The state and nation building in ethnically diverse society like Pakistan requires careful crafting of national political institutions so that no part of the country is left without adequate representation in the state institutions. The reason is without representation, empowerment and participation in the national political process, the diverse communities that represent pluralistic societies feel a sense of depravation. It is this feeling of being left out that promotes deeper sense of ethnicity, leading to alienation from the national streams they are formally part of. In essence building a nation is about settling the primary issue of politics, which means, "who gets what and how". The answer to this question is in a social contract among the constituent regions, based on consent of all about sharing sovereignty.
The idea of a federation, which Pakistan bas been since its independence, is how to share national sovereignty. This sharing is done at two levels. One is at the level of territoriality in the form of national government and provincial governments. The 1956 and 1962 constitutions divided the national power between the two levels of governments, but in both cases, power became formally and informally centralized in the national government. Both the constitutions ignored the basic principles of creating a federation. First, provincial boundaries and identities of the four provinces that now constitute Pakistan were merged into a single unit, called West Pakistan in order to create a territorial 'parity' with the East Pakistan. Strangely the one-unit scheme was dubbed as creating 'unity'. Even a layman with some knowledge of history of federalism and nation building process wouldn't taken such a self-destructive step, as the framers of the two previous constitutions did. It denied rights, identity and existence to the provinces in West Pakistan that had deeper sense of their history and came into the fold of Pakistan as equal members of the unit. Second, the East Pakistan was denied the basic principle of democracy - one-man-one-vote. Making such blunders rested on false assumptions about the idea of nationalism and state formation. The result was alienation of East Pakistan and rise of Bengali nationalism. The flawed nation building reflecting false ideas also created a deeper sense of deprivation in the rest of Pakistan that has yet to completely fade off, even after some path correction that has been done since the adoption of the 1973 Constitution.
Before I get to progress on federalism and the role of the Senate, let me briefly discuss a critical issue of representation in generating national solidarity. In ethnically or territorially diverse societies, representation takes place at two levels because there have to be two different categories of representations. First are the people, and second are the territories or units. These issues were well debated in the remarkable constitutional debates in the framing of the Americans Constitution in 1787, and in the debate on its ratification. Had the authors of our first two constitution been slightly aware of the history, philosophy and ideas that shaped and continue to influence the American federation, the first ever created, they might have avoided the big mistakes. Even culturally, linguistically and with a much stronger sense of American nationalism were unwilling to write a document that would not allow the states-federating units-equality.
It is the second principle of federalism-equality among the federating units that created the Senate. Let us make it clear that principle of majority is important for creating a legitimate government but represents only the people not the units, and majoritarianism, meaning since we have the majority, we can make any law and policy argument works both against the spirit of democracy, and against the rights of the federating units. In a federation with multiple regions and ethnicities the principle of majority rule has to be balanced with the equal rights of the units disregard to the size of the population, territorial endowment or resources.
Senate in Pakistan represents the federating units on equal basis. Learning from the East Pakistan debacle, the framers of the 1973 Constitution was cognizant of the fact that diversity had to be recognized, accommodated and respected. It was the belief in the equality of the provinces that Senate, an upper chamber of the Legislature was created. Just the existence of the Senate is never a guarantee that the rights of the federating units are protected. It involves two more principles. First is the distribution of power between the two houses of the legislature. Since the peoples representation weigh heavier in democratic framework, the house, like the National Assembly would get greater powers. This is a universal principle of federalism. However there is no set standard according to which powers between the two are distributed. It depends on national circumstances, history, interests of the political elites and the general political process.
Second, principle to ensure rights of the federation is through vertical distribution of powers between the federal governments and the provinces. Federalism and federations change over time through experience, bargaining more rights of shifts of the balance of power either way depending on which level of the government can address the national issues better. History of Pakistan's federalism reflects this flexibility, the principle of 'living constitution'.
Overtime, the political parties despite ideological differences and several deadly bouts of confrontational politics have worked out political compacts that have contributed to immensely to constitutional development in Pakistan. The first is restoring the parliamentary character of the Constitution with remarkable unanimity. They purged the Constitution of semi-presidential amendments that the last two military dictators had introduced to empower themselves. Second, they have re-written the social contract between the federal government and the provinces by providing greater autonomy to the provinces under the 18th Amendment. There is no comparable federation in the developing world with so much devolution of powers to the provinces.
Finally, the Senate of Pakistan, which is a symbol of national solidarity, has gained greater powers than were given to it when the 1973 Constitution was framed. Since it is the voice of the federating units, it carries their will on equal basis. The parliamentary democracy has further contributed to representation of diversity, as smaller regional parties can get representation in the Senate according to the electoral principle of proportional representation for the elections of Senate.
Although the role of the Senate has grown overtime, the balance of power is heavily loaded in favor of the National Assembly. And when we compare the Legislature, both the houses included, the power appears to be concentrated in the Executive branch. In the current scheme of distribution of powers, the Senate is grossly at disadvantage, and that means weaker representation of the federating units in the federal governments. Some further steps are necessary to empower the house of the units. First, it must have a voice in the passage of the money bills, like in the US Senate. The bills like this originate in the House or Representatives, but it must have approval of the Senate. We may follow the same principle. It would strengthen the federation because of the power of the Senate, as representative of the provinces. Second, all treaties with the foreign countries must also have to be ratified by the Senate. Thirdly, in the formation of national councils, commissions or boards where the National Assembly has a role, the Senate of Pakistan must have an equal say. This can be done with the creation of a bipartisan committee of both the houses. Finally, a candidate for senatorial position must have been a resident of a province at least for five years from where he contests elections. These reforms if carried through will enhance the power and prestige of the Senate, actually ensure that the voice of provinces in allocation of resources is heard and accommodated. Powers that satisfy the provinces and keep a balance with the effective national government are best guarantee of national unity. Further reforming the Senate will exactly do that.
(The author is a Political Scientist and Professor of Political Science, LUMS)
Comments
Comments are closed.