Pakistan Constitutions (2) early history; pls comment on changes to it since 1973

[American Eagle]

The constituent assembly of Pakistan (Bengali: পাকিস্তান গণপরিষদ, Pākistān Gaṇāpāriṣād; Urdu: آئین ساز اسمبلی, Aāin Sāz Asimblī‎), was formed to write Pakistan's constitution, and serve as its first parliament. It first convened on August 11, 1947, on the eve of independence and the end of British rule. Muhammad Ali Jinnah remained its president until his death on September 11, 1948. Subsequently Liaquat Ali Khan headed it for three years, and produced Objectives Resolution which served as the annex to Pakistan's constitution. It was dissolved on October 24, 1954, by Governor General Malik Ghulam Muhammad. Muhammad Ali Bogra was the prime minister at the time.

After Jinnah's death, the assembly was widely criticized for its incompetence. Addressing a rally in Lahore on October 14, 1950, Maulana Maududi demanded its dissolution, arguing that the 'lampost legislators' were incapable of drawing up an Islamic constitution. Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy said that assembly did not possess any of the characteristics of a democratic parliament. He argued that the nation would overlook any unconstitutional action on the governor general's part, if he exorcised the fascist demon and established representative institutions. Source: Inamur Rehman, Public Opinion and Political Development in Pakistan (Karachi, Oxford, 1982)

In contrast, the Indian constituent assembly which had more diversity, took less than three years to draw up the constitution. The Indian constitution was promulgated on January 26, 1950, and first general elections were held in 1952.[1]

The second constituent assembly reconstituted on May 28, 1955. The constitution was promulgated on March 23, 1956, and Pakistan became an Islamic republic. On October 7, 1958, martial law was clamped on the country. The new regime declared the constitution unworkable and abrogated it.

Pakistan's constituent assembly was preceded by the constituent assembly of India, which first met on December 9, 1946 in Delhi, while India was still under British rule. It originally included the provinces that now compose Pakistanand Bangladesh, and the representation of the princely states of India. In June 1947, the delegations from the provinces of Sindh, East Bengal, Baluchistan, West Punjab and the North West Frontier Province formed the constituent assembly of Pakistan in Karachi.

After gaining power, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto invited the leaders of the parliamentary parties to meet him on 17 October 1972, which resulted in an agreement known as the 'Constitutional Accord', after an intensive discussion. As per consultations floated by PPP, the National Assembly of Pakistan appointed a committee, of 25 members, on 17 April 1972, to prepare a draft of the permanent Constitution of Pakistan. Mahmud Ali Kasuri was the elected chairman of the Committee. On 20 October 1972, the draft bill for the Constitution of Pakistan was signed by leaders of all parliamentary groups in the National Assembly. A bill to provide a constitution for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan was introduced in the Assembly on 2 February 1973. The Assembly passed the bill nearly unanimously on 19 April 1973 and endorsed by the acting President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto on 12 April 1973.[2] The Constitution came into effect from 14 August 1973. On the same day, Bhutto took over as the Prime Minister and Choudhary Fazal-e-Elahi as the President of Pakistan.

 

[American Eagle]

Does no Pakistani care about telling us the history since 1973 to 2014 of how the present day Constitution now stands?

What does the Pakistan Constitution as of January 22, 2014 say about the Armed Forces of Pakistan and how they shall be organized? About the civilian government of Pakistan and how it shall be organized? About the Judiciary of Pakistan and how it shall be organized?

 

[Armstrong]

Does no Pakistani care about telling us the history since 1973 to 2014 of how the present day Constitution now stands?

What does the Pakistan Constitution as of January 22, 2014 say about the Armed Forces of Pakistan and how they shall be organized? About the civilian government of Pakistan and how it shall be organized? About the Judiciary of Pakistan and how it shall be organized?

Most wouldn't know partly because most Pakistanis aren't very interested in reading about these sort of things (its a tedious process going through the Constitution) & partly because more often than not the Constitution has been used as little more than toilet paper by Military & Civilian Executives alike so it has lost quite a bit of its 'value' as a somewhat hallowed document (in a political sense) for most people !

Come to think of it - Even I don't know much about it !

All I know is that the Original Constitution talked about a Federal Structure in a Parliamentary Democracy with a bicameral system !

Where all the citizens of the State shall have the same rights & responsibilities subject to some exceptions !

Where the name of the State shall be the Islamic Republic of Pakistan !

Where the administrative & jurisdictional rights & responsibilities of different organs of the State were laid down !

Some aspects of Political Islam (Political Islam according to the writers of the Constitution) were institutionalized e.g only a Muslim can be the PM & President of the country & that there would be a Federal Shariat Court & that the Ahmedis were declared apostates etc.

Then during the '80s - the Zia Era - the Constitution & the State was even more Islamized (Islam according to them) with the Hudood Ordinances & other such amendments where Criminal & Civil aspects of what they perceived Islam to be were Institutionalized with many of them being, in the opinion of many, regressive & oppressive not to mention Un-Islamic Measures.

Including a toughening of the Anti-Ahmediya Laws & the Blasphemy Laws !

In the same period & ever since different amendments have seen the System swing between a quasi-Presidental System & a quasi-Parlimentary System - the former usually in case of the Military Dictators whilst the latter usually in case of the Civilian Executives !

Then of late more portfolios were devolved to the Provinces (States) as was promised in the '73 Constitution but never implemented upon & a much more Parliamentary Form of Government was introduced !

Much of the above is in gross violation of the wishes of the Founder of Pakistan !

 

[American Eagle]

Most wouldn't know partly because most Pakistanis aren't very interested in reading about these sort of things (its a tedious process going through the Constitution) & partly because more often than not the Constitution has been used as little more than toilet paper by Military & Civilian Executives alike so it has lost quite a bit of its 'value' as a somewhat hallowed document (in a political sense) for most people !

Come to think of it - Even I don't know much about it !

All I know is that the Original Constitution talked about a Federal Structure in a Parliamentary Democracy with a bicameral system !

Where all the citizens of the State shall have the same rights & responsibilities subject to some exceptions !

Where the name of the State shall be the Islamic Republic of Pakistan !

Where the administrative & jurisdictional rights & responsibilities of different organs of the State were laid down !

Some aspects of Political Islam (Political Islam according to the writers of the Constitution) were institutionalized e.g only a Muslim can be the PM & President of the country & that there would be a Federal Shariat Court & that the Ahmedis were declared apostates etc.

Then during the '80s - the Zia Era - the Constitution & the State was even more Islamized (Islam according to them) with the Hudood Ordinances & other such amendments where Criminal & Civil aspects of what they perceived Islam to be were Institutionalized with many of them being, in the opinion of many, regressive & oppressive not to mention Un-Islamic Measures.

Including a toughening of the Anti-Ahmediya Laws & the Blasphemy Laws !

In the same period & ever since different amendments have seen the System swing between a quasi-Presidental System & a quasi-Parlimentary System - the former usually in case of the Military Dictators whilst the latter usually in case of the Civilian Executives !

Then of late more portfolios were devolved to the Provinces (States) as was promised in the '73 Constitution but never implemented upon & a much more Parliamentary Form of Government was introduced !
Much of the above is in gross violation of the wishes of the Founder of Pakistan !

Your response is very thorough and to my understanding as an outsider very accurate.

Perhaps Pakistan would yet best be served by the original British style of a Constitution. one that is largely unwritten but for the precepts and precedents that flow down in most laws of the world today as "English Common Law."

The fact that the UK has a symbolic monarchy and a "state church" does not oppress nor put down all other faith systems freely allowed to worship as they see fit throughout the UK today (England, etc.).

Just my old country "Republican" views on how a "democracy" as great as Britain keeps on keeping on.

 

[Armstrong]

Your response is very thorough and to my understanding as an outsider very accurate.

Perhaps Pakistan would yet best be served by the original British style of a Constitution. one that is largely unwritten but for the precepts and precedents that flow down in most laws of the world today as "English Common Law."

The fact that the UK has a symbolic monarchy and a "state church" does not oppress nor put down all other faith systems freely allowed to worship as they see fit throughout the UK today (England, etc.).

Just my old country "Republican" views on how a "democracy" as great as Britain keeps on keeping on.

Having either an unwritten or written constitution would be, in my opinion, a moot point because for one we do have a written constitution & one that can't be abrogated; for another its not the constitution nor even its embedded biases (every constitution & every society has that in varying degrees) its the lack of leadership & governance that is the bane of my Motherland !

Our Father - Muhammad Ali Jinnah - died in '48; he was our Washington, Jefferson & Lincoln all rolled into one !

None of his successors were even a shadow of him in terms of their Statesmenship; nor could they command anything close to the same Loyalty, by different organs of the State, or the unflinching Love & Trust that the People of Pakistan had in Our Father !

He died too soon far....far too soon & had he lived the Vision he had for Pakistan as a Pluralistic Democracy that held onto the ideals of Fair Play, Social Justice & the Equality of Man whilst remaining true to her Islamic Roots would've been realized & these Constitutional questions would've gotten solved long...long ago !

Now all we can hope for is someone who can just steady the ship long enough for us to get our act's together !

 

[American Eagle]

I was serving in my USAF Liaison Officer job with the old US Embassy in Karachi in 1965 when Miss Jinnah ran for Presidenet against Field Marshal Ayub Khan, the incumbent. Pakistan's electoral process then was referred to as "basic democracy."

Young (early 20s, same age as me, I was 25)) Pakistani Foreign Office and Defence Ministry officials who had become personal friends and were of course business colleagues quietly told me that "the people" wanted MIss Jinnah to win. But the "results" of that election had Ayub Khan win by about 60 to 40.

A person, man or woman, to be an effective leader as you wish for, has to have a "point of reference" either written or unwritten as you Constitution should be. Religion played a role in the founding of Pakistan, and unhappily misuse of religion today wrecks havoc now nationwide.

Attempting to keep a struggling form of democracy which over here was a a republic, there in Pakistan has moved toward theocracy from/due to the era of Bhutto, who was the Pakistan Foreign Minister agitating for what became the 1965 India-Pakistan War. While I did not personally nor as a political observer like PM Bhutto, Ms. Bhutto, who was murdered running for President, was in my view a well educated (at Harvard, etc) very capable and very democratic leader who seems to have been in great favor with the grassroots struggling masses inside Pakistan.

I am off to an MD appointment now, back on your site later.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Your response is very thorough and to my understanding as an outsider very accurate.

Perhaps Pakistan would yet best be served by the original British style of a Constitution. one that is largely unwritten but for the precepts and precedents that flow down in most laws of the world today as "English Common Law."

The fact that the UK has a symbolic monarchy and a "state church" does not oppress nor put down all other faith systems freely allowed to worship as they see fit throughout the UK today (England, etc.).

Just my old country "Republican" views on how a "democracy" as great as Britain keeps on keeping on.

Your views are admirable albeit impractical. And impractical in the Soth Asian Context specifically.

An unwritten Constitution cannot work in South Asia. Just as it does in Britain. The reasons are simply that the British have evolved a Legal Constitunional system ove a long time, centuries in fact.
In contrast, the South Asian countries have never had a steadily evolving system save for the period under British Rule. Insufficient time for any precedents to form and evolve; more so in countries largely unfamiliar with Democratic Republican Governance otherwise!

This was precisely the fact that the Founding fathers of the Indian Republic understood and recognised. And opted to go in with a "Written Constitution"; which drew its inspiration both from the British model and from the American Model (arguably to the greater extent) among others.

This line of action in India has been abundantly validated and justified over the last six decades or so.
As an Indian, I am indeed grateful at the great vision of our Founding Fathers who opted for this route and effectively 'telescoped' the evolutionary processes in other Countries and then 'distilled' their wisdom into our Constitution when our Country became a Republic. Which we have improved/ changed/ tweaked over the years. To the Good for the most part. But the Basic Principles and Values have remained unchanged and sacrosanct. to this day.

If only a similar process had been followed in Pakistan........

 

[American Eagle]

I agree that what is done is done, in that "a" constitution exists, with changes as other and I have noted, over time.

Yes, my comments are idealistic.

Generally in the US we recognized our legal system to have evolved as follows:

1. Mosiac law from the Ten Commandments in our Holy Bible Old Testament.

2. English Common Law, used when we were colonies of Britain.

3. Then the evolution into US law, down to the present day.

I will desist here and anything I might say further would be my "biased speculation."