The National Assembly has passed the 18h constitutional amendment bill to remove the clauses introduced by Gen Ziaul Haq and Gen Pervez Musharraf that had trampled the spirit of the 1973 constitution with an overwhelming support from across the political divide. The Parliament will thus be sovereign now with the revocation of article 58(2)(b). The bill envisages removal of Gen Ziaul Haq’s name from the constitution and declared Gen Musharraf’s coup of October 12, 1999 as illegal and unlawful besides nullifying the Legal Framework Order 2002. It also declared Gen Musharraf’s emergency as illegal.

The bill that has amended 102 clauses of the constitution also dispensed with the Concurrent Legislative List, renamed the NWFP as Khyber-Pakhtoonkhwa. The House, however, rejected (PML-Q)’s Kashmala Tariq’s amendment in article 17(4) for retention of the provision that made it mandatory for political parties to hold regular elections within the parties. PML(N)’s Javed Hashmi and Kh Saad Rafiq supported Kashmala’s stand in violation of the party line. The renaming of the NWFP also evoked opposition in the House. As many as 20 PML-Q members voted against the provision while some PML(N) members from Hazara division also staged walk out against the party’s policy. They included Capt ® Safdar, son in law of PML(N) leader Nawaz Sharif. The bill will now go to the Senate for passage paving way for President’s assent.

Reza Rabbani’s constitutional reforms committee has done real hard work in producing a general consensus on the amendments although there was a virtual revolt against it in the House. The uproar against removal of Clause 17(4) pertaining to the holding elections within the political parties not only brought out differences within the PML(Q) and PML(N) but also focused the disgusting conduct of their representatives in the reforms committee.

The committee’s recommendation for its removal negates the spirit of democracy and is meant to promote and protect the hereditary politics especially in the PPP and PML(N). Similarly the committee as well as political parties especially the PML(N) have ignored the voice and sentiments of the people of Hazara and DIKhan divisions, besides Hindko speaking Peshawar city on the issue of the renaming of the NWFP as Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa. The ugly demonstrations taking place in Hazara and Peshawar amply speak of the fact that the issue has been bulldozed in the committee as well as in the House through ‘mutual connivance’ in utter disregard to the aspirations of the people of Hazara, DIKhan and Peshawar . It’s pertinent that the aspirations of the people of these areas should be given due consideration in the interest of the unity and cohesion at the provincial level.

The reforms package also smacks of personal vendetta on the part of the PPP and PML(N) against Gen Ziaul Haq and Gen Pervez Musharraf apparently because both the parties were victims of the military dictatorships. While Gen Ziaul Haq executed his benefactor ZA Bhutto, Gen Musharraf deported his benefactor Nawaz Sharif to Saudi Arabia for ten years. The attempt to remove Gen Zia’s name from the constitution, however, appears ridiculous since he is part of the country’s history as he ruled it for over a decade. He signed the ZA Bhutto’s execution. It’s, therefore, an act of mortification and whining on PPP’s part. Interestingly, the nationalist parties of Sindh and Balochistan have also rejected the 18th amendment bill and assert that the real powers still remain with the centre. Senator (retd) Abdul Hayee Baloch is the opinion that provinces have not been invested the real powers. Irrespective of the irritants emerging from the bill, there can be no denial of the fact that the Raza Rabbani led reforms committee has done hard work to formulate a document that has paved the way for removal of the vestiges of dictatorship from the 1973 constitution.

The removal of article 58(2)(b) inserted in the constitution by Gen Ziaul Haq and Gen Musharraf and revocation of the Concurrent Legislative List are undoubtedly the major achievements for the promotion of democracy and national unity. Article 58(2)(b) will, however, continue to haunt parliament till such time that our rulers and politicians will change their ways of governance and good conduct. Our history is replete with instances where military interventions had come either at the invitation of the politicians or due to bad governance. The present governance and rulers’ conduct certainly constitutes a threat to democracy. The confrontation between government and the judiciary emanating from the former’s deliberate attempts to sidetrack the implementation of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the NRO does have a potent danger to democracy. It’s certainly time to subordinate personal interests to the larger national interests for the sake of country’s security and survival.

The revocation of the Concurrent Legislative List was, in fact, long overdue it. It should have been done in 1983 as it was provided in the constitution itself that it will be removed after a period of ten years. Though some elements are not satisfied with the end of the List on the premise that the centre will still wield the financial powers rather than the provinces, yet it’s bound to provide sufficient autonomy to the provinces to manage their affairs on their own. The transfer of the responsibility to look after the subjects in the Concurrent List will, however, involve not only a lot of effort on the part of the provinces, but will also need to be supplemented with additional resources for the process of transfer of subjects. Understandably, the federal government and the provincial governments have not yet comprehended the funds needed for the project.

Since the process is supposed to be completed within 15 months, it’s imperative that both the federal and provincial governments work with top speed to be able to implement it within the stipulated period. A number of ministries in the federal government will become redundant with the revocation of the Concurrent Legislative list. The size of the federal cabinet is likely to be reduced to 49 with only five advisors as a result of the 18th amendment. The recommendation is very vital since the rulers had hitherto remained unbridled on this count. Even today, the number of ministers, ministers of state, parliamentary secretaries and advisors is fantastically irrelevant to the national resources as well as the work load.



Pakistan Observer