Re: Assemblies to be dissolved after presidential election
As for Presidential re-election, I do not think that it could be any problem, as I believe that government already has enough votes to re-elect President, without need of help from any opposition parties. Presidential re-election would need simple majority, and government has that. Last time when President needed MMA, it was to change constitution that needs two-third majority.
First of all, many Pakistanis believe that Pakistan needs stability, growth, education, and unity, before thinking of corrupt democracy. Some believe that corrupt democracy would disappear with time, but in reality, that is concept of those who are either living in fool’s paradise or corrupts themselves. Reality is that, corrupt democracy would disappear only when Pakistan gets developed, financially strong, and educated. When this would happen, people would get out of the clutches of their masters who are mostly corrupt politicians.
Democracy would never bring development, prosperity, and education, as corrupt politicians would not cut their own hand that survives on poverty, illiteracy, financial dependency, and in having control on jobs. Before Bhutto, politicians only controlled rural areas. Starting with Z A Bhutto, politicians extended their control on urban areas too. Bhutto started the system where urban jobs also came in control of politicians (that he did by nationalisation and enforcing political influence on private businesses). Thus, now whenever politician comes in power, they control jobs and hence lively hood in cities too, that in turn means making urban populations hostage.
Anyhow, forgetting what politician did or does, let see present situation. Is President Musharraf going to stay in power for foreseeable future? It all depends.
That dependence is not in the hand of judiciary or politicians. I did not write masses, as masses are still not with politicians or against Musharraf. For masses, I believe they prefer President Musharraf more than any politicians, but in reality, have little say, as most in masses do not feel that they matter.
So on whom President depends and who matters for President? ONLY ARMY, that’s it. IF army supports him, he is fine and if majority in army top brass goes against him, he would be out.
Politicians in Pakistan (any politicians or political party) do not have enough countrywide supports to give any trouble to President Musharraf. Rather, they know that Musharraf has roots and big appeal amongst masses. If they did not felt that way, politicians would not have bothered and protested on Musharraf giving public speeches in support of PML (Q). Rather, politicians would have been happier, as if Musharraf was scorn of people, his speeches would have made PML(Q) less popular. If President was not having any public appeal, PML (Q) would have told President to keep away from public appearances and speeches. Even ISI and MI would have advised President to keep low profile. [AS PPP had told Zardari, to disappear and hide his face from public].
As for judiciary, they can make judgments, but have no power to impose their judgments. In the end, judiciary can do whatever; they cannot impose their will or decisions on anyone. Just imagine that Judiciary give judgment and declares that martial law, or semi-military rule, or President in uniform, or Musharraf as President and Chief or army, all of these are illegal. Now, who would carry out the implementation of their judgments? Well, who would even defend judges and protect their lives in the country?
Suppose if army oppose the judgments of judiciary, do judiciary has men in arms to challenge army, and impose their rulings? Obviously, in such situation it would be declared that judiciary is trying to create anarchy in the country and army might even make a move against judiciary. Hence whatever the ruling, in the end, it would be decision of the army that matters. Mass public protest and civil disobedience may make army go against President (though that is also not certain), but I believe that mass public protest and mass civil disobedience against President is impossible.
Pakistan has 160 millions people and around 85 million voters (for coming election). To oust government that has military support, opposition has to bring at least 25 to 30 million people on the streets, stopping all activities with civil disobedience, paralysing all major cities. (One should remember opposition civil disobedience move against Bhutto that pushed Bhutto to impose martial law in almost all major cities). At that time, total voters in country were around 31 million (and most crucial cities were completely shut down). It took long time even than for army to move against Bhutto (when Bhutto was not even army man).
Even if mass movement against government starts, most crucial place in Pakistan is Karachi that gives 60 to 70 percent of government revenue. Karachi has to stop working if opposition could ever pressurise government. If Karachi keeps working, opposition could gain very little even if they can bring 25 to 30 million people on streets at other places.
Now, there is another twist here. If opposition could really bring 25 to 30 million people on streets, they would not do that before election. It would be best for them to wait for election and win the election with such strength. If rigging would happen, than only they would need to come out on street. Coming out before election shows that they do not have supports that they think is enough for them to win election against the government, hence opposition wants to pressurise government into negotiation (or deal).
In last election, registered voters were around 72 millions. 42 percent (30 million) cast their votes. PML(Q) secured 26 percent of the cast vote (and 118 seats in NA). PPP secured 28 percent of the cast vote (and 80 seats in NA. PPP percentage of the votes is high, because they put in most candidates). MMA secured 12 percent of the cast votes (and 59 seats in the NA).
Imran Khan narrowly won the election with 68 thousand votes. Next candidate was of PML(Q) who secured 64 thousand votes and thus lost the election against Imran (many consider that it was establishment and agencies that made Imran win the election, else Imran would have lost).
I do not believe that opposition at present could bring out even few million people through out Pakistan. Nevertheless, I believe that as media was behaving in CJ case, government might have got panic and thought that what would happen if they could? Especially when opposition decided to evaluate their strength in Karachi, directed Chief Justice to go to Karachi. Purpose was not addressing the lawyers, as that could have happened if CJ would have used government provided helicopter to get to the court, but once CJ team realised that he could not go to Court in rally, CJ declined the offer of helicopter route and left Karachi. [If opposition could have shown their strength in Karachi, it would have meant that, if opposition decides to start civil disobedience, there is chance to harm government (and Pakistan) by effecting Karachi financial output and government knows that if they can, it would be disaster for the country and government].
Obviously, government realises that to allow opposition to do whatever outside financial hub (Karachi) is not as important as to let opposition have a go in Karachi unopposed, as that could mean big trouble ahead. I think that this is main reason government made sure that opposition should not be allowed to show strength in Karachi on 12th May, though unfortunately opposition was also testing what they can do in Karachi, and all this show of strength by both sides resulted in loss of precious lives.
After 12th May, government realised that opposition could not do much in Karachi and if Karachi stay under control, opposition show of whatever little strength outside Karachi is also insignificant to get worried. Hence, now government seems less concerned, and bold enough to take unpopular step of giving a soft kick to media.
As for people getting killed due to political reasons under Pakistan present regime? How ever unfortunate, comparative to past rules, it is insignificant.
During Ayub Khan’s rule, thousands were killed in Balochistan, hundreds got killed in East Pakistan, and many also got killed in Karachi (during Ayub Khan’s victory parade in 1965), all were politically motivated (Killing due to political reasons, suppressing the opposition to the government).
During Yahya Khan’s time, 100s of thousand people got killed in East Pakistan, and all killing was politically motivated.
During Z A Bhutto’s rule, tens of thousands were killed in Balochistan (there was civil war in Balochistan almost throughout Bhutto rule), and all was political motivated. Actually, random killing of opposition due to political reasons throughout Pakistan was one of ugly characteristic of Bhutto rule.
During Zia-ul-Haq’s rule, tens of thousands were killed in interior Sindh, and all was political motivated.
During Nawaz and BB rule, tens of thousands got killed in Karachi, and all was politically motivated.
During Musharraf’s rule, again probably thousands got killed in NWFP and Balochistan, most of them are due to move by government to eliminate extremism and terrorism from Pakistan and also stopping use of Pakistani land by tribal and foreigners to attack another country (Afghanistan), hence they cannot be called politically motivated. Politically motivated killing that happened during present rule happened in Balochistan (of those that were opposed to development work and were using arms to challenge Pakistan government, because they considered development a political threat to them) and what happened in Karachi on 12th May.