Artistic Challenges to Power

Banksy, the famous British street-artist, is back in the new with a series of works in Gaza. There are a lot of ways that people can challenge power and Banksy does an excellent job of this through artistic expression. The paintbrush (or spray paint can) is mightier than the sword!

Christian Storm, 25 of Banksy's Cleverest Works, Buisness Insider, 10-24-14
http://www.businessinsider.com/banksy-art-2014-10?op=1

Dell Cameron, Banksy filmed himself sneaking into Gaza to paint new artwork, The Daily Dot, 2-2-15
http://www.dailydot.com/politics/banksy-new-gaza-artwork/

Session 11 - Importance of 1973 Constitution

To date, Pakistan has had three constitutions and several amendments in its 70 year history. While the previous two constitutions only lasted two and four years respectively, the 1973 constitution has remained intact for almost 40 years. Even the mighty dictators Zia and Musharraf did not dare abrogate the sacred document. The most they could do was to place the constitution in abeyance. What is so special about the 1973 constitution that it is still standing today?

For many Pakistanis the 1973 constitution, despite its many quirks and flaws, is a sacred document. All the officers of the state take an oath to defend the Pakistani state and its constitution before assuming office. The state and the constitution are one and the same and thus by extension any attempt to dismantle the constitution is treasonous and punishable by death. Also, the 1973 constitution was the only constitution that was able to reconcile the question of minorities (Ahmadiyya community being an exception) on paper at least.

Thus, the 1973 constitution inspires to be a beacon of order and stability in times of chaos and confusion.

Session 10 - The Man of Destiny: Adolf Hitler

In January 1933 an Austrian born corporal was sworn in as the Chancellor of Germany under President Paul Hindenburg. That man was Adolph Hitler who in the coming years commanded absolute loyalty of 70 million Germans as he set Europe on a path of absolute and unmitigated destruction.

For the past 70 years Historians have constantly grappled with the question: Why was Hitler able to command so much power that he did?

An orator of unparalleled talent, Hitler elevated himself to a deity/godlike stature. Loyalty to Hitler was superimposed on loyalty to Germany. Moreover, after the death of President Hindenburg the offices of Chancellor and the President were combined into the office of the Fuhrer. The German Reichstag was stripped of all but symbolic power as every German swore an oath to Hitler personally. The roles of the military and the bureaucracy were clouded such that Hitler remained the final arbiter.

Perhaps the combination of all the above factors ensured that Hitler remained unarguably the most powerful executive figure in recorded history.   

Session 10: Leadership

Political Leadership is the process of defining the direction of a team and communicating it to people; motivating, inspiring and empowering them to contribute towards achieving political success. It is basically a process of social influence which maximizes the efforts of individuals towards attainment of a specific goal.

Can any person in charge of authority and power be called a leader? The answer to this question is determined by the effectiveness of a leader. Not every leader is an effective leader. Successful outcomes, ability to communicate the message across and to make sound decisions while being an inspiration for the followers is what defines an effective leader.

Leadership consists of different styles. Leadership style refers to the strategies and behavioral patterns through which a leader seeks to achieve goals. Three identified styles are namely: Laissez-faire, transactional and transformational leadership.m

Laissez –faire leadership involves a hands-off approach and that the leader is reluctant to interfere in matters outside his or her personal responsibility. Transactional leader however, has a more hands-on approach and believes that motivation is gained through punishment and rewards.  Transformational leaders on the other hand, adopt a more visionary position and attempt to execute goals while performing a more inspirational role for others to follow.

Now the question that can be inferred is that which leadership style is most effective?  The answer however, cannot be provided by naming a particular style. The effectiveness of each style depends on the specific leadership situation, difficulty of the task, extent of a leader’s authority and the capabilities of the subordinates. Thus no right or wrong can be established in determining the degree of effectiveness of a particular style.

Session 10- The Functions of the Executive And Why we should care

 There are three main branches of government. One of these is the Executive branch, this is responsible for the implementation of laws passed by the legislative branch. There are numerous function the political executive have to carry out in order to be successful.

The Executive usually implement the laws that affects economic and business activity. These rules have a direct connection to the daily lives of the population since everyone is connected to the economy. Therefore the decisions of the executive need to be analysed and studied. This power to the executive leads to certain business groups swaying decisions to favor their interests. Lobbyists usually follow the corridors of power to the group that can put what they want into the law.

Another function is of the popular leadership. This translates to getting public support to push laws into implementation. It is this function that can be manipulated during the election period. By getting laws that are backed by the general public, candidates hope to suck up the most votes. In the haste of all this, the implications of these laws are not considered to the fullest and the nation mostly suffers in the long run. An example of this was the radical pushing through of more 'Islamic' law that Bhutto made sure happened in time for the election he had to fight for his second term.

Thirdly, the executive holds the function called "Bureaucratic Leadership". This is where technocrats and bureaucrats come together to run the executive. This branch of the executive usually becomes independent of the political sphere. As a result we see differences in the thinking of the two spheres and therefore rifts when it comes to the decision making process. This friction will lead to delayed decision making and this leading to the necessary laws not being implemented in time.  

Session 10: Political Executives - Leadership Style

A leader is someone who commands a group of people or an organization. To be successful in today’s competitive business world one needs to be a good leader – but what makes a good leader?

“Leadership is hard to define and good leadership even harder. But if you can get people to follow you to the ends of the earth, you are a great leader.” – Indra Nooyi

The three main leadership styles are laissez-faire leadership, transactional leadership and transformational leadership.

Laissez-faire leadership allows group members a lot of autonomy; this means that workers can freely discuss ideas and without a leader always on their back they may be more creative. However, no order is established and therefore there may be delays and chaos.

Transformational leadership revolves around developing relations with and motivating workers. Consequently workers feel inspired and perform better.

Transactional leadership runs on rewards and punishments, this means that workers always have an incentive to perform well and there is a clear chain of command.

There is a lot of debate on which of these styles are the best; perhaps each person should choose a style in accordance to their set of skills. 

Session 9:Parliamentary System and Pakistan

A parliamentary system establishes a high degree of social and political awareness, universal education, and an advanced system of mass communication for speedy and accurate dissemination of information on a wide variety of themes of individual and general interests. In the absence of these pre-requisites, people cannot be expected to exercise their right of vote in the context of broad national policies. Educated people with enlightened approaches are the first condition for the success of parliamentary system. An opposition of the same caliber must be there to watch the administration as well as to provide alternative government. There should be a vigilant press for the support of the Government on the merits of issues and to expose its weakness whenever desirable.

Unfortunately Pakistan lacked the requisites for a successful parliament. In this country we had a limited parliamentary experience. A strong executive authority persistently influenced the parliamentary system. The government and the Governor-General always held special powers. In a parliamentary set up the Legislature has to sustain and control the executive but Parliament in Pakistan was not allowed to function independently. It could never survive from its subservient position, and always felt that it was only an interim body. The story of the parliamentary era would have been different if the Legislature could attain its proper place in Pakistan. Cabinets were frequently installed and removed with no regard to the Legislature. A parliamentary system demands educated, and enlightened voters, which unfortunately this country lacked at the very early time and the same deficiency persists even today.Moreover the political chaos gave chances for the non-political forces to establish strong. To rectify them the country must first be taken to sanity by a peaceful revolution, then there should be a team of patriotic persons to examine problems in the political field and devise constitutions more suitable to the genius of the Muslim people. When it is ready at appropriate time it should be submitted to the referendum of the people so that the progress can be made.

How a rape was filmed and shared in Pakistan

How a rape was filmed and shared in Pakistan, BBC News, 2-26-15
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-31313551

Session 9: Effectiveness of committees in controlling governments

An effective committee system can increase the integrity and efficiency of any government decisions. Committees monitor the actions of the government and work to improve them in the most efficient way possible, committees are the critical analysts of everything the government does. A good committee system can improve the quality of services provided to the people by its ruling class and can also make the systems more efficient but for all of this the committee system should be made flawless and should work without any biasness towards any one political class. In a developing country like Pakistan role of committees is very crucial in ensuring that the project being announced are also implemented in a productive manner. In Pakistan the role of committees have been observed to be rather different, be it committees to investigate rigging in elections or to investigate he shortage of petrol in the country, many committees have formed but have failed to implement an effective solution to problems and to bring a positive change in the country. Every Pakistani hopes to see the day when Pakistan will be actually on the line of progress and this will be the day when all institutions of the country start working on their defined lines.

Session 9- Does the Pakistani assemblies discriminates?

 Pakistan is the nation which comprises of diverse ethnic and religious sectors. As we all know assemblies act as bridge between the governments and people and plays important part in devising legislatures of the state. However, in certain legislations and laws the voices and interests of minorities were suppressed.

In 1974, under Bhutto regime a constitutional amendment declared Ahmedis as non-Muslims and in 1984, a section  was added into Pakistan Penal Code which banned the practice of Ahmadiya i.e. prohibits preaching of their faith, conference and public gathering. Any violation of these terms results in imprisonment of 3 years and fines. These amendments disturbs the Ahemdi community and regarded as suppression of their religious freedom.

Secondly, in Zia’s regime several controversial polices were passed like Hudood Ordinance. According to this ordinance, the women were required to provide the four male witnesses in case of Zina (adultery) and Zina-bil-jabr (rape).However, Quran does not talk about the witness requirement in case of Zina-bil- jar and any failure leads to punishment of tazir. Moreover, according to Quran, these laws are only applicable on Muslims whereas Hudood Ordinance applied to all citizens of Pakistan. So the women rights were repressed as it would be extremely difficult for them to find ‘pious’ man and failure leads to their accusation.

However, several step were taken to reduce the gender discrepancies by the assemblies like the women representation were increased and Women Protection Bill was passed in 2006, which repealed the Hudood Ordinance. Moreover, new electoral process was introduced which allows the minority to vote only for their respective communities thus increasing the chances of their representation in assemblies.   

 So it is difficult to conclude whether assemblies discriminate or not as laws were amended and repealed according to the circumstances.  

US and the UK.

The US and the UK possess two varied versions of democracy in the form of a presidential system and a parliamentary system respectively. The American president, directly elected by the people, is the chief executive while in the UK, it is the prime minister who is elected by and drawn from the parliament. Therefore in the UK, the executive ascends to the position by commanding support in the legislature which is often dominated by his or her party through a majority. Due to this relation between the prime minister and the parliament, the executive-legislative function is fused in a parliamentary system of democracy. This is in contrast to the presidential system which is based on the Separation of Powers between the executive, judicial and legislative organs of the state in order to check the concentration and abuse of power by establishing checks and balances through independence of state institutions.

Regardless of the difference in both the systems in these two countries, they have been very successful. 

Constitution and assemblies in pakistan

                There exists two systems of governance , the parliamentary system and presidential system i-e  America. In presidential system , president is directly elected by the people whereas in form of parliamentary system the appointed members by people elect the prime minister.The difference between both is that in parliamentary system prime minister holds the power and in presidential system president is sovereign. Moreover in presidential system the government is elected twice , the congress and president.

                In this chapter it has been explained how assemblies are formed to run the government. Legislation is a key function that assemblies perform, parliament make laws while courts implement them.These laws are made by the members of parliament which are politicians who belong to different parties and mostly they make laws for their own benefits,which is questionable.Various amendments in constitution has been made by our rulers that people were not in favour of.

                Question is that  whether our political parties are capable of making amendment in laws? The constitution of Pakistan has been made after a long effort  and the dictators played their role in complicating the constitution to a extreme level, now politicians play with the constitution by doing different amendments

The role of legislation and assemblies in Pakistan. Session 9)

Session 9 - Assemblies are Spineless

Countries like China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam fall under the umbrella of Communism. Their Assemblies, Legislatures, State Council's and Parliaments have determined the existence and following of communist principles till this date. After the collapse of the U.S.S.R, which is considered as the figurehead of this umbrella, one wonders why have states like North Korea and Vietnam not yet left these failed principles behind? These states have been experiencing a decline in their performances. Several reasons account to it, but the one reason their population put a blame upon is communism. A large number of its dying population is wishing and praying for an end to it. But what power do they have? To ask their pious representatives in legislatures? Or to stage demonstrations? Or to call for support from a new ally of the public's, i.e Media? Though the option to knock on the doors of State Council's and Assemblies seems alright, but nowadays these assemblies have almost turned into executive dominated assemblies, rather than policy making assemblies. Assemblies hold a very significant, and rather sacred position in a state. They are intended to represent the people's voice. But today I'm claiming it with great pity that assemblies have become spineless.

Session 9: The Two Systems of Government

The two systems of governance that are in place today differ largely in terms of the electorate and the role of the chief executive. 

The executive head of the Parliamentary system, the Prime Minister in this case, is appointed by the members of an elected assembly. The legislature thus holds the power as a vote of no confidence can oust the Prime Minister.

In the Presidential system, the executive and legislative functions are distinct. The President is directly voted for and thus determined by the people or a body elected specifically for the purpose of the particular election. 

Passing laws of their own choosing becomes harder for the legislators in the Presidential system in case the president holds views different from those of the assembly. This is a result of the president not being held accountable to the assembly but to the people directly. Power is thus more diffused in this system.  

Session 9: Assemblies

The effectiveness of an assembly varies depending on different things. The power of that assembly and the right to exercise that power is usually tailor made according to the people and what suits the state best. In my opinion, assemblies are most effective as a tool to check government power. This is very important for accountability. For example in the case of Congress, the president can veto a law passed by Congress, and the Congress can in turn override this veto by a two thirds majority against this law. This way the people's interests in the state are largely protected and the assembly forms a bridge between government and the citizens. Neither party gets too much concentrated power and both parties have certain checks and balances imposed on them. However, this is not always the case, and at times the balance of power is tilted, one side gains too much power, and unrest ensues. This was clearly seen after the French Revolution when the National Assembly was in power and proved largely uneffective.

Session 9: Assemblies

The chapter explains to us how assemblies are bodies primarily formed for the purposes of  operating governments in structured bureaucratic ways such that democracy can run smoothly in our framework. Yet, from what I've witnessed so far, neither of these functions are being fulfilled in our current scenario.

Legislation: A key function of assemblies set to ensure fairness and popular vote for critical law making is rarely seen here. I see very little positive or negative legislative power of our assemblies whereby laws such as blasphemy are prevalent and no debate is being undertaken and whose like Salman Taseer who do discuss its abolishment are shot in out political culture. How then, can we have a confidence in out legislative power of assemblies to produce and correct laws for our betterment when the most critical issues such as sectarian killing and terrorism are wandering free from and reaction in legal formation terms?

Representation: A joke. "A parliament is nothing less than a big meeting of more or less idle people" says Bagehot. Never heard a more accurate quote. How many times have we all witnessed videos of parliament meeting with many prominent members doing nothing but utilizing that time to take their afternoon naps? There is no representation in any way. And these bodies are nothing more than discussionary panels producing no outcomes. If representation were fair Ahmedis, Shias, Christians and all other minority sects would have their voice clearly and loudly heard!

Scrutiny: Bodies set up to check executive power is how this purpose is upheld. Zardari had almost absolute power during the past political tenure and now Nawaz enjoys the same privilege. Lavish fundings, never ending security protocols, large personnel staffs and wealth being piled in Swiss banks all come part and parcel with winning elections and public offices. There is NO check on the power of those ruling us.

Recruitment and training: Assemblies are well known for providing a talent pool from which decision makers emerge but here all most parliamentarians do is engage in useless rhetoric instead of acquiring useful bureaucratic skills to run the government. Assembly seats are being sold at crores and hence are corrupted by power. These parliamentarians are too distanced from the needs of their constituents to even address the issues of grass-root party workers therefore this purpose too is left unfulfilled.

Legitimacy: They're meant to present the regime in a legitimate light as rightful. That, is clearly failing. They were meant to function a popular conventions and to mobilize public consent regarding the ruling party but because the educational role has been hijacked by the media so the assemblies really have little or no influence in the political socializing of the common man.

Why then, do we still have an assembly system when all they are is a face to pacify the public by telling them that this IS democracy. Ironic, indeed.

Session 9 - Is Presidential form of government suitable in Pakistan?

Currently, Pakistan is experiencing a mixed, ‘hybrid’ form of government which consists of elements of both the parliamentary and presidential form of systems. The country had a parliamentary system after its birth, which was then shifted to a presidential form with the 1962 constitution but later on it reverted back to the parliamentary system with the 1973 constitution that is in practice till today. – Various amendments in the constitution are carried out by the leaders, so can it be viewed that the democratic, parliamentary system exists only in paper? Does the true pure form of parliamentary system suitable for Pakistan?

Parliamentary form of system is considered as a direct descendant of Monarchy. Moreover, as stated by S.C. Stroke, for a true parliamentary democracy political parties are an essential component. However, the question arises that are the current political parties capable enough to accommodate the essence of liberal democracy where people with different backgrounds can represent their group?

It is true that in a Parliamentary system the division of power is often blurred but this does not mean lack of power sharing. A decentralized decision making with powers vested in various ranking of the government can be a part of parliamentary system. United Kingdom serves a great example of it where although the ultimate power of decision rests under the executive, the Crown but the decision making power is greatly differentiated with the House of Commons and House of Lords being part of the legislative process. On other hand, the presidential system is constructed strictly on the Doctrine of “separation of powers’ and the President and core legislative body is elected directly by the public. – In Pakistan where large parts of the country are likely to have their candidates elected to the office every time, will a presidential system be suitable?

Though this system will bridge a close relation between the leaders and the public, the charismatic leadership in Pakistan which is usually dominated by the feudal hegemony held by the ruling elite will create this advantage of the system as a drawback. However, the parliamentary system promises an opportunity to allow more people to compete with the ruling class and be a part of the government institution if functioned in its proper form.

Moreover, in a parliamentary system the government is elected once whereas in the presidential form it’s elected twice, first the congress and then the President. If the President believes in a different ideology than the majority of the congress, the government will be at loss while passing any legislation as it will be following a very slow pace.

Whatever the final outcome maybe, it is imperative for the country to move away from the mixed form of system to a proper system of government. Decentralization of decision making and the clean up process within the political parties should be taken by the government to pave its path towards a better successful democratic country. 

Session 9:Our legal dilemma?

The primary function of the Parliament is Legislation. The Parliament makes laws, while the courts interpret those laws and the executive implements those laws. A recent debate about the extent of the parliament’s ability to enact laws has started in Pakistan after the enactment of the 21^st amendment.

It has posed a question on the supremacy of the parliament to amend the constitution, and to make the matter event more complex the courts have decided to rule on the matter. The courts will use the ‘basic structure doctrine’, which states that the salient features of the constitution, which refer to the Islamic injunctions, federalism, independence of judiciary etc. cannot be altered or amended by the parliament, to strike down this amendment.

This is a very dangerous line of reasoning, as the Parliament should have the unrestricted right of amending any law it sees fit, even if it is the supreme law; The Constitution. The courts should only be responsible for the interpretation of the law. If the courts exercise the basic structure doctrine and strike down this amendment than they will not only interpret the constitution but will also lay down the dangerous precedence of controlling its text.

It is in Pakistan’s national interest that the judiciary should not touch the 21^st amendment. They should not try to cover for their shortcomings by hiding behind the cloud of the Basic structure doctrine. The parliament has the unabashed right to bring about appropriate legislation, and the only way that legislation should be challenged is through the political process and not through judicial activism. By politicizing the courts we would be doing Pakistan a great disservice.

Session 9: The broken link

The assemblies in the simplest of terms are the link between a government and the people. It is filled with elected representatives from the masses who voice the opinion of their people in front of a national audience. The core objective of the assemblies is to debate on the things that impact the nation. The sheer power of the assembly in its ideal state is very high.

The amount of power is accompanied by a great deal of responsibility as their actions can play a very big role in the lives of the people. The problem however arises when the representatives of the people represent themselves and not the people in the act of decision making. The elected members in the assemblies have to go through a great ordeal and hence can be manipulated by those who had supported them.

In a country like Pakistan where institutions such as the army have insurmountable powers, the assemblies can be manipulated into making decisions that might not be in the best interest of the nation.

Every assembly need to be comprised of people for whom self-interest is outweighed by the national interest. The institutions should be accountable to the assembly and not vice versa. The voice of the people needs to be heard for a government to prosper and that can only be achieved with an assembly that at its core discusses and debates matters that effect the nation without the fear of repercussions from other institutions that might have their own agendas. The link between the people and the government is vital and a broken link can spell doom for the entire populace.

Session 9- Pakistan's Bicameral System

Pakistan has a bicameral system constituting of the  National Assembly, Senate and the provincial assemblies. The Senate is the upper house, whereas the national assembly is the lower house respectively. It is a functional democratic system which makes sure the executives and the legislators work together and there is a balance of power.

 Although on paper Pakistan has a parliamentary system, where power mainly resigns with the Prime Minister; in Pakistan the presidential system is in working most of the time. For instance, when Musharaf came into power in 1999 via a military coup he remained Chief of the Army Staff but in 2001 he also declared himself president. During Zia-ul-Haq's time, the 8th amendment was passed, which gave the president additional powers including ability to dissolve the national assembly, and this certainly increases  the power of the president.

In the presidential system the president is chosen by the public, one man one vote policy. However, as we follow the parliamentary system the Prime Minister of Pakistan is elected by the National Assembly. The president is elected by the Electoral college, which consists of both houses of Parliament together with the provincial assemblies. With this overlap in hierarchal boundaries,  Pakistan ends up having a nonstandard system. Additionally, the strong party system and personal loyalties also make this system unable to effectively run because National Assembly members vote for party alleged candidates rather than making unbiased decisions for national issues.

For instance, in 2008 when PPP won the elections they made Asif Ali Zardari the President as he was the chairman of PPP and it was only fair if he also took up the most powerful position in the government as well. Our government officials care more about what they gain get out of their years in office than about the well being of the people. If they have a president who would make decisions in their personal favor than why not vote for him/her.

Session 9 Assembly-Representative or not?

The assembly is defined as a representative body of the government that helps in passing legislation that meets the needs  of the public and therefore is a reflection of its’ opinions. Although the democratic theory implies that in principle assemblies should represent popular opinion, in reality assemblies seldom work that way.

In particular, it can be argued that, in Pakistan, the interests of certain political parties are the dominant factor in the law making as the doctrine mandate asserts .The political party that is dominant in these decisions is usually the party in power. It can be argued then that the real power lies mainly in the hands of the executive faction as the ruling party allies with the executive’s wishes.

 For example, in Pakistan despite of the existence of an opposition, the PML-N government and its Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has significant power in the formulation of laws and policies. The executive faction in the recent government is particularly strong, so much so that even the current president Mamnoon Hussain has been merely reduced to a ‘puppet’ president with minimal influence in determining public policy.

Moreover, the assemblies tend to be dominated by elitist politicians who are lobbying for their own interests mainly to advance certain ideological and capitalist goals.

In conclusion, the assembly may claim to be the’ voice of the people’ but is largely a tool for promoting executive interests and cannot be called representative.

Session 9 - Evaluation of the Parliamentary System

In a parliamentary system of government immense power lies with the assembly or parliament, in that the government is drawn from and ultimately accountable to the parliament. The parliamentary system, therefore, combines the legislative and executive branches of the government.

Given that the parliament is a representative body and that the government is answerable to it, this system is effective in a variety of ways. Firstly, it can be argued that it helps in the people's voices being heard. Since the assembly is present primarily to form a link between the people and the government, the fact that it retains ultimate power in a parliamentary system is beneficial for the people. If the government acts in an unjust manner, the assembly has the right to remove the government. Thus, those in power are constantly held accountable for their actions and the chances of power being misused, in theory, are very few.

However, the reality of parliamentary systems of government differs from country to country. Overall, parliamentary systems are associated with political instability and weak governments. Taking into account the failure of many parliamentary systems of government, such as that of France in the years 1945-1958, it is evident that political instability does prevail if the different interests of groups conflict.

An alternative to this form of government is the presidential system. This system does not violate the doctrine of the separation of powers and allowing the legislature, executive and judiciary to be separate results in a reliable system which ensures there are checks and balances.

Ultimately, in my opinion, the decision to implement a parliamentary or presidential system depends on how much power one wishes to give to the legislative assembly.

Session: 9 Legislation

Legislation is the most important function of an assembly because these legislation leaves an enormous impact on the lives of the nation. Assembly is that platform where debates and discussions are carried out to make the functioning of society and government better. Problems and issues are brought into light by the people who are selected as the representative of a common man in the assembly. The power of legislation makes it possible for the assembly to solve them

There is a general perception about the assembly of Pakistan that they do not think about the public. They always pass and bring those bills in light which will only give benefit them or which will benefit the progression of the party. But it’s not always true we should not always condemn them because they have also done work only for the sake of people’s interest or to secure their rights. It’s true that there are flaws in our assembly in fact in the people who are elected but at the same time, brighter picture should not be neglected and it should be encouraged so that others should also take the initiative of helping the public who elected them. For instance, in the recent years, the assembly and then the senate passed the women specific bill: fourteen year jail term for acid throwers. Though it took a lot of time to get it passed but they tried and made it happen. This bill is going to save a lot of lives because of the harsh punishment the guilty might get. 

Session 9- Assemblies: How important exactly?

This reading for this session focuses on the study of assemblies. It strikes me as interesting that an assembly is considered beneficial as a breeding ground for discussion and debates which further shape the politics of a region.
    Furthermore, the mention of assemblies as being a source of propaganda is something that caught my attention because it basically just goes to show that assemblies can prove detrimental if they promote ideas due to the ulterior motives of a certain group of people. 
    An example of an ‘assembly government”(basically a government possessing legislative as well as executive power), was also interesting to read. This is the example of Robespierre taking charge and actually boosting the economy and political situation of France during the French revolution( before succumbing to his paranoia and starting his reign of terror). This is intriguing to learn about because it implies that a separate government might not be needed in order to efficiently run a people. However, in today’s time we see that the importance of assemblies is such that is increasingly decreasing, and that governments seem to be handling things on their own.
     Furthermore the concept of ‘responsible government’ mentioned in the reading, makes one ponder over: a) Pakistan’s level of accountability towards the National Assembly and b) whether or not the National Assembly is actually succeeding in its role as an institution that makes laws and keeps a watchful eye on the government( which is widely perceived as being a corrupt one).

Session 9: The Dilemma of Representative Loyalty.

My analysis in this paper will elaborate my thoughts on the normative role of a representative legislature.

One of the alleged roles of the legislature in a functional democracy that prides itself on public inclusion is their willingness and ability to reflect what people on the streets, in offices and at roadside ‘dhaabas’ are talking about inside a hall dedicated to the voice of the common man being raised by their loyal and altruistic elected well-wishers.

I will discuss the theoretical normative dilemmas faced with regards to the manner and priorities that representatives should employ. What is the role we want them to have? The political field is split amongst preferences for loyalty to the party, to the constituency, the self and to the ‘people’ (a term I will soon proceed to define). It is a profusely fascinating conflict.

In assemblies such as the Pakistani Parliament and the British House of Commons, every elected representative is bound to vote the party line, in the case of a violation of which they are liable to be asked to vacate their seat in the hall dedicated to the good of the people. In the American model, the primary priority of loyalty is to the electing constituencies. Both these approaches create conflicts of interest that require almost painful value judgments for resolution.  

The legislation that followed the Peshawar school attack of 16^th December provides a valuable microcosm. Military courts were suggested after days of all-party deliberations in which an immense effort was exerted to bring the Zardari-led PPP on board with a constitutional amendment. On the day the Senate (the upper house of Pakistan’s Parliament) voted, Raza Rabbani (elected to his seat as a member of the PPP) was found in tears as he announced that his vote was a blow to his conscience. While political theory explains that legislators are workers of a party that is representing the interests of the broader public, the positive reality is quite different as all three agents are quite often at odds with each other and pulling for affairs to move in opposing directions. Is a representative of the people who is a worker of a party primarily answerable to the people, the party, or himself?

A similar scenario is found when the representatives of a particular constituency are face with a decision that, if made, would benefit those with whom are affiliated their regional allegiances, but at the cost of utilitarian disadvantage to the province or the country in the legislature of which they are sitting and to serve which they swore an oath. Constituency-oriented voting is the political trend of both American houses. However, to further explain this paradox, I will utilize the close-to-home Kalabagh Dam controversy, which is different in nature but will hopefully drive the point home as it is a sufficiently qualified parallel. Multiple comprehensive studies were conducted, communicating the conviction that the project could be a sustainable attempt at solving the country’s energy woes. The feasibility of the project was backed by several leading technocrats and energy experts. However, political will could not be mustered because of broken consensus between parties (the Pakistani parallel of elected American representatives) with regional loyalties. It is possible (though empirically unverifiable due to the rejection of the dam’s construction) that the ‘voices of the people’ caused Pakistan to bare a monumental opportunity cost in their attempt to minimalize the negative impact of the initiative on certain sub-segments of the Pakistani population. Dilemma: are popular Pakistani political parties (and hence elected legislators of the two American Houses of Representatives) normatively meant to look out for Pakistan (and hence for American interests) in a utilitarian and holistic manner or for the regional, ethnic, religious support groups from whom they derive their power, popularity and legitimacy (hence, the American constituencies that elected them).  

There remain several unanswered questions in the realm of normative political thought. 

Session 9- Too powerful assemblies?

I believe we need devolution of power in Pakistan to the grass root level. As stated in the readings the function of assemblies is legislation, representation, scrutiny, political recruitment and legitimacy, however in Pakistan members of the National assembly have been given an additional task of carrying out developmental work in their respected constituencies. This task should be left to the local govt, with the task of development being carried out by mayors and councilors.

Not only will this help proliferate power to deeper levels but it will also reduce corruption and mal practice. In the incumbent set-up, parliamentarians are given large funds and they are free to use these funds, as they deem best. This results in concentrated development in certain areas, such as the one being witnessed in Lahore, whereas other areas such as South Punjab remain improvised.

It is unsurprising to note that the current rulers are unwilling to hand power over to the local govt. The last local govt elections occurred in 2005, under a military govt.

Session 9: The problem of under representation

There are three essential branches of government called the legislatures, executives and judiciaries. Legislatures are the people who enact and formulate laws. The executive branch can also form laws through decrees or ordinances. The executive branch members can be selected from the parliament. One of the major components of legislatures is assemblies or parliaments .Let us first understand the meaning of the word itself. The world parliament means to speak. It is an assembly of people essentially. It is the public face of the government. Assemblies that ideologically hold respect because they are composed of lay politicians who claim to represent the people.

                   The concept of representation is very promising aspect of assemblies. This Burkian idea of representation as independent actors is not obvious today. Because today it is the parties that rule the decisions .So we can view parties today as central mechanism through which representation takes place. In Pakistan eighteen amendments has awarded powers to party leaders to strip away the assembly membership of parliamentarian if he/she does not conform to party policies and its stance on political issues. Although on paper it does make sense to give the party heads this power. But practically this can be harmful for the true representation of people. Let us say for instance there is a political worker and member of parliament coming from an area with stance of his people on certain issue completely varying with the party position on the particular case. He is in true dilemma of choosing b/w his people or his party. The ideal way of doing it would be to prefer people of his place rather than party. Because strictly speaking he is the representative of his people rather than party. But then can he count on these people to reelect him if he loses his seat in violation to the party agenda on the issue.

These kinds of situations may compel one to ignore the stance of the people and follow party policy strictly. Consequently resulting in a gap b/w the selectors (people) and selected (the representative).The true representation of the people would not occur. To curb such a practice one of the steps in this regard can be to reduce the term of these parliamentarians so that they cannot for long period under represent their people. Another step can be to curtail the power from the party heads which will also contribute in making independent actors in parliament. Only then we would be able to work towards addressing the problems of the people from the grass root level and representation would occur in its true essence.

Session 9: Role of the general assembly during the Cold War.

An assembly constitutes a group of people and politicians who represent the needs and the priorities of the citizens. It represents not only the needs and the priorities of the common people but also involves in debates regarding laws executed and implemented and the prevalent issues effecting either a fragment of the society or the entire society as a whole.

An assembly plays such an integral role in a society that theoretically it can actually alter the laws discussed and issued. In addition, it can also bring a change in the society. Despite this fact, the position of assemblies has declined. This deterioration of the importance of the assemblies, be it due to the weaknesses of the assemblies themselves or due to the growing influence of the government, cannot overshadow the truth that assemblies played an integral role in some of the major world events either independently or as a part of an organisation for example, the general assembly in the Cold War.

 One of the six entities of the United Nations International Organisation is the 'General Assembly'. This general assembly played a valuable role in several events encompassing the cold war. It influenced the events of the cold war not only when the war was primarily bipolar but also when the war became more global. The general assembly did not only focus on passing resolutions that concerned global peace and human rights but also participated in relieving the regions trapped in cold war crisis.

Though, the general assembly could not work to its full potential like all the other entities of the UN, due to the superpower conflict and the ideological differences, the severe cold war crisis such as the 'Suez Canal Crisis' and the 'Korean War' could have been worse if the supporting policies of the general assembly weren't simultaneously in place.

Session 9 - Restoration of Parliamentary Sovereignty

Since Pakistan’s history has witnessed repetitive authoritative interventions, the parliament systems have mostly been short-lived, they have for the most part been silent and have always been a puppet to the military’s power. Over the entirety of Pakistan’s existence, the military has ruled over the people more than civil government has had a chance to. 

Pakistan has had a history of about 67 years since its independence and for more than 32 years, the military has had power and control. The fact that Pakistan’s democratic government has not been allowed to develop to its full potential because of constant military intervention, the legislature is still in its developmental phases to finding an institutional identity. The political system in Pakistan will remain in this worsened condition so long as the military still has indirect power. But one thing to note is that, it is a first that the 2013 elections and their aftermath marked the first-ever transition from one elected government to another. This is a step towards fully restoring parliamentary sovereignty and stabilizing a volatile polity. 

Session 9: The failure of our Legislators

Parliaments are the debating chambers or the representative bodies, the surrogate for the people.  Pakistan has a bicameral parliamentary system with a upper house, the senate, and the lower house, the national assembly.

The function of the parliament is to legislate, represent, scrutinize, recruit and promote the legitimacy of the regime by encouraging the public to see the system as the rightful rule.

Is the parliament of Pakistan performing all these functions? Or can we consider it a failed parliament?

The passing of the bills such as the bill for the 21st amendment of the constitution that challenged the basic structure of our constitution, without being properly debated upon, and the passing of draconian laws such as the Protection of Pakistan bill shows that the parliament has failed to perform is functions adequately.

The constitution of Pakistan is based on the principle of the separation of powers between the legislative, the judiciary and the executive and the establishment of military courts under the 21st amendment challenges this notion.  A parliament, which makes laws against the basic structure of the fundamental law, the constitution, can never be considered a parliament performing its legislative functions properly.

The Protection of Pakistan bill (PPB) allows the suspension of the fundamental rights of the citizens, which have been enshrined in the constitution. How can we consider a parliament the true representative of the people, which enacts laws against their fundamental rights? One can argue that the constitution of Pakistan allows the suspension of rights for the integrity and safety of the country, but laws such as the PPB are too broad that such lines can be blurred.

The failure of the parliament in making laws for the protection of the minority communities also highlights that the parliament is unable to perform its functions properly.  What further adds to the case against our parliament is the enactment of laws, which exacerbate the issue of the minority rights. This was done in 1974, when the 2nd amendment to the constitution was passed that declared the Ahmadis non-Muslims.


Observing the past performance of the parliament shows that it has failed to legislate properly and act as a representative for the people. Hence, such parliament can never promote the legitimacy of a regime and it would not be wrong to consider this a failure of the legislators.

Session9: Pakistan's legislative assembly

Pakistan's assembly is characterized by a bicameral system of legislature with the Senate and the National Assembly.The main aim of adopting a bicameral system is the efficiency in policy making consistent with the national interests. However, evaluating the Pakistani system we can see that the bicameral system has both its advantages and its flaws.

A bicameral legislature ensues more and better representation which allows for more thought towards passing a policy.Bicameral system allows for diverse views and opinions to be taken in to account, however representation of women and minorities is fairly limited in our assemblies. The advantages and disadvantages of  policy can be pondered upon in each house so that decisions are not made hastily which means even though the decision making is slowed down, quality of the decisions is not compromised. The problem occurs when members of the assemblies are not competent in decision making, possess fake degrees and insufficient intellectual skills along with affiliating themselves to political parties rather than keeping in mind the public interest. This results in conflicts and disagreements which are not resolved in a civilized manner and Pakistan's legislature becomes a laughing stock. Debating delays decision making and wastes precious resources, this is where a bicameral system falls in to jeopardy and fails to deliver its purpose efficiently.