1729685382-0%2FUntitled-design-(57)1729685382-0.png&w=3840&q=100)
What hope?
Listen to article
I love protests and chaotic gatherings. They represent the naivety, innocence and beauty that humans carry within themselves. At the same time, they prove that we all thrive amidst commotion. It makes for a good picture moment and adds to one's portfolio. But does it do any good? Does it bring about change?
Historically, protests have definitely brought about change and even ignited revolutions. The secret there was consistency where you became a thorn in the path of those who were doing wrong and promoting foul.
In our country today though, we have to accept the fact that the writ of the state cannot be challenged. No matter what.
We saw this during the passing of the 26th amendment to the Constitution and we saw it recently when the JCP convened and elevated judges to the apex court. Lawyers and activists (albeit in a small number) tried to get their point across by protesting in Islamabad but the capital police had blocked off roads to the red zone. Of course, it's a separate debate as to why the protesting lawyers were manhandled by the police.
The point here is that we need to accept the fact that the 26th amendment is here to stay. The state will continue to take decisions that it deems fit for its welfare despite us not agreeing with those decisions. We have no choice but to accept the fact that the current government will continue to do what it wants to do and on the face of it, whatever they are doing and have been doing isn't illegal either.
It might be immoral and unethical but Niccolo Machiavelli once said that ethics have nothing to do with politics, the state can exercise whatever power, however it chooses to in order to remain in power. Fear works better and is more effective than affection.
It might be safe to say that the days of igniting a revolution might be over. Gone are the days when you could bully the government into succumbing to your demands. Be it legal or illegal, we operate within a system where democracy is merely a façade and the ones who rule us care only about their next meal, not about what the people will eat.
No matter how educated, experienced and correct one may be, they will have to bow down to nepotism and corruption. That explains why more than a million skilled youth have left this country and continue to depart every day.
It is alarming how many skilled people, that I knew personally, have left this country for better opportunities abroad and are now doing much better than they were here. From not being able to afford renting a house, to purchasing cars and owning homes, it is evident that we aren't doing something right here. We aren't doing anything right! This is just one of the alarming trends. But everything is fine as long as we continue to give away laptops and arrange questionable scholarship schemes.
Skilled youth is leaving and we aren't doing anything to stop them unless of course we can legislate and make that a crime too. That day isn't far away. Run while you still can.
Every other youngster I meet either in court or in any other setting is either working towards leaving or has his flight booked. If that doesn't alarm you, I don't know what will. Those who can't afford to leave, continue to dwell in uncertainty and look forward to eventually leaving.
Why can't we have nice roads, basic infrastructure and a parliament that actually works for the welfare of its people?
I wouldn't stay we still have time. I think the time has gone. People are leaving because they've lost hope in things ever improving. They've lost hope in the system and in the rulers. There's no turning back from here. Save what you have and either be honest and poor or be corrupt and rich. There's no other way.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
3 days ago
- Business Recorder
Selection of CEC chief, ECP members: PTI nominates members for parliamentary body
ISLAMABAD: The opposition Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) on Thursday formally nominated its members for the parliamentary committee tasked with selecting the new chief election commissioner (CEC) and two members of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). In a statement on X, the opposition leader in National Assembly Omar Ayub posted a June 2 letter addressed to National Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq, in which PTI nominated four National Assembly members and two senators for the committee. The nominees include MNAs Asad Qaiser, Gohar Ali Khan, Sahibzada Hamid Raza, Latif Khosa, along with senators Shibli Faraz and Allama Raja Nasir. The move comes after Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif invited the opposition leader for consultations on appointing a new CEC, following the expiration of the terms of the current CEC Sikandar Sultan Raja and two ECP members from Sindh and Balochistan on January 26, 2025. The premier's letter highlighted that despite their terms ending, the incumbents have continued to perform duties under Article 215 of the Constitution. According to Article 213 of the Constitution, the prime minister and opposition leader must send three names for each position to the president by mutual consensus. If no consensus is reached, names are submitted to a 12-member parliamentary committee equally representing the treasury and opposition benches, which then recommends a name to the president. The PTI's nominations follow procedural consultations within the party and were announced a day after the prime minister's invitation for dialogue with the opposition. The nominations are part of the constitutionally mandated process under Article 213(2B) for appointing the CEC and members from Sindh and Balochistan. The appointments are pending amid deep political polarisation in the country, with little prior engagement reported between government and opposition leaders on the matter. PTI had earlier filed a petition with the Islamabad High Court (IHC) in March, challenging the delay in appointing a new CEC. The petition named the federal government, Senate chairman, National Assembly speaker, and ECP as respondents, alleging constitutional violations due to the delay. It requested the court to compel relevant authorities to form the parliamentary committee and hold meaningful consultations under Article 213. Meanwhile, two other ECP members from Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa continue their terms until 2027, ensuring partial continuity within the commission. The selection process remains critical as the ECP is responsible for overseeing the transparency and conduct of elections in Pakistan. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
4 days ago
- Express Tribune
PM writes to opp to confer on new CEC
After months of dead air and no movement on key electoral appointments, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif on Wednesday extended an olive branch to National Assembly Opposition Leader Omar Ayub, inviting him for consultations on the appointment of a new Chief Election Commissioner (CEC). In a letter, the premier stated that the term of the CEC, as well as that of two other members of the ECP, ended on January 26. However, all three have continued their duties under Article 215 of the Constitution. He stated that, according to Article 218, proposals for the CEC and its members must be submitted to the parliamentary committee. The letter comes as the constitutional logjam has been festering since January, as the five-year terms of CEC Sikandar Sultan Raja, Sindh Member Nisar Durrani and Balochistan Member Shah Muhammad Jatoi ended on January 26. The process, laid out clearly in Article 213, requires a consensus between the prime minister and the opposition leader. In the event of no agreement, both sides are supposed to send separate lists of three names to a 12-member bipartisan committee, which would then pick one and send it to the president for formal appointment. However, the process has been gathering dust. Though the seats of the CEC and two members expired in January, the government allowed the 45-day constitutional deadline for new appointments, which lapsed on March 12, to come and go without resolution. The impasse now rests at the feet of both the treasury and opposition, with neither side making serious contact until the PM's letter. On the other hand, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has already taken the government to court in March. A petition filed in the Islamabad High Court by Ayub and Senate Opposition Leader Shibli Faraz lambasts the inaction as a constitutional violation. It names the federal government, Senate chairman, National Assembly speaker and the ECP as respondents. The petition urges the court to compel the National Assembly speaker to constitute the required parliamentary committee and calls on the Senate chairman to provide names of senators for the same. It further asks the court to order the prime minister to hold meaningful consultations with Ayub, as required under Article 213, and to declare the continued presence of the CEC and two expired members as illegal. Constitutional experts point to the 26th Amendment, which altered Article 215(4) to allow officeholders to continue "till successors are appointed". Both opposition and observers allege the amendment is a legislative patch over executive indecision, especially when key posts meant to guarantee fair elections remain in limbo. Of the four members of the ECP, only the Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa representatives - Babar Hassan Bharwana and Justice (retd) Ikramullah Khan - still have valid tenures, both stretching till mid-2027. It is worth noting that CEC Sikandar Sultan Raja's tenure has been full of political minefields. Opposition parties, particularly the PTI, have accused him of everything from election mismanagement to open partisanship. He has been criticised for failing to ensure timely general elections and for stripping the PTI of its iconic 'bat' symbol ahead of the 2024 polls. The ECP has also come under fire for failing to implement the Supreme Court's verdict on reserved seats and for not holding Senate elections in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, a delay denounced by critics as undermining federal parliamentary integrity.
Express Tribune
4 days ago
- Express Tribune
Alarms over the 27th constitutional tweak
While the federal government has yet to formally move ahead with the 27th Constitutional Amendment, murmurs of discontent and debate have already taken root within the legal fraternity as the Supreme Court resumes hearings on review petitions challenging the July 12 order in the reserved seats case. Tensions escalated further when Islamabad High Bar Association (IHCBA) President Wajid Gilani came out in support of the proposed amendment, hailing it as an opportunity for much-needed "structural reforms" in the superior judiciary. However, the Karachi Bar Association (KBA) fired back, condemning Gilani's stance and warning that lawyers from Sindh would "strongly resist, by any means necessary, any attempt to reintroduce martial law and impose this judicial one-unit scheme upon the federation of Pakistan". 'Post-constitutional order' Weighing in, former additional attorney general Tariq Mahmood Khokhar pointed out that the original draft of the 26th Amendment had already been significantly revised under duress. "In the face of opposition, to the chagrin of the Established Order, many of its amendment clauses had to be dropped from the final draft. But they were not abandoned as a lost cause," Khokhar said. He argued that the current political climate is "propitious" for reintroducing those previously omitted provisions through the 27th Amendment. "Victory on the battlefield can be seductive. Opposition is almost invariably a daunting task in Pakistan. More so now than ever before. Even otherwise, controlled institutions, lacking public legitimacy, unrepresentative legislatures and executives, the mainstream media and the legal fraternity are vying for collaboration." Khokhar warned that these dormant clauses could now return with ease, asserting that the 26th Amendment had already propelled Pakistan into a "post-constitutional order". "The proposed 27th Amendment will 'formally' replace the already diminished rule of law with rule by law (law as an instrument of control). Expect reintroduction of military courts, a federal constitutional court, revamped judicial commission, redefined provincial powers, diminished judiciary, curtailment of the fundamental rights, marginalisation of the constitutional institutions, an authoritarian presidential system and more," he said. "The supreme tragic irony is that the intended victims are, with rare honourable exceptions, willing accomplices in and apologists for offences against the constitution and democracy," Khokhar warned. Meanwhile, lawyers have begun to question why the committee of constitutional benches, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan and comprising Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, has not yet fixed hearings on petitions against the 26th Constitutional Amendment, as it moves swiftly on the reserved seats case – a matter deemed crucial for enabling the ruling coalition to secure two-thirds majority in Parliament. Observers note that the constitutional bench appears eager to wrap up the proceedings on the reserved seats case without delay. However, questions are being raised over whether such haste risks undermining judicial independence, a salient feature of the Constitution. Moreover, the very formation of the constitutional bench is itself under scrutiny. A section of the legal community alleges that those who benefited from the 26th Amendment are hesitant to adjudicate its legal challenges. In 2015, a majority of SC judges, in the landmark 21st Constitutional Amendment case, had held that the parliamentary form of government was a salient feature of the Constitution and could not be amended via constitutional amendment. Justice (retd) Sheikh Azmat Saeed authored the judgment, which was endorsed by eight judges. According to the verdict, the constitution contains a scheme that reflects its salient features. "In an effort to discover such salient features, material outside the Constitution cannot be safely relied upon. The salient features are ascertainable from the Constitution including democracy, the parliamentary form of government and independence of the judiciary," the ruling read. It further stated that Parliament's power to amend the Constitution was subject to implied limitations. As per Articles 238 and 239, Parliament may amend the Constitution, provided that the salient features are not repealed, abrogated, or substantively altered. The judgment also affirmed that the apex court is vested with jurisdiction to interpret the Constitution and to determine whether any constitutional amendment violates its defining features. While the majority judgment remains in force, legal circles maintain that there was still a pressing need for the top court to examine the validity of the 26th Constitutional Amendment. They caution that further delay in adjudication could open the door for additional constitutional amendments, potentially threatening the Constitution's foundational principles. Meanwhile, in its strongly worded statement, the Karachi Bar Association expressed dismay over IHCBA President Gilani's public endorsement of an amendment "as yet unknown to the nation at large". "The lawyers and the people of Pakistan expect Bar Associations and Bar Councils to be independent voices. They must not act as proxies on behalf of the Government and be used to throw out feelers on the Government's behalf and declare support and rubber-stamp constitutional amendments that are yet to even see the light of day." The KBA argued that making such statements while the legal community continues to grapple with the consequences of the 26th Amendment, which has not only been rejected by the legal community at large but is also sub judice, was "entirely unwarranted". "If indeed there is any such Amendment on the anvil and the Government has seen fit to secretly share its contents with the IHCBA President; he should share the same with his actual constituents – which is the legal community." "The news is also being spread that such Amendment will include a requirement of fresh oath for superior court judges. This is a transparent attempt to intimidate the few judges left who are yet to surrender their conscience at the feet of the government. It is identical to the PCO oaths invented by General Zia and General Musharraf for this very purpose and any civilian and legal/judicial collaborators in this martial-law exercise shall surely be remembered in the same terms as Sharifuddin Pirzada and Abdul Hameed Dogar," the statement further read. "In any event, to the extent the learned IHCBA President has announced support for constitutional amendments that would allow High Court and Lower Court judges from Islamabad to be transferred and posted in the different provinces (with or without their consent); the Karachi Bar Association considers this not only an attack on judicial independence but an attack on federalism and the autonomy and independence of provincial judiciaries." "Let there be no doubt, the lawyers of Sindh strongly reject and shall resist, by any means necessary, any attempt to reintroduce martial-law and impose this judicial One-Unit scheme upon the Federation of Pakistan," the association warned.
