Islamabad has been on edge for a number of weeks. Not that there has always been love and peace in Pakistan. However, the past few weeks have been particularly chaotic, marked by road and internet blockages, rights groups’ bans, skirmishes between law enforcement and protesters as provincial government officials marched on the federal capital, and odd attempts by the federal government to feign normalcy during visits from dignitaries from other countries.
Despite Gandapur’s calls for a “revolution,” the Maulana continues to speak with both sides of the House in the power corridors. It has consequently happened to most extreme significance to require a moment of retribution. What brought us here? Who is responsible?
There is not a single, enlightening response, and the reasons are fairly obvious. Notwithstanding, matters aren’t quite as obfuscated as one would naturally suspect. Take, for instance, the most recent amendment proposal. We should leave out the unsafely esoteric “reports” about the creators of this purportedly spilled draft — a story for future students of history to tell, trusting the Punjab Slander Act, 2024, won’t be a thing by then.
Rewriting the Constitution The government’s blatant haste in attempting to vote on the bill is evidence of its betrayal, as it violates a promise made almost two decades ago in “The Charter of Democracy,” signed by Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. Despite the fact that they assert that they are carrying out precisely what they had promised and hoped to do, the government has broken that promise.
Nonetheless, to reify the feeling and commitment that the two chiefs settled on wouldn’t include having a governing body, limited of authenticity, revising the Constitution to change the extremely fundamental construction characteristic for it — the freedom of the legal executive. This would be nothing short of metamorphosing the current situation into a particular kind of suzerainty, one in which the apex court becomes dependent on the executive and its judges become pawns for the prime minister who appoints them; perhaps even putting up or dismissing their annual confidential reports (ACRs).
Although many have argued that a constitutional court could be beneficial to the nation, it is essential to determine how such a court would operate and answer some fundamental questions. Assuming the adjudicators are to be selected by the public authority, how could it be that we anticipate that they should remain objective? Parties who approach the constitutional court for redress on constitutional grounds after exhausting all other options run the risk of seeing their cases drag out even further if the constitutional court only dealt with matters pertaining to the Constitution. If what really needs to be done is expedite constitutional cases, wouldn’t it be better to just add more judges to the Supreme Court so that they can only hear constitutional petitions?
The songs are long and sad, but I’ll limit myself here and move on. Wish this were the only instance of recent stupidity.
Chaos in politics is even more obvious on the political level. An impending economic crisis is still a long way off, even after the IMF’s bailout package is confirmed. The world has been unaware of how such plans for economic recovery—or, to put it more optimistically, growth—would work in a political climate that is weakening the government from the inside out and instilling a sense of blatant distrust.
How is it possible that a chief minister, who is riding high on a savior-for-all bandwagon and occupies the political center stage of the country, is engaging in antics and making calls for revolution? At the same time, the federal government is busy praising the beloved prime minister’s UN speech and outright suppressing protests about 20 kilometers from Islamabad.
The right to peaceful protest must be protected by the government, especially during times of increased inflation, economic stress, and tension. The government must give the people time to digest and maybe even burp.
The government must behave like a government in the event of the CM going rogue: it must be patient and calculated, ready to listen, listen some more, and accommodate. Not to bode this administration sick, or overlook the calls of the rancorous CM, yet the truth is: For the benefit of Pakistan and its people, it is high time that calmer minds occupy the political corridors, call for reconciliation, put aside self-interest, and unite.
One-size-fits-all responses The government’s inexorable track record of dismissing every issue, dissenter, or opposition at first sight is difficult to understand. Which carries us to our next cry: Balochistan.
Take, for instance, Sami Deen Baloch and Dr. Mahrang Baloch. After these women led a rally to Islamabad, the state reacted with an iron fist where it was supposed to engage in meaningful discourse. Dr. Mahrang was named one of Time’s 100 Most Influential People, but the government deliberately prevented her from attending the event, rather than honoring a national hero. Due to her inclusion on the Exit Control List, Sami Deen was previously denied access to Brussels.
It might be time to try something new. A more essential one — one that isn’t vaporous in effect and teaches the reason a lesson; one in which we learn how to interact with people like Sami Deen Baloch and Dr. Mahrang Baloch; one in which the missing person’s files are moved from their dusty racks, where they have been for a very, very long time; what’s more, where contradiction isn’t seen as something to be squashed yet a solid piece of majority rule talk. The government would then be back on its feet and ready to deal with bigger problems.
Even if it wanted to, a burning house cannot extinguish the neighborhood.
Our house is on fire, politicians.
