Military rule in Pakistan started in 1977 with Zia ul-Haq
General Zia ul-Haq took power in a bloodless coup and ruled under martial law.
In 1985, Zia declared elections which put in place a parliament and a civilian
Prime Minister, Muhammad Khan Junejo, who was later dismissed by Zia ul-Haq.
Zia was killed in a mysterious plane crash in 1988. After Zia ul-Haq was
killed, Benazir Bhutto was elected prime minister and became the effective head
of government in December 2, 1988. In August 1990, President of Pakistan,
Ghulam Ishaq Khan, removed Benazir Bhutto from power under allegations of
corruption. In 1999, General Pervez Musharraf took power after overthrowing
Pakistan’s Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif. The military’s major goal is to expand its power
and protect its business organizations. Changes to the constitution and the
political system in Pakistan and interference in the electoral process have
noticeably increased. For examples, when Musharraf took power in 1999, he
established the National Accountability Bureau (Pakistan’s apex anti-corruption
organization), which is usually run by former military personnel, to ban
opposition leaders from participation in parliamentary elections under
allegations of corruption. To maintain power over security policy and ensure a
strong budget for the military, Musharraf created the National Security Council
that comprises the chiefs of all military services and is in charge of making
decisions about defense and national security policies to increase and institutionalize
the military’s role in policymaking in Pakistan.
Theoretically, the test of leadership is to lead the country
and the nation out of a crisis situation. The dynamic leadership of Jinnah is a
witness to this reality. Muslims of the sub-con
tinent under the leadership of
Jinnah successfully fought the forces of. British imperialism and Hindu
nationalism culminating in the creation of Pakistan. After the death of Jinnah,
his political successors badly failed to create consensus politics. The second line
leadership could not translate the political achievements of Jinnah into a
vibrant, moderate and forward-looking democratic polity. Factionalism,
provincialism and power politics marred the first decade of Independence. Pakistan
had seven Prime Ministers and eight cabinets during 1947-58. The ruling parties
maintained power by using state patronage and coercive apparatus in a highly partisan
manner. The situation was not much different at the provincial level where
different political parties and leaders engaged in struggle for power in
violation of parliamentary norms. The Constituent Assembly established at the
time of independence was unable to frame a constitution as the members and the
political parties did not work towards evolving a consensus on the operational
norms of the political system. The objectives of the Constitution were approved
in March 1949 after a contentious debate; some members did not take part in the
vote on the Objectives Resolution. Subsequently, the Constituent Assembly
deliberated on the framework of the Constitution during March 1949 and October
1954: when they agreed on a draft of the Constitution, Governor General Ghulam
Muhammad dissolved the first Constituent Assembly before the latter could take
up the draft for final consideration and vote.36 Governor General Ghulam Muhammad,
in violation of established parliamentary norms, dissolved the above cited
Assembly in a reactive move. There was unwarranted and continuous interference
by the head of state in the political sphere of the country. Traditionally, the
head of state is a nominal and titular office in parliamentary democracy
whereas there was repeated interference into politics by two heads of
state—Ghulam Muhammad and Iskander Mirza.37 Had the political successors of
Jinnah been sane enough, the interference of heads of state might have been
averted. Those who were to steer the ship of the state of Pakistan were
predominantly unscrupulous, corrupt and power hungry. None of them could rise
to the level of a statesman. They remained self-centered petty politicians. The
result was inevitable extreme political instability, palace intrigues, the
ever-growing influence of the bureaucracy and the military in politics. Thus,
military leaders felt justified in taking over when politicians failed to
provide efficient and popular governance.
Comments
Post a Comment