2 - 8 May 2002
Issue No.584
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 2 - 8 May 2002 Issue No.584 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
What's in a 'yes'?
Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf played the referendum game with all the trumps up his sleeve. Will this keep him in power, asks Iffat Malik in Islamabad
On Tuesday 30 April, Pakistanis went to the polls. Not to cast their votes in an election, but to participate in a referendum. The question they were required to answer with either "yes" or "no" was whether they support policies being carried out by the current government. These include the establishment of local government, the consolidation of democracy and the clamp- down on sectarianism and fundamentalism. A "yes" vote implies support for Pervez Musharraf staying on as president for the next five years.
Securing the presidency through a referendum is not new to Pakistan. The last military chief to rule the country, General Zia-ul-Haq, also tried to legitimise his assumption of the presidency through a referendum. In December 1984 the people of Pakistan were asked if they supported the process of Islamic reforms introduced by General Zia. Their yes vote was taken to mean approval of Zia staying on as president for five years, to continue his Islamic reforms.
In a long-winded one-and-a-half hour televised speech to the nation, in which he announced the referendum, President Musharraf took great pains to explain the reforms initiated by his government.
Not surprisingly, he claimed that it had achieved substantial success in improving the economy, health, education, national cohesion and Pakistan's international standing. But he also took great pains to stress that the process had not been completed, that real success would only come with completion and that his staying on in power was vital to that completion process. General Musharraf concluded his address with the question, "Am I required for Pakistan?"
Based on the long list of achievements outlined by Musharraf, he obviously expected people to respond in the affirmative. He appealed for their support, explaining that it would give him the strength and moral ascendancy to carry on with his task of improving Pakistan.
That was the Musharraf version. Many analysts offered a somewhat different explanation. Having been in power for almost three years, and with the Supreme Court deadline of 12 October 2002 calling for elections and the restoration of civilian government looming ahead, analysts claim that President Musharraf faces a dilemma. He has acquired a taste for power, but must soon hand it over. Most observers predicted that he would resolve this dilemma by ensuring that a pliant civilian government was elected in October, one that would be satisfied with a partial transfer of power from the military.
Musharraf would strengthen the powers of the presidency before October by restoring its ability to dismiss the government and dissolve the Assemblies. Once the Assemblies (National, Provincial and the Senate) were in place, he would legitimise his own position as president by a vote of approval from them, which is the established route for electing a president in Pakistan.
Six months before the elections, however, Musharraf seems to have opted for a different strategy. Doubts about the reliability of politicians appear to have made him decide to legitimise and secure his presidency through the referendum route instead.
This route would guarantee Musharraf the presidency for the next five years, well before the new Assemblies are in place. He will not be dependent on their goodwill and will not have to make deals with them. Little wonder then that politicians have been almost universal in their condemnation of the referendum proposal.
The so-called kings party -- the Pakistan Muslim League Quaid-i-Azam [PML (QA)] -- backed the move, and so too did a number of individual politicians, including former cricket star Imran Khan. Their support is widely seen as motivated by the expectation of securing government appointments after October.
But the other main parties, including Nawaz Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League (PML), Benazir Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP) and various religious groups have all vociferously opposed the referendum as unconstitutional and undemocratic. Opposition by the religious parties is somewhat surprising. In 1984 Jamaat-I- Islami (JI) and others were ardent supporters of General Zia's referendum. Musharraf released the JI Amir Qazi Hussein Ahmed and other prominent religious leaders, including Fazal-ur-Rehman, from detention just weeks before as a sweetener. But a public demonstration organised last week by JI against the referendum shows his strategy did not work. Reaction in newspaper columns and opinion pieces has also generally been negative. People still recall Zia's farcical referendum and the blatant rigging he engineered to get a positive result.
Thanks to that precedent, the word referendum has very negative connotations in Pakistan. It is definitely not seen as a democratic, or even constitutional exercise. Critics argue that Musharraf faces no opposition. They also complain that support for the continuity of the reform process cannot be equated with support for a five-year Musharraf presidency.
None of which has put Musharraf off track. He has taken to the referendum campaign trail with gusto, touring the country and addressing large rallies to seek public support. The capital, Islamabad, is festooned with pictures of the general, and state television is diligently promoting both Musharraf and the referendum. The prominent role of state organisations and resources in the referendum campaign has drawn considerable criticism. According to newspaper reports, many of the thousands listening to Musharraf's speeches in Lahore, Peshawar and other cities were pressured to attend by local councillors, politicians and employers.
Media criticism of his campaign has caused Musharraf to turn against the press. Once famous for his tolerance of press freedom, he is now accusing them of bias and serving the interests of opposition politicians. In Faisalabad journalists were heckled by a crowd on the incitement of the Punjab Governor Khalid Maqbool, and then baton- charged by police. Musharraf ordered an inquiry but refused to take action against the governor.
Musharraf's winning the referendum seemed like a foregone conclusion long before 30 April.
In order to ensure a high turn-out, the government has greatly facilitated the electoral process; anyone over the age of 18 can vote anywhere. There are no electoral lists or constituencies. But even a high "yes" vote is unlikely to give Musharraf the democratic legitimacy he craves: the manipulation involved in securing that outcome is simply too great. He is likely to go down in history as yet another military ruler who created the illusion of democracy in Pakistan. It remains to be seen whether, unlike his predecessors, that is sufficient to keep him in power.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page