|
My
columns about parliamentary system being untenable in Pakistan provoked
a bitter response from one of my readers who wrote back saying, "When
you speak of 'parliamentary system' you speak of FORM and not of SUBSTANCE.
People are the substance and system the FORM. The problem as I see
is that if you put a piece of crap in a container, any container,
it would adopt the form of the container but will remain a piece of
crap."
This evokes a very fundamental 'chicken or the egg' conundrum: Does
people's value system define their political system or does a political
system define the value system of the people? I have discussed this
issue at length in my book, "Dysfunctional Democracy: A Case
for an Alternative Political System". I quote, "Philosophically,
there are two schools of thought with respect to constitutional development.
The first and the more popular school seeks moral and intellectual
solutions. It is held that an unhampered continuation of the democratic
process will automatically lead to the creation of moral and intellectual
standards required to run a viable democracy. The other school advocates
institutional reforms in the political system on the grounds that
morality and intellect is not a product of natural social evolution;
at least not in a country of great economic disparities and low literacy
rates. I tend to subscribe to the latter school of thought. Therefore,
I consider constitutional reforms imperative. In today's world, the
Institutions mould individual character; not vice versa. Most people
lack the intellectual acuity and moral determination to originate
political concepts and assert these on their environment. Instead,
they conform to the prevalent norms and try to seek self-interests
within the given system, without the involvement of moral or intellectual
evaluations. Economic forces impel most people to join the relentless
race of self-advancement. The outer edifice of social structures is
plastered with hyperbole provided by each system - justifications
and prejudices whitewashed and presented as beliefs."
In short, if it is the 'Substance' or the good sense of the people
that determines good governance then, in fact, there is no need for
a constitution and all we have to do is to elect wise and good persons
to public office and leave all statecraft to their judgment without
restraining them by a set of rules and regulations in the name of
constitution. However it is with the recognition that such un-circumscribed
and absolute power in the hands of any state functionary is not desirable
have constitutions come into being. If the constitutional framework
and rules cannot operate as checks and balances against abuse of power
and to promote the greatest public good, then such a constitution
is surely flawed.
Looking beyond the specific observation about democratic system made
by a reader mentioned in the beginning, a far more serious predicament
faces Pakistan today. Dearth of credibility in politicians is just
one manifestation of it. The society has lost faith in almost everything
including itself.
Democracy stands totally discredited and brings no more than a sarcastic
snigger on most faces. The validity of the constitution is under perpetual
enquiry in the courts, in the assemblies, talk shows and in the streets.
The role of the military in politics is only endorsed by those who
benefit from it. All elections held after 1971 have had deep shadows
cast over them. The Judiciary is perceived as a hamstrung institution
at the top and as an inefficient and exploitive agency at the lower
tiers. Civil services have become synonymous with red-tape and discretionary
irritants. Law enforcement agencies are seen as either ineffective
or out right exploitive, even abettors of criminals. CBR is looked
upon as an irrational ogre to be played hide and seek with. Public
sector utility providers are management disasters; their inherent
inefficiency and corruption has a parasitic existence on tax payers'
subsidies. Intelligence agencies are perceived as manipulators of
political acquiescence more than national security.
Information agencies, whether public or private do not inspire faith.
Government statistics are taken with a large pinch of salt. Private
sector media is manipulated by state authorities in no uncertain ways
and means. The newspapers are known to harbour individual and ideological
agendas and independent investigative reporting is conspicuous by
its absence. However, individual columnists do enjoy a high level
of freedom to express views but mostly in English press. Vernacular
press remains chained to chauvinistic ideologies and commercial sensationalism.
Most Pakistanis pay far higher credence to foreign news agencies.
Private sector fares no better. All large scale industries are uncompetitive
and thrive on protectionism - pharmaceuticals, synthetic fibres, sugar,
car manufacturers, and cement industry. Consumers carry the yoke of
their exploitive existence.
Weakness of judicial remedies for resolving commercial disputes and
ensuring good trade practices stifles investment, local and foreign.
Joint ventures and partnerships are dicey. Small and Medium scale
entrepreneurs are shy of collaboration and each one operates individualistically
out of mistrust of fellow businessmen. So much so that most medium
and large sized businesses disintegrate under laws of inheritance
- kith and kin loath to trust each other.
Foreign policies are considered doctored by external forces. External
forces, whether friends or foes are viewed as inherently dishonest.
Even the pristine game of cricket is mired in doubts of match fixing
and now, lo and behold, political manipulations. Hardly anyone believes
that the current series between India and Pakistan is being played
in a spirit of healthy competition and good faith.
Scepticism is a healthy component of democracies, as far as policies
are questioned, not the intentions. The crisis we face is that of
fundamental credibility of intentions. The President, the Prime Minister,
the opposition parties, Dr. Qadeer Khan, the clergy, the courts, all
ministries, gets tainted by conspiracy theories. We as a nation cannot
help but see anything but conspiracies everywhere around us.
With opening up of media and greater freedom of expression, instead
of building a rational and positive mindset to review situations and
re-evaluate our beliefs on factual evidence we keep regressing into
emotive hyperbole of doubts and disbelief. The ideology of Pakistan,
even Quaid-e-Azam's political thoughts, our history as taught in text
books and syllabi, is fraught with sceptical colours.
There is no smoke without fire, as the proverb goes. We have to ask
ourselves what has brought us to the point where no one trusts anyone.
Can a family, institution, a community or a society survive if there
is no trust between its individuals and mutual suspicions prevail
as a matter of rule? Are we just a paranoid society or is there some
historical justification to communal scepticism.
Irrespective of explanations, the black hole of credibility gap is
a fatal phenomenon. As long as it exists investors will not come here,
friends will remain unreliable, enemies will not trust us and any
good fortune and opportunities that come out way will be dissolved
in to this black hole. If we do not begin to trust ourselves, how
will others?
This is a national malaise festering since long, and now that we are
at cross roads of history, we must take cognisance of it and scratch
our heads about liberation from the debilitating black hole of incredulity.
Iqbal
Mustafa
1200 words
17 April 2004
|
