Democracy and Rule of Law in Pakistan. A Case Study of Federal Government 2008-2013

Table of Contents

1. CHAPTER 1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Hypothesis

1.2 Research Questions

1.3 Statement of the Problem

1.4 Objectives of the Study

1.5 Implications of the Study

1.6 Research Methodology

1.7 Literature Review

1.8 Organization of the Study

2. CHAPTER 2

2. THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE OF DEMOCRACY AND RULE OF LAW

2.1 Theoretical Perspective of Democratic Form of Governments

2.1.1 Defining Democracy

2.1.2 Types of Democracy

2.1.2.1 Liberal Democracy

2.1.3 Essential Elements of Democracy

2.1.3.1 Separation and Balance of Powers

2.1.3.2 Judicial Independence

2.1.3.3 Political Parties, CSOs and NGOs in Pluralistic Form

2.1.3.4 Transparency and Accountability

2.1.3.5 Freedom of Political Activities

2.2 Theoretical Perspective of Rule of Law

2.2.1 Definition and Explanation

2.2.2 Rule of Law: A Continual Process through Centuries

2.2.3 Technical Assistance for Rule of law in the Contemporary World

2.2.4 Universal Goals of Rule of Law

2.2.4.1 Superiority of Law over Everyone

2.2.4.2 Equality of Individuals before the Law

2.2.4.3 Maintenance of Law and Order

2.2.4.4 Efficient Justice; Predictability of Laws

2.2.4.5 Maximum Human Rights Protection

2.2.5 Development of Rule of Law

2.3 Linkages between the Rule of Law and Democracy

2.3.1 Democracy and rule of Law Nexus

2.3.2 Preference and Completion

2.3.3 Compatibility and Resemblance

3. Chapter 3

3. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES OF DEMOCRACY AND RULE OF LAW IN PAKISTAN: 1947-2008

3.1 Initiatives Taken Towards Democracy and Rule of law After Emergence of Pakistan and the Chaotic Situation of the Parliamentary System from 1951-1958

3.1.1 Collapse of Unanimous Status of the Founding Party: An Initiative towards Multi-Party System

3.1.2 Bureaucratic Interference in Political Affairs

3.1.3 Dependent Role of Judiciary

3.1.4 Poor Performance of Political Leaders

3.1.5 Federal Parliamentary Constitution 1956 and its Demise

3.1.6 Continuation of Political Turmoil

3.2 Military Period of General Ayub and Yahya 1958-71

3.2.1 ‘Basic Democracies’: A Controlled Political System

3.2.2 Interruption of Bureaucracy

3.2.3 Judiciary influenced by ‘State of Necessity’

3.2.4 Rapacious Character of the Opposition

3.2.5 Ample Powers of the President and Consolidation of Bureaucratic Influence

3.2.6 Violent Riots and Abolition of the Government

3.2.7 Yahya Regime: A Provisional Period

3.3 Bhutto Regime 1971-77: Restoration of Parliamentary Government

3.3.1 Democratic or Dominative Period (1971-1973)

3.3.2 Bureaucratic Reforms in Bhutto Regime

3.3.3 Dominant Executive: Unsatisfactory Performance of the Parliamentary

3.3.4 Dominant Powers of the Executive over Judiciary

3.3.5 Intolerable Behavior of Political Parties

3.4 Military Era of General Zia-ul-Haq1977-88

3.4.1 Authoritarian Rule of Zia Regime

3.4.2 Bureaucracy: A Powerful Institution

3.4.3 Eclipsed Judicial Independence

3.4.4 Character of Political Parties in Zia Regime

3.5 Democratic Parliamentary Phase 1988-99

3.5.1 Benazir Bhutto’s First Term 1988-1990

3.5.1.1 Political Contradictions

3.5.1.2 Interest Driven Bureaucracy

3.5.1.3 Inactive Parliament

3.5.1.4 Judiciary

3.5.2 Nawaz Sharif’s First Term (1990-1993)

3.5.2.1 Political Contradictions

3.5.2.2 The Executive on Eroding Bureaucracy

3.5.2.3 Military’s Political Intervention

3.5.2.4 Inactive Parliament

3.5.2.5 The 12th Amendment and Restoration of the Government by Judiciary

3.5.3 Benazir Bhutto’s Second Term 1993-1996

3.5.3.1 Political Disagreements

3.5.3.2 Carelessness of the Parliament: Excessive Presidential Ordinances

3.5.3.3 Upholding the Dissolved Assembly by Judiciary

3.5.4 Nawaz Sharif’s Second Term Government 1997-1999

3.5.4.1 Further Political Disagreements

3.5.4.2 The Parliament in Haste: Bulldozing Roles and Regulations

3.5.4.3 Disagreements between the Executive and Judiciary

3.5.4.4 Arbitrariness of the Government and its Dissolution through Direct Military Intervention

3.6 Military Regime of General Musharraf 1999-2008

3.6.1 Legitimization of Military Dictatorship

3.6.2 Militarization of Bureaucracy and Reforms

3.6.3 Restructuring Local Governments in the Name of Grassroots Democracy

3.6.4 Antagonistic Role of Opposition

3.6.5 Judiciary: Initiative for Change

4. CHAPTER 4

4. THE DYNAMICS OF DEMOCRACY AND RULE OF LAW: 2008-3013

4.1 Mixed Mandate of Political Parties: Elections 2008

4.1.1 Political Compromise and Formation of the Coalition Government: Politics and Governance

4.2 Political Democratization: Development in Relations between Federal and Provincial Governments through the 7th National Finance Commission Award

4.2.1 Developments in Relations between the Federal Government and FATA, Gilgit-Baltistan, and Balochistan

4.2.1.1 FATA and Gilgit-Baltistan

4.2.1.2 Balochistan

4.2.2 Human Rights and Social Welfare

4.2.3 Counterterrorism and Maintenance of Law and Order

4.2.4 Civil-Military Relations

4.2.5 Political Participation: Free and Pluralistic Political Activities

4.2.5.1 Activated Civil Society

4.2.5.2 Dynamical Role of Political Parties

4.3 Abundant Legislation of the Parliament

4.3.1 Removal of Arbitrary Powers of the President and Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms (PCCR)

4.3.2 The 18th Amendment: Restoration of the Original Constitution

4.3.4 The 20th Amendment

4.4 Strengthening the Concept of Judicial Independence

4.4.1 Movement for Restoration of the Sacked Judges

4.4.2 National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) and the Enigma of Disqualification of the Prime Minister

4.4.3 Verdicts Strengthening Judicial Independence

4.4.4 Suo Moto Actions of the Apex Judiciary

4.5 Measuring Rule of Law

4.5.1 Supremacy of Law and Equality of the Individuals before the Law

4.6 Opacity and Unaccountability

4.6.1 Missed Opportunities

4.6.1.1 Unsatisfactory System of Education

4.6.1.2 Poor Health Facilities

4.6.1.3 Food and Nutrition in Vulnerable Position

4.6.1.4 Feeble Condition of Economy

5. CHAPTER 5

5. CONCLUSION

5.1 Executive Summary

5.2 Findings

5.3 Recommendations

Objectives and Research Focus

The primary objective of this work is to analyze the reciprocal relationship between democracy and the rule of law within the specific socio-political context of Pakistan, focusing on the transitional period from 2008 to 2013 and examining how democratic mechanisms and institutional reforms have impacted the state's governance structure.

• The interdependence and theoretical nexus between democratic governance and the rule of law.
• Analysis of Pakistan’s political history and the historical challenges faced by its democratic institutions.
• Evaluation of the 2008-2013 period as a phase of democratic restoration and institutional strengthening.
• The impact of parliamentary legislation, judicial activism, and constitutional reforms (including the 18th, 19th, and 20th Amendments) on national governance.
• The role of key political actors, civil society, and the military in the ongoing struggle for stable, accountable democratic rule.

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION: This chapter outlines the fundamental concepts of democracy and the rule of law, presenting the hypothesis, research questions, and methodology used to analyze Pakistan's political context.

THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE OF DEMOCRACY AND RULE OF LAW: This chapter explores the theoretical frameworks and essential elements of democracy and the rule of law, discussing their interdependence and role in a modern state.

HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES OF DEMOCRACY AND RULE OF LAW IN PAKISTAN: 1947-2008: This chapter provides a historical analysis of Pakistan's political development from independence to 2008, highlighting the systemic failures, military interventions, and challenges to rule of law.

THE DYNAMICS OF DEMOCRACY AND RULE OF LAW: 2008-3013: This chapter examines the specific era of democratic restoration in Pakistan, evaluating institutional reforms, judicial independence, and political developments between 2008 and 2013.

CONCLUSION: This chapter synthesizes the study's findings, proving the core hypothesis and offering recommendations for strengthening democracy and the rule of law in Pakistan.

Keywords

Democracy, Rule of Law, Pakistan, Political History, Judiciary, Parliament, Constitutional Reforms, Authoritarianism, Governance, Civil-Military Relations, Accountability, 18th Amendment, Institutional Reform, Human Rights, Coalition Government

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the central focus of this research?

The work primarily focuses on the democratic evolution of Pakistan, specifically examining the reciprocal relationship between democracy and the rule of law, with a detailed case study of the federal government during the 2008-2013 period.

Which thematic fields are addressed?

Key themes include the historical struggle for constitutional stability in Pakistan, the evolving role of the judiciary, civil-military dynamics, and the impact of legislative reforms like the 18th Amendment on the balance of power.

What is the primary objective or research question?

The study aims to determine the reasons behind the persistent political turmoil in Pakistan since 1947 and to assess how democratic processes effectively improved the state of the rule of law during the 2008-2013 era.

Which research methodology is employed?

The author utilizes a qualitative "Case Study" approach, drawing upon an extensive array of primary sources—such as judicial verdicts, official reports, and semi-structured interviews with politicians and legal experts—as well as secondary literary sources.

What does the main body of the work cover?

The main part of the thesis chronicles the historical development of Pakistan's political institutions, analyzes theoretical perspectives on democracy and law, and investigates the specific legislative, judicial, and governance shifts during the restorative transition of 2008-2013.

What criteria define the key terminology?

The keywords are centered around "Democracy," "Rule of Law," and "Pakistan," reflecting the critical intersection of political theory, constitutional status, and governmental accountability in the context of a developing state.

How is the 2008-2013 period characterized in the text?

This period is defined as a transition from semi-authoritarianism to a democratic era, characterized by political consensus, legislative activity, and the judiciary's increasing role in holding the executive branch accountable.

What role did the judiciary play during the study period?

The judiciary is portrayed as a newly independent institution that successfully utilized suo moto actions and constitutional reviews to check executive arbitrariness, most notably in the disqualification of the Prime Minister for disobeying court orders.