Pandemonium in parliament

In a democratic dispensation, the ruling party and the opposition are considered to be two sides of the same coin. While the government runs the show on the basis of the given mandate, the opposition makes sure that it remains within the parameters and contours of governance prescribed by the constitution and law, established democratic norms and popular franchise to play its desired role. The purpose of both entities is to promote the well-being of the public by strengthening the state institutions and democracy itself.

Governments all over the world have the disadvantage of incumbency and their conduct and style of governance is continuously under incisive scrutiny of the opposition. But in civilised societies, the opprobrium directed at the government has a constructive purpose and is based on concrete and valid reasons. It is not merely an impulsive and essentially hostile exercise by the opposition to justify its existence, as is the case in Pakistan.

Judged against the backdrop of this standard for the opposition in democratic entities, the pandemonium created by the PTI legislators, who returned to parliament after a self-imposed absence of two months and 10 days, has certainly lowered our prestige as a democratic polity. It has also portrayed the party in dismal colours. The speaker, who tried his best to restore order, eventually had to adjourn the session until the next day.

The speaker was right in rejecting the privilege motions on an issue which was being heard by the apex court and giving the floor to the government benches after the leader of the opposition had expressed himself.

But the PTI members continued with their unruly behaviour by besieging the speaker’s desk, raising slogans against the prime minister and tearing apart copies of the rules of business and the agenda of the day. It was the worst exhibition of trampling parliamentary norms. This kind of nasty behaviour on the part of members of this august house, which is the custodian of national morality, cannot be condoned.

The PPP and PTI had filed separate privilege motions with a common purpose to take a swipe at the government – particularly the prime minister for the alleged contradiction in his statement in parliament – and wanted to influence the court proceedings.

There was a marked difference in their reaction to the rejection of the motions and the plea of the speaker to give the floor to the opposition and the government benches turn by turn. While the PPP behaved in a dignified manner, the PTI members displayed the typical character of its brand of politics. It is generally believed that the return of the PTI members to parliament after a long absence, against the backdrop of the adjournment of the Panama leaks case till the first week of January, was a well-calculated move to pressurise the government and the judiciary. Though it represented yet another volte-face by the party which had vowed not to return to parliament until the court decided the Panama case.

No one can take away the right of the opposition to question the government and its policies on merit and trigger a debate on the issues of national concern in conformity with the democratic practices. But pre-judging something and trying to obstruct the proceedings of the house through despicable conduct that is unbecoming of a democratic opposition, is simply not acceptable. The cause of democracy would have been better served had the PTI respected the decision of the speaker and waited for its turn to take the floor.

The Panama leaks case is before the court and all the stakeholders must wait for its verdict. They must avoid any move to prejudice the process of justice. This is especially true of parliamentarians, who are the architect of the constitution and law according to which the judiciary is supposed to dispense justice. Any behaviour to the contrary is tantamount to a lack of faith and confidence in the court.

Unfortunately, the PTI has miserably failed to live up to the expectations of the people by resorting to the politics of agitation tinged with violence. It has betrayed the mandate of the people by staying away from parliament, which is the proper forum to represent the cause of the people who voted for the party. Imran Khan, who emerged on the political scene as a revolutionary with a mission to rectify the maladies afflicting the system of governance, has disappointed the public through his negative politics that is solely aimed at clinching power by hook or by crook. He now resembles a traditional power-seeker who is obsessed with the syndrome of self-righteousness.

Our politicians, to the chagrin of the hapless public, have failed to learn from history. They are seen crying hoarse from every convenient rooftop to espouse the cause of democracy but their conduct has been just the opposite. These politicians are the ones who, through their reckless politics, have been creating conditions for takeovers by the khakis and encouraging them to encroach upon the civilian territory. Trying to destabilise or change governments before their mandated period has hurt us grievously in the past. Unless politicians shun this archaic mode of politics, the country cannot be winched out of the morass it has been pushed into through the criminal indiscretions of the politicians and the khakis.

The PTI needs to change its political creed if it wants to remain relevant to the future political landscape of the country. The country is confronted with serious challenges which necessitate saner politics and a collective will to tackle them.

The politicians also have a collective responsibility to reform the archaic colonial system of governance. There is an emerging national consensus on the need to reform the system and eliminate the avenues of corruption built into it. Although the PTI is pursuing the legitimate cause of changing what Imran Khan claims is an exploitative system, it needs to be reminded that legitimate goals can only be achieved by adopting legitimate means.

In the task of nation-building, it is not the ends that justify the means but the means that justify the ends. The observance of universal democratic norms and the recognition and use of the forum of parliament are the right means to go about such tasks. The sooner this thinking sinks into the minds of our politicians, the better.

 

The writer is a freelance contributor.

Email: ashpak10@gmail.com