Do we need a new constitution?

The News, July 19, 2006
Do we need a new constitution?
PLAIN WORDS
M B Naqvi

The writer is a veteran journalist and freelance columnist.

Many groups and parties have demanded a new constitution because the present one and also the one earlier to the 1973 basic law ones have not worked and have served as the instruments of military dictators to running or controlling political life. There are others, and they are powerful, who appear to be shocked at the very idea of trying to make a new constitution. They believe that should the effort be made, it will destroy the present social order and uncontrollable new forces will be released.

Let's see who wants and who opposes a new basic law. Large numbers of individuals, groups and parties think that without a new constitution Pakistan's problems will go from bad to worse; Pakistan now stands in peril with a bad constitution. All Pushtoon, Sindhi and Baloch nationalists want a new constitution; many prominent commentators have advocated a new organic law. It must be admitted that most of these are outside the charmed circle of power.

Those who oppose the idea include most of the feudals -- who always tend to support the dictators -- and they are solidly for retaining the 1973 Constitution as it stands today. The big business is mostly for it. The armed forces too are no changers. The Q League opposes a new supreme law. Many successful lawyers are also working in the service of conservatives.

Some think drafting a new constitution is a dangerous task. Why? Because those who prosper in the present dispensation want no change. All those whose lives are beset with myriad difficulties -- because of unemployment, high prices, and lack of social amenities and for want of opportunities for alternative politics -- want a change. The disadvantaged see the 1973 Constitution to be no real improvement over previous ones. It also provided a fig leaf for military dictators to enjoy ultimate power and it permits social and political elites to make more personal gains. Factually Pakistan has been looted by its social and economic elites; the common man has been at the losing end all along. No wonder the elite are for preserving the present constitution as are the rulers.

Pakistanis have agitated for democracy several times. Ignoring East Pakistan's movements, the 1964 election campaign by peacetime Field Marshal against Miss Fatima Jinnah became a pro-democracy mass movement, though only 80,000 persons were to vote who favoured Ayub Khan. The second major movement erupted in 1968 against Field Marshal's dictatorship and brought him down, though another general snatched victory from the people. The third major movement took place in March 1977 that brought down the Bhutto government -- again for the benefit of Gen Ziaul Haq. Zia went on to bloodily suppress the fourth popular agitation by the MRD that had remained confined to one province. Thereafter people became far too dejected and apathetic; they remain pessimistic and alienated. The ARD and MMA are talking of agitations soon; let's see what happens.

Writing a new constitution is not an academic exercise. A constitution reflects the social, political and economic purposes of those who frame it. All constitutions so far have provided cover to the powerful elite who are the rulers. Pakistanis have had much travail in constitution making because people's conscious pressure has been absent.

Pakistan was born a parliamentary democracy. Muslim League had mid-wifed it. But the League was a different thing in its two zones. East Bengalis did not have elites such as in West Pakistan and wanted simple democracy. In West Pakistan, almost all elected deputies belonged to landed aristocracy with no tradition of opposing governments; they always deferred to bureaucracy for selfish ends. Faced with the prospect of being ruled by Bengalis -- who had abolished landlordism without compensation in their own province -- West Pakistan grandees accepted the higher bureaucracy's leadership to deny Bengalis the power to harm them.

Thus emerged the bureaucratic coterie around Ghulam Muhammad, prominent members of which were Col Iskandar Mirza and Chaudhry Muhammad Ali. The secret of its power was the rumour that Iskandar Mirza carried the Pakistan Army in his pocket; Gen Ayub owed him gratitude. After a decade of manipulating the political class, the bureaucracy lost out to Ayub who, with American collusion, manoeuvred Iskandar Mirza to abrogate the constitution and appoint him martial law chief.

Initial political discourse in the late 1940s concerned three cliches: the ruling Muslim League relied on Muslim nationalism and an amorphous Islam. The Bengali contingent demanded political democracy and economic development. The third slogan that later arose was about creating a uniquely Islamic State -- raised by Jamaat e Islami that later attracted other religious groups. The reality however was a tug of war between the social elites of West Pakistan and the Bengali majority in the Constituent Assembly.

The first two constitution-making efforts were unsuccessful and the third one nearly succeeded. As soon as success approached, Ghulam Muhammad sacked the Constituent Assembly whose creature he was -- to wide acclaim by West Pakistani elite and press. After ruling as a civilian dictator for over a year, he was persuaded to call another Assembly which did pass a constitution, the 1956 one, based on Bengalis foregoing their majority status.

The constitution that Pakistan had inherited and the one made in 1956 served as covers for the power and influence of the top man (later the army chief wrote his own). The latter sacked the whole political lot and ruled as a dictator for 11 years. The point is that Ayub Khan showed that constitutions can be killed and a new one written if you have the power. Pakistan experienced democracy for the first few years while it has lived under a constitution-covered dictatorship ever since.

The 1973 statute was billed as closing the chapter of military rule. But that was not to be. First intolerant Zulfikar Ali Bhutto behaved autocratically, barely keeping the façade of democracy intact. And General Ziaul Haq again showed that he could always tear up a constitution or put it on the shelf. Choosing the latter device he ruled for 11 years. After him came 11 years of military-guided democracy in which five prime ministers were shown the door at the president's whim. After 1999 we have been in an open military-controlled democracy -- all under the 1973 constitution.

True, no constitution ensured effective human rights to the common people or occasioned economic development that could change their economic fortunes. For 55 years Pakistan has been ruled by dictators who have pursued development that enriches the top 15 per cent of the population. For the rich Pakistan is shining. The fate of the bottom 40 per cent is poverty. The rest of the lot makes the two ends meet with difficulty.

The question is who should prevail: the conservatives who want no change or the reformists who want a new constitution for desired changes? The change sought by reformists is to make Pakistan both an ordinary representative democracy and a federation in which the units or states are the real government that expands the economy for the benefit of the bottom 70 per cent and the centre is confined to performing agreed common tasks. The choice is urgent.

Attitudes among opposition parties on this question vary. The PML(N) seems to abhor the idea of a new organic law; on this question, the government and opposition do not differ. Both have conservative outlooks and are opposed by those who hate the strong centre and favour radical social and economic policies. As for the PPP, it too would oppose a new constitution because the party is today as conservative a force as the PML-Q; it is unlikely to have social and economic policies that are different to what Musharraf is pursuing. Other regional parties want more provincial autonomy; therefore they will opt for a new basic law. The small groups are too many and too insignificant to matter.

Email: mbnaqvi@cyber.net.pk