An Islamabad-based think-tank this week issued its annual report on democracy in Pakistan, stressing that if the Army and its chief remain apolitical, it will prove a crucial first step toward elected governments and civil bureaucracy taking charge of their mandate in providing effective democratic governance to citizens.
Titled ‘A Depressing Year for Democracy,’ the 2022 State of Democracy report compiled by the Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency (PILDAT) laments that the past year had “exposed” the many tricks played with democracy “by the establishment in the past 70+ years in partnership with power-greedy politicians.” This, it said, had culminated in a confession by outgoing Army chief Gen. (retd.) Qamar Javed Bajwa that laid bare the “farce of democratic dispensation.”
While acknowledging that it was “too early” to form a firm opinion, PILDAT noted that thus far there seemed to be no evidence of the establishment’s involvement in political affairs following the retirement of Bajwa in November. “This policy of no-interference-in politics will not yield quick results but if the establishment stands by its commitment to stay aloof from politics, there is hope for long-term improvement in the state of democracy,” it added.
Describing the “painful state of affairs” in the past year as Pakistan “reaping the bitter fruits of years-old policy of establishment interfering in political affairs,” the think-tank said this policy had nearly paralyzed almost all institutions, including Parliament, political parties, judiciary and the bureaucracy. To reverse this, it advised, authorities must develop “zero tolerance” for unconstitutional acts from the very onset of 2023.
According to PILDAT, Pakistan under Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chief Imran Khan had gradually plunged into an “unspoken authoritarianism” with attacks on free media, divide-and-conquer tactics on social media and a political witch-hunt in the name of accountability. “It is difficult to argue whether personal proclivities of [Imran Khan] dominated his style of authoritarian governance or the hybrid governance model actively aided by the military in his support was the leading cause behind the governance malaise,” it said, noting that Khan had only started to blame the military for his style of governance after his ouster, when he publicly acknowledged that the military had supported him in passing federal budgets, passage of various laws by Parliament, and making constitutional appointments.
Noting the paradox of Khan’s ouster from power breaking the control of authoritarian power while also negatively affecting the continuity of democracy, it stressed that this was nonetheless done through a constitutional and democratic process of the vote of no-confidence against him. “However, it is also a reality of the power of military in Pakistan’s political process that Khan’s government ended just when the support of the Army was withdrawn,” it said, adding that ruling coalition could likewise not have assumed power without the support of the Army.
While Khan’s ouster reduced media curbs and relief from largely politically-engineered NAB cases, it still meant that citizens were robbed of their right to vote out a political leader and party. The PTI’s political fortunes, noted the think-tank, have benefitted from the political martyrdom associated with a truncated term, unleashing a new wave of populism and unprecedented polarization with “serious consequences for fledgling democracy and politics.”
According to PILDAT, the coalition government has had little positive impact on quality of democracy and governance in its 8 months in power. “While economic default is in no one’s interest, the coalition government’s management of an already beleaguered economy has given rise to loud and worrisome whispers on the likelihood of Pakistan’s economic default,” it said, pointing to the forced exit of Finance Minister Miftah Ismail within 5 months, which “adds little to the economic and political credibility of the PMLN compared to the PTI, which changed 4 finance ministers in 3 years and 8 months.”
The report also pointed out the irony in Gen. (retd.) Bajwa admitting in his last public address that the Army had realized its interference in politics has not been helpful. Noting that there was little factual basis to his public claim of the Army refraining from politics of Pakistan in the 21 months since February 2021, it highlighted his support to the PTI as well as over 40 interactions with foreign dignitaries in Pakistan and overseas that had no bearing on his role as the Chief of Army Staff. Even more ironic, it said, was the lack of constitutional clarity on what constitutes interference and the military’s constitutional role. Recalling the Army chief’s address, it said he had listed examples of the Army interfering in the domain of the civilian elected government while describing them as his successes.
“While the intent of successive services chiefs in entering into domain of federal government ministries would be to help the country, this help has rendered useless other arms of the state machinery constitutionally responsible for carrying out this job,” it said, stressing that the Constitution must be the basis of the Army’s commitment for non-interference in politics and the political process of Pakistan. Explaining that interference in politics is generally understood to mean the military favoring one or another political party and influencing the electoral process in their favor, PILDAT said this had been expanded to include judicial interference to facilitate judicial outcomes. “It is important to underscore, therefore, that while military’s interference in politics, political and the judicial process has gravely damaged democracy, military’s interference has also critically affected nearly every aspect of every-day governance,” it emphasized.
ECP and Assemblies
Despite the constitutional vote of no-confidence, said PILDAT, there was little to indicate that the National Assembly had strengthened democracy in Pakistan in 2022. Noting the “most bizarre political behavior” affecting democratic conduct, it referred to the actions of then-deputy speaker Qasim Suri as particularly unconstitutional. Similarly, it said, the Punjab Assembly had witnessed even more catastrophic and embarrassing behavior during the election of the chief minister, which could only take place as per the orders of the Lahore High Court.
However, it praised the conduct of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), noting its ruling in the prohibited funding case against the PTI, while lamenting the federal government’s inability to take the verdict to its logical conclusion. However, it said, courts’ interference in the working of the electoral body would have long-term huge and disastrous impact on the future prospects of holding free and fair election in Pakistan and raised questions over its future independence.
Supreme Court
On the conduct of the apex court, PILDAT said that while “glimpses” of it upholding the Constitution were witnessed through its ruling on the deputy speaker’s actions on April 7, its interpretation of Article 63-A of the Constitution was regrettable. It also questioned the court’s inability to agree on a clear appointment and elevation criteria for judges of the Supreme Court.
The PILDAT report also took to task President Arif Alvi, noting his refusal to take oath from Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and his federal cabinet was “quite unusual and political partisan.” Similarly, he refused to remove the Punjab governor on the prime minister’s advice, delayed the appointment of a new governor, and advised the Punjab governor against administering oath to a newly-elected chief minister. “This partisan approach continued for a while as the president also refused to give assent to two pieces of legislation,” it said, stressing that Article 48 of the Constitution binds the president to act in accordance with the advice of the cabinet or the prime minister.
The PILDAT report also outlined the renewed threat posed by populism, most clearly in the form of Imran Khan, who “uses religion at will and weaponizes its use for petty, personal benefits,” with a political strategy based on feeding the public with “fluff slogans and skin-deep notions.” The biggest threat from this, it stresses, was how populists attack all forms of check on democracy such as media, civil society, independence of courts, parliament and finally try to take “effective control of electoral administration” to ensure their re-election.
On local governments, the think-tank emphasized that resistance from Pakistan’s leading political parties to devolving power were tarnishing their own image and subverting the Constitution. In conclusion, it said there was little indication that leading political parties had prepped for elections due later this year, with a likely consequence of “last-minute manifestos” with little involvement of the party’s grassroots membership.