If the Charter of Democracy (C.O.D) signed between Shaheed Benazir Bhutto and Mian Nawaz Sharif in 2006 is fully implemented, the current judicial crisis will be resolved, and the country will move towards political stability. Last week, while addressing members of the Sindh High Court Bar Association, Pakistan People’s Party Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari emphasized that when his mother, Benazir Bhutto, agreed on the Charter of Democracy with Nawaz Sharif in 2006, one of the most important points in the charter was the establishment of a constitutional court. He stressed that the time has come to establish such a court, asserting that the judiciary has failed in its responsibilities, the judicial system has collapsed, and 90% of its time is spent on political cases. He also mentioned that the constitutional court would provide equal representation to all provinces, with a Chief Justice appointed from each province.
Bilawal Bhutto singled out the point regarding the constitutional court as the most important, but if we seriously review the entire Charter of Democracy signed in May 2006 in London, we find that all of its points are highly significant. One of these points states that the political wings of all intelligence agencies will be abolished, and they will be made accountable to elected governments. The charter also includes a provision that these intelligence agencies will be accountable to the elected government through the Prime Minister’s Secretariat, the Minister of Defence, and the Cabinet Division. Another point in the charter is that the budget of these agencies, after recommendations prepared by the relevant ministry, will be approved by the Cabinet’s Defence Committee.
The charter also states that a committee will be formed to review the increase or decrease of the country’s defence and security institutions. Most appointments will be made through the relevant ministries with government approval. Land allotments and cantonments will fall under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Defence. A commission will be established to review all matters related to state and government land allotment since October 12, 1999, and to hold accountable those involved in corruption, profiteering, or bias. The charter also emphasized that the Supreme Court and High Courts would focus on hearing civil and criminal cases.
Moreover, the procedure for appointing judges was changed. It was proposed that a commission would prepare recommendations for judicial appointments. The commission would be chaired by the Chief Justice, provided they had not taken an oath under the PCO (Provisional Constitutional Order). The commission would include Chief Justices from provincial High Courts, and candidates would be nominated through the Vice Chairman of the relevant provincial Bar Council. The Attorney General and Advocate General of the relevant province would send three names to the Prime Minister, who would then send one of these names to the Parliamentary Committee for confirmation through a transparent public hearing process.
The joint parliamentary committee would consist of 50% members from the government and 50% from opposition parties. In this way, the Chief Justice’s discretionary powers regarding judges’ permanency would be restored. Another clause in the charter proposed the abolition of all special courts and accountability courts. The system for transferring High Court judges between provinces would also be completely reformed. The charter also agreed on the establishment of a comprehensive, autonomous local government system. A provision was included that the head of the Public Accounts Committee in Parliament and the four provincial assemblies would be the leader of the opposition. A Truth and Reconciliation Commission (T&RC) was also proposed.
The concept of the Truth Commission originated in South Africa when, after the success of the black people’s struggle under Nelson Mandela’s leadership, it was feared that after gaining freedom, the black majority might seek revenge on the white minority for centuries of oppression. Nelson Mandela introduced the idea of the Truth Commission, where individuals who had committed crimes in the past could confess their wrongdoings before the commission and be forgiven.
A study of South African history reveals that thousands of people, including Mandela’s former wife, appeared before the commission and confessed their crimes, thus achieving reconciliation. The purpose of including this clause in the Charter of Democracy was to provide a path for those who had violated the constitution, imposed martial law, or committed corruption to confess their crimes sincerely and promise not to repeat them in the future, in which case they would be pardoned.
The framers of the Charter of Democracy included these proposals to eliminate the elements weakening the country’s political system. An analysis of the charter’s points clearly shows that the three pillars of the state would function within their constitutional boundaries. If any pillar oversteps its boundaries, it will impact the entire system. A few months ago, former ISI chief General Faiz Hameed was arrested on serious charges, including misuse of power, illegal accumulation of wealth, harassment of businessmen, running a parallel government, and pressuring senior judges.
Several former prime ministers have repeatedly stated that government officials were involved in their dismissals. High Court judges have frequently complained that their phones and those of their families are tapped. There are also documented complaints about secret cameras being installed in their homes. The proposal to introduce a clear mechanism for holding such individuals accountable in the Charter of Democracy is crucial.
While there was consensus on establishing a local government system in the Charter of Democracy, political parties like the Pakistan People’s Party, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf have never been serious about creating a local government system. Instead, these parties have established bureaucratic bodies through legislation as alternatives to the local government system, but these experiments have failed. The absence of local government systems with powers at the grassroots level has led to issues like waste management and sewage becoming international media concerns.
According to the Charter of Democracy, the heads of public accounts committees were appointed from the opposition in the federal, Punjab, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa assemblies, but the Pakistan People’s Party did not implement this clause in Sindh. As a result, the Sindh government has demonstrated a weaker governance model, where transparency appears to be lacking. If all the clauses of the Charter of Democracy are incorporated into constitutional amendments and fully implemented, political stability will prevail in the country.