democratic transition. The leaders of the two parties took remarkably similar public postures on every major political issue, and during the elections, short of formal electoral alliances, they cooperated to defeat the candidates of the Muslim League (Q), the king's (Pervez Musharraf's) party, by fielding common candidates in critical constituencies.
Well before the elections were announced, Bhutto and Sharif signed the Charter of Democracy in September 2006, which can be termed as the second most important political document after the 1973 Constitution. The charter, in addition to an agreement on fundamental rules of political game, provided for a roadmap of democratic change in Pakistan. An accord between the former political rivals, who had polarised and destabilised Pakistani polity a decade earlier, raised hopes that elites of the country had reached a consensus on revival of parliamentary democracy.
While some of the background political factors – common sense of being oppressed by Musharraf, retaining larger social support base and restoration of democracy – created a groundswell for political cooperation, the fact that neither of the two parties on its own could form a government at the Centre prompted them to form a coalition government. Moreover, public sentiment in the country was supportive of the PPP and PML (N) forming coalition governments at the Centre and in the largest province, Punjab, for stabilising the country and resolving some of the outstanding structural issues that the legacy of the military regime had left unattended. Topping these complex legacies were the restoration of deposed judges and independence of judiciary, lingering militancy in the western borderlands, and energy and food crises.
Before going into the elections PML (N) had sensed the public mood better than the PPP in Punjab, which favoured restoration of judges and where anti-Musharraf feelings ran higher than perhaps other places. Very prudently PML (N) drew closer to the lawyers and civil society movement and took up the issue of restoration of the deposed judges. It asked all its candidates contesting elections to take an oath never to compromise on the issue.
Never before in the history of Pakistan's democracy had independence of judiciary emerged as a focal electoral or political issue as it did in the 2008 elections. More than the political parties, which remained on the sidelines showing party flags, the lawyers movement, which has proved to be the longest and most tenacious movement of its kind, popularised these issues. Since the lawyers and other opposition political parties of All Pakistan Democratic Movement (APDM) had boycotted the elections, the PML (N) harvested the political windfall of the movement by pledging itself to the restoration of deposed judges.
The issue is being highlighted because the future of coalition between PPP and PML (N) will depend on when, how and in what form the deposed judges are restored. Sensing the political importance of the issue, PML (N) made its joining the central government (with PPP) conditional on the judges' restoration and it was to be done by April 30 through a simple resolution passed by the National Assembly. The Bhurban Declaration that took up the cause of sacked judges extended the deadline to May 12.
The PPP retracted on the modality of restoration of judges through the National Assembly resolution and proposed doing it through a constitutional amendment. The move prompted the PML (N) to withdraw its ministers from the cabinet but to continue to support the government.
Why is the constitutional amendment route preferred by PPP and why is it opposed by PML (N)? Are there other issues that trouble the coalition? What are the prospects for a stable coalition?
The constitutional amendment proposal prepared by the PPP is an omnibus package containing more than 80 changes in various articles of the Constitution that covers a range of issues, and not just the restoration of judges. Most of the proposed revisions are aimed at preserving the amnesty granted to politicians, businessmen, military generals and bureaucrats for their corruption under the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) that Musharraf issued after protracted negotiations with Benazir Bhutto. The reason PPP co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari has been dragging his feet on the restoration of judges and has backtracked on his earlier commitment on the issue is that he fears that the NRO could be declared unconstitutional by an independent judiciary.
The spectre of judicial accountability and political realism seems to be driving PPP leaders into the fold of Musharraf. It is widely believed now that secret understanding or political deal that Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto reached between them is holding. The deal brokered by the American and British diplomats gave relief to both leaders – the PPP got amnesty against corruption cases pending in courts and Musharraf got a passive political acceptance by the leading party.
There is ample evidence to support this view because the PPP has continuously opposed impeaching Musharraf, which the PML (N) has persistently demanded. From the point of view of PML (N), the proposed constitutional package gives constitutional cover to the November 3 actions of Musharraf through which he suspended the Constitution, imposed emergency and issued a Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO), which required all judges of high courts and Supreme Court to take fresh oaths of office. The military rulers have applied the PCO to get rid of independent judges who were suspected of ruling against them and to pack the judiciary with loyalists.
It is now very clear that the PPP would not like to restore all judges without making sure that the constitutional package has been passed, which is unlikely to happen until next March when one-third of the members of Senate, the upper house of Parliament, are elected. And even if the coalition partners get the two-third majority that is required to pass a constitutional amendment, the PML (N) may not likely be on board, as the political situation in the country between now and March next year may get more chaotic.
The PML (N) has also distanced itself from the PPP government on the issue of operations in the Federally Administered Areas, known as FATA, where the Taliban have launched an insurgency with frequent suicide bombing raids into major cities. The party also appears to be upset that it has not been consulted by PPP in taking important economic decisions like the recent back-breaking increase in gas and oil prices that have sparked public anger. The smaller parties – the Awami National Party (ANP), Jamiat-i-Ulema-i-Islam (JUI) and the Mutahidda Qaumi Movement (MQM) – equally share the general unhappiness with the PPP government but their reasons vary from issue to issue. What upsets them all is a common feeling of marginality and that the PPP leaders have not taken them into confidence on any significant issue.
The emerging political situation in the country presents the PPP-led government as a rudderless ship, and its captain, Mr. Zardari, not even bothering to understand the political storm it is passing through.
Meantime, an uncontrollable economic slide, emerging fault lines in the PPP and widespread feeling that Zardari shares greater interests with Musharraf than the PML (N) or other parties in the coalition have generated political dynamics that may not hold the coalition together. The PML (N) has threatened to withdraw support from PPP if the deposed judges are not restored by the end of August. And the PPP wants the PML (N) ministers back in the cabinet by the end of July or it will fill the position from other parties.
In a meeting of coalition partners in Islamabad on July 23, which was attended by Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, PPP's chief Zardari, PML (N)'s president Shahbaz Sharif, JUI's chief Maulana Fazlur Rahman and others, it was agreed that Pakistan will not let its soil be used for terrorism nor allow attacks by foreign forces on its territory. At the meeting the Chief of Army Staff Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and other security chiefs took the politicians into confidence on the military operations in tribal areas. Reacting on the move, Shahbaz Sharif and Fazlur Rahman complained that the military operations were launched without consulting the coalition partners. The meeting, however, did not touch upon the thorny issue of deposed judges.
Essentially the two unresolved issues – the judiciary and the future of Musharraf – compound the prevailing uncertainty about the coalition. There are pragmatists in both parties working hard to save the coalition by reaching a middle ground because they rightly fear a lapse back to confrontational politics and revival of political forces that have supported dictatorship in the past. Their success, however, would depend on how the PPP leaders control their go-alone impulses and whether the PML (N) modifies its dogmatic stance on judiciary and Musharraf.
top |
