darkinsky
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2010
- Messages
- 10,754
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Imperfect democracy - Ikram Sehgal
Holding parliamentary elections in about 60 days from a standing start, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) says that local bodies polls cannot be held soon for various reasons. Informed sources claim delays may range from four months to even eight. The deliberate foot-dragging in the various provincial local bodies bills confirms there is only lip-service to the concept of local government.
While the perception of a democratic environment has been created by the national polls, laws are being framed for power to be in the hands of a few trusted individuals selected by democratically-elected rulers. To Musharrafs credit, while his local bodies initiative was not perfect, it did bring self-government down to the grassroots level. This was soon corrupted by those politicians who became his collaborators from 2002 to 2007, very much with Musharrafs willing knowledge, to perpetuate his uniformed rule under the guise of democracy.
One is deeply disappointed at the PTIs performance in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Imran Khan needs to make good his repeated promises of a model local government and soon! To quote my article An exercise in democracy (August 18, 2005), Democracy is of no use to the individual unless the various freedoms are available at his (or her) doorstep and he (or she) has a say without any hindrance in the governance of his (or her) immediate community. Local bodies provides the grassroots democracy that is extremely important for the welfare and well-being of a unified society.
Without providing effective participation of the citizen in the affairs of his community, democracy is a convenient farce in a feudal society it is hypocrisy. Vested interests have prevented local government from functioning on one pretext or the other since 1947 with disastrous results. Where are we now? To quote my article Politics of expediency (Feb 28, 2013), The deliberate hash of local government to reflect the diverse demographics of the ruling coalition, the PPP in the rural areas and the MQM in the urban areas of Sindh, the Sindh Peoples Local Government Ordinance (SPLGO) was essentially a hybrid measure which never resolved the vertical integration of the local governments with the provincial tier. Condemned outright by Sindhi nationalists as a sell-out of ethnic Sindhi interests, there was reaction even from diehard PPP loyalists in interior Sindh.
The language divide was the major factor leading to Pakistans self-destruction in 1971. The feudal politicians from West Pakistan first delayed the development of the first constitution of Pakistan and then devised tools like one unit and parity to deny the majority Bengali population (56 percent) their inherent democratic rights on the one-man, one-vote concept. East Pakistan never claimed the right to rule at the centre; what they only wanted was to be treated fairly. The ultimate tragedy was that to stay within Pakistan they accepted parity even when they were in a majority and even that was denied to them.
Large joint families in West Pakistan possessed hundreds, even thousands of acres of land (and continue to expand in todays Pakistan), worked by peasants or tenants living at or below subsistence level. Comparable to medieval Europe, feudals virtually run towns, operating private prisons for personal enemies, the locals dependant on them generation after generation through debt bondage. This control makes the landlord an all-powerful master, able to critically influence the distribution of water, fertilizers, tractor permits and agricultural credit and, consequently exercising considerable diktat over revenues, police and judicial administration of the area, and crucially the voting behaviour of the dependant peasants and town population. Can feudals ever allow power in the hands of the people whom they detest? We need a Magna Carta in Pakistan!
Bengal did not have a strong feudal upper class but a vast peasant and lower middle-class. Most politicians had no stakes in feudal landholding. Despite the strong Muslim religious feeling among an overwhelming majority, the socialist tendency was the cause of grave apprehension for West Pakistani feudal leaders, further aggravated when the East Bengal Assembly voted in as early as 1950 to end feudalism.
Abolishing permanent settlement and absentee landlordism, and imposing ceilings on landholdings they ensured no new feudal landholdings. With the West Pakistani feudals vehemently against any commensurate land reform, Pakistan was condemned to repeated cycles of short-lived periods of corrupt civilian rule, descent into chaos and as a result repeated military intervention. Did Bangladesh really secede from Pakistan or was it the other way around? Feudal mindset and democracy can never coexist. The compromise of conscience in favour of nepotism is the major reason for the sorry state of Pakistan today, whose leaders are not prepared to shun their kith and kin for the good of the state.
A good local-bodies system, Ayubs Khans basic democracies was corrupted by reason of being person-specific in having indirectly elected posts and becoming the electoral college for an indirectly elected president. A minority of powerful Romans in the Roman Republic got overwhelming control through a system of gerrymandering. Most high officials, including members of the Senate, came from a few wealthy and noble families. We fool ourselves that the indirectly elected Senators in Pakistan are there because of their popularity, competence and/or integrity. In reality, are they any different from the 20-centuries old Roman Senate?
In Local Bodies Elections (January 1, 1998) I had said, If the Nawaz Sharif government can reform the system and make it simpler, we will come a long way towards true governance. By not giving the voter participation at the grassroots level you disenfranchise the voter. He (or she) must be brought out of the cold into the mainstream. The crux of unity and integrity lies in citizen participation in the community and up the tier into national development. The person directly elected will be accountable or can at least explain credibly at the local level the reasons why a particular civic facility and/or utility is not available. Every deprivation is presently laid at the central and/or provincial governments doorstep.
To quote the 1998 article further, in Bangladesh the upazila concept (in 1982 then Bangladesh president Gen Ershad through an act created over 1000 self-governing units) was a very potent exercise. Unfortunately manipulated for political purposes it lost its fundamental credibility of government by the people, of the people and for the people providing governance at the grassroots level. Community participation is the basic ingredient for the unity of the nation, a non-complex simple formula for integrating and solidifying the foundations of this country. With Mian Nawaz Sharif genuinely interested in the amelioration of the miseries of the common man, this is the motorway that leads to the heart of the problem.
Rampant feudalism keeps us prisoners in the heart of darkness. Despite the magnificent counter-insurgency campaign conducted by the armed forces, terrorism continues unabated. Only participation by all citizens in the governance of their own communities will deny terrorists the logistical and moral space they need to foment their horrors. In todays world, good governance at the local level is a vital ingredient for national security. The real question is whether we shall ever see the light before this country plunges permanently into a dark abyss.
The writer is a defence and political analyst. Email: ikram.sehgal@wpplsms.com
Holding parliamentary elections in about 60 days from a standing start, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) says that local bodies polls cannot be held soon for various reasons. Informed sources claim delays may range from four months to even eight. The deliberate foot-dragging in the various provincial local bodies bills confirms there is only lip-service to the concept of local government.
While the perception of a democratic environment has been created by the national polls, laws are being framed for power to be in the hands of a few trusted individuals selected by democratically-elected rulers. To Musharrafs credit, while his local bodies initiative was not perfect, it did bring self-government down to the grassroots level. This was soon corrupted by those politicians who became his collaborators from 2002 to 2007, very much with Musharrafs willing knowledge, to perpetuate his uniformed rule under the guise of democracy.
One is deeply disappointed at the PTIs performance in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Imran Khan needs to make good his repeated promises of a model local government and soon! To quote my article An exercise in democracy (August 18, 2005), Democracy is of no use to the individual unless the various freedoms are available at his (or her) doorstep and he (or she) has a say without any hindrance in the governance of his (or her) immediate community. Local bodies provides the grassroots democracy that is extremely important for the welfare and well-being of a unified society.
Without providing effective participation of the citizen in the affairs of his community, democracy is a convenient farce in a feudal society it is hypocrisy. Vested interests have prevented local government from functioning on one pretext or the other since 1947 with disastrous results. Where are we now? To quote my article Politics of expediency (Feb 28, 2013), The deliberate hash of local government to reflect the diverse demographics of the ruling coalition, the PPP in the rural areas and the MQM in the urban areas of Sindh, the Sindh Peoples Local Government Ordinance (SPLGO) was essentially a hybrid measure which never resolved the vertical integration of the local governments with the provincial tier. Condemned outright by Sindhi nationalists as a sell-out of ethnic Sindhi interests, there was reaction even from diehard PPP loyalists in interior Sindh.
The language divide was the major factor leading to Pakistans self-destruction in 1971. The feudal politicians from West Pakistan first delayed the development of the first constitution of Pakistan and then devised tools like one unit and parity to deny the majority Bengali population (56 percent) their inherent democratic rights on the one-man, one-vote concept. East Pakistan never claimed the right to rule at the centre; what they only wanted was to be treated fairly. The ultimate tragedy was that to stay within Pakistan they accepted parity even when they were in a majority and even that was denied to them.
Large joint families in West Pakistan possessed hundreds, even thousands of acres of land (and continue to expand in todays Pakistan), worked by peasants or tenants living at or below subsistence level. Comparable to medieval Europe, feudals virtually run towns, operating private prisons for personal enemies, the locals dependant on them generation after generation through debt bondage. This control makes the landlord an all-powerful master, able to critically influence the distribution of water, fertilizers, tractor permits and agricultural credit and, consequently exercising considerable diktat over revenues, police and judicial administration of the area, and crucially the voting behaviour of the dependant peasants and town population. Can feudals ever allow power in the hands of the people whom they detest? We need a Magna Carta in Pakistan!
Bengal did not have a strong feudal upper class but a vast peasant and lower middle-class. Most politicians had no stakes in feudal landholding. Despite the strong Muslim religious feeling among an overwhelming majority, the socialist tendency was the cause of grave apprehension for West Pakistani feudal leaders, further aggravated when the East Bengal Assembly voted in as early as 1950 to end feudalism.
Abolishing permanent settlement and absentee landlordism, and imposing ceilings on landholdings they ensured no new feudal landholdings. With the West Pakistani feudals vehemently against any commensurate land reform, Pakistan was condemned to repeated cycles of short-lived periods of corrupt civilian rule, descent into chaos and as a result repeated military intervention. Did Bangladesh really secede from Pakistan or was it the other way around? Feudal mindset and democracy can never coexist. The compromise of conscience in favour of nepotism is the major reason for the sorry state of Pakistan today, whose leaders are not prepared to shun their kith and kin for the good of the state.
A good local-bodies system, Ayubs Khans basic democracies was corrupted by reason of being person-specific in having indirectly elected posts and becoming the electoral college for an indirectly elected president. A minority of powerful Romans in the Roman Republic got overwhelming control through a system of gerrymandering. Most high officials, including members of the Senate, came from a few wealthy and noble families. We fool ourselves that the indirectly elected Senators in Pakistan are there because of their popularity, competence and/or integrity. In reality, are they any different from the 20-centuries old Roman Senate?
In Local Bodies Elections (January 1, 1998) I had said, If the Nawaz Sharif government can reform the system and make it simpler, we will come a long way towards true governance. By not giving the voter participation at the grassroots level you disenfranchise the voter. He (or she) must be brought out of the cold into the mainstream. The crux of unity and integrity lies in citizen participation in the community and up the tier into national development. The person directly elected will be accountable or can at least explain credibly at the local level the reasons why a particular civic facility and/or utility is not available. Every deprivation is presently laid at the central and/or provincial governments doorstep.
To quote the 1998 article further, in Bangladesh the upazila concept (in 1982 then Bangladesh president Gen Ershad through an act created over 1000 self-governing units) was a very potent exercise. Unfortunately manipulated for political purposes it lost its fundamental credibility of government by the people, of the people and for the people providing governance at the grassroots level. Community participation is the basic ingredient for the unity of the nation, a non-complex simple formula for integrating and solidifying the foundations of this country. With Mian Nawaz Sharif genuinely interested in the amelioration of the miseries of the common man, this is the motorway that leads to the heart of the problem.
Rampant feudalism keeps us prisoners in the heart of darkness. Despite the magnificent counter-insurgency campaign conducted by the armed forces, terrorism continues unabated. Only participation by all citizens in the governance of their own communities will deny terrorists the logistical and moral space they need to foment their horrors. In todays world, good governance at the local level is a vital ingredient for national security. The real question is whether we shall ever see the light before this country plunges permanently into a dark abyss.
The writer is a defence and political analyst. Email: ikram.sehgal@wpplsms.com
