Personalization of politics in Pakistan

Personalization of politics in Pakistan

Introduction

Reasons

Distorted journey of democracy in Pakistan
disrespect for merit
Lack of democratic culture and behavior among the politicians
Weak Political parties
Parties are run on personal whims and wishes not on manifestoes
Lack of democracy in the inner circles of Political parties
Strong Personalities leading the parties
Military interference in politics
strong hold of feudalism
illiteracy
poverty
corruption
Ineffectiveness of Constitutions
Lack of accountability
Havocs played with Student Politics
Involvement of criminal elements
Politics of caste/corruption
Effect

Bad Governance
Leadership Vacuum
Failure of democracy as system of governance
Martial Laws
Lack of vision
Leaves political development in a stand still
Corruption
It hurts the national unity
.Centralization
.


Solution

Strict implementation of Political parties act
Empowerment of Election commission
Accountability
Spread of education
Spread of awareness through media
Add effectiveness to the election process
.
.
.


Conclusion








1 - The politics of Pakistan is tremendously personalized. Democracy is still a distant dream in this land because up-in-the-dough personalities and mammoth pressure groups are more powerful than the institutions. The politics of Pakistan revolves around the commanding hammer men and the influential bunches while the fate of democratic institutions is hanging in the balance. It is rightly said power is intoxication and who are obsessed to abuse cannot live peacefully without it. Therefore, they spare no effort to hanker after in establishing strong bonds with top bureaucrats and army generals who can help them to jump in the saddle to usurp the bridles of dominion as early as possible without considering political values, democratic principles and their own party manifestoes. This is the loophole through which brass hats and bureaucrats enter in the politics. The double whammy of feudal legacy is the key factor for the power lust in Pakistan. Grains of feudalism were present in the genesis of the country. The father of the nation kicked the bucket during the formative phase of the nation state. He didn’t get sufficient time to groom the nation on democratic lines. After his untimely death, political wrangling triggered among the deep-seated bureaucrats, power starving palm-pressers and overzealous generals. This political wrestling to gain authority culminated in the dark period of Martial Law that conked out the democratic process by driving the first nail in its coffin and crippled it before taking firm roots. After political protests in the late-sixties Ayub transferred power unconstitutionally to general Yahya Khan who was more interested in drinking than the population welfare. Ayub’s industrialization resulted in the concentration of resources in 22 families belonging to West Pakistan that generated a sense of deprivation in the eastern wing resulting in dismemberment of the country due to Indian intrigue on December 16, 1971 and drew permanent lines of separation between the two halves of the Quaid’s monument. Z.A.Bhutto became the leading political personality of the truncated Pakistan. The alleged rigging of the 1977 elections and their repercussions in the form of ceaseless protests by the PNA provided vacuum to the army to intervene. Ziaul Haq imposed Martial Law between the night of 4 and 5 July and once again military putsch pushed the country towards the darkest and the longest period of Martial Law. Bhutto hanged on April 4, 1979 although he was the most popular leader of Pakistan after the death of the Quaid-i-Azam but his charisma haunted Zia like a ghost. General Ziaul Haq ruled the country for more than eleven years with a steel rod like a true autocratic ruler. The Ziaul Haq authoritarian rule left 3.5 million Afghan refugees at Pakistan’s doorsteps and gave the nation the bitter gifts of sectarianism, ethnic discords, heroin and Kalashnikov culture .Pakistan is still paying a dear price for the legacy of Zia period in the form perpetual subversive activities ignited by the miscreants to create instability. Four civilian governments changed the driving seat during 1988-99 but no government was being permitted to complete its tenure. The two elected governments of Benzir Bhutto and the first regime of Nawaz Sharif in power were ousted by the incumbent Presidents by using their discretionary powers under Article 58-2(b) that is another award given by Ziaul Haq so that democratic processs can never take firm roots and smooth course. It hangs like Damocle’s Sword over each civilian government. Both Prime Ministers during their tenures endeavored to curtail the powers of the President and tried to undermine army whom they consider great threats for their rule. The civilian government with heavy mandate terminated on October 9, 1999 and once again army came to power to rule the roost. President Musharraf created King’s Party in the form of Q-League to legitimatize his rule by establishing an engineered democracy. Pakistan is at the crossroads of formidable challenges. These gauntlets demand unity among the public but their trust has been badly shaken and cracked in the well-fixed politicians due to their continuous betrayal of the public. Their unrestrained misuse of authority to make quick bucks through flash roll and let stick to their fingers by waxing up has ruined national economy. The flushed hot shots should give up the politics of vested interests if they want to correct their image. They should join hands to uplift the public rather than safeguarding their self-seeking interests. Each institution should play its due role because the problems arise when one institution pokes its nose in the affairs of the others. These sticky beak practices enfeeble all institutions of the state. The political parties are deprived of true democratic culture. They should conduct regular elections within their ranks to become genuine democratic parties. In this way capable men in the street down to their bottom dollar would get opportunities to rise to the top on the political horizon and thus personality politic will make a shift in the direction of institutional politics and true democracy will automatically take its course.

2 - Personalization of politics has been one of the factors weakening institution-building. It has considerably contributed to further fragmentation, thereby reinforcing tribal, ethnic, national and other factors. Personalization is psychologically and structurally linked to the “feudal mentality”, and to the weak and non-democratic character of political parties. The weakness and lack of infrastructure also has made national integration more difficult to achieve. Especially in rural areas, in the mountainous North, and in Balochistan not even streets are always available. Electric power, the telephone system, railroads and other means of public transport have been and are in constant crises. The banking system has been inefficient and has been looted by politicians, who are used to receiving “loans” which they never pay back. Police is incompetent, corrupt, and in rural areas acting on behalf of local landlords and “feudal”, who keep their own groups of strongmen. The tax system is a bad joke, and public utilities are hardly accessible without paying bribes. In short: “national infrastructure” is not just weak, but has deteriorated in many respects. Outside pressure on the country does not make things easier. Some five million refugees, a spillover of arms and a resulting “Kalashnikow Culture”, and cheap opium and heroin have entered Pakistan as a result of the Afghan war. Constant tension and fighting in Kashmir at the Indian border have helped justify military expenditures that take up to 50 percent of the national budget. At the same time the IMF and international lenders have turned the squeeze and force Pakistan into one of their “structural adjustment programs”. The economic pressure is being felt all over society, increasing internal competition for meager resources results and reinforces fragmentation.

3- The appointment of Bilawal as the new chairman of the party after the sad demise of her mother is not out of the blue given our political culture but it is not something in tandem with the democratic traditions. This is the leading political party of our country and even it is not mature enough to cultivate the democratic spirit within its own ranks. It makes one sad to know when the political parties who stand for democracy do not act democratically.The recent decision of the party is nothing but the continuation of the personalization of politics in Pakistan which has caused suffocating leadership vacuum and has not let the democracy take deep roots. Feudalism is still the order of the day even in the 21st century. The party has many towering personalities who have served and kept the party alive in the absence of even Benazir.The party has missed the grand opportunity of choosing its chairman by election.

4 - Democracy is possible in the third world if the organs of the state work according to their prescribed job, if the countries do not accept dictation from the west, if freedom of media is guaranteed, if rule of law prevails, if the concept of welfare state is practiced, if human rights and will of people are given importance and most importantly if personalization of politics and dictatorial rules are controlled.Recently, Gyanendra Shah of Nepal, the descendant of a proud line of Shah kings going back to 240 years was forced out of office by a popular revolt. It was followed by an election, thus turning the country into a republic. Personalization plays an important role in the politics of third world countries and has become a hindrance in the path of true democracy in these countries.India is the largest democracy in the world but its people’s hearts and minds have yet to capture true democratic spirit. It is undoubtedly a great revolution that it has given the right to vote to the lowest of the low and the poorest of the poor but the Indian society is still far from being equal in spirit. Gandhis and Nehrus of India have dominated Indian politics since her inception. Likewise in Pakistan Bhuttos, Mukhdooms, Murri and Chaudhrys have transferred their crowns to their next generation. Thus emergence of any new faces in Pakistan’s politics is always suppressed.Similarly, in other third world countries, influential families have dominated the political system. In Sri Lanka, Bandaranaike family and in Indonesia, Sukarnoputri families have a key role in running the governments. Furthermore, dictatorial rule has also hampered the smooth flow of democracy in the third world. For instance, in Myanmar, a bunch of thuggish and incompetent army generals have been in charge for several years, while the lady whom the people look up to, Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, languishes in house detention.Moreover, Pakistan has seen three martial laws and two emergency periods. Not even a single instance, has a true democratic government completed its full tenure. Thus, pure democracy has never prevailed in Pakistan too.There are a number of reasons that become a hindrance in the way of true democracy. Apparently, it looks as if the west is facilitating the people’s will in these countries, however; this is not true. West for the sake of its own vested interest appoints puppets to run the governments. They give dictation to these puppet leaders and thus governments work against the desires of people. Therefore, sovereignty of these countries comes under question.Moreover, the organs of state in these countries do not work properly as desired from them. Likewise, Pakistan has remained a victim of judicial and media crisis. Desires of the people have always been curbed in order to fulfill the interests of the elite. The capitalistic approach has made the rich richer and poor poorer. The concept of welfare state has been diminished. Thus, all these factors contribute to democratic incompetence.Therefore, if the organs of the state work effectively, dictation from western powers is not accepted, freedom of media is guaranteed, the concept of welfare state is practised, human rights and the will of people are given importance and lastly the personalization influence in politics and the dictatorial rules are controlled, then there is no doubt that the third world countries will experience true democracy.

5- Now to the topic of the week. In 1970, the PPP attracted 42 per cent of the votes polled in Punjab. A total of eight elections — spread over a thirty-seven year time span — PPP’s vote bank in Punjab has been shrinking. In 1988, the PPP got 40 per cent of the Punjab vote, 39 per cent in 1990 and 1993, 22 per cent in 1997, 27 per cent in 2002 and 29 per cent in 2008.
In 1970, the PML attracted a mere 23 per cent of the votes polled in Punjab. In 1988, the PML got 38 per cent of the Punjab vote, 49 per cent in 1990, 45 per cent in 1993, 59 per cent in 1997 and 52 per cent in 2002. In 2008, the combined PML-N-PML-Q vote stood at 69 per cent.
According to a 2008 exit poll by Gallup Pakistan, 43 per cent of the PPP voters are “illiterate” while only 26 per cent of the PML voters are “illiterate”. Furthermore, a mere 5 per cent of the PPP voters are “college-educated” while the PML’s “college-educated” voters are twice that many.
Next. A typical PML voter is urbanized, relatively better educated and upwardly mobile. This is the Pakistani that’s growing. A typical PPP voter lives in a rural area with almost no education. This is the Pakistani that’s shrinking. No wonder, PML’s constituency is growing and PPP’s is shrinking.We have had nine elections in the past 37 years, and the one lesson that stands out is: if non-political forces do not interfere in Pakistan’s natural political evolution then the process is definitely heading towards a two-party system. Those two parties are: the PPP and the PML, and the two collectively take away a good 75 per cent to 80 per cent of the national vote. In essence, the national race becomes a bi-polar contest.Interestingly, some 15 per cent of all Pakistani voters have a family member employed outside of Pakistan. According to Gallup, 13 per cent of overseas Pakistani families voted for PPP and 18 per cent for PML.Yes, interior Sindh with its rural, untutored population-base voted the PPP but Punjab’s urbanized, educated population-base voted the PML-N. History is witness that Punjab is where governments are made — or broken. And, Punjabi politics is fast becoming issue-based as opposed to emotion-driven. The PPP, once again, is behind the PML-N on issues. The PML-N won in Punjab because its politics was issue-driven; unambiguously anti-Musharraf and categorically pro-judiciary. The PPP lost out in Punjab because its politics revolved around emotions more than issues.The PPP has been out of power for 12 years. For a decade, the PPP’s leadership has either been in exile or in jail. It now seems that the PPP is having difficulty grasping the emergence of at least two new centres of power — the electronic media and the lawyers’ community both as parts of the new, reawakened civil society.The PPP needs to repackage itself. Clearly, the politics of ‘roti, kapra and makaan’ work no more (even less so in a future election). Punjabi vote is moving away from personalization of politics to issues. So should the PPP. Pakistani vote will be a cult no more in the next election. At 41, it’s time for the PPP to develop formal structures that transcend individuals. To guarantee permanence, the PPP should have a social purpose. The PPP ought to become an institution. It should have a life of her own; a life that is beyond the ‘conscious intentions’ of the PPP’s individual leaders.Is the PML the party of the future? Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s PPP must reinvent itself. Shaheed Benazir Bhutto’s PPP must recreate itself.