blackmail democratically elected governments and empower the parliament is its true spirit. This is not difficult for him as in his own words he had no craving for the slot and only the "gravity of the situation" at the insistence of his party had led him to run for this office. Similarly, when Benazir Bhutto's will was read for the first time last year Zardari had told journalists that he was "not interested in any post". Another argument given in favour of the prime minister vis a vis president in this context is that the former is people's representative whereas the former (the president), according to the Constitution of Pakistan, is in the service of the country and gets the benefit of pension, unlike the prime minister, chief ministers and any other elected representative. He becomes ineligible to be a member of parliament for two years after his exit from the presidency precisely under the same rule as it applies to any other government servant. Therefore, a representative of the people should enjoy true powers and not the person who is in the service of Pakistan. But at the same it needs to be ensured that the president does not become a puppet after relinquishing his certain powers. His role should be that of an umpire during a crisis and for the rest of the time the prime minister and the cabinet must govern. After all, we have seen the rule of President Rafiq Tarar when the slot of the president was more of ceremonial in nature. Email: shahzada.irfan@gmail.com Just as with every person in the public eye, especially the politicians, his 'past' is apt to haunt Zardari Asif Ali Zardari has
long had a reputation. The polo-loving charmer of the 1980s was dubbed 'Mr
10 Just as with every person in the public eye, especially the politicians, his 'past' is apt to haunt Zardari. As he assumes the charge of the President of Pakistan, Zardari knows he has a slew of tough, pressing issues to deal with -- on home front, that is -- but he is also faced with the 'challenge' to redeem himself in the eyes of his detractors who aren't few anyway. Even though the Musharraf government dropped all corruption charges against him, through a National Reconciliation Order that was a direct result of yet another (American-backed) power-sharing deal with Benazir Bhutto, the public memory of stories of his dollar accounts in Swiss banks, his misusing the state money to build a polo ground at PM House in Islamabad, his alleged involvement in Murtaza murder case, and his lavish living in a posh Manhattan apartment hasn't faded into oblivion. It goes without saying that Zardari has taken office amid popular apprehensions. Reports of his post-prison, chronic psychiatric and physical conditions -- including dementia and a heart surgery -- have not helped him earn the sympathy of the general masses and improve his image -- not so far at least. Nor the fact that this 53-year-old, 'wannabe' statesman is now a single parent to three young children who have been traumatised by their mother's assassination. In a report printed recently, The Sunday Times correspondent Christina Lamb writes, "Pakistanis from Karachi to Khyber are scared that Zardari might use his new-found power to seek revenge of another form." She also quotes from Benazir Bhutto's autobiography, Daughter of the East, where the latter had described Zardari as "a friend's friend and an enemy's enemy". Even though he has a 'ghar ka' prime minister, a rather benign PML-N for an opposition, holding the President's court is not going to be a cakewalk for Zardari. And, certainly he cannot afford to repeat his mistakes -- not this time over.
|
|
1973 constitution envisages it as? A ceremonial office. Period. The
'balance of power' discourse is absent in the original 1973 constitution
because all powers are vested in the directly elected prime minister. So,
has Mr Zardari decided to be a president subservient to the parliament's
will and therefore the prime minister's? And if he has, a thought that
confounds imagination, how will he reconcile it with the party office that
he is holding. How will a country's president, with all the trappings of
protocol, lead and run the affairs of a party that belongs to the masses?
Hasn't Mr Zardari's candidature strengthened an institution that only
deserved to be weakened?
as politics, because (apparently) he needed medical treatment. No one
could predict that he was destined to return home -- only a couple of
years later -- and head the party that was orphaned by its tragically
killed leader, Benazir Bhutto.
of Pakistan, the US carried out unilateral military operations in South
Waziristan and North Waziristan without caring for its fallout on the
democratically-elected, PPP-led government. And soon after he was
administered oath of his new office, Washington announced that it's
revised strategy for the region included targetting the Pakistani safe
havens from which the militants allegedly operate and attack the Nato and
Afghan forces across the border in Afghanistan.
Percent' during his slain wife Benazir Bhutto's two, brief tenures as
prime minister because he (allegedly) demanded kickbacks on government
contracts. Zardari was also accused of money laundering and plotting the
killing of his brother-in-law, Murtaza Bhutto (unproven charges) and seen
as a political liability for Benazir. He ended up spending 11-odd years in
jail, before a deal -- brokered between Benazir and then-president
Musharraf -- famously saw him leave the country for good. Benazir's tragic
assassination at the close of last year brought Zardari back home and into
the limelight -- this time for all the 'right' reasons. He was now the
co-chairperson of Pakistan People's Party and headed for mainstream
politics -- big-time. Zardari took his worst detractors by surprise, the
shrewd way in which he held the reins of the party -- considered the
birthright of Bhutto dynasty -- and steered it through a period of shock
and mourning to a historic win in the Feb-18 election. What's more, he
inspired the party members to forge an alliance with traditional rivals --
the PML-N lot -- and accomplished the Herculean task of pushing Musharraf
to resign, thus winning over a lot of his critics who now hailed him for
his political acumen and feted him as the 'Kingmaker'. Although the
coalition came apart recently, following Nawaz League's growing distrust
in the PPP government on the long-standing issues of the restoration of
judiciary and the removal of 58-(2)b, Zardari clinched another 'victory'
when he got MQM and certain PML-Q dissidents on his side to vote for him
for the office of the President.