[Dhaka Tribune] Pakistain’s current political system does absolutely nothing to hold those at the top accountable
Pakistain is a parliamentary democracy modelled on the UK, its former colonial ruler, with a ceremonial head of state and an all-powerful parliament.
But this arrangement is not serving the country well at the moment.
Like in the UK, the institutional inertia of the parliamentary system ensures that power is retained by the political insiders of the major parties.
In some context, this is a good thing. For example, in the UK, this system has enabled a smooth transition of power after the Brexit vote from the former prime minister,  David Cameron
... has stated that he is certainly a big Thatcher fan, but I don't know whether that makes me a Thatcherite, which means he's not. Since he is not deeply ideological he lacks core principles and is easily led. He has been described as certainly not a Pitt, Elder or Younger, but he does wear a nice suit so maybe he's Beau Brummel ...
, to his successor, Theresa May.
At a time of great political upheaval, this system allowed for a swift change of leadership toward someone who is regarded as competent and "a safe pair of hands," someone who is generally trusted to be boring but effective, and someone who would not have otherwise been likely to win the leadership.
And so, the country can now focus its attention on the actual Brexit negotiations, which will determine its future for decades.
But the same institutional inertia which keeps power solidly confined to just top political operators is much less positive if those at the top of political parties, who control the government and most areas of the state, are chronically corrupt.
The parliamentary system has given Pakistain a good deal of political stability, after so many decades of on-again-off-again military takeovers.
But this stability has also come at the price of putting most of those at the top of the political class beyond effective accountability.
This system has made it more difficult for the military to remove the civilian government from power, but it has made it even more difficult for the people to challenge and hold to account the incumbent government. 
|
