|
|
|
|
Dr. Sohail Mahmood
GOOD GOVERNNACE ISSUES AND THE MUSHARRAF REGIME: AN ANALYSIS
The Musharraf regime faces serious governance challenges. The first major external challenge is the globalization of the world economy and the accompanied shifts. The trend is occurring partly because of the reduction in communications and transport costs in recent decades. Globalization has increased capital flows and trade worldwide. Some developing countries that opened their economies appropriately have been successful in achieving prosperity in less time. Since 1990, capital flows to developing countries have increased six-fold, according to the World Bank. This development have been linked with another important global change – a paradigm shift towards development of a global knowledge economy. The two coupled are perhaps the single most significant change of our times. We are living in an era that is characterized by rapid change due to various technological, economic and social changes. Countries have jumped from poverty to world economic power in a single generation. Technological advances in telecommunication and computers proliferate in an ever-increasing stride. Great changes have come about as a massive transformation of the global economy is taking place right before eyes. History is being squeezed as never before, so to speak. Rapid development of telecommunications and global trade has created a global economy of truly staggering proportions. Markets have gone global lately. Unquestionably, on a diversity of dimensions, the world economy has become far more integrated in the past few decades than it used to be. Trade is one such measure. International transactions in equities and bonds and daily turnover on the foreign-exchange market have both risen at an amazing rate over the past 20 years. It is now a well-known fact that daily turnover on the currency markets frequently surpasses the global stocks of official foreign-exchange reserves. The issue is whether central banks can any more influence exchange rates by buying and selling currency in the markets. Flows of foreign direct investment have also risen swiftly, although nothing like as rapidly as transactions in securities and currency. The World Economic Survey notes that the demand of economics shape both culture and politics. It argued that perhaps the nation state have come to a turning point. In future, the need for communication and mobility between economies shall gain importance. This need shall create an increasingly homogenous global culture that in turn will promote economic integration and gradually fog the political frontiers between countries.
The future trend of regionalization is sure to grow. Countries are coming together in an integrating their economies to achieve economies of scale and other advantages. A successful experiment is unfolding in front of our eyes in the shape of European Unions. North America is coming together under the umbrella of NAFTA. It is speculated that a new form of arrangement should be made at the regional level. Instead of normal competition, countries seek various options through which they share resources and join hands in countless ways. Supranational institutions are in the making. At times, it is referred to as “government by cartel”. The World Economic Survey argued that states are “pooling power in order to retain and increase it, in just the same way that a firm in a cartel gives up the freedoms to sell all it can in order to gain share in the group’s fatter monopoly profits. So far the state’s freedom of actions have barely been touched by the global market; should it become more circumscribed, expect more rule by cartel”.
There are other profound changes taking place worth mentioning. Technological advances in telecommunication and computers proliferate in an ever-increasing stride. Great changes have come about as a massive transformation of the global economy is taking place right before eyes. History is being squeezed as never before, so to speak. Surely, a new industrial revolution is under way. Advances in computer technology and telecommunications are moving rapidly on, eroding national boundaries, shrinking distances and extending the domain of the global economy. Increasingly, this reconstruction is rendering states as “mere servants of international markets”. These technological changes are also bringing about “a transformation in the realm of ideas, starting towards the end of the 1970s and reaching its climax ten years later with the collapse of communism. That destroyed the system not only in the form practiced in communist countries but, more important for those in the West who never experienced it directly, as a sustaining Utopian myth. Judged as propaganda, 1989 did for big government what 1929 did for laisser-faire”. There is an on-going debate about “globalization”. Is it a good thing or a bad thing? Do we embrace it or resist it? However, every one agrees that international market forces have indeed emerged as powerful. Rapid development of telecommunications and global trade has created a global economy of truly staggering proportions. The World Bank’s recent report entitled Entering the 21st Century: World Development Report 1999/2000: Summary says:
The second major external challenge faced by Pakistan is the democratization wave sweeping the developing world. People everywhere are demanding a greater share in power than ever before.
A good method to achieve it is through decentralization and devolution mechanisms. Empowering of local government is a global trend. They have been empowered in many countries in Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East and Africa. Europe and North America already have a tradition of decentralized structures in many countries. The question to be asked is why is this happening. The issue of decentralization and devolution has attracted considerable attention lately. Out of seventy-five developing countries that have a population of more than five million, sixty-three developing countries are engaged in decentralization. What is wrong with highly centralized systems? Centralized systems fail because of a number of factors. First, the problem faced is that of low response by the people. The government activity has been directed from above rather than from demand below. It is common that the local people reject these gifts from the central government simply because they have not been involved in the decision-making process and therefore do not feel that they own these projects. Second, officials employed by the federal government lack knowledge about local problems and needs. They do not understand differences in local needs and conditions because the knowledge happens to be thinly distributed across the entire community is not available to the central planning agency. Even the greatest central planning agency can not decide whether, in a particular local village case, improving the irrigation system or expanding schooling is more significant at a specific time. Only the local government can decide these things. The report Entering the 21st Century: World Development Report 1999/2000: Summary maintains that all but a few democracies have decentralized political power. It further adds:
The Musharraf regime faces fundamental internal governance challenges, including demand for public accountability, a weak economy, failed political system, dysfunctional public services and a problematic development agenda.
1. Public accountability
The Musharraf regime promised to tackle the problem of corruption in Pakistan on a war footing. Soon after it came to power last October it established a very powerful agency- the National Accountability Bureau (NAB). The NAB’s first head was General Amjad, a serving Lt. General of the Army. He had a reputation of great honesty, integrity and commitment to serve the nation. The current head is Lt. General Khalid Maqbool; another serving Lt. General of the Army. According to international financial institutions, total size of stuck-up loans, including all the public, private and commercial banks, was Rs208 billion (about $4 billion) in end 2000. The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) has recovered about Rs 28 billion so far. Many see this as a good start. The Musharraf regime promised to identify a few big tax evaders, corrupt officers, and give them exemplary punishment. Critics also point out that the current workload of NAB includes cases against only politicians, businesspersons, and bureaucrats. No military official or member of the higher judiciary, serving or retired, has yet been apprehended by NAB. Why? By playing favorites, the NAB seems to have lost credibility in popular perception. People think that every corrupt individual, including the military top brass and judiciary, should be hauled up in the accountability net. There should no exceptions whatsoever. The universal norm of justice and fair play demand it. In addition, Islam is adamant that all be treated equally under the law and that every criminal, regardless of his position in society, be punished. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) declared that he would even punish his own daughter if she were to commit a crime. The noble examples of justice set by the Khulafah-i-Rashidun are also a part of the Muslim legacy. Under Islamic tradition, absolutely no one can be spared of a punishment for a committed crime. It seems that NAB has finally bowed under relentless public criticism of even-handedness in the accountability drive. It has decided to investigate several shadowy defense deals involving retired military chiefs. The period under investigation is from 1985 up to the October 1999 military coup. Sources disclosed that the defense ministry entered into defense deals worth six billion dollars in the last ten years. Some of the deals are shadowy and involved kickbacks worth at least one billion dollars. It has been alleged that millions of dollars has been paid in illegal commissions to secure these defense contracts.
Recently, in a dramatic development Nawaz Sharif and his family left
for exile in Saudi Arabia in mid December. The nation is shocked by the
news and there is uproar in the country. In his televised address to the
nation December 20, 2000 General Musharraf, while defending his decision,
said that Nawaz Sharif’s exile is not a panic reaction but a deliberate
decision taken by him in what he believes is the national interest. The
decision and demonstrated tolerance and moderation, Extreme action did
not disclose the d details of the deal saying that there is a degree of
confidentiality in any deal of such kind. General Musharraf assures that
the accountability process on as before. He has agreed to the request of
the Saudi monarchy to move the country beyond politics of revenge. Because
of introduction of money in politics and all the national institutions
are corrupted. He said that the entire Muslim bloc and Western countries
have appreciated the decision. Life and 14 years of imprisonment for Nawaz
Sharif have been converted into ten years exile. Sharif paid millions of
dollars in fine, and many of his assets are forfeited. The Sharif family
shall have to pay all the loans and defaults against their names. Several
hundreds of millions are to be collected by the state from the Nawaz Sharif.
Many viewed the exile as a blessing in disguise for the nation. Others
are adamant that it is nothing but a sell-out of the nation. Meanwhile,
General Musharraf seemingly has lost the goodwill that greeted him earlier
because of the exile of Nawaz Sharif. Notwithstanding all regime clarifications,
the recent release of Nawaz Sharif has seriously eroded the credibility
of the General’s promise to eradicate corruption in the country. This is
an obvious setback to NAB’s effort. Public accountability is essential
for maintaining public confidence in governance, justifying state activities
and ensuring the overall legitimacy of the state. An individual performs
best in an organizational culture that is rewarding, and fair. It is possible
to make systematic improvements by pursuing a practical strategy to improve
integrity and accountability in the public service. In sum, the overall
performance of the military regime in this vital area has been less than
spectacular.
The primary components of the economic crisis in the country’s economy are described as economic slowdown, rising debt, and fiscal deficit. Since independence, Pakistan has achieved substantial economic growth averaging about 5% annually. The country has shown impressive economic improvement from 1976-77 to 1986-87. Per capita income grew by an average of 3.46% per annum and the total GNP grew by an average of 6.50% per annum during the same period. However, Pakistan is not included in the World Bank’s category of “Highest-Growth Economies” which included countries like Thailand, South Korea, China, Singapore, Chile and Malaysia. All these countries have a GNP per capita growth rate of at least 5.7% during the period 1985-1993. The growth rate in the last five years or so has been uneven. In 1995-96 real GDP growth rates at constant factor cost is a healthy 6.8%, in 1996-97 it decreased to only 1.9%, in 1997-98 it increased to 4.3%, in 1998-99 it again decreased to 3.1%. The target for 1999-2000 is 5%. However, the actual growth rate last year is 4.8%. The current year’s target is 5%.
Pakistan is faced with a serious debt crisis. The total external debt of Pakistan is now 54% of GDP. Pakistan is caught in a vicious debt quagmire from where there seems little hope of escape. The 1999-2000 budget total expenditure outlay is Rs526 billion out of which Rs287 billion went for debt servicing alone. Thus, nearly 56% of the budget is going to debt servicing. Luckily, debt-servicing payments declined from $4.7 billion in 1997-98 to $2.6 billion in 1998-99. The significant decline is due to the re-scheduling of payments of $2.89 billion by December 13, 1999. This is part of an exceptional financial arrangement, which Pakistan have negotiated with the IMF in January 1999. It have been decided by the Paris Club creditors to re-schedule $3 billion to give Pakistan some breathing space till end of December 2000. Pakistan’s financing gap in 1999-2000 has been estimated as $5.4 billion, which have been fully covered by these exceptional financing arrangements. Meanwhile, the country is facing possible default by the end of 2000. The IMF bailed out Pakistan through a $ 596 million facility package. The breather qualified Pakistan to secure loans from other multilateral agencies such as the Asian Development Bank and a rescheduling of loans of about $1.6 billion from the London Club, which is due in February 2001. The MF set strict conditionality for its assistance. The GoP has agreed to the following IMF conditionality:
In fiscal 1999-2000, total revenue receipts are projected at Rs 356 billion only. Against this, debt servicing and defense respectively swallowed up Rs 287 billion and Rs 142 billion. The total adds up to Rs 429 billion. Revenue fell short by Rs 73 billion in funding just these two expenditures. Meeting other expenditures like running the government and development meant further public debts. However, the previous government has pledged to reduce the budget deficit. In order to reduce the budget deficit further, the Musharraf regime will have to raise additional billions in taxes.
The budgetary deficit as percentage of GDP is 3.3% in 1999-2000 slightly down from 3.4% in 1998-99. The deficit have been a high of 5.6% of GDP in 1997-98, and still higher 6.4% in 1996-97. The tax to GDP ratio has remained stagnant in the range of 11 to 14% over the last two decades, which needs to be improved. Added together, debt servicing and defense expenditures exceed Pakistan’s total national income. The current ratio of tax to the GDP ratio is low at 15%. This ratio is one of the lowest in the developing world. The tax/GDP ratio in similar developing countries, as regards the stage of development, is 18-20. Tax revenues in 1996-1997 are Rs268 billion; in 1997-1998, they increased to Rs286 billion, and further increased to Rs380 billion in 1998-99. In 1999-200, they increased to a further Rs351.6 billion. The tax revenue target for current year is Rs536.7 billion, a large increase of Rs84 billion from last fiscal year.
The Musharraf regime has pledged to reduce the budget deficit. What shall be Pakistan’s stance as regards deficit financing? We recommend that the budget deficit should be reduced to 4% as plan and that it further reduced to zero in the next five or six years. The Musharraf regime should specify a timetable. A balanced budget makes economic sense and is an Islamic obligation. Islam teaches us to live within means. One cannot spend more than what one earned. What goes for an individual goes for the nation too. The GOP aimed to reduce the size of the fiscal deficit by reducing public sector expenditures and simultaneously increasing revenues. What Pakistan needs to do is to borrow less, increase its own resources, and distribute them in a more equitable and rational manner. We ardently believe in this approach. It is expected that the Musharraf regime to increase spending on the social sector without which Pakistan is doomed. The crisis and economic slowdown is acknowledged by the new Musharraf regime. Shaukat Aziz, Finance Minister has recently said that there is “no easy exit from the existing economic quagmire”. The Musharraf regime quickly announced a broad-based economic revival strategy to tackle the fundamental problems. It is determined to move swiftly ahead at reforming the political economy. The question is why have Pakistan’s economic performance remained poor. What is the reason for the slow growth? Most importantly, why have the state failed to deliver? The answer is complex and beyond the scope of the essay. However, policy makers agreed on a number of primary reasons: political instability, poor governance, corruption, lack of consistent state policies, and chance. As Pakistan’s population is rapidly increasing, it must increase the economic growth rate just to stay at the same level. Failing to do so will further increase poverty in the country.
The fundamentals of Pakistan’s economy are very weak. Consider:
The federation of Pakistan comprised of four provinces: Punjab, Sindh, NWFP and Baluchistan. The federal design signified division of powers between a national government and constituent units. Such a division is given in the constitution. Governors are appointed by the central government but served as figureheads only. Local governments are constituted by elected Provincial Assemblies and headed by Chief Ministers. There are also tribal areas administered by the federal government, like FATA and FANA, and the NWFP provincial government. Responsibility for the subjects of health, labor, education, agriculture, social welfare, industry and roads is entrusted to the provinces. However, principal power resides with the central government, which is headed by a premier. The head of state is the President, who is elected for a renewable, five-year term jointly by an Electoral College composed of the National Assembly, Senate and the four provincial assemblies. The presidency is originally a titular post, but following the famous Eighth Amendment of March 1985, the office holder is given authority to dissolve the National Assembly, and appoint and dismiss the Prime Minister, the cabinet and provincial governors. The president, therefore, emerged as a dominant political figure. Later, the comparative significance of the office is eroded due to the last constitutional amendments. Toady, the president is a mere figurehead as the military rules the country.
The federal legislature consisted of a Lower House, the National Assembly, and an upper chamber, the Senate. The National Assembly have 207 members, directly elected for five-year terms by universal adult suffrage; in addition, 20 women chosen by the National Assembly and 10 separately elected religious minority members. The Senate has 87 members, elected a third at a time, for six-year terms by provincial assemblies, and tribal areas, in accordance with a quota system. The National Assembly is the more powerful of the two chambers, having exclusive jurisdiction over financial affairs. To become law, bills must be passed by both chambers and must be approved by the President, who has the power of veto. The presidential veto can be overridden by a simple majority of both houses. The chief of government is the Prime Minister, drawn from the National Assembly. Benazir Bhutto held, until nearly the very end of her tenure, additional portfolios of defense and finance. Similarly, Nawaz Sharif also has additional portfolios.
Federation
The highest tier of government is the federation. At the federal level, the administrative machinery mainly comprises of the ministries, divisions and directorates. A Minister heads a ministry while a Secretary heads a division. There are currently 35 divisions in the federal government. Apart from the regular federal departments, there are a number of and statutory bodies like the Election Commission, AGPR, Wafaqi Muhtasib (Ombudsman), State Bank of Pakistan, Federal Public Service Commission, etc.; autonomous agencies like AGPR, PAEC, WAPDA; state corporations like PTCL, SNGPL, PIA, NFC, OGDC, PIDC, PMDC, Utility Stores Corporation, etc.
The total number of federal employees, according to the 1996 census, is 662,000, which is 23% of total government employment. The total number of employees in the federal corporations is 424,073, which is 15% of total government employment. The grand total of public sector employees is 2.7 million. It is commonly argued that the crisis of governance mainly stems from centralization of power in the federal government.
Provinces
The second tier of government is the province. The Governor is the constitutional head of the province and is appointed by the central government. A provincial government is constituted by the elected Provincial Assemblies and headed by Governors. Today, the Governors acted as the chief executive of the administrative machinery. Primarily the Governors and the provincial cabinet conduct the government policy-making in a province. The setup is the counterpart of the federal government at the provincial level.
To facilitate the administrative work, the provinces have been divided into 20 divisions and then sub-divided into 106 districts. A Commissioner heads each division while a Deputy Commissioner heads each district. Perhaps the single most important administrative unit in the country is the district. The Deputy Commissioner, as head of the district, holds powers of the district magistrate and is responsible for revenue collection, coordination, protocol, law, and order. The provincial departments, e.g. communication, education, health, agriculture, irrigation, etc. are controlled by their respective heads called Secretaries, reporting to their respective Ministers. The setup is the counterpart of the federal government at second level. The total number of provincial employees, according to the 1996 census, is 1.7 million, which is 61% of total government employment.
In the provinces, the Local Government and Rural Development Department (LG &RDD) together with the elected institutions form the local government system. The LG & RDD have been involved in technical functions of planning, contracting, supervision, and monitoring of development schemes. Serving as an executive branch of the local government the department oversees the operation of the local councils. Under the ordinance, the local government members are prohibited to contest national elections. The ordinance provides direct elections of the Chairman of all councils for a term of four years, and limits the role of the councils to non-political local governance and rural development. The union council is the lowest tier, with membership elected based on universal adult franchise. The Chairman is elected by majority vote of the members and received a monthly honorarium from the government.
Local Government
The third tier of government is extremely weak. The Musharraf regime has suspended the few existing local governments in the country. However, they are increasingly being seen as vital for Pakistan’s democratization, sustainable development and empowerment of the people. It has to be rebuilt after a lapse of several years. The Musharraf regime is in the process of creating a strong third tier in the country. The first phase of local government elections are successfully held in December 2000. The Local governments shall be in place by August this year.
The restructuring of the system of government is the need of the hour. Pakistan needed a better administrative setup to fulfill the demands of sustainable development for the benefit of the people.
Before the coup in October 1999, Pakistan has witnessed an unprecedented period of internal strife, lawlessness, high crime rates, and bad governance at lower levels. What are the problems in Pakistan’s political system and why? Pakistan moved from a parliamentary system to a presidential one and then finally reverted to the original parliamentary system. Unfortunately for Pakistan, Jinnah died in 1948 and his chief lieutenant Liaqat Ali Khan soon after in 1951. Thus, the PML lost its most capable leaders. The succeeding party leadership did not have the stature or the capability of the earlier party leaders. The party floundered as a result. The first parliamentary period stretching from 1947-1958 is conspicuous for a musical-chair of sorts in the national capital where a number of successive governments came and went. Political instability and the weakening of the PML marked the period. In 1958, General Ayub seized power through a bloodless coup. Later, he used the PML as a prop to his regime. He is to rule until 1969 when he abdicated in favor of the Army chief, General Yahya Kahn. The Yahya interregnum lasted until December 1971 when the rulers are forced to resign having lost East Pakistan and the humiliation of over 90,000 Pakistani troops having to surrender to the Indian military. East Pakistan seceded to become Bangladesh. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto took power in January 1972 right after the debacle in East Pakistan. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto has once served in Ayub Khan’s cabinet as his foreign minister but has left him to establish his own party in 1967. Bhutto’s PPP swept the polls in West Pakistan in the first general elections of 1970. Bhutto is a gifted populist who introduced a new people’s style of politics in the country. In the beginning, he is immensely popular with the people and his socialist vision is a great hope of the country’s impoverished masses. However, Bhutto is not able to deliver as per expectations of the people. He turned dictator from populist and even abandoned the left orientation of his PPP. General elections are held in March 1977 the results of which are contested by the Pakistan National Alliance – an electoral alliance of nine parties opposed to the PPP – which resulted in violent protests. Bhutto clamped down hard. Finally, General Zia ousted him on July 5, 1977. He is executed two years later. Once again, the PML is used by the military regime to legitimize its rule. After the party-less general elections of December 1985, General Zia chose a PML leader – Junejo – to become his premier. General Zia ousted Junejo in July 1988. Zia himself died in August 1988 in a mysterious airplane crash. Meanwhile, the ISSI have cultivated a young Punjabi executive – Nawaz Sharif – to enter the political fray under the mantle of the PML. Nawaz Sharif has served briefly as a finance minister in General Jiliani’s cabinet in Punjab during the Zia era. General elections are held in November 1988, which are won by the Pakistan People's Party (PPP), and Benazir Bhutto became chief executive. Earlier, Benazir have successfully taken over the leadership of her father’s party. She was seen to be a new style politician - progressive and a reformer. Benazir is the first women chief executive of a Muslim country. The people expected Benazir to lead Pakistan into a new era of economic progress and social and cultural modernity. She failed to deliver, however. In turn, Nawaz Sharif became chief minister of Punjab. President Ghulam Ishaq Khan dismissed Benazir on corruption charges in 1990. General elections are again held in which the IJI – an election coalition dominated by the PML - won power. Nawaz Sharif became chief executive for the first time in 1990 but is dismissed in 1992. After winning the general elections, Benazir replaced him as chief executive in 1993. President Farooq Ahmed Legahri dismissed her in November 1996. This wais the second time Benazir have been dismissed on identical charges of corruption. This time it is all the more ironic because Legahri is her choice as President. He has earlier served the PPP as its secretary general. Elections are again held and PML came back to power in February 1997. By now Pakistan’s multi-party system have moved towards a two-party system composed of the PML and PPP. The two parties have emerged as the biggest political forces in the country and the two main rival contenders of power. The two-party system failed to deliver, however. Finally, General Musharraf ousted the Nawaz Sharif Government in a bloodless coup on October 12, 1999. After more than a thirteen-year stint of frail democracy from 1985-1999, the military have returned to power. Today Pakistan’s major external challenges are globalization of the world economy, and decentralization wave. Internal challenges include: sagging economy, poverty, dysfunctional political system, and the issue of devolution, weak federal system and inefficient and ineffective public services.
Whatever the form of government the country is governed in a highly centralized manner. Some name it the vice regal system as understood in the colonial British Raj era. Pakistan has a federal and parliamentary system of government. The last constitution adopted in 1973 created this system. There have been significant changes since then. Since the death of General Zia in August 1988, the country has had four governments because of four general elections based on adult suffrage. Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif have taken turns at running the government. Pakistan’s constitution has been amended several times for the benefit of only the rulers. The country has suffered because of misrule. Pakistan has been weakened from within. The situation have become very complex, to say the least. During this democratic era, spanning at least eleven years of civilian government has failed to deliver. Matters have grown worse with time. The Pakistani state is malfunctioning. Many will point out that poor governance is the primary reason of this malfunction. Undoubtedly, the country has faced a crisis of governance. The military regime’s task of solving them is indeed very daunting. The people have suffered because of the shortcomings of the political system. Apparently, there is a deep desire and longing for a real change. Given the past grave failures of all governments in our history, the Musharraf regime is still being given the benefit of the doubt. We need to understand that though the two- party has failed to deliver yet the institution of political party-system cannot and should not be discarded. It is agreed that politicians and also political parties do not command the respect they might otherwise have commanded in circumstances that are more positive. Nevertheless, it does not make any sense to throw out the baby with the bathwater. The regime must understand that the political party system is an institution needing urgent repairs. The task is formidable for any one. By their very nature, political parties are tedious to build. The sooner we begin the better for the country. Strong political parties are seen as essential institutions in any modern democracy. Next time around, let us such parties compete against each other in a more sophisticated manner. The question is that can we afford to wait until they are built and then call for general elections. Obviously, building strong political leadership and political parties will take years not months. What is to be done? The regime must do its best in the time allocated to it. Meaning hold elections as plan and then gracefully pull out. Remember there are no great saviors or “a great general on horseback” any more. Men who always knew everything or can do everything better. Given the complexity of the age, a single leader cannot lead the nation to triumph. No single person can even understand the complexity, let alone have a solution for it. For modern societies, the concentration of power in one person or an uncontrolled elite is extremely dangerous. Since wrong decisions are more probable. Therefore, we urge the military regime to restore democracy in Pakistan sooner than its stipulated three-year period. In the eventually Pakistan shall progress better under an Islamic democratic system. Why has General Musharraf decided not to allow participation of political parties in the forthcoming local government elections? No satisfactory explanation has been given as yet. Exclusion of political parties from the election process is a very big mistake. The country shall suffer from it. Remember that political parties are crucial to the whole exercise of building true democracy through a “bottom-up” strategy. They cannot and should not be ignored. Political parties are useful mechanisms for the practical conduct of democracy. They fulfill essential functions to promote democracy in the nation. They recruit; mobilize public opinion for their cause. Parties educate public opinion and provide venues for its systematic orchestration. Most importantly, political parties provide platforms where serious discussion about political matters takes place and a consensus policy arrived at. Remember conflict in politics is inherent. The question is whether ideological conflict waged by political parties is any worse than conflict based on ethnic, tribal, biradari, or other loyalties. The regime be warned that local government elections conducted on non-political basis will further fan the worst forms of ethnic and biradari conflicts in the country. The country cannot afford such a situation from building up. Therefore, it will be more prudent to allow political parties to participate in the coming elections. One of the primary reasons for the failure of the democratic experiment in Pakistan can be attributed to the failure of its political parties. We need to rectify this shortcoming. What better place to begin than the Local Government. Pakistan badly needs strong political parties that can deliver what they promised. Today Pakistan has a very weak political party system. Political parties, with very few exceptions, are undemocratic establishments with personalistic politics being the norm. Leadership is not chosen in democratic fashion nor is internal democracy practiced in any significant manner. There is mere lip service to democracy. Once in power they acted with authoritarian impulses and weakening internal democracy even further. Moreover, patronage politics and massive corruption in party ranks have eroded popular faith in the party system itself. Most seriously, parties in power have failed to deliver according to the expectations of the people, including their own ranks. Thus, politicians have political parties generally do not command the respect they might otherwise have commanded in circumstances that are more positive. Enforce democratic norms in all political parties. In fact, very few political parties are democratic internally. When there is no meaningful practice inside the parties, then how can we expect them to behave in democratic fashion once in power? They should be required by law to practice what they preach. At the minimum, we must forbid parties that do not practice what they preach. These must be suspect and therefore shunned. That is also an Islamic dictum. The irony is that all the major political parties in the country, PPP and PML included, are bereft of internal democracy. The contradiction in what they said and did is apparent. Hence, the failure to deliver any meaningful democracy. Let all our parties be required to practice democratic values in their operation. It should be required that all political parties elect their party leadership in yearly elections. In addition, the elections should be held in a fair and transparent manner. The example of Quaid-i-Azam is before us. He being a true democrat insisted in contesting the post of president of the Muslim League as per constitutional requirements of the party. This is even when the nation have reposed in his person their complete and unflinching loyalty and support. To him these internal elections are the essence of democratic behavior. We must today emulate his examples. His spirit at building a disciplined party machine needs to be recreated once again. The spirit of working g for a great and noble cause must be rekindled. Let us join hands to build strong parties and thereby build strong institutions for the nation. Let our parties slowly and surely build democratic norms and values in themselves. Let them become the vehicles of the required transformation. Only then, will they be allowed to contest general elections. Otherwise, law will forbid them. It be understood clearly that strong vibrant political operates are crucial to putting the democratic experiment back on track. Again, the sooner we begin the better for us all. In the previous democratic era, the two parties other than the PML and PPP that counted are the MQM and ANP. The MQM represented the Muhajirs of urban Sindh, especially Karachi and Hyderabad. The Muhajirs are the Urdu-speaking migrants who found themselves outside the primary four ethnic divisions – Punjabi, Pathan, Baluch, and Sindhi – of Pakistan. They perceived that Muhajirs are being denied political space in Sindh. Their political sensitivities are later exaggerated into full-blown ethnic nationalism and a demand for a separate province for the Muhajirs. Successive governments employed violence to contain the increasingly violent demonstrations of the MQM. The military and the para-military are used to curb MQM’s violent politics and “terrorism”. Several hundred have been killed over the years. The polarization between Muhajirs and non-Muhajirs (Sindhi and Punjabi) has not been gulfed. However, MQM has lost its support because of its violent tendencies. Plus, Altaf Hussein, the leader of the MQM has been in exile in Britain for several years. Resultantly, his hold on the party has weakened. The ANP is the successor of the earlier NAP that has once ruled the NWFP during the Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto era. It is led by Wali Khan son of Badshah Khan who has gained fame for his populist politics and the “red shirt” movement before Partition. Wali Khan’s NAP is a left-of-the center political party that has a stronghold in Mardan, Charsadda districts in NWFP. Currently, Asfander Wali is leading the party. He is the son of Wali Khan. The party has supported the renaming of the NWFP to Puktunkhwa after the term Pakhtuns, another name for Pathan. The renaming of the province is a controversial issue and is opposed by the mainstream political parties and also the non-Pakhtuns in the NWFP itself. For example, the people of the southern Hazara district do not agree to the re-naming of the province to Puktunkhwa. They felt discriminated against in the northern Pathan areas. Currently, the party received a blow when its leadership is involved in corruption cases pursued by the Musharraf regime. Both MQM and ANP have suffered politically for various reasons. The heyday of ethnic politics in Pakistan seems to be over. A new chapter is opening in the country’s history. The Musharraf regime is going to promote a new style of politics in the country. It envisioned a clean political system as earlier corruption has weakened it considerably. It can be safely predicted that the above-mentioned political parties will suffer setback in the next general elections because they have been discredited for various reasons. At the cost of both PML and PPP other political parties shall gain ground. Today, political parties worth mentioning are:
The Jamaat has consistently advocated the cause of Islamic “revolution” in Pakistan. It believes that the whole Islamic world is a single Ummah united by religion. There is no separation between politics and religion in Islam. It has been consistent in its demand that the Shariah (Islamic law) is the guiding framework for all activity, economic and political. An Islamic “revolution” is legitimate but within the framework of the political system. The Islamic movement will usher into an Islamic state through disciplined activism. The movement will gradually take over the state apparatuses when the party itself comes into power.
Allama Tahir ul Qadri founded Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) a few years back. Tahir ul Qadri have an academic background in law and about a decade ago he established the Minhaj ul-Quran Islamic Institute in Lahore focused on Quranic Studies. Today there are several Minhaj ul Quran branches in the country. Qadri has written several books on Islamic subjects. Later, Qadri have ventured into politics by establishing the Pakistan Awami Tehreek. The PAT relied on the earlier religious network established for launching its political activity. It is a small but well organized political party.
Pakistan needs to discard the present parliamentary system and move towards a presidential system, as it is definitely closer to our Islamic legacy. It is much better suited for Pakistan than the Westminster parliamentary system. There is no need of a fragmentation of power at the highest level in the shape of a head of state and head of government, as is the case in a parliamentary system. Today we have both a chief executive (Musharraf) and president (Tarar), which is unnecessary. In a parliamentary system, the executive and legislature are fused, which sometimes gives rise to an extraordinarily powerful chief executive. Only a presidential system with a system of check-and-balances can end abuse of executive power. In addition, Islam does not allow an institutionalized Opposition in the current style of parliamentary practice. The whole nation, according to the Quran, must be united to build and serve a strong Islamic Ummah. Every Muslim is part of the “Hizb Allah”. Obviously, there cannot be an institutionalized Opposition to the Emir ul-Momineen. This does not mean that Islam condones dictatorship. Far from it. The rulers are themselves subject to the confines and checks of the Shariah and the Islamic legal tradition, in the same way as ordinary people. As everyone jointly struggles to establish the Islamic State, there is no purpose left for an institutionalized Opposition? An alternate government or a government-in-the-waiting is not necessary in Islam. Here the judiciary acts as the primary check on the executive as the Shariah remains supreme over the State. This does not mean cleric rule, however. The Shariah is to be duly embodied in the country’s Constitution, laws, and governance. The rule of law is a fundamental principle of the Islamic state and its supreme manifestation can only be through an independent judiciary. A new system needs to be formulated though the revision of the 1973 Constitution. The people desire that the military regime further Islamize Pakistan’s political system by putting it under a strong permanent foundation.
The Musharraf regime must open a new chapter in the country’s history by stopping the military Intelligence services, especially the ISSI, from playing godfather. The country has suffered enough already from its intrigues and manipulations. Promote a new style of politics in the country through a clean political system as earlier corruption has weakened it considerably. Let the people decide whom they trust with leadership of the country. Do not second-guess the choice of the people.
There is a need to improve the country’s electoral system by undertaking the following reforms. The electoral system is faulty and needs to be improved. The country must discard the current FPTP system in favor of the majoritarian system where only a person acquiring a majority (above fifty percent). Most important, it should ensure that the coming elections are held to be fair by both the contestants and the public at large. Public perceptions matter a great deal. Therefore, be very cautious and take all the necessary precautions that the elections are perceived as fair. In addition, it should ensure that the voter turnout is reasonable. The very credibility of the regime is at stake here. Reports in the press point to little enthusiasm in the public for the coming elections. More efforts need to be undertaken soon. The military regime simply cannot afford to botch up this election affair.
Initiate devolution of powers to the provinces immediately recently, the NRB commenced on the second phase of its task that pertains to provincial autonomy. There is no right formula for granting autonomy to the provinces only a correct method is followed. Provinces should be granted greater autonomy that must necessarily take place in a gradual and phased manner only after careful deliberation. This exercise can happen simultaneously with the establishment of the new local government system in the country. We believe that decentralization shall prove to be a practical methodology to solve acute governance problems in Pakistan. Over centralization and lack of delegated authority at lower levels have created a mess of government in the country. We will urge the regime to initiate devolution of powers to the provinces immediately. The Musharraf regime has shown some resolve to tackle the matter. This development is commendable. More effort needs to be made to open up the process of policy-making in the NRB. For example, a Roundtable of National Political Parties and Groups be immediately called in Islamabad to deliberate on these issues. The establishment of an effective Islamic democracy demands more public consultation throughout the process and not just in the end.
.
The issue of devolution of power
The issue of decentralization and devolution has attracted considerable attention lately. Out of seventy-five developing countries that have a population of more than five million, sixty-three developing countries are engaged in decentralization. Many countries consider decentralization as an extremely promising process of solving various problems and employing existing potential. People everywhere are demanding a greater share in power than ever before. Decentralization is a global trend and local governments have been empowered in many countries in Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East and Africa. Europe and North America already have a tradition of decentralized structures in many countries. The question to be asked is why is this happening? It is at the local level that people contact government departments for meeting their every day life needs. For ordinary people the federal government is far away from their own every day life experiences and their needs. The local level matters most for the individuals and their families. In several countries, with centralized systems, the local level has been neglected. Despite allocation of money and many attempts of reforms, several governments have not been able to provide quality and consistent services at the local level required to improve the standard of living of the people. Kalin gives four reasons for strengthening local government. They are: 23
Local government institutions in Pakistan are weak largely because of their particular history, and the disinterest and the apathy of the federal and provincial governments. Effective links with government and the communities, which though have been a part of the cherished goal of the local government institutions, have been missing. Devolution of authority by government to this lowest tier has yet to occur. Pakistan has a highly centralized system, in which the local level has been grossly neglected. Despite allocation of money and many attempts of reforms, several governments have failed to provide quality services on a regular basis at the local level. Primarily, the GOP activity has been directed from above instead of from citizens’ demands from below. Local governments serve a very important function in the administrative system of any country. Local governments are concerned essentially with providing services for the local communities like municipal services, primary education and health care, These services are obviously very essential and local governments are given elected councils so that the citizens can have open access to them and get the services they desire. Local problems are best handled locally. Islamabad should not unduly interfere in this area. It can only create unlikely problems like what is happening now. Undue delay is caused because Islamabad or the provincial capital is involved in affairs that are too mundane for their level. We need to apply the subsidiary principle in government. The principle simply says that decision-making should happen at the lowest level possible. In other words, decisions should not go to an upper level (provincial government, or even worse the federal government) than necessary. Decentralization is an effective way to solve governance problems in Pakistan. Acute centralization and lack of delegated authority at lower levels have created a mess of government in the country. Some indications point to a positive change. The regime claims that the past top-down approach needs to be modified with a vital bottom-up segment duly incorporated in the development strategy. Accordingly, there is a need for an effective third tier of government backed by sufficient resources to meet public needs. The principle of subsidiary is to be practiced wholeheartedly for meaningful results. Thus, the regime realizes that decentralization and devolution of power is essential for the efficiency and effectiveness of public service.
Reform Agenda: The Local Government Plan 2000
Notwithstanding the apparent contradiction between a military regimes promoting democratic governance, we are convinced that the Local Government Plan 2000 (henceforth the Plan) has revolutionary potential. We believe that the plan shall prove beneficial to the country, if properly implemented. The overall direction is correct and the “bottom-up” strategy is certainly workable. According to the 1973 Constitution, holding of local government elections is the responsibility of the provinces and the Provincial Election Commissions. As the Constitution is held in abeyance and the provincial assemblies are suspended, General Musharraf has ordered the Election Commission of Pakistan to hold local government elections in the country. Meanwhile, the Plan is proceeding as per scheduled. A set of ordinances is promulgated in the provinces and Islamabad for the purpose. Other than a few minor problems, the Plan is indeed remarkable. Given the past grave failures of all governments in our history, the Musharraf regime must be given the benefit of the doubt. Unlike other military regimes, it seems to be sincere in turning around Pakistan. Remember this is the most serious thrust at devolution yet. The people want real change in the country and the military regime has to deliver. Pakistan will be richer for the devolution exercise. Although the military regime is flexible on the final shape of the devolution plan, there are many complex issues still to be worked out. The plan’s briefness and lack of essential details is uncomforting. As the popular saying goes, “the devil is in the details” and the details are surely missing. Thus, the main problem with the NRB report is not what it contains but what it leaves out. In all fairness, the NRB faces a stupendous task well beyond its human capacity and limited means. Therefore, all the more reason for civil society and international agencies to lend a helping hand. The people owe the military regime their full cooperation because if it fails the country fails also.
Highlights of the Plan
Structures of Local Government
There shall be established a three tier pyramid-shaped structure of local governments (district, tehsil and union).
A. Union Council
Each Union Council shall consist of 21 seats headed by a Nazim (administrator) and his deputy (Naib Nazim). There are 4,147 union councils in the country. Of them, 2,492 are located in Punjab, 625 in Sindh, 668 in NWFP, 362 in Baluchistan, and 12 in Islamabad capitol territory. The Nazim and Naib Nazim shall be directly elected on a joint candidacy.
The Nazim will automatically become a member of the Zila Council while the Naib will become a member of the Tehsil Council. The Zila Nazim and the Naib Nazim shall have to be educated to at least secondary school/matriculation certification or equivalent.
The functions of the union council is to undertake local development and perform a myriad of public services such as finance, municipal, public safety, health, education, literacy, works, and justice. Monitoring committees shall facilitate the work of the union council. In addition, citizen community boards in both urban and rural areas and village councils in rural areas shall be established to facilitate the functioning of the union councils. The union council may also form a local guard service, which will be registered with the local police station. The guard service shall be recruited and paid by the union council. The Public Safety Committee of the union council shall liaison with the guard service and the police station.
B. Tehsil Council
The tehsil council shall consist of general seats equivalent to the number of union councils in that particular tehsil. In addition, 33% of these seats are reserved for women, 5% reserved for workers or peasants and 5% for minorities. The Electoral College for elections to these reserved seats shall be the union councilors of the tehsil.
Each tehsil shall have a tehsil nazims and a deputy (naib-nazim) to be elected as joint candidates. The Electoral College for these nazims shall be the union councilors of the tehsil.
There are 376 tehsils in Pakistan (Punjab 118, Sindh 87, NWFP 58, and Baluchistan 113).
The functions of the tehsil councils have been left vague. It is mainly supposed to be involved in coordination function between the district and tehsil levels. The Plan says that through various committees it will monitor the performance of the tehsil administration and the tehsil-level offices of the district government. There shall be a Public Safety and Justice Committees at the tehsil level.
City District Administration
City district administrations shall be establishing in all four provincial capitals and Islamabad. These city governments shall provide centralized municipal services with additional capacity and resources. Public services provided include: water supply and sanitation, waste disposal and sewerage, transport, housing, public works, roads, river and riverine management, and streets. City districts to be divided into towns to be further sub-divide into unions. The borders of the city district shall be demarcated as that of the tehsil.
C. District
The district government shall compose of a Zila Council and the nazim and naib-nazim. There are 106 districts in Pakistan (Punjab 34, Sindh 21, NWFP 24, Baluchistan 26, and the Islamabad capital).
Zila Council
The zila council shall consist of union nazims. Each union council shall have a representative in the zila council. Each zila council shall have general seats equivalent to the number of union councils in the district. In addition, there shall be 33% reserved seats for women, 5% for workers or peasants, and 5% for minorities.
The Electoral College for these reserve seats shall be the union councilors of the district.
An electoral college composed of union counselors of the district shall elect the zila nazim and the naib-nazim as joint candidates. There is an academic qualification required for the two candidates. They shall have to be at least matriculates, or equivalent.
The zila council shall have the following functions:
The zila Nazim shall provide political leadership for the development of the district.
He or she shall be the executive head of the district administration. The district police shall operate under the zila nazim.
The naib-zila nazim shall be the speaker of the zila council and will liaison between the zila nazim and the zila council.
The zila nazim will present development plans and budget to the zila council for approval.
The zila nazism’s powers to fire state officials have been restricted. He or she is only able to transfer district officials after giving them formal warnings and that too after first consulting the District Coordination Officer (DCO). In such an eventuality, he or she will have to give the reasons of the transfer in writing.
The Zila Nazim shall initiate the performance evaluation report of the DCO. The technical reporting officer of the DCO shall remain the provincial Chief Secretary.
Removal from Office
The zila nazim may be removed from office by an internal and external method. The internal method shall be composed of a two-stage process: First, simple-majority motion initiated in the zila council. Second, affirmative vote by two-third of all union councilors in the district. The external method shall be composed of three stages: First, a motion by the chief minister of the province stating the grounds of the removal. Second, a simple-majority vote in the provincial assembly. Third, confirmation of the governor in his discretion. The zila nazim may not be removed in the first six months of his assumption of office. Only one removal motion may be made in a year.
District or Zila Administration
A grade 20 official shall be posted as the DCO to coordinate the Zila administration. There shall be 12 offices each headed by an Executive District Officer who shall for the most part coordinate the work of the sub-office. There will be an internal audit office under the Zila Nazim. District officers shall head sub-offices at the district headquarters. Deputy District Officers shall be in charge of specific functions at the tehsil level.
An incentive system shall be established to quickly reward good performance by the public servants. End user satisfaction shall determine the grant of these public service rewards. In addition, unsatisfactory performance of public servants shall be punished.
The revenue and magistracy shall be separate offices. This action alone has diminished the power of the erstwhile Deputy Commissioner’s office.
The Provincial Government shall still be able to post the DCO, District Police Officer, and District Officers to the districts.
The following offices shall be established:
The district shall be having financial autonomy and sustainability. A district finance system shall be established to fulfill the following primary goals:
District Ombudsman
The office is established to redress citizens’ grievances. The District Ombudsman shall investigate matters and redress matters suo moto or on receiving a citizen complaint. It shall be selected and appointed by Zila Council.
District Police
The police service in Pakistan is notoriously corrupted, inefficient, and ineffective. General Musharraf claims that through new reform, measure the police will be purged of corruption and it will be converted in to an honest, people-friendly, and efficient department. He has admitted that the existing police force “failed to inspire people and earn them confidence” and that the police is regarded as “a highly inefficient, corrupt and a politically motivated department.” Nevertheless, the government is committed to ensure rule of law and good governance, says General Musharraf. He claimed that the regime would soon implement police reforms to “restructure the force to make it modern, efficient and respectable”. The efforts are now in an advanced stage and that a comprehensive strategy regarding police reforms has been formulated which includes:
As regards the district-level police service, the LG Plan says explicitly that: “law and order will remain a provincial subject. The provinces will be responsible for raising, organizing, equipping, training, and maintaining the police for the district in all respects”. Thus, the control of the police at the district level shall remain the same as before. Locals, as far as possible, shall operate the district police, however.
While on the one hand, it is said that law and order shall remain a provincial subject on the other hand, it is said that the district police will be exclusively responsible for the maintenance of law and order in the districts. The province will maintain all police facilities but the districts may also add to them for the purpose of greater efficiency.
The police will be restructured with the aim of providing it with proper remuneration, training, equipment, and accommodation facilities.
It has been plan that the Assistant Superintendent Police (ASP) officers shall head the police station eventually. Note that the ASP is the entry-level posting of a grade-17 police officer in the Central Superior Services (CSS) and is recruited through the standard FPSC examination system. Generally, the current Station House Officer (SHO) heading the local police station is a junior officer and not part of the CSS system. Among other reforms, the police have also been given protection from undue political interference. The LG Plan says that no police official besides the DPO shall be directly answerable to any elected representative, board, or committee. One of the factors often cited for police ineffectiveness is the undue political interference in the normal working of the service. An attempt is being made to rectify the problem. Another factor cited is the untrained and sometimes barely literate SHO being in charge in the “thana” (local police stations). The culture of the Thana invariably has become notorious for bad behavior corruption and abuse. It might be somewhat improved when better trained and senior officers operate them. Meanwhile, a serious exercise is being undertaken right now to replace the 1861 police act with a new one.
There is an obvious duality in the LG Plan’s district police service. In addition, there is an obvious apprehension that the nascent district governments shall be unable to handle the awesome responsibility of policing. Therefore, it is best left in provincial hands. This line of argument has apparently won the day in the corridors of power. People fear too much change happening too soon. The question remains whether the duality shall adversely affect the working of the district administration. It much depends on how ground events unfold in realty. Maybe there is smooth working of the system. In that case, current apprehensions may prove to be largely unfounded.
The LG Plan has some other checks on police abuse, namely:
(1) District Public Safety Commissions to monitor police performance. The commission shall be composed of 8-12 members, half of whom shall be elected by the Zila Council and the other half to be appointed by the provincial Chief Minister on the recommendations of a selection panel consisting of:
(2) The differentiation of functions in the service. For example, the function of prosecution shall not be part of the function of the police. Investigation function has also been separated from normal police duties. It shall be performed by a separate chain of command accountable to the District Police Officer. The investigation head is responsible to the police chief o the province through a Deputy Inspector General of Police Crimes Branch.
(3) An FIR can also be registered outside the police stations (already being done in Karachi).
Public oversight has been strengthened. The citizens’ community boards and the Public Safety Committees at various levels shall monitor the performance of the district police. There shall also be a criminal justice coordination committee.
A Police Complaint Authority to guarantee fundamental rights is also being envisaged. The PCA shall be established in all provinces and districts, if required. It shall consist of a chairperson and six members. The chairman shall be appointed by the chief minister of the province whereas the Home minister of the province shall appoint the members upon recommendation of a list of candidates by the Public Safety Commission of the said province.
Each province shall have a Provincial safety Commission (PSC). It will have 12 members, the Provincial assembly will elect six, and the remaining six will be appointed by the Governor of the province in his discretion, from a list of candidates given to him or her by a panel. The recommending panel shall consist of the following:
The commission itself shall select the chairperson of the PSC. The person
shall serve the term on a quarterly rotation basis.
District-level criminal justice system
The criminal justice system suffers from a number of flaws that need to be rectified. Some proposals submitted by the Good Governance Group (G-3), GOP in 1999 already under consideration.
A common criticism of the judicial process in all regions of Pakistan is that it is cumbersome, costly, and time-consuming. The idea that everyone is equal before the law does not make practical sense if people are prevented, or dissuaded from going to the law courts by the sheer cost involved. Critics of the system argue that not only is the system costly it is also riddled with corruption, especially at the lowest levels. Anecdotal evidence suggests that these observations are largely accurate. The GOP needs to make the judiciary much more efficient in terms of cases adjudicated in a given year. Court cases have piled up, and the backlog of cases is formidable. Even the higher judiciary suffers from a high amount of caseloads and delay. The GOP also needs to increase the equality and effectiveness of our judicial system. The quality of judgments can only be improved by the recruitment of quality judges. You cannot have quality judgments by mediocre judges. This is most important at the highest level.
No work plan has been chalked for the district judiciary for the reason that, after the approval of recommendations by the National Security Council, they have been sent to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. He is now consideration them for implementation. The previous NRB document of the Local Government Plan released in May 2000 has vague references on improving the working of the judicial system. However, the higher judiciary itself is engaged in the revamping of the system. Details are not known yet.
Recommendations to Strengthen the Regional Judiciary System
The GOP is considering major reforms in the subordinate judiciary. A report by Asian Development Bank on the subject, plus proposals submitted by provincial law ministries and bar councils, combined in a final document have been submitted to the Chief Executive. The said document contains the following proposals:
Some issues are still left undecided, the most important being the announcement of a date for provincial and national assembly elections. Other less important issues are:
Much like its counterparts elsewhere, the GOP shall also make the following transfers:
Decentralized Governance of Large Cities
Big cities in Pakistan are in a mess as their administrations are highly inefficient. Therefore, urban areas need immediately attention of the Musharraf regime to resolve their myriad nature of problems. Rampant urbanization has put tremendous pressure on the government to deliver services to an increasing population. Social decay, crime, and loss of community feelings have resulted because of the inability of government to properly handle the situations. Shantytowns, around and in some of the big cities, are proof of a lack or proper planning to manage urban development. Problems have piled up and, if let unchecked, will prove explosive, politically speaking. The problems in all the cities differ only in quantum, but nature of the problem is the same. No large city has been able to develop a decent mass transit system; there is lack of discipline and chaos on the roads, etc. The Good Governance Group, GoP held a workshop on the subject in 1998 which came up with some key objectives of a reform strategy that include:
In 1997, we have strongly recommended the creation of at least fifteen provinces in Pakistan. Under the new federal scheme, the Punjab province can be split into five; Sindh into three; NWFP into three; Baluchistan into three; and FATA Northern Areas and Kashmir can be consolidated into the fifteenth province. The breakup of the federation into smaller units must necessarily be initiated from the Punjab because of its heavy domination of the country’s politics. This measure is politically very difficult for any government because of deep-seated fears of national disintegration. These fears are unfounded, however. We strongly urge the Musharraf regime to take the bold step of breaking up Punjab in the initial phase. Only the military regime can take such a courageous step given the unique circumstances. Many eminent Pakistanis, like Khursheed Mahmood Kasuri, Altaf Husain leader of MQM (Haqiqi), Shahid Javed Burki, have already been proposed more provinces be created in Pakistan.
Why create more provinces? Earlier, we have argued that comparative analysis indicated that the number of constituents units in a federation have an important impact upon its effectiveness and operation. The fact that Switzerland has 26 cantons, Germany has 16 landers; Canada has 10 provinces, and the 50 states comprising the USA did explain different overall performance. Recently the Russian federation adopted a new constitution that has 89 constituent units. Federal systems are suited for either very large countries or ones, like Pakistan, that have numerous ethnic, cultural and linguistic cleavages. Gunlicks points out that a study of Belgium, Spain, Russia, India, Canada, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, and South Africa indicates that the most significant factor behind the establishment of several federations is linguistic, ethnic, religious or racial strains, real or potential. The Malakand tribal belt is unlike cosmopolitan Karachi, and the Potahar region in northern Punjab is dissimilar to the Seraiki belt in the south of the province. Hence, a new formula for federalism needs to be adopted. Pakistan will not be the first or the last federation to change its setup. India did it so can we? From only 12 provinces at the time of Independence India have gone up to 25. We must realize that all countries evolve new political structures to solve their conflicts and that there is nothing sacred in the current federal setup of Pakistan. If by discarding the current setup we are able to lessen Pakistan’s problems of governance then we should not hesitate to incorporate the necessary changes. In addition, there seems to be an increasing consensus in the country for changing the current federal structure. In fact, Pakistan has too few provinces for its size and is a glaring exception in this regard. For example, Austria and Belgium each have nine provinces; Brazil 22 provinces, Egypt 26; France 21, Indonesia 27; Iran 23; Iraq 18; Japan 47; Nigeria 19; Malaysia 14 and Turkey 67.
The increase in number of provinces must necessarily accompany decentralization and devolution of power to regional and local levels of government. Pakistan suffers from an over centralization of power in Islamabad. Provinces should be granted greater autonomy and devolution of power must necessarily take place immediately. A highly centralized government is increasingly becoming unpopular in the minority provinces. The constitution of Pakistan should be modeled on that of Canada where the federal government is weak in comparison to the provinces. The federal government of Pakistan must retain only a few clearly spelled out powers in the Constitution. The country needs a looser federal setup because of its great diversity both social and economic. Provinces must have greater control over their purse strings and should have the freedom to allocate a greater bulk of their resources, as they deem fit. Jurisdiction over a number of subjects from the Concurrent List of the Constitution of 1973 can be permanently transferred to the provinces. It is about time that we stressed the principle of federal restructuring. The details of provincial autonomy should be worked out. The Musharraf regime has shown some movement in this regard. Omar Asghar Khan, federal minister said that certain subjects would be handed over to the provinces ending duplication of ministries at the two levels. He sounded confident that reduction of ministries at the federal level would prove helpful in saving national resources and in implementing the devolution plan.
Pakistan needs a better administrative setup to fulfill the demands
of sustainable development for the benefit of the people. The regime must
increase the number of provinces in the country. From four provinces, we
should go up to eight or so. Remember there is nothing sacred in the present
dispensation. The present administrative setup is inherited from the colonial
era of the British Raj. It is now obsolete to meet the demand s of the
21st century. Many will agree that restructuring of the system
of government is the need of the hour. The number of provinces in India
has increased from the original ten at independence to 27 today. Every
federation alters its setup to solve its most pressing problems. Why not
us? In addition, Pakistan is unlike any other federation in the world where
only one majority province (Punjab) has more weight than all the other
remaining ones. Most importantly, the other three provinces (NWFP, Baluchistan
and Sindh) resent this occurrence. The imbalance must be immediately rectified.
A healthier dispensation will call for the creation of more provinces but
in a gradual fashion spread over a reasonable time. We propose a new federal
scheme where the Punjab province can be split into three (North-central-south);
Sindh into two (north-south); NWFP; Baluchistan, FATA, and Northern Areas
and Kashmir can be consolidated into the eighth province. The breakup of
the federation into smaller units must necessarily be initiated from the
Punjab because of its heavy domination of the country’s politics. This
measure is politically very difficult for any government because of deep-seated
fears of national disintegration, however. The breakup of the federation
into smaller units must necessarily be initiated from the Punjab because
of its heavy domination of the country’s politics. This measure is politically
very difficult for any government because of deep-seated fears of national
disintegration.
Several nationalist movements have sprung up during the years. Nationalist parties are protesting of being deliberated ignored in the present setup. A new PONM - an alliance of nationalists is in the making. On the eve of the census in September 1997, different Seraiki nationalist parties protested on the absence of the Seraiki language as an option in the census form. The Seraiki Qaumi Movement led the protest. Akram Shaheen, a central leader of the party, claimed that there are over 37 million Siraikis in Pakistan and some 25 million reside in Bahawalpur, Multan, Dera Ghazi Khan and Sargodha divisions alone. Previously in 1973, Riaz Hadhari had formed the Siraiki Suba Mahaz in Bahawalpur. Demand for a separate province is being echoed by a number of other Siraiki parties which included: Jag Siraiki Party, Siraiki Qaumi Inqalabi party, Siraik Qaumi Tehrik, Pakistan Siraiki Party (PSP), Siraikistan National Front, Siraiki Mazdoor Mahaz, Siraiki Inqalabi Council. Asad Langah, leader of PSP have asserted that the Siraiki area is ignored and the demand for a separate province is widespread.
The issue of decentralization and devolution of powers
The increase in number of provinces must necessarily accompany decentralization and devolution of power to regional and local levels of government. Pakistan suffers from an over centralization of power in Islamabad. Provinces should be granted greater autonomy and devolution of power must necessarily take place immediately. A highly centralized government is increasingly becoming unpopular in the minority provinces. The constitution of Pakistan should be modeled on that of Canada where the federal government is weak in comparison to the provinces. The federal government of Pakistan must retain only a few clearly spelled out powers in the Constitution. The country needs a looser federal setup because of its great diversity both social and economic. Provinces must have greater control over their purse strings and should have the freedom to allocate a greater bulk of their resources, as they deem fit. Jurisdiction over a number of subjects from the Concurrent List of the Constitution of 1973 can be permanently transferred to the provinces. It is about time that we stressed the principle of federal restructuring. The details of provincial autonomy can be worked out later with the agreement of other political parties. Provincialization of federal subjects like education, housing, agriculture, housing, rural development, etc. must commence immediately
The constitution of Pakistan should be modeled on that of Canada where the federal government is weak in comparison to the provinces. The federal government of Pakistan must retain only a few clearly spelled out powers in the Constitution. The country needs a looser federal setup because of its great diversity both social and economic. Provinces must have greater control over their purse strings and should have the freedom to allocate a greater bulk of their resources as they deem fit. Jurisdiction over a number of subjects from the Concurrent List of the Constitution of 1973 can be permanently transferred to the provinces. It is about time that we stressed the principle of federal restructuring. The details of provincial autonomy should be worked out. Provincialization of federal subjects like education, housing, agriculture, housing, rural development, etc. must commence immediately. The Musharraf regime should initiate devolution of powers to the provinces immediately. The Musharraf regime has shown some resolve to tackle the matter. The NRB is tackling the issue. This is commendable beginning. More is expected from the military regime.
Pakistan also suffers from a weak checks-and-balance system that has led to abuse of power. Today, in Pakistan, for all practical purposes, we have shifted towards a presidential system instead of the pearlier parliamentary system. The development is commendable. A presidential system is more suited for our purposes than a Westminster parliamentary type. Our Islamic legacy points out to a powerful single office of the Emir, or Khalifah. There is no need of a fragmentation of power at the highest level as is the case in a parliamentary system. We have here both a premier and president, which is unnecessary. In a parliamentary system, a chief executive can become a “dictator”. Many premiers have been accused of having dictatorial tendencies, such as Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi. The only difference between a dictator and a strong leader is the ideological perspective of the person making the evaluation. Opponents paradoxically perceive what supporters see as “strong leadership” as “dictatorship”. Simply meaning that you might agree or disagree with the accusation of dictatorship on the grounds of your own ideological moorings. If you are with the chief executive, then you will look up to him as a strong leader. On the other hand, if you oppose him, for whatever reasons, then you will think of the person as a dictator. The point is that it all depends on individual preferences and that the notion is relative. Only a strong presidential system with a built-in system to check abuse of executive power can possibly work in Pakistan. We must improve quality of the Cabinet. A move towards a permanent presidential system will take care of the mediocrity problem in the Cabinet. Personal failure of ruling MNAs has hurt us the most. Very few of them are capable to handle affairs of state. Yet, they filled the ranks of the Cabinet. This is done at the cost of the nation. In a presidential system, we can scout for the best talent available. That is a necessary condition for the revival of democracy. Recently, General Musharraf said that he is “completely committed” to the timetables for elections in 2002 given to him by the Supreme Court of Pakistan and that he “cannot visualize staying on beyond that deadline”. He also talked about the need of a “checks and balance” on any future chief executive to prevent him or her from abusing power. The quality of politicians needs to be improved, as they have been a “dismal failure”, said the General. The Plan is a good beginning in that direction. Let us adopt the presidential system in Pakistan, as it is more suitable for our requirements. General Musharraf should become the president of the republic immediately. President Rafiq Tarar must also resign at once.
Later, the military regime needs to revamp the National Assembly and Senate. This is very essential for the future working of the political system. Strengthen the two institutions because their performance up until now has been less than satisfactory. Require that the Senate be popularly elected. Let an equal number of Senators be elected from each province. End Presidential Ordinances and require that all laws, even if of an immediate nature, be passed by the parliament. Provide full media coverage for the proceedings of the parliament to educate the citizens. Strengthen the committee system to oversee the business of the federal government. Have a minimum education requirement for MNAs and Senators. Get rid of the Thirteenth Amendment, which is meant to stifle dissent within the ranks of the ruling party. We have suffered from the results of this heavy handiness on the part of Nawaz Sharif. We should not let it happen again. Let people in parliament speak their mind. After all, the people elected them for that very purpose.