Monday, April 2, 2018

Why establishment dislikes 18th Constitutional Amendment?

The 18th constitutional amendment has eliminated the chance of any martial law in future. Although General Ayub Khan abrogated the Constitution of 1956, no military dictator has ever done this with the Constitution of 1973. Instead, it was either suspended or held in abeyance to capture power whereas Supreme Court of Pakistan validated these adventures.

The 18th Amendment has broadened the definition of treason through changes in Article 6 bringing in loop the judges who would validate in addition to generals thus ending an era of doctrine of necessity. Article 6 (2A) reads: “An act of high treason mentioned in clause (1) or clause (2) shall not be validated by any court including the Supreme Court and a High Court."

As the President of Pakistan’s power of dissolving Parliament and appointing governors have also been done away with, this is another step taken to discourage those thinking of martial law which was easily possible in past only through seizing power in the Center. Neither president can dissolve Parliament without the advice of prime minister nor can governors dissolve provincial assemblies without the advice of respective chief ministers after 18th Amendment which has heralded a new era of governance through consensus instead of coercion.

Not only any martial law is out of question, federal government has lost the right of imposing emergency in any province as was done against the NAP government in now Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan through the imposition of Governor’s Raj during first PPP government, in Sindh during second PML-N government and in Punjab by fourth PPP government at federal level. Article 173 has been amended that says any such act requires ratification from the respective provincial assembly within 60 days.