In the light of Bhuttto's obsession with power, former Air Marshall M. Asghar Khan, who was heading

Elections are the most significant element of democracy, as with the ballot democracy begins. It is constitutional liberalism that laid foundation of democracy everywhere but democracy has not been successful in bringing constitutional liberalism. e.g. democracies in third world countries usually ignore the statutory boundaries of power and do not recognize basic rights of their citizens. Developed countries, esp. in West, have liberal democracies with fair elections, free political system accompanied by rule of law, judicial independence, protected basic rights of religion, speech, assembly and property, etc for their citizens. Actually these protected rights and liberties offered to citizens establish constitutional liberalism and governments should be assessed on all relevant elements of constitutional liberalism. Countries like Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand offer their citizens a better quality of life, liberty and happiness but a restricted political choice, as compared to intolerant and fake democracies in Slovakia, Ghana and Pakistan which don t have any welfare offered to citizens. Democracy is not a synonym of constitutional liberalism it is just an element of constitutional liberalism. Magna Carta, Rule of Law, Habeas Corpus all are various tones of constitutional liberalism. It shouldn t be a surprise if People of Pakistan have lost faith in the democratic process since they face fake elections, corrupt candidates and subdued electorate, majority of who are poor and illiterate: the result of all these brings a non-deserving leadership to power who are either very rich or enjoy the favor of influential lot of the country. Consequently Pakistan has turned into an ill-governed renter state, a banana republic where power-hungry group rules as American minion. A decade ago Pakistan was much stable, free, and sovereign country but today Pakistanis can t recognize themselves as their condition is no different than a citizen of a feudal- bureaucratic state of the colonial era. How can democracy, even in its worst form, survive in a current which is neither independent nor sovereign? Let s have a quick glance at the political past of Pakistan. The first incident of playing with democracy is recorded against General Ghulam Mohammad who, on 24 October 1954, dismissed the Prime Minister Mohmmad Ali Bogra for passing a Bill that obliged the president to abide by the advice of the prime minister. The dismissal of the Constituent Assembly was challenged in the Sindh High Court, but with the support of the then chief justice of Pakistan the Federal Court overruled the Sindh High Court's decision under Article 22-3a. Between the years 1953 to 1958, Pakistan had seven prime ministers removed through palace intrigues. The national elections were scheduled in 1959, but that would have ensured the East Pakistanis dominating the West. "To circumvent the transfer of power, the Civil Service asked the army to takeover". Finally, the 1956 Constitution was abrogated on September 7, 1958, after the military intervention. The bureaucracy, in connivance with the army, laid to rest the infant democracy, and needless to say the role of politicians facilitated such transformation with great ease. After taking over, Ayub Khan was of the opinion that parliamentary democracy did not suit Pakistan with its high illiteracy rate and overwhelming rural population. The army wanted "controlled democracy" and to pursue its own security interest without any difficulties. Hence, it introduced basic democracy in October 1959. According to this formula, the country was divided into 80,000 geographical units; each constituency consisted of 1,000 voters who in turn elected a representative. These representatives constituted an electoral college that would elect a president. Ayub was elected through this system. The activities of the politicians were brought under heavy restraint by the Elective Bodies (Disqualification Order). The 1962 Constitution banned political parties, and members of the National Assembly were chosen on the basis of personal merit. The Political Party Bill introduced in July 1962 allowed the formation of political parties, but many of the former leading politicians, prime ministers and ministers were not only barred from participating in the politics but also from making political statements. The civil servants looked after day-to-day administration and both the army and the civil service acted in great coordination not only in policy formulation but also in its implementation. Over-centralisation alienated various ethno-linguistic groups. The Bengalis nurtured a sense of political marginalisation and

economic exploitation. Under growing pressure from various political parties, Ayub relinquished power, but handed over to his trusted lieutenant Gen Yahya Khan, who imposed martial rule. Though the army was prepared to transfer power to a civilian government, it was reluctant to forgo its primacy in the political sphere of the country. By proclaiming the Legal Framework Order in 1970, the army had insured itself against shifts in the balance of power. The Awami League victory surprised Gen Yahya Khan. A new kind of power struggled had evolved between Z.A. Bhutto and Mujib-ur-Rehman in which the army got willingly involved, to manipulate the situation in its favour. Bhutto, notwithstanding the fact that Mujib had a majority, said, "Majority alone does not count in national politics...no Constitution could be framed, nor could any government at the centre be run without my party's cooperation" His intoxication with power can be gauged from the fact that he did not even hesitate to threaten the elected members of the National Assembly, and argued for the recognition of two majority parties and even two prime ministers of Pakistan. The political stalemate gave rise to dissatisfaction in the Eastern Wing, leading to a civil war and finally the creation of the separate country of Bangladesh. This disaster left the army with no choice but to relinquish power to Bhutto. Bhutto's role in the events leading to the separation of East Pakistan is controversial and questionable to the extent that he used the tragedy of the country for his political benefit, to emerge as the unquestioned leader, with the army "cut down to size". During Bhutto's regime the 1973 Constitution defined the role of the army to be limited to dealing with external threats, and in aid of civil power. The military personnel were required to take an oath of allegiance to the Constitution, and subverting the democratic order was made a capital offence. The Civil Service of Pakistan was abolished on August 20, 1973, and it was replaced by the All Pakistan Unified Grades Structure which benefitted politically inclined people, apart from the civil servants. The members of the civil service actively participated in the rigging of the parliamentary election of 1977. Under Bhutto s regime, out of four provinces of Pakistan, Balochistan and the NWFP were ruled by the National Awami Party and Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Islam (JUI). The coalition was allowed to function and it was agreed that the federal government would appoint governors in consultation with the major political parties of the province. However, the dismissal of the Balochistan government in less than a year and subsequent army action in the province was a stark reminder of the reality of provincial autonomy, and Bhutto's democratic credentials. Instead of evolving a culture of tolerance which is a necessary ingredient of democracy, Bhutto emerged as a leader intolerant of opposition. Bhutto not only banned regional political parties and organisations under the plea that the objectives of such organisations were against the "sovereignty and integrity of Pakistan", but also limited the freedom of association as enshrined in Article 17 of the 1973 Constitution through the First Amendment to the Constitution. In 1975, Bhutto, through the Third Constitutional Amendment, curtailed the right of personal liberty through the provision of indefinite detention without trial, of people whose acts are perceived as a threat to national security. The Fourth Amendment debarred the High Court from granting bail to persons detained under the Preventive Detention Act. Bhutto suppressed the Press through the National Press Trust, a body which the PPP in its election pledge had promised to abolish. Hence, even people who had been supportive of Bhutto, turned against him. Bhutto used the tactics of land reforms to punish his political opponents belonging to the National Awami Party (NAP) however, the PPP itself was dominated by leaders with feudal backgrounds. The party, instead of being mass-centric, became personified with the charisma of Bhutto, who through the power of his oratory, was capable of influencing the voters. In the light of Bhuttto's obsession with power, former Air Marshall M. Asghar Khan, who was heading

one of the Opposition parties, did not hesitate to call the army to take over power. It was believed that the army would conduct free and fair elections. Gen Zia, after assuming power and successfully eliminating Bhutto, was able to rule without any threat to his regime. Zia understood Pakistan's politics very well, including the nature of the politicians through his close association with the government during Bhutto's regime. The unity of the PNA was exposed when Gen Zia formed his Cabinet. The characteristic political opportunism was evident as the Jamaat-i-Islami and the Muslim League expressed their desire to join the government. In August 1978, many of the parties which constituted the PNA, joined Zia's government, thus, burying their so-called commitment to democracy for the sake of political expediency and opportunism. After taking over power, Zia postponed the election and started his Islamisation programme to garner legitimacy. By focusing on security concerns that arose from the Soviet intervention, Zia was able to control the domestic political situation. Moreover, political parties were banned, and this was justified under his Islamisation bid. In 1983, Zia started his limited civilian rule by incorporating civilians into the administration. The local municipal election, as a prelude to his national election, took place on a non-party basis in 1984. The Movement for the Restoration of Democracy (MRD), an amalgamation of various political parties, boycotted the election. Since political parties were banned, the election campaign remained devoid of debates on socio-economic issues. In spite of this, the military was able to garner the support of the feudals and other elites like the business class. Zia held elections to the National Assembly and amended the Constitution to enable the president to nominate a member of the National Assembly as the prime minister, subject to his winning the confidence of the National Assembly. Later, martial law was lifted, after Zia secured the political legitimacy to rule on being elected as the president of Pakistan, though he retained his position as chief of army staff (COAS). Gen Zia introduced the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution which gave enormous power to the president under Article 58-2b. Most interestingly, this subservient role for the civilian government was acceptable to most of the members of the National Assembly-188 out of 217- who supported it, with no vote cast against it. The last pillar of democracy, an independent and impartial judiciary, was acutely harmed under Gen Zia s rule. The judges of the Supreme Court and High Court were required to take a fresh oath under the military regime. The government had the power to remove judges directly, without regard to their tenure. The government was empowered to detain without trial any person who was accused of speaking or acting against the regime. It deprived the judiciary of the power to intervene to protect civil liberties. General Zia also militarized the bureaucracy systematically. By his government's orders, 5 % of all new posts in the higher civil service were to be filled by army officers who, consequently, occupied important civilian positions.another legacy that Gen Zia left behind him was sacking the elected Prime Ministers. Gen Zia sacked Prime Minister Muhammad Khan Junejo and dissolved the elected assemblies while President Ghulam Ishaq Khan sacked Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and disbanded the national and provincial assemblies, later doing the same again with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was again sacked by President Farooq Leghari using the same powers. General Zia-ul- Haq's Islamization policy also proved to be extremely influential, and has continued to affect the political and sectarian situation in Pakistan till the present day. In the 1988 elections, the PPP emerged as the single largest group in the National Assembly, and its leader, Benazir, became prime minister. At the same time, however, Nawaz Sharif emerged as the most powerful politician outside the PPP. Mian Nawaz Sharif became Prime Minister in 1990 through political coalition with IJI. He rebuilt the confidence of the businessmen which was badly damaged by Bhutto's policies. A lot of foreign investors began to take interest in the economy of Pakistan and it began to flourish, however Pakistan had a heavy set back because of Nawaz's diplomatic failure. Then Benazir Bhutto got her second Regime but the country remained economically unstable, and Pakistanis were far

from developing a genuine civil society. Bhutto, favoured by the Americans, had to juggle relations with them and the Pakistani people: Pakistan came under U.S. pressure to freeze Pakistan s popular nuclear program and to reach a settlement over Kashmir. The army earlier had pledged a hands-off policy in political matters, but domestic conditions had so deteriorated that that promise had to be reconsidered. Moreover, in October 1995 some 40 army officers were arrested for allegedly plotting to overthrow the government and kill the president and prime minister. In September 1996, when Benazir s brother Murtaza Bhutto was killed in a police shootout, and Asif Ali Zardari was accused of complicity in Murtaza s death, President Leghari dismissed Bhutto s government. In subsequent elections the PML-N of Nawaz Sharif was the big winner, taking all the provinces either outright or through coalitions with provincial parties. Mindful of the need to limit the power of the president, Nawaz Sharif gained parliamentary approval of the 13th amendment to the constitution, which withdrew the president s authority to remove a government at his own discretion. A 14th amendment, which prevented party members from violating party discipline, was struck down by the Supreme Court, an action that set the stage for a confrontation between the prime minister and the high court. Sharif attempted to have the number of Supreme Court members reduced from 17 to 12. However, this attempt to tamper with the judiciary stirred up the Pakistani bar, which entered the fray and demanded that Sharif be disqualified as a member of the parliament. Although the prime minister relented, by December 1997 Sharif, with assistance from the parliament, had extended his powers to such a degree that even President Leghari was forced to resign. Nevertheless, Nawaz Sharif s successful power plays were minimized by his failure to halt the sustained ethnic conflict in Karachi and Sind, the sectarian bloodshed that had broken out in the North-West Frontier Province, and the tribal struggle for greater autonomy in Balochistan. The prime minister s autocratic behaviour only intensified local and provincial resistance. With ethnic strife continuing unabated, Pakistan s army chief of staff, Gen. Jehangir Karamat, spoke for a frustrated public when he appeared to indicate the country was teetering at the abyss. However, Karamat s role in the political process angered Nawaz Sharif, and in October 1998 the prime minister pressured the army high command into forcing the general s early retirement. Karamat was quickly and quietly replaced by Gen. Pervez Musharraf. On Oct. 12, 1999, Sharif attempted to oust Musharraf while the general was out of the country, but other generals thwarted the plot and arrested Sharif; on his return to Pakistan that same day, Musharraf announced the dissolution of the Sharif government and the suspension of the constitution. Although the action was clearly a coup d état, Musharraf did not declare martial law, and he stated that fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution were to be preserved and that all laws other than the constitution would continue in force unless altered by military authority. Musharraf nevertheless did declare a Proclamation of Emergency, and on October 14 he announced that Pres. Mohammad Rafique Tarar would remain in office, while the national and state legislatures would be suspended. The country s courts would continue operating with the limitation that the justices not interfere with any order coming from the chief executive as Musharraf at first styled himself. Moreover, Provisional Constitution Order No. 1 of 1999 specified that the president could only act in accordance with and with the advice of the chief executive. Pakistan s political landscape changed dramatically with the events of September 11. In April 2002 Musharraf, seeking to formalize his position as the head of state, held and overwhelmingly won a referendum granting him an additional five years as president. The referendum also reinstated the constitution, though modified with provisions spelled out in the Legal Framework Order (LFO). In addition to extending Musharraf s term, the LFO expanded the president s powers and increased the number of members of both houses of the legislature. Parliamentary elections followed in October under the limitations imposed by the LFO, and Musharraf s adopted political party, the Pakistan Muslim League (Q) (PML-Q), took more of the seats in the National Assembly than any other contending

party. The party subsequently forged a coalition government headed by PML-Q leader Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali. The opposition PPP polled next highest, but it was a coalition of religious parties known as the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) that made the most notable showing. In January 2004 Musharraf sought and received an unprecedented vote of confidence from a parliamentary electoral college. In August Shaukat Aziz, a former banker and minister of finance, took the premiership after the resignation of PM Jamali. In early 2007 Musharraf began seeking reelection to the presidency. However, because he remained head of the military, opposition parties and then the Pakistan Supreme Court objected on constitutional grounds. In March Musharraf dismissed Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, which sparked a general strike of Pakistani lawyers and outbreaks of violent protest in various parts of the country; the Supreme Court overturned the dismissal in July, and Chaudhry was reinstated. In the fall of 2007 Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto were permitted to return to Pakistan, and each began campaigning for upcoming parliamentary elections scheduled for early January 2008. The outcome of the voting was seen as a rejection of Musharraf and his rule; the PPP (now led by Asif Ali Zardari, Benazir Bhutto s widower) captured about one-third of the parliamentary seats up for election, and Sharif s party, the PML-N, with about one-fourth of the seats. In March the PPP and PML-N formed a coalition government. Yousaf Raza Gilani was elected prime minister. In light of ongoing differences, including disputes over Musharraf s successor, Sharif subsequently withdrew the PML-N from the governing coalition. Zardari s era marks the worst ever rule in Pakistani history with deteriorating economy, blasted law and order situation and a country with no sovereignty and identity of its own. The dynamic changes within Pakistan combined with the global unsettled background have made it indispensible that there should be true democracy and statutory liberalism in Pakistan. At this critical stage youth are the only hope who can rebuild the economy and revitalize a demoralized nation. What currently Pakistan needs is the attitude of integrity and responsibility of decisions at all levels. Youth being the 43% of current population can drive a change if they not participate but also honor their actions and decisions. Until now youth seemed to be exploited by various political and civil forces but now they must realize their own worth and through political and cultural participation of youths, through their juvenile organizations, should play a decisive role in restructuring all facets of Pakistani political and social scenarios. But they must work beyond any political, ideological, or any religious influence or interests in order to take the conscious responsibility for pushing the process of change and social rehabilitation. The youths must realize that they are responsible for their own future and they must strive to create it the way they want. They can make a positive and far-reaching affect by educating the poor, ignorant and ignored electorate of how their single vote can make a difference. Participation of youth in decision making is an inherent virtue of true democracy which demands responsibility and accountability from youth themselves. Now the responsibility belongs to the youth to generate new source of power and new models of organizing the society and to affirm themselves through concrete proposals. The transformations are done within the system and the credibility is acquired through concrete proposals and full responsibility. At the end I would just like to say that May God prosper our beloved country. No matter with the help of Politicians, Historians or Youth. Ameen I certify that the thoughts and ideas that I have presented in this essay are my own. I also certify that all the thoughts and ideas that I presented in this essay were never presented before to any other competition/contest and I strongly discourage plagiarism

Themes:- THEME A - Historical Approaches towards democracy in Pakistan THEME B - Struggle for democracy in Pakistan THEME K - Role of youth in Pakistani model of democracy