Practical and tangible steps to bring about structural changes in Pakistan

[VCheng]

First step would be to stop American meddling into Pakistani affairs either through proxy support to its Millitary or by sponsering puppet governments like the one currently led by Zardari.

And exactly HOW would you do that?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

First step would be to stop American meddling into Pakistani affairs either through proxy support to its Millitary or by sponsering puppet governments like the one currently led by Zardari.

Again, that is something that needs to be addressed down the road. You cannot get to an 'independent foreign policy' without having a 'strong and effective Pakistan'.

In order to have a 'strong and effective Pakistan', we need to start with reforming some core institutions, which IMO are the ones I outlined above.

An independent law enforcement and prosecution service would not have to wait for a go ahead from the Presidency or GHQ to arrest and prosecute 'Raymond Davis', or any other diplomats/spies that are caught breaking the law.

An independent law enforcement and prosecution service would not have to wait for instructions from Nawaz Sharif or Rana Sanaullah to arrest IJT thugs or various other religious extremists and criminals.

Again, we need to focus on the basics first, and the basics involve institutions that work FOR the people of Pakistan, free of political influence and bias.

 

[VCheng]

............... we need to focus on the basics first, and the basics involve institutions that work FOR the people of Pakistan, free of political influence and bias.

Wise, important words. I hope we can at least identify what CONCRETE steps can be taken to get the BASICS right.

 

[mjnaushad]

At somebozo.
We all keep saying that US is the reason 4 every problem but we should realize that govt needs money to work effectively. When they recieve money 4rm people they work 4 people. But when they dont get money 4rm people they find other ways(US AID AND IMF) and they then work 4 them.

When ever u ask someone do u pay tax they'll answer yes( they refer to gst). That is not the only tax u r suppose the pay. There r other taxes aswell ( income tax, cap gain, property etc etc ). Before we blame all systems like democracy or dictatorship we need to see our own mistakes. 80% of this nation do not pay tax and then we expect to rise as developed nation over night.
And please dont give me excuse that our leaders dont pay tax. If one man do something illegal dosent mean u should do the same.

Least we can do to make stronger pakistan is pay ur taxes.
MJ

 

[VCheng]

Okay, here is some relevant material to discuss:

ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN

The Election Commission of Pakistan is an independent and autonomous constitutional body charged with the function of conducting transparent, free, fair and impartial elections to the National and Provincial Assemblies. The holding of elections to the office of the President and the Senate, and the conduct of Local Government Elections are the functions of the Chief Election Commissioner.

The Election Commission consists of the Chairman (Chief Election Commissioner of Pakistan) and four Members each drawn from the sitting judges of the High Courts of their respective Provinces.

All the executive authorities in the Federation and in the provinces are constitutionally duty bound to assist the Chief Election Commissioner and the Election Commission in the discharge of his or its functions.

The Election Commission of Pakistan enjoys full financial and administrative autonomy and works independently of all government control.

The Election Commission performs its functions without interference of the executive. The Election Schedule for the conduct of General Elections as well as for the bye-elections is decided by the Election Commission or, as the case may be, by the Chief Election Commissioner.

The preparation of polling schemes, the appointment of polling personnel, assignments of voters and arrangements for the maintenance of law and order are under the control, supervision and directions of the Election Commission.

The Budget of the Election Commission is provided by the Federal Government. Any re-appropriation within the sanctioned Budget can be done by the Chief Election Commissioner without making any reference to the Finance Division.

FUNCTIONS OF CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER

(1) To prepare electoral rolls for elections to the National and Provincial Assemblies and revising such rolls annually. [Article 219 (a)];

(2) To organize and conduct election to the Senate and fill casual vacancies in a House or a Provincial Assembly [Article 219(b)];

(3) To appoint Election Tribunals. [Article 219 (c)];

(4) To decide cases of disqualification of members of Parliament and Provincial Assemblies under Article 63(2) and Article 63A of the Constitution on receipt of reference from the Chairman or the Speaker or Head of the political party, as the case may be;

(5) To hold and conduct election to the office of the President as per Second Schedule to the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan [Article 41 (3)];

(6) To hold Referendum as and when ordered by the President. [Article 48 (6)];

(7) To make rules providing for the appointment of officers and servants to be employed in connection with the functions of the Chief Election Commissioner or an Election Commission and for their terms and conditions of employment. Under this power, the Honorable Chief Election Commissioner framed the Election Commission (Officers & Servants) Rules, 1989. [Article 221];

APPOINTMENTS

CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER

The Chief Election Commissioner is appointed by the President of Pakistan. The Chief Election Commissioner can be a person, who is, or has been, a judge of the Supreme Court or is, or has been, a judge of a High Court and is qualified to be appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court. The term of Chief Election Commissioner is three years from the day he enters upon his office. The National Assembly may by resolution extend the term of the Commissioner by a period not exceeding one year. The Chief Election Commissioner enjoys the same privileges as of the Chief Justice of Pakistan.

MEMBERS

Each one of the four members of the Election Commission are appointed by the President in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court of the province concerned and the Chief Election Commissioner.

Anyone?

The paucity of tangible steps or coherent discussion does not make for a promising start, just as I feared.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Anyone?

The paucity of tangible steps or coherent discussion does not make for a promising start, just as I feared.

Well, I thought I had made my views on this clear - appointment of the EC members needs to be through a bipartisan committee in parliament, similar to the nomination process for the Supreme Court justices. The same for the other institutions I mentioned.

Bipartisan appointments may not necessarily result in 'brilliant' individuals being appointed, who can 'turn around' these institutions, but they would at least be a good step towards a more neutral EC (for example), and therefore a good step towards building faith in the democratic process.

 

[AAtish]

VCheng.. I have not forgotten or haven't backed out.. rest assured that my input will be here pretty soon.. It is easy to criticize and point fingers but is difficult to suggest practical solutions.. i am working on it..

 

[S.M.R]

Well then, we are back to 'bring about change democratically', which means that Pakistanis have to be educated and educate themselves about the political options they have, outside of the PML-N, PPP and PML-Q, and vote them in come election time and pressure them to enact changes along the lines of those outlined.

AM, we need to get rid of this old system of parliament, we need to implement 'presidential system'.

A voter normally votes for his party, like he doesnt like PPP and votes of PML-Q, in the current situation, chaudaries got sold and now sitting in lap of PPP. Is there any possibility to get rid of this?

 

[VCheng]

Well, I thought I had made my views on this clear - appointment of the EC members needs to be through a bipartisan committee in parliament, similar to the nomination process for the Supreme Court justices. The same for the other institutions I mentioned.

Bipartisan appointments may not necessarily result in 'brilliant' individuals being appointed, who can 'turn around' these institutions, but they would at least be a good step towards a more neutral EC (for example), and therefore a good step towards building faith in the democratic process.

Sure, but consider this:

Do you really think you can realistically get a group of parliamentarians changing the very electoral system that got them to that position in the first place? Even assuming Imran Khan (or YOU) as President, let's see how to get the relevant committee put together and the necessary amendments through.

I hope you can see my point of view: volumes have been said as to what are the right things to do. My whole premise is NONE of what is RIGHT can be IMPLEMENTED.

My apologies if I offend anyone.

VCheng.. I have not forgotten or haven't backed out.. rest assured that my input will be here pretty soon.. It is easy to criticize and point fingers but is difficult to suggest practical solutions.. i am working on it..

... and I am waiting for it.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Sure, but consider this:

Do you really think you can realistically get a group of parliamentarians changing the very electoral system that got them to that position in the first place? Even assuming Imran Khan (or YOU) as President, let's see how to get the relevant committee put together and the necessary amendments through.

I hope you can see my point of view: volumes have been said as to what are the right things to do. My whole premise is NONE of what is RIGHT can be IMPLEMENTED.

Dear sir, of course the challenge is always going to be 'implementation', but my understanding regarding this thread was 'proposing solutions to help reform institutions', that is after all what you were leading towards when you asked members to 'pick an institution and propose how to change it'. Why ask for proposals on reforms if you are going to dismiss them by raising 'implementation'?

If it is 'implementation' that is the overriding issue, then forget discussions on 'reforming institutions' and 'kinds of reforms', and merely focus on proposals to get rid of the current political leadership, or any others like them.

 

[VCheng]

Dear sir, of course the challenge is always going to be 'implementation', but my understanding regarding this thread was 'proposing solutions to help reform institutions', that is after all what you were leading towards when you asked members to 'pick an institution and propose how to change it'. Why ask for proposals on reforms if you are going to dismiss them by raising 'implementation'?

If it is 'implementation' that is the overriding issue, then forget discussions on 'reforming institutions' and 'kinds of reforms', and merely focus on proposals to get rid of the current political leadership, or any others like them.

Dear Sir,

If you are more comfortable with discussing "solutions" ad nauseum that have no hope in hell of ever being implemented, then please carry on, along with the rest of the august membership here.

"Gallaan jinyan marzi kara lao, bas koi kaam keran nu na kehnaa!"

What do you mean "if" implementation is the issue? IT IS THE ONLY ISSUE!

Proposals to "reform" the current leadership and "any others like them"? What do you think I mean when I always add "......unless some drastic changes are made, internally or externally"?

Please note that I also said in the beginning: I do not see any reason for optimism. And I don't even care now how anyone takes that.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

What do you mean "if" implementation is the issue? IT IS THE ONLY ISSUE!

You should have phrased your questions differently then, especially when asking people to 'pick an institution and suggest ways to reform it' - it isn't our fault that you lead the discussion in one direction and then pooh-pooh it and go off on a different track.

But in any case, if it is 'implementation' that you want to talk about, then all this brouhaha over 'pick an institution' and 'the military must reform' is useless and irrelevant. The ONLY issue that remains is:

'How do we get rid of the current political leadership and political class (assuming it is beyond redemption)'.

On that count, to quote one of your own chosen quotes 'Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results', and supporting Imran Khan, whatever his flaws, certainly does not fall in that category.

Supporting a continuation of the PPP, and to a lesser degree, the PML-N, certainly would fit into Einstein's definition of insanity.

So are we back to 'putting the Waderas, Chaudhries, Sardars, Zardaris and Sharifs in front of military firing squads?'

 

[VCheng]

You should have phrased your questions differently then, especially when asking people to 'pick an institution and suggest ways to reform it' - it isn't our fault that you lead the discussion in one direction and then pooh-pooh it and go off on a different track.

But in any case, if it is 'implementation' that you want to talk about, then all this brouhaha over 'pick an institution' and 'the military must reform' is useless and irrelevant. The ONLY issue that remains is:

'How do we get rid of the current political leadership and political class (assuming it is beyond redemption)'.

On that count, to quote one of your own chosen quotes 'Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results', and supporting Imran Khan, whatever his flaws, certainly does not fall in that category.

Supporting a continuation of the PPP, and to a lesser degree, the PML-N, certainly would fit into Einstein's definition of insanity.

So are we back to 'putting the Waderas, Chaudhries, Sardars, Zardaris and Sharifs in front of military firing squads?'

I was very clear: Let's talk about TANGIBLE steps that can REALISTICALLY be taken to reform XYZ. May be that was not clear enough to you. I have not "pooh-pooh"ed anybody, but rather I have been called much worse, with the implicit approval, and indeed participation of Admin and Mods here.

"Assuming" it is beyond redemption? Do you need any more proof to say IT IS BEYOND REDEMPTION!

And I never said anybody to be put before a firing squad, because that is also NOT going to happen.

And then I am the one who is the bad guy for saying the truth?

Let me say it again:

Even if IK comes, or any flavor, nothing substantive is going to change. Cuss me all you want, but I am fairly confident I am correct.

Is this clear enough for you? Delete this post or ban me whenever you like Sir.

 

[VCheng]

This, dear Sir(s), is the reality:

from: Parliament is supreme over all institutions: Zardari | Pakistan | DAWN.COM

ISLAMABAD: President Asif Ali Zardari said on Friday that the Parliament is supreme over all other institutions, DawnNews reported.

A high level meeting was called at the Presidency after a second extension was issued to the government by the Supreme Court.

The meeting was headed by President Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani.

In the meeting it was decided that the parliament will be strengthened and its supremacy will be ensured. It was also decided that no compromise will be made on the authority of the executive.

Senior Law Minister Babar Awan briefed the meeting about the resulting situation after the decisions made by the Supreme Court.

“The parliament is answerable to the aspirations of the people,” said President Zardari.

Moreover, President of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), Asma Jehangir said government should implement decisions of Apex Court otherwise non implementation would lead the country towards anarchy.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I was very clear: Let's talk about TANGIBLE steps that can REALISTICALLY be taken to reform XYZ.

Again, you need to refine your question - your objections to the proposals made so far are objections that would apply to ANY proposal for reform. So in essence you are not asking for 'tangible steps that can be realistically taken', but 'tangible steps to remove the current political leadership/political class', since the current political class will be an obstacle to any kind of reform.

May be that was not clear enough to you. I have not "pooh-pooh"ed anybody, but rather I have been called much worse, with the implicit approval, and indeed participation of Admin and Mods here.

Diversionary tactics and circular arguments is what you are engaging in, posing questions about reform and then objecting to any suggestions by arguing 'implementation'.

Again, implementation lies in the hands of the political class, and if you do not see the current political class as capable of or interested in 'implementing reform', then the question clearly is 'how do we replace the current political class' - we cannot talk of reform without removing that major hurdle to 'implementation' of reform.

And then I am the one who is the bad guy for saying the truth?

You are not a 'bad guy' for 'saying the truth', rather you are being criticized for shifting your arguments and setting up strawmen.

Again, define the issue first - if it is 'implementation' of any potential 'reform proposals', then the discussion needs to revolve around how to remove the current political class from the scene - everything else is secondary to that.

So, any suggestions on your part on how to achieve 'a removal (from power) of the current political class'?