Low Graphics Site
 
 
 
 
 
 
|
|
|
|
April 30, 2002
|
Tuesday
|
Safar 16, 1423
|
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
In search of legitimacy
Israel’s fear of the truth
Dog bite deaths
In search of legitimacy
TODAY, for the third time in Pakistan’s chequered constitutional history, an army chief is presenting himself to the people for their approval of his rule. In 1960, 80,000 elected Basic Democrats constituted the electoral college for the referendum Ayub organized for himself. In 1984, the vote for Ziaul Haq was direct, and the nation was asked to decide whether it approved of his Islamization policy. A Yes vote meant he would stand elected as president for five years. In today’s referendum, the question is more direct, asking the people to decide whether they want Musharraf to stay on as president for five years for the sake of protecting his reforms. The vote for Ayub and Zia was 95.6 and 97.7 respectively, and there is no reason to believe an affirmative vote this time will be anything less ‘spectacular.’
The biggest difference, however, is that the referendum today is being held in a relaxed and liberal atmosphere. Ayub’s referendum was held when martial law was still there, and all political parties and political activity stood banned. Ziaul Haq’s referendum was organized in an atmosphere of terror. All political activity stood banned, though some religious parties functioned illegally with full state backing and were asked to mobilize support for the general. In the case of the present referendum, the political atmosphere is much more relaxed. Political parties are not only working, they are allowed to campaign against the referendum. Saturday’s ARD rally in Lahore was one such proof of the general’s liberal attitude towards dissent. The press is also free, which was not the case in 1960 and 1984. Also, no one went to court to challenge the two earlier exercises. Today’s referendum was, however, challenged in court. This helped Musharraf obtain a legal cover for his move which would have not been there if his opponents had not gone to court.
Saturday’s supreme court order validating the referendum is vague, and leaves the consequences of the referendum “to be determined at a proper forum at an appropriate time.” In any case, the chances are that we will have Gen. Musharraf as our head of state for the next five years. The stated aim behind his continuation in office is the protection of the economic and political reforms, specially devolution, which his government has launched over the last two and a half years. Nevertheless, under the 1973 Constitution, it is the prime minister and his aides who have the power to formulate and execute domestic and foreign policies; the president has only a limited role in this sphere. What happens if the prime minister who assumes office as a result of the general election in October sees the reforms in a different light? The president will have no way to change the direction of the prime minister’s policies, unless Gen Musharraf decides to amend the Constitution to get more powers for himself. This is easier
|