The 18th Constitutional Amendment mandates that the Federal Cabinet, together with the ministers of state, shall be collectively responsible to the Senate and the National Assembly, departing from the original position when it was supposed to be collectively responsible only to the National Assembly.
The amendment is in line with the demand of the smaller provinces to strengthen the legislative role of the Senate where they enjoy parity with the larger provinces. But as to what that 'collectively responsibility' means, there the Constitution offers no definition, may be because it is an established convention in governments using the Westminster system, which envisages that members of cabinet must publicly support all government decisions made in the cabinet even if they don't agree with them. Since the Science and Technology Minister Azam Swati has joined the petitioners against his colleague Hamid Saeed Kazmi in the Hajj scam case, the issue of 'collective responsibility' comes to the fore. In his statement before the Supreme Court on Thursday, Azam Swati informed the court that he 'in a Federal Cabinet meeting had asked the Prime Minister to punish the Federal Minister for Religious Affairs Hamid Saeed Kazmi'.
Azam Swati also wants the court to "Look at the proceedings of the parliament as well as the report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Hajj affairs", he added, in support of his argument that the alleged corruption by the Hamid Saeed Kazmi was not only in the knowledge of Prime Minister Gilani but the Cabinet and Parliament were also fully aware of various aspects of the Hajj scam. But, obviously, Azam Swati failed to convince the Federal Cabinet and therefore he is now standing in court. Then, is it a case of his failing to measure up to the dictates of the constitutional convention of collective responsibility and should he resign? During the Iraq War Clare Short resigned as she differed with Prime Minister Tony Blair's take on that issue.
However, in this case a certain peculiarity sets it apart from the cases of the Cabinet's collective responsibility. For one, there is a minority point of view that the concept of collective responsibility is different from 'individual ministerial responsibility,' which holds that ministers are responsible and 'therefore culpable for the running of their departments'. So, one may suggest that Azam Swati escapes accusation of violating the convention of cabinet's collective responsibility and let Hamid Kazmi stew in his own juice.
Having said that one cannot overlook the ugly fight now raging between the two federal ministers, and while Hamid Saeed Kazmi filed but then withdrew under the Prime Minister's advice, a defamation suit of Rs 100 million, Azam Swati is prepared to place before the Supreme Court 'detailed evidence to prove what he alleged was the reckless and disrespectful attitude of the Religious Affairs Minister towards the pilgrims'. How the court looks at this evidence and what it decides is not our subject here, but we do think that with a hundred-plus cabinet of full ministers, state ministers and advisors such bouts of in-fighting cannot be ruled out.
No wonder then that Hamid Saeed Kazmi accuses Azam Swati of leading the charge against him as a proxy of Maulana Fazlur Rehman to snatch this ministry. As some say, the ministerial clash stems from the sectarian Deobandi-Barelvi divide that so dangerously besets out polity today. Others point fingers towards Multan from where both Kazmi and Prime Minister Gilani hail. Indeed, there are wheels within wheels of corruption-laden sagas, of which the Hajj scandal is just one. As we said earlier in these pages, we believe there is no need for the Hajj Directorate, which brings the people nothing but pain and frustration every year.
The affair being seasonal it can be looked after by our diplomatic mission in Saudi Arabia, which has the required potentiality to make the Hajj arrangements while keeping close contact with the host country's concerned officials. Meanwhile, it would be in the fitness of things that the Prime Minister should seek resignations of both Kazmi and Swati to keep their fight clean and above board. After all, there is an undeniable public perception that the government is divided over this issue along political and sectarian lines.
Comments
Comments are closed.