In politics and democracy, one of the key components to success is finding a way forward and creating new political possibilities. If politics falls into a deadlock or the path of cooperation closes, it leads to conflict, confrontation, and distrust, which not only affects politics but also stagnates the overall system, creating further chaos. Our political, democratic, constitutional, and legal system is currently presenting a scenario of deadlock, and it seems we have trapped ourselves in a web of confusion. Instead of focusing on principles, we are becoming victims of personal egos. This type of politics pits us against each other, and we are consciously or unconsciously becoming participants in the game of tension, confrontation, and disorder.
The detailed decision by the eight judges of the Supreme Court regarding the reserved seats and other constitutional entanglements has raised new questions. The decision on the government and Election Commission’s review appeals is still pending, while the Election Commission is exploring its other legal options. PTI has approached the court against the Practice and Procedure Ordinance. Moreover, the Supreme Court’s decision on reserved seats is not being implemented. Not only has there been a refusal to accept the detailed decision, but its implementation has also been denied. Thus, a deadlock is visible.
The judges who ruled on the reserved seats are facing severe criticism from the government and its supporters. Whether the court’s decision is right or wrong, criticizing judicial decisions is understandable, but targeting individuals is inappropriate. This battle is not just limited to the government and judiciary; it has also extended to society. Many complaints and reservations are being expressed against one another, giving rise to new controversies. The issue is no longer confined to the government alone; even the Election Commission, which is a constitutional and independent institution, is caught between the judiciary and parliament.
The government is already in a difficult position. It has faced political embarrassment over the approval of the proposed package of constitutional amendments. Furthermore, the ongoing cold war between the government and PTI has polluted the political environment. The country now faces a crisis of political and legal credibility. Fundamentally, this entire crisis is a struggle for power, which has deepened the pre-existing crises. It appears that political interests have become more important than state interests.
No one can ignore the supremacy of parliament, but is the judiciary a subordinate institution to the parliament? Is the Election Commission a subordinate institution? Can the denial of judicial decisions help maintain parliamentary supremacy? Are the decisions of the Election Commission insignificant? These are questions that parliament must answer. The balance of powers between state and governmental institutions is what establishes the democratic process and the rule of law, and this should be our primary focus.
However, it seems that the political disputes present in national politics are becoming more complex rather than resolving. Political and legal complications are increasing. If we do not establish a balance between constitutional institutions, the situation will not improve. Regardless of the reasons for the deterioration of the situation, both the government and parliamentarians are responsible for failing to play their roles effectively.
It should be kept in mind that our institutional system is breaking down, and the policy of mutual conflict is not in the interest of the state. When the country’s economy is dependent on the IMF, the severity of the situation increases even more. Essentially, the government seeks a two-thirds majority, and the Supreme Court’s decision on reserved seats is seen as an obstacle. The government feels that implementing the court’s decision will weaken its grip on power. This is why the government is linking the approval of the proposed constitutional amendments with its political survival and is unwilling to compromise on it.
The government is trying to stop the implementation of the court’s order regarding the reserved seats. The Speaker of the National Assembly has written to the Election Commission, stating that after the amendment to the Election Act, the court order cannot be complied with. Parliament has the right to legislate, and legislation is being attempted based on this right.
If this happens, it will undoubtedly create an atmosphere of greater confrontation. It is also true that no political party can be deprived of its fundamental right to participate in elections, nor can its parliamentary status be challenged. By doing so, we are inviting a major crisis. Interestingly, although the Supreme Court’s decision came with a majority of eight to five, even the judges who wrote the dissenting notes agree that PTI is a parliamentary party and cannot be deprived of its reserved seats. Therefore, accepting the majority decision is the only way to move forward with the democratic and legal system. If we do not avoid confrontation, no one will benefit, and the state’s crisis will become even more complicated.