The 17th session of the Senate was prorogued on Tuesday at the conclusion of weeklong tumultuous proceedings the highlight of which was the passage of the uniform bill. The bill entitled President Musharraf to keep the office of Army chief beyond December 31, 2004, the day stipulated by agreement with MMA as his last day in uniform.
Whether he would like to keep both offices--of President and Chief of Army Staff--is still an open question, given that the President himself has not yet said in categorical terms that he would keep the uniform.
Although it is said that he believes that 95 percent people of Pakistan want him to keep both offices, and also it is inconceivable that the treasury benches in both houses would have taken so much pains to pass the controversial bill without his tacit consent, but on record all that he has said is that 'we will cross the bridge when we come to it'.
After Eid-ul-Fitr, that bridge would be only 45 days away. One of the President's detractor, (Hafiz) Hussain Ahmad, has said to 'make sure the bridge is intact when you come to it'.
The intensity of the debate on the uniform bill in the National Assembly, and then in the Senate, threw up ample indications suggesting that Musharraf would not doff uniform. Power has its own dynamics: once in power no one would like to go out of it, say specialists in the art of power politics. But S M Zafar has thrown a spanner in the works for President's parliamentary supporters, however. Addressing the Senate on the day the uniform bill was passed he said the exercise undertaken by the ministers was "unnecessary and premature", because the incumbent of these two offices had not yet announced he would do so.
He expressed his conviction that the quality of leadership Pervez Musharraf has provided obviates the need for such bills. Having said that in the Senate on the day the bill was voted upon, he walked away, deserting the long of pro-uniform senators.
Now that the President has crossed the legal hurdle, he would be required to secure political and moral support for his supposed intention not to doff the uniform. Given peculiarities of Pakistan's political system the parliamentary verdict in favour of uniform does not automatically lend moral and political public acquiescence for the scheme of keeping both offices.
The opposition has promised to take the issue to the streets, which in the light of past experiences, is a deadly proposition. Somehow, the decision of the streets enjoys more political legitimacy than parliament's.
Realistically speaking, the issue of President's uniform is not the issue behind us just because the Senate also backed it, but in front of us. The opposition has already announced the schedule for its protests.
The Senate proceedings on Tuesday, which was supposed to be private members' day, were essentially a one-way affair after the opposition walked out-as-usual--as part of the protest against the uniform bill.
As an appetiser, the Senate chairman has adopted the practice of accommodating some points of order at the start of proceedings so that the senators may be able to settle down after having vented their feelings.
The points so raised are generally of some importance but the government is not expected to respond, unless it feels it should. So, Sanaullah Baloch lambasted Islamabad for its "nightlong glittering lights when the rest of country is drowned in darkness".
When power gets concentrated in one place like Islamabad and the President is "bunkered", the freedom disappears from the land.
"For the last two years, our lands are being snatched from us but our calling attention notices are being ignored. Come to senses," the senator from Balochistan said angrily.
Rahmatullah Kakar wanted to know as to what was going on in Karachi the other day when helicopters were landing in a certain area as the rumpus gripped the city that a big operation was in the offing. "Let the people know the truth," he said.
Abbas Kumaili lambasted the Quetta administration for changing the route that the procession on Hazarat Ali's 'Youme Shahdat' would be taking in that city.
Parigul Agha contested the assertions that Balochistan government had failed to handle law and order situation in that province. Having made their positions known on points of order the opposition members walked out. Raza Rabbani said the boycott was to register protest against passing the uniform bill and the 17th amendment.
With the opposition away from the scene, the government took up normal business in relative peace. Gulshan Saeed's motion on police performance evoked interesting debate where treasury members grilled the force for its alleged corruption and inefficiency.
Anwer Bhinder proposed setting up a commission with vast powers to reform the police force, adding that the Police Order 2002 had failed to redeem the situation.