IN a democracy, parliament is not only supposed to legislate; it is also expected to safeguard the national interest and deliberate on key policy matters. That criterion does not seem to apply to our parliament. One seldom witnesses a major foreign or national security issue being deliberated by the ‘representatives’ of the people, and there is hardly any meaningful debate even on critical constitutional amendments and legislation. This ineffectiveness of the country’s highest legislative body reflects the sorry state of democracy against the backdrop of creeping authoritarianism.

Last week, both Houses of parliament approved, within hours and by a two-thirds majority, the decision to remove an elected provincial government and impose a state of emergency and governor’s rule, with no substantive debate. A highly controversial matter was disposed of within hours, with some ministers and leaders of the ruling coalition justifying the action against a provincial government that enjoyed the support of a majority of the members of the assembly, and the arrest of its chief minister and members of his government.

It was obvious that the decision had already been taken elsewhere, and that a parliament of debatable legitimacy was, as usual, expected to rubber-stamp it. Most members may not even have understood the constitutional provisions invoked to declare a state of emergency in a province, or whether those provisions applied to the conditions at hand. It looked like a puppet show. But it was not the first time this parliament blindly toed the line.

Over the past two years, it has passed the 26th and 27th Amendments, virtually destroying the essence of........

© Dawn