Why not a well thought out constitution?

for a constitution to suceed, it needs dedicated adherants who belive in it, and at times will bear arms for it. so it will work if its organically grown and is truely accepted by the people who proclaim a nation (at least a leading group who will fight for it). else, its not workable.

americans were a willing nation, and the constitution came from debated, and they fought a civil war over it. indians are still fighting a civil was over it. so, where are the warriors in pakistan? who really cares for the constitution enough to bear arms?

Constitutions are made by lawyers, politcians and philosophers. You don`t have to be a newspaper reader for that, you have to believe in certain concepts which have been around since the dawn of man. Justice, reciprocity, transparency and consensus are all concepts engrained in every successful society.

re: #9 by AdamSmith
I apologise for my outburst. I think it was unwarranted.
Your point about general mood of the public deciding policies is well taken. I agree that this article and the like in other forum are useful in creating public awareness but pray tell me: how many in Pak read English? The English elite in Pak wants democrazy and secularism and would like the Army to go to the barracks but what about the majority who may not share this view? What about the Urdu press and the common man in the street?
I hope some day it will dawn on Pakistanis that democrazy will come when they want it. It is they who decide what they can have.
Sridhar

#19
I do not know if you have heard of the addition to the age-old fable that you recited. Let me tell you:
The silence was broken by one mouse who said, ``hey we may not need to bell the cat we can research into sensiong devices. It will take a long time given our technology but it is worth a try.``

The naysayer mouse kept up his refrain ``who will bell the cat?`` for he could not see the value of research and development. Or is it that he was using it as an excuse to justify his inability to think!

Moral of the story: ``do not stop thinking and looking for other alternatives.`` and ``those who live in stories of yore merely wish to show that they cannot change and keep up with the times!``

# 17 No one disagrees with democracy. The only reason for writing this piece is because we believe in democracy. But unless we take pains to understand and define democracy, we will behave like that ``technologically retarded mouse`` that PaagalInsaan reminded us of.

Urstruly: I agree with your premise, I make no excuses or defence of the Army, however one reason for it`s relative success under Musharraf is that Musharraf co-opted the reform movement in his initial days. Also I would disagree with the assumption that with time the system would have cleaned itself up. While One would hope that would be the truth, if the PPP or PML-N had completed one full term in office they would have done everything possible to ensure their re election. Unlike The ``Agencies`` who mainpulate subtly political parties tend to rig elections very openly and very shamelessly. If That had happened in 2002 under Nawaz Sharif and he had succeeded in his coup against the COAS, I doubt there would have been much left of Pakistan to talk about..


PaagalInsaan: Good point!!

Ref PaagalInsaan! #19

Is the Koran the cat or the Pak Army?

Long ago, the mice held a general council to consider what measures they could take to outwit their common enemy, the cat. Some said this, and some said that; but at last a young mouse got up and said he had a proposal to make, which he though would meet the case.

``You will all agree,`` said he, ``that our chief danger consists in the sly and treacherous manner in which the enemy approaches us. Now, if we could receive some signal of her approach, we could easily escape from her. I venture, therefore, to propose that a small bell be procured, and attached by a ribbon round the neck of the cat. By this means we should always know when she was about, and could easily retire while she was in the neighborhood.``

This proposal met with general applause, until an old mouse got up and said, ``That is all very well, but who is to bell the cat?``

The mice looked at one another and nobody spoke.

I thought you guys had one in the Koran!

Zakkk

I agree with your post as long as you do not involve faujis, in any shape or form, in this process of reformation. The political structure of country as well as that of a party changes through an evolutionary process if left on its own. Had we let NS or BB complete their terms without interferring from ISI, the process of natural selection would have eleiminated both of them out of competition for good. And now these incompetent thieves have become heroes after military meddled in civilian affair. A constitution that is not changed through a democratic process is as robust as the men who forced those changes in. These changes do not reflect the will of the people and no matter how much they make common sense to you, are bound to fail.

Zakk you summed it up well.

``What is left of Civil society in Pakistan needs to design an alternative and put pressure on whoever comes to pwoer to push through these reforms. however in the end I would say no system will succeed if the people dont` fight for it and protect it..``

We are looking for a free lunch`` for the army to go away and for us to have a political system. Every civil society gets the political system it deserves. When every writer and every discusssion is saying we want seperation of powers and spelling it out like in this article, we migh wake up those in power.

The only reason for writing this article was as a wish for democracy. Btu without going deeply inot these issues, let us not think we will get democracy. Those who wish to see the world only as fauji non-fauji are doing us a disservice.

Dig deeper and publcise reform ideas if you want progress. Do not dump on reform ideas.

14:Urstruly: BB`s support for the repeal was more about payback against Leghari than any political vision. Consider despite all the comments about how Musharraf and his mainpulation of the political landscape, he has allowed enough room for political parties(minus the PML-N) to organise and reform. Nothing stops the PPP or other groups from reforming their own political structure, making it more democratic (I believe Aitaza Ahsan published an excellent piece of research in 1998 about ways to devolve and democratise the PPP).

If you want to curb the Intelligence Agenciesyou do it through reforming dismissal powers like 48 2B and not it`s out right repeal, you do it through laws bringing the Intelligence Agencies under civilian monitoring and greater transparency. Unfortunately our political parties intentions are different, they want to control Intelligence agencies and use them against their opponents.

zakkk

I don`t think political parties have failed. They are slow learners but that is how democracy works. An example is that of the the annulment of article 58(2)B by Nawaz Sharif during his second term and Benazir, his archenemy, supported it all the way. That move certainly stripped ISI of its teeth. That is why Musharaf had to bring tanks and armoured personal carriers to re-conquer the parliament and prime minister house. Only if political parties had guns, tanks and APCs as well then I wonder military could dare think about attacking civilian institutions.

I agree with your premise Mr Samad, Pakistan`s political parties have failed in rpesenting an alternative to the existing system or even a code of conduct on how to prevent a repeat of the previous problems.

What is left of Civil society in Pakistan needs to design an alternative and put pressure on whoever comes to pwoer to push through these reforms. however in the end I would say no system will succeed if the people dont` fight for it and protect it..

Mr. Smith

You should have said that explicitly in your article; but since you have said it now, you are my friend.

I didn`t like the sound of second paragraph of your post though. I beleive that the only way to change/ ammend the constitution is thru a 2/3rd vote in the parliament which is elected through fair elections. Neither faujis nor this rubber stamp parliament has an authority to touch the constitution. You should always make this point clear, no matter how redundant it sounds.

1. This is not the first article I have written for Chowk.
2. This is not a proarmy article. I do believe that the only defense against a fsuji take over is a strong political system. the current system provides them wiht an excuse to come in as they please and the people do not protest because they have no faith in the political system.
3. The generals when they dream up their consitutional reform packages only seek to concentrate power in the president. All the ideas presented here will limit power in the executive, strenghten the legislature while focussing it on legislation and empower the judiciary while bringing forth better judges. In addition, democratic institutions will be developed.

But if all of us do not ask for the right constitutional changes, this game of both the faujis and politicans collaborating to produce a poor quality consitution (which concentrates power and distributes goodies) will continue.

I think what you are saying is that you do not want thinking people here.

look mr. samad, its the first time you are writing at chowk so you are getting off easy. The na-pak fauj`s collaborators are not wanted here- keep in mind.