Working within constitutional

domain
By Talat Masood
Published: January 23, 2019
The writer is a retired lieutenant general of the Pakistan Army and a former federal secretary. He has also served as
chairman of the Pakistan Ordnance Factories Board

Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, speaking at a full-court

reference last week, made some highly pertinent remarks and
useful suggestions on wide-ranging issues. Among other
matters, he spoke of the need for deliberating on how to
ensure civilian supremacy along with civilian accountability —
a subject of vital relevance for Pakistan’s future democratic
development and institutional harmony.

Although the PTI government is the third successive

democratically-elected government, civilian supremacy on
vital national issues still remains illusory. The armed forces,
and primarily the army leadership, play a leading role in
determining relations with our neighbours. This is especially so
in respect of India, Afghanistan, China and the US. In addition,
the defence and security policy, for all practical purposes,
remains under their overall control. In matters associated with
CPEC the military works closely with the Chinese. The army
leadership actively engages with Middle Eastern monarchies
and our armed forces have a highly-cooperative relationship
with them.

Realising the prominent role of the military, foreign dignitaries

attach great significance to their interactions with its
leadership. Ambassadors regularly interact with military and
foreign government delegations make it a point to meet them.
The regional security situation, specially the perennial hostility
with India, the civil war in Afghanistan and problems related to
smuggling, drug and human trafficking across the borders
have further enhanced the role of security forces.

Nuclearisation of South Asia is another factor that has further

expanded the responsibilities and the power base of the
military. In all nuclear-armed countries, with the exception of
North Korea, the nuclear establishment and control rests with
civilian or political leadership.

Major national activities such as conducting national or

provincial elections, or managing nationwide census that in a
democratic country would normally fall in the orbit of the
civilians, is conveniently passed on to the armed forces.
Floods, earthquakes and other national calamities that
generally are handled worldwide with the help of armed forces,
justifiably fall in the scope of its responsibility.

Defending the eastern and western borders both of which are

in a state of semi-war conditions remain its primary
professional responsibility that draws most of its energy. Our
officers and other ranks continue to shed their blood valiantly
defending these borders. And this state of affairs is likely to
continue until relations with India move towards normalisation
and peace efforts in Afghanistan succeed. In addition the
internal fight against militancy and extremism also falls in the
orbit of the military’s responsibility.

The object of cataloguing the current major responsibilities of

the armed forces was to show the extent of their spread and
the magnitude of challenge that faces the correction of the
civil- military imbalance.

Other major area that the chief justice rightly identified was
civilian accountability that remains very weak. The question
arises what measures are to be taken to overcome it without
which the political governments will never be able to gain the
confidence of the people or that of the armed forces to remain
within constitutional boundaries.

This weakness stems from several factors. The structure and

leadership of political parties is not adhering to democratic
norms in the conduct of choosing its leadership or taking party
or national decisions. Unless political parties do not become
internally democratic, they will never command the respect of
the electorate or those of institutions. If party leaders do not
attend parliament regularly, fail to take their responsibilities of
legislation and policy formulation seriously, they undermine
their importance and prestige. A cursory glance of the
activities of the National Assembly and the Senate will confirm
this negligent behaviour. Imran Khan prefers tweets rather
than making any profound policy statements or discussing
national issues in parliament. This is in sharp contrast to what
we witness in Britain, Malaysia and Turkey or near home in
India where the prime minister and the leader of opposition
initiate debates in parliament and attend sessions regularly. A
classic example of the neglect of parliament was evident when
no substantive policy statement by the PM or the FM was
made after their return from Saudi Arabia, the UAE or China
apart from flaunting over the loans and financial assistance
that was offered. What were the terms of these financial
agreements and what are their expectations in return remain
shrouded.

By being more focused on governance, accepting greater

participation in matters that fall in their jurisdiction and having
a clean reputation would definitely leverage politicians to
assert for their rightful place. Another point that needs serious
attention is the genuine activation of the various committees
of the National Assembly and the Senate. It has taken five
months to formulate some of the committees and it is time
that they started functioning soon. The quality of discourse in
parliament, interest and understanding in matters related to
economy, security and foreign relations need to be compatible
with the challenges that the country is facing. Most of the
chiefs of staff in recent years have displayed a much better
grasp of global and regional dynamics than political leaders.
This is not to acknowledge that our history is replete with
major military decisions taken by military dictators such as the
1965 war or the Kargil conflict and which made the nation pay
a very heavy cost.

Accountability of civilian leaders has to be broad based and

not confined to any particular political party or group specific.
And it should be by civilian institutions in which the military
should have a minimal role otherwise it would be construed as
a perversion of the legal system and of the Constitution. Over
the years, people have lost confidence in integrity and
competence of state institutions and are resorting to
alternative ways of seeking justice and finding solutions. Loss
of trust in the justice system and bureaucracy is an ominous
trend that can only be corrected by better performance and
honest public dealings.
By and large, experience of other countries demonstrates that
as the performance of government improves involvement of
the military and judiciary gets limited to its constitutional
boundaries.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 23 rd, 2019.