dawn.

com

Asserting democracy
Usama Khilji
5-6 minutes

THE impact of this government on democracy and parliamentary

norms are worth exploring given the motion for the vote of no-
confidence against Prime Minister Imran Khan filed by the now
united opposition in parliament.
First, some historical context. Founded in 1996, the PTI remained a
small party with not more than a single seat in parliament until
2011 when all of a sudden a massive jalsa in Lahore brought it
several new members from other political parties, as well as
newcomers to politics. The PTI boycotted the 2008 elections, and
had no presence in the 2008-13 parliament. In the 2013 polls, it
won 35 National Assembly seats, but alleged rigging on another 35
in the infamous ‘35 punctures’ allegation; and blocked the capital
for months through a sit-in outside parliament, during which the
latter’s premises and PTV buildings were also stormed. Arif Alvi,
the current president, apologised for the 35 punctures allegation in
2015.
In the 2018 elections, the PTI won 155 seats in the National
Assembly, the highest by any party but not enough to form a
government on its own. However, with the help of the MQM’s seven
MNAs, PML-Q’s five, the newly formed BAP’s five, BNP’s four, the
newly formed GDA’s three and AML’s one, it was able to form a
coalition government. The PTI had to rely on coalition partners who
were also given key ministries in the federal cabinet.
How did the PTI conduct parliament? Leader of the House Prime
Minister Imran Khan attended only 11 per cent of Assembly sittings
between August 2018 and February 2021, as per the Free and Fair
Election Network. The ruling party also consistently tried to
delegitimise elected opposition members, many of whom have cases
ongoing against them in court, including the opposition leader, by
saying they did not deserve to be in parliament.
The PTI has tried to delegitimise the opposition.
This refusal to engage with the opposition damaged parliamentary
functioning. Legislative business was also impacted, as the
opposition in response also delayed matters in the Senate where
they had a majority. Had the PTI established a working relationship
with the opposition, which it did manage to do on a few bills related
to human rights, then perhaps legislative business and the political
discourse would have been different.
However, what we saw was that parliament was reduced to an
insignificant body, with over 68 ordinances passed by the PTI
government through the president, without much debate in
parliament or any input from the relevant stakeholders.
Coalition partners were also unhappy, often complaining that they
were not taken on board on several decisions despite being elected
representatives. The BNP-M quit the coalition in less than two
years, after having been disappointed that the accord signed with
the PTI was not respected, especially regarding the non-recovery of
missing Baloch, the continuing enforced disappearances, non-
implementation of the National Action Plan against terrorism, and
unequal sharing of resources with Balochistan.
Recently, the MQM-P and BAP also quit the coalition government,
leaving the PTI without a majority in parliament, and rendering
defections from within PTI unnecessary for the no-confidence
move. Still, it is important to note the large number of disgruntled
PTI members. Despite the party’s very public campaign to shame its
dissidents as traitors and Imran Khan warning that ‘nobody will
marry their children’, one must ask why several PTI members are
dissatisfied. Were they significantly engaged with? Were they
heard? These are points to reflect on as PTI joins the list of parties
that have had their government term disrupted in one way or the
other.
Lastly, the PTI’s ties with the military establishment are
noteworthy. The party and the military proudly proclaimed being
on the ‘same page’ — until last year when the very public saga of the
appointment of the next ISI chief exposed turns in that very page,
coinciding with the development of a consensus in the opposition
alliance, the Pakistani Democratic Movement, and later the filing of
a motion of no-confidence against Prime Minister Imran Khan. The
PTI is now blaming foreign interference, while the army chief
outlined foreign policy objectives publicly, stressing the importance
of the relationship with the US, soon after the prime minister
proclaimed that foreign policy should be independent and alleged
US pressure behind the motion against him.
It should of concern to all Pakistanis that the ‘establishment’, as
claimed by the prime minister, provided the latter with three
options: resignation, early elections or facing the vote of no-
confidence. Is such meddling democratic? Is it constitutional? All
political parties must be united in rejecting unconstitutional
interference in politics, and assert the importance of parliament in
ensuring accountability in our democracy.
The writer is director of Bolo Bhi, an advocacy forum for digital
rights.
Twitter:@UsamaKhilji
Published in Dawn, April 3rd, 2022