The President’s
office
President Arif
Alvi in an interview with a panel of this paper on March 11, 2019 dilated on a
variety of issues including the regional situation in the wake of India’s war
hysteria, striking a balance between the requirements of his office and having
been an active party leader before assuming the post, the issues bedevilling
the smaller provinces and Balochistan’s long standing sense of deprivation. The
Constitution defines the President’s office as the head of state representing the
unity of the Republic, therefore representative of the entire federation, irrespective
of which party is in power where. As such, President Alvi’s answer to a
question about his transition from being an active political worker of the
ruling Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf (PTI) to the office of President, hit the nail
on the head when he said he had taken an oath to remain unbiased and
apolitical. He did admit however, that he had a very ‘strong bias’ towards the
eradication of corruption, a cause dear to the heart of and constituting the
PTI’s main political banner. Regarding what he called the hot debate inside the
PTI and some other circles regarding replacing the present parliamentary system
with a presidential one, President Alvi said every form of government works
provided it is free of corruption and there is no intention to hegemonise the
rights of different institutions. If any government wants a presidential
system, he went on, they need a two-thirds majority to change the Constitution.
However, the concerns of the smaller provinces regarding representation in the
federation’s affairs needed to be kept in view, especially, it may be pointed
out, since there exist such concerns and complaints even at present. Personally
the president seemed quite satisfied with the parliamentary system, one of the
few things on which all shades of opinion in the polity seem to agree. However,
it needs to be emphasized that changing the system from the present
parliamentary form to a presidential one may not be as simple as garnering a
two-thirds majority in both houses of parliament as it would alter the basic
structure of the Constitution. It may require electing a constituent assembly
to enact such an amendment. Not surprisingly, given his medical background, the
cause of oral health, child mortality and malnutrition are priorities for the
president. Dilating at length on the recent tensions with India, the president
pointed to the serious challenge to secularism in India posed by extremism,
contrasting it with Pakistan’s own experience and the huge price paid in this
context over the last four decades. He praised the maturity with which Pakistan
played its cards in the clash with India, underlining that the country wanted
peace with dignity. Asked whether he could play a role in forging a consensus
by taking all parties on board on all contentious issues like the unity shown
by the country during the tensions with India, President Alvi rightly pointed
out that the Constitution was silent on this point but since it would constitute
a political initiative, the law is very clear that political matters are to be handled
by the elected prime minister. The President defended the 18th
Amendment as he supported devolution but pointed to the need for capacity
building of the provinces to handle the new responsibilities and subjects
transferred to them. He also said the Balochistan National Party-Mengal (BNP-M)
was a coalition partner of the ruling PTI and the government had engaged with
it on the issue of missing persons that the BNP-M amongst others has been
agitating. Although President Alvi thought the state was unduly blamed for the
phenomenon because of lack of transparency, it must be acknowledged that the
state nevertheless cannot avoid its responsibilities for locating such people
and dealing with cases of enforced disappearances, no matter how many or how
few. Last but not least, a piquant question about his relationship and
interaction with Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan produced interesting insights
how, in the changed circumstances, the president and his political party leader
handled their new responsibilities vis-à-vis each other. President Alvi said he
was regularly briefed on federal cabinet decisions and foreign dignitaries’
visits but he cannot visit the PM because of his position and equally cannot
call the PM to his office.
Pakistan in the
past has experience of the president and PM coming from the same political
party but some instances in the past offer lessons in what should be the
protocol and method of functioning in the light of parliamentary and democratic
conventions. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s handpicked president Fazal Ilahi Chaudhry
could not escape becoming the butt of jokes about the need to ‘free’ him from
the hold of the PM. Things have never reached quite that level since, but PM
Imran Khan should set an example, adhere to constitutionally non-binding but parliamentary
and democratic conventions by himself briefing and keeping the president up to
date on all matters of state. This would not only enhance the PM’s credentials
as a democrat who respects such protocol and conventions while diluting some of
the criticism levelled at him for ignoring parliament, it would also help
enhance the status and respect of the president’s office that it deserves and
is its due under the Constitution.
No comments:
Post a Comment