Dysfunctionality of the System

Pakistan’s political system is in the grip of crises. It has been jumping from one crisis to another in the post-Musharraf period. Mostly the crises emanate from clashes between rival political parties, but occasionally it has happened that the ruling party’s tussle with one or the other state institutions have also generated crises in Islamabad. There has never been a dull moment in Islamabad’s power politics since the demise of the military government of General Pervez Musharraf. Crisis is the new normal. So much so that policy making and serious governance issues have been pushed into the background by a permanent crisis that defines Islamabad’s political scene. Military’s dominant political position in the power structure of the country has become a permanent feature of our political system. It’s not that this permanent feature has added any source of stability to the situation—rather the dominance of the military has added to the dysfunctional nature of the system. Pakistan is a federal parliamentary form of democracy where the Prime Minister is bestowed with the complete executive authority by the 1973 constitution. And yet there are instances where in recent times, the incumbent Prime Minister has acted as a supplicant before the military establishment. While the opposition leaders routinely ask the COAS to shun his neutrality. Other state’s non representative institutions like superior judiciary have started acting like a permanent mediator in political conflicts, thanks to the political naivety and inaptitude of political leaders, most of whom are in a permanent state of conflicts with their rivals. Superior judiciary’s role as a mediator in political conflicts is not a rare occurrence in the system any more. It has become a norm with judges regularly issuing verdicts on such petty administrative matters such as whether to allow the opposition to hold a protest rally in Islamabad and where such a rally should be held.

Want to Read More