Causes of the Failure of 1962 Constitution of Pakistan

Main causes of the failure of 1962 Constitution of Pakistan

Introduction
After 9 years of hard labor. Pakistan was able to have its first compact constitutional
document. But due to many factors this could not last for a long span of time and at last
in 1959, Martial Law was imposed and the constitution was abrogated by Gen. Ayub
Khan, who appointed a constitutional commission to frame a new constitution. Under
the new constitutional arrangement, autocratic military polity came into operation and
many new political innovations were experienced. But this one-man military and political
drama of Ayub Khan flopped in the end and the General was compelled to hand over
the power to the new General. With the departure of Ayub Khan from the political scene
of Pakistan, his peculiar constitution also departed with him.

Major Causes of Failure of 1962 Constitution

Following are the major causes of the failure of 1962 Constitution

It was not a Popular Constitution

The origin and growth of the constitutional concepts and evolution of democracy
develop simultaneously. In modern democracies, the constitutions reflect the aspirations
of the people and the representatives of the people perform the task of framing the
Constitution on behalf of the people. The US Constitution for instance (though
presidential in nature) was drafted by a convention. But 1962 Constitution of Pakistan
was a one man show. Obviously, such a constitution could not satisfy the aspirations of
the people.

Presidential Dictatorship
The Constitution of 1962 was not formed in the best national interest. Its only objective
was to give legal cover to the military rule of Gen. Muhammad Ayub Khan. Separation
of powers, an important principle of Presidential system was not kept into consideration
while vast and extensive powers were enjoyed by the President. National Assembly was
virtually made ineffective to hold the President accountable. The method of
impeachment of the President was so cumbersome so to remove him was made a very
difficult task.

Absence of Checks and Balances

Modern legislatures perform an important function in controlling the executive. But the
National Assembly was completely powerless under the then political arrangement in
respect of its dealing with the executive. The ministers were nominated by the
President. They could participate in the proceedings of the Assembly but were not
accountable to it. Due to the unconditional support of the Muslim League (Conventional)
a majority party, the executive could pass any bill within the legislature. The presence of
ministers on the floor of the House would ensure complete pre-dominance of the
executive over the legislature. The Assembly was not able to pass a vote of no
confidence against the ministers, as they were not a part of the assembly and were
accountable to the President only. In short, all the devices of parliamentary and
presidential systems were adopted so that more and more powers were to be
concentrated in the President. Whereas all those practices were avoided that could
make the executive subordinate to the legislature. Hence, the President enjoyed full
control over both the branches of the government.

Nominal Provincial Autonomy

The new system was outwardly federal, but it was unitary in actual practice. The central
government was virtually made powerful at the cost of provincial autonomy. It could
intervene in the jurisdiction of the provinces. The provincial governors and ministers
were appointed by the President and were accountable to him alone. Through the
provincial executive, the central government could control even the provincial
legislature. Consequently, both the branches of the provinces had to work under the
hegemony of a strong center. Even during emergency, the central government could
intervene in provincial matters.

Indirect System of Election

For legislature and presidency, indirect election system was defined in the Constitution
of 1962. The voters would only elect Basic Democrats that constituted an electoral
college to elect the President and the legislators. Its purpose was to prepare a ground to
the ruling elites to perpetuate their hold by manipulating the comparatively limited body
of electors. This was practiced in the Presidential Election between Mohammad Ayub
Khan and Mohtarma Fatima Jinnah in which the former got elected easily since the
peace keeping in the country was an impossible task. Consequently, when the people’s
reaction broke into street demonstrations, it resulted not only in changing the
government but also toppled down the whole constitutional set up.

Absence of Fundamental Freedom

Public liberties suffered under the presidential-come-military rule of General Muhammad
Ayub Khan. There was no room for criticizing the government. In the original
constitution, fundamental rights were part of the Principles of the State Policy, but due
to strong opposition’s pressure, the basic rights were made part of the constitution
through the first amendment. But the government continued its policy of suppression
and repression in one way or the other, which increased popular hatred against the
government and strengthened the hands of its adversaries.

One Party Rule

The era of Muhammad Ayub Khan is also characterized by one party rule. Muslim
League (Conventional) was organized under official patronage and its members were
bestowed with privileges. The ruling elites fully exploited the state resources for their
personal and group interests. The hatred against this class in the popular eyes resulted
in damaging, theoretically the credibility of the government.

Dark Aspect of the Basic Democrats

The B.D. System was not bad although the ruling elites had created it for certain ulterior
motives. To use this institution as Electoral College and to assign it a judicial role was
especially objectionable. Public representatives had their political affiliations and
rivalries, which hampered the enforcement of justice and fair play. The union councils
were also given certain judicial powers, which created parochial prejudices and friction
though at local level it reforms some developmental works.

Promotion of Secularism
In the original constitution, Pakistan was named as Republic of Pakistan omitting the
word Islamic. However, due to popular opposition, it was renamed as Islamic Republic
of Pakistan through first amendment. Ayyub’s regime was secular in approach
throughout its period; rather it encouraged anti-Islamic elements by its various steps. In
difference to Islamic ideology created an acute contrast in the working of the
government resulting in fostering socio-economic ills. His Family Law Ordinance and all
such reforms hampered the growth of a rational Islamic society. As a result, the people
rose in revolt and removed the government along, with its constitutional system by the
resigning of Ayub Khan in March 1969.