The old and the new

The writer is a lawyer based in Islamabad.
The generation at the helm that developed its consciousness in a newly independent Pakistan and has served in positions of authority over the last two decades has proven to be a failure.
Uncharitable as it may sound, our parents’ generation has consumed and ravaged much and contributed little to the fortunes of this country or its political, economic, socio-ethical consciousness. The only contribution attributable to this generation is that its excesses and self-indulgence has left no room for apathy, injected political consciousness in the youth and the urbanites, and created a sense of urgency to instil change and steer our state and society toward civility. And it is in this context that it was painful to see the young Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari regurgitate failed ideas and harmful prejudices of the past.
The new hyphenated middle name of Bilawal is proof that we are still shackled by all things hereditary. We must move forward to a stage of social and cultural evolution wherein, to borrow Martin Luther King’s ideas, individuals will be judged not by their lineage but by their character, the merit of their arguments and their personal accomplishments.
But while we are slowly changing, with growing resentment against hereditary politics and the affiliated sense of entitlement, we unfortunately still live in times where treating political parties as heirlooms is acceptable behaviour for many and ‘pedigree’ is embellished as a legitimate and relevant credential. Thus today, no one can steal from Bilawal the perquisites PPP’s core constituency would offer on a platter to any son or daughter of Benazir Bhutto.
But does he really need to endorse his predecessor’s baleful politics of drumming up fear, prejudice and personal loyalty? Can this Oxford-educated young man or his mentors not sense the desire for change in this country? Doesn’t the PPP already have enough venom-spewing bigots lashing up

ethnic prejudice and ridiculing the judiciary?
Rather than tainting him with Zardari’s controversial politics of deals and deceit built around harmful use of ethnicity and political and institutional scheming, why would PPP not have Bilawal emerge as the promise of change as opposed to a remnant of the status-quo? Why not encourage him to be a youth ambassador and understand and connect with the segment of our populace that will decide the fate of the elections over the next few decades? Why not groom him in the art of governance to make him relevant for a Pakistan that wishes to break free from politics of patronage?
In order to survive and prosper a new Pakistan wishes to break from the old in how it views politics, the economic function of government, institutional roles and responsibilities linked to constitutionalism, and desirable social and ethical values. Representative politics will need to be changed from a network of personal patronage to one rooted in the promise of governance. Elections will have to be contested, won and lost on the basis of policy programmes and public faith in a party’s ability to implement them.
Public authority will need to be seen as a trust by those vying for it and public office holders will have to be saddled with stringent fiduciary responsibilities. State resources will have to be approached as the collective property of citizens and not spoils of war at the disposal of rulers to be devoured by cronies and loyalists.
To emerge as the engines of effective democracy, political parties will need to be reformed. Going through the motions of party elections will not be sufficient. To develop a policy programme capable of addressing the complex problems confronting Pakistan, political parties will need to court and attract individuals with talent, training and experience to devise and implement policies.
It will be the competence and merit of individuals that will have to guide the distribution of party tickets for the legislature and enlistment within the cabinet once a party wins elections as opposed to the whims of the party leader. And the promise, contribution and loyalty of individuals to policies and causes resulting in public welfare will have to determine the fortunes of individuals within the political sphere and not slavish loyalty to the party head or an individual’s facility with flattery.
The party ruling the country will need to understand that once elected it is required to serve all citizens and not the 25 to 30 percent of the voting population that votes for such party. And the economic policies of the government will have to be rooted in the idea that our state resources are finite and depleting. It might be possible for Arab countries rich in natural resources with tiny populations to use state bounty to provide for the needs of the citizens.
But with Pakistan’s sprawling population, the distribution of state largess to afford a financial safety net to all citizens or offering jobs to the unemployed within the public sector will not work. All our public sector entities – the Steel Mills, Railways, PIA etc – that have been stuffed with political appointees have rendered these entities unsustainable apart from causing massive financial loss to the state.
Our politicos will need to understand that the recipe for economic growth and addressing unemployment isn’t the artificial creation of jobs within the public sector. The economy grows when government introduces policies and creates an environment that enables businesses to flourish and in turn create jobs within the private sector.
And in a country where the average national age is 21.5 years, millions of youth are unemployed and millions of others are soon going to enter the job market, the only means of preventing anarchy would be to bring our national security and foreign policy in sync with a prudent governance and economic programme focused on raising our growth rate up to double digit.
Pakistan has moved closer to the scheme of separation of powers and checks and balances enshrined in our Constitution. And this means two basic things. One, no one institution – be it the army, the federal government or the judiciary – will enjoy unfettered power. The seats on the table have increased and the hands of the clock cannot be turned back. Gone are the days when an army chief, a prime minister or a president – the troika as the 90s knew it – could bark orders at others on the high table where everyone represented the Executive.
We now live in a multi-polar polity where power is widely distributed. The army can no longer make and break governments at will, the judiciary isn’t the alter ego of the ‘establishment’, and the media isn’t a monolith. Those still obsessed by the conspiratorial absolutist power constructs of yesterday need to wake up and reconcile with this new reality.
And two, if we are to be a country bound by constitutionalism, we have no room for regressive notions of honour and respect such as affording preferential treatment to ‘pirs’ and ‘gaddi nashins’, or hiding behind concepts such as sovereign immunity that were conceived in an age when monarchs ruled and not the law.
We must bear allegiance to the text of our Constitution and the protections afforded to the head of state under Article 248, as determined by the Supreme Court in good faith, while this Article forms part of our fundamental law. But a progressive Pakistan must bear fidelity to the ideal of equality and question the prudence and vision of those who believe that hiding behind technical legal protections is more honourable than waiving them and submitting oneself to the law.
As you grow up you realise that your parents are also humans and thus fallible. That doesn’t mean you love them any less. If Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari wishes to be relevant to the new Pakistan that ought to emerge, it would serve him well not to inherit the politics of the past along with the party.

Email: sattar@post.harvard.edu