1

PARTY POLITICS IN PAKISTAN 1985 - 1999: A

HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

A thesis submitted to faculty of Arts and Humanities University of the Punjab

in Candidacy for the fulgillment of Doctor of Philosophy in History

BY

SHAHBAZ ALI

DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY AND PAKISTAN STUDY CENTRE

UNIVERSITY OF THE PUNJAB
LAHORE, PAKISTAN
NOVEMBER 2019
 2

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this Ph.D. dissertation titled “Party Politics in Pakistan
1985-1999: A Historical Perspective” is the result of my individual effort, and is not
being submitted concurrently to any other university, for any degree or whatsoever.

Shahbaz Ali
Ph.D. Scholar
 3

CERTIFICATE

Certificate by Research Supervisor

This is to certify that Shahbaz Ali has completed the Dissertation entitled “Party
Politics in Pakistan 1985-1999: A Historical Perspective” under my supervision.
It fulfills the requirements necessary for submission of the sissertation for the
Doctor of Philosophy in History.

Supervisor

Professor Dr. Muhammad Iqbal Chawla

Dean, Faculty of Arts and Social Science
University of the Punjab Lahore

Submitted Through

Prof. Dr. Muhammad Iqbal Chawla

Chairman, Department of History and Pakistan
Studies, University of the Punjab Lahore

External Examiner

Dr. Naumana Kiran

Co-Supervisor
Department of History and Pakistan Study
University of the Punjab Lahore
 4

To

My elder brother

Imtiaz Ali

&

My Dearest Daughter

Fatima Shahbaz
 5

ABSTRACT

This study explores, investigates and analyzes the role of political parties and its
leadership in political development of Pakistan from 1985 to 1999. It also discusses the way
how political parties and their actions had affected the democratic culture and political
norms in the country. However, the major focus is to investigate the role and functions of the
political parties in Pakistan including the responsibility to represent the civil society, to
integrate the diverse and disparate elements of the society into a political system, and to
respond to the demands and needs of the people.
The roles of several national, regional, religious and ethnic political parties including
Pakistan Muslim League (Junejo and Nawaz group), Pakistan People’s Party, Awami
National Party, Jamaat-i-Islami, Jamiat Ulema e Islam and Muttahida Quami Movement has
been explored. During the 1985-1999, the Pakistan People’s Party and Pakistan Muslim
League (N) had remained either main ruling or the opposition parties while having coalition
set up or forming alliances. The party politics of these two mainstream political parties
besides smaller ones has been evaluated. Secondly, the relationship of these parties with the
President and Military has been highlighted. In 1988 and in 1993 Pakistan People's Party
became ruling party while in 1990 and in 1997 IJI and PML (N) form her governments in the
Centre. Interestingly, when PPP came into power, PML was in opposition and when PML
occupied the Parliament house, PPP sat on opposition benches. Both political parties
remained in National Assembly throughout in this democratic era. The party politics
between PPP and PML especially the tug of war amongst their leadership for gaining power
and hostile relations of these two mainstream political parties with President, Chief of Army
Staff, Judiciary and even political confrontation with in these political parties was the main
topic of this research.
 6

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

During the course of this research study, I have incurred a debt of many people and
institutions. My deepest gratitude is to my mentor and supervisor, Prof. Dr. Muhammad
Iqbal Chawla, whose guidance, cooperation and support at every stage proved indispensable
for this research work. I acknowledge the advice and encouragement I received from my
teacher and co-supervisor Dr. Noumana Kiran. I am also indebted to Dr. Faraz Anjum, Dr.
Mehboob Hussain and Prof. Umer Imtiaz, my colleagues, who read some chapters, proposed
ways and means for improvement, and guided me throughout the period. I thank them for
their unfailing support and comments.

I owe a great personal debt of gratitude to a number of scholars. In the initial stages,
advice of Dr. Usmani, Dr. Abdul Ghafoor Rashid, Dr. Tariq Kaleem, Dr. Adnan Tariq and
Dr. Zahid Hussain was helpful in understanding the complexities of this research project. In
the later stage Dr. Rehman Gul, Dr. Taimor Raza and Dr. Ijaz Ahmad clarified one point or
the other. I thank everyone for their invaluable suggestions and scholarly feedback. I thank
my other colleagues for their encouragement, including Prof. Hafiz Safdar Bashir, Prof.
Hanif Abbasi Prof. Shahzad Mehmood and Prof. Yawar Haroon.

I feel myself blessed to have painstaking students Nazir Ahmad and Munawar
Husain who proved great support in writing and composing of the draft.

I also take this opportunity to offer my heartfelt gratitude to the library staff of the History
Department, Central Library, University of the Punjab, Lahore; Punjab Public Library,
Lahore; Punjab Assembly Library Lahore. I gratefully acknowledge the assistance and
support provided to me by the staff of the University of the Punjab, Particularly of Hafiz
Waris, Aqeel Ahmad and Ijaz Ahmad.

My family has always been a source of strength for me and their encouragement and
support always remained behind me. Lastly, I must mention that the responsibility for any
lapses and shortcomings in this thesis remains mine alone.

November 2019 Shahbaz Ali

 7

ABBREVIATIONS
ANP Awami National Party
APC All Party Conference
APCL All Pakistan Confederation of labor
APDM All Pakistan Democratic Movement
ARD Alliance for Restoration of Democracy
BBC British Broadcasting Corporation
BNA-A Baluchistan National Party (Awami)

BNP-M Baluchistan National Party (Mangal)

C.C. Central Committee
CBR Central Board of Revenue
CCI Council of Common Interest
CPP Communist Party of Pakistan
CJCSC Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee

COAS Chief of Army Staff

COD Charter of Democracy
COP Combined Opposition Party
CPAC Chairman Public Accounts Committee
CWC Central Working Committee
DCC Defense Committee of Cabinet

DIG Deputy Inspector General

DSF Democratic Student Front
EUOG European Union Observer Group
FATA Federal Administered Tribal Areas
FCA Foreign Currency Accounts
FEER Far Eastern Economic Review

FIA Federal Investigation Agency

 8

FIR First Information Report

GDA Grand Democratic Alliance
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GHQ General Headquarters

HBFC House Building Finance Corporation

IJI Islami Jamhori Ittehad
ISI Interservices Intelligence
IUF Islamic United Front
JAH Jamiat Ahl e Hadith
JI Jamaat-i-Islami

JUI-F Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (Fezal ur Rehman)

JUI-S Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (Sami ul Haq)
JUP Jamiat Ulema-e-Pakistan
JWP Jamhori Watan party
KESC Karachi Electric Supply Corporation
KPK Khyber Pakhtun khwa

LDA Lahore Development Authority

LFO Legal Frame Work Order
LHC Lahore High Court
LPP Labor Party Pakistan
MDM Muttahida Deeni Muhaz
MKP Mazdoor Kisan Party

MNA Member of National Assembly

MPA Member of Provincial Assembly
MQM Muttahida Qaumi Movement
MQM-H Muttahida Qaumi Movement (Hakiki)
MQM-P Muttahida Qaumi Movement(Pakistan)
 9

MRD Movement for the Restoration of Democracy

MSF Muslim Student Federation
NAB National Accountability Bureau
NAM Non-Alignment Movement

NAP National Awami Party

NDA National Democratic Alliance
NDFC National Development Finance Corporation
NDHA National Democratic Institute of International Affairs
NDP National Democratic Party
NFC National Finance Commission

NICFC National Industrial Credit and Finance Corporation

NPP National People’s Party
NRO National Reconciliation Ordinance
NSC National Security Council
NWFP North West Frontier Province
NWP National Worker’s Party

OIC Organization of the Islamic Conference

OPG Official Parliamentary Group
PCO Provisional Constitutional Order
PDA Pakistan Democratic Alliance
PDM Pakistan Democratic Movement
PDP Pakistan Democratic Party

PIF Pakistan Islamic Front

PKMAP Pakhtun Khawa Milli Awami Party
PLF Pakistan Liberal Forum
PML-F Pakistan Muslim League (Functional Group)
PML-J Pakistan Muslim League (Jinnah)
 10

PML-N Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz Group)

PML-Q Pakistan Muslim League (Quaid e Azam Group)
PML-Z Pakistan Muslim League (Zia Group)
PNA Pakistan National Alliance

PNP Pakistan National Party

PONM Pakistan Oppressed Nations Movement
PPA Pakistan People’s Alliance
PPA Political Parties Act
PPO Political Parties Order
PPP Pakistan People's Party

PPP-S Pakistan People's Party (Sherpao Group)

PPP-SB Pakistan People's Party (Shaheed Bhutto Group)
PSF Pakistan Solidarity Front
PSP Pakistan Socialist Party
PTUF Pakistan Trade Union Federation
PWP Pakistan Worker’s Party

PWP People’s Work Program

QWP Qaumi Watan Party
RAW Research and Analysis Wing
RO Returning Officer
SAP Social Action Program
SBFC Small Business Finance Corporation

SECP Security and Exchange Commission of Pakistan

SJC Supreme Judicial Council
SQM Sindh Qaumi Movement
UDF United Democratic Front
 11

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………..…………………………………………………………………………………vi

ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………..……………………………………………………………………vii

Introduction…………………………………..…………………………….………………………………………………01

Chapter 1……………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………….20

Political Parties: Conceptual Study…………………….……………………………………………20

Chapter 2…………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………57

Emergence of Political Parties and Party politics in Pakistan 1947-1985………….57

Chapter 3…………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………116

Party Politics in the Reign of M. Khan Junejo 1985- 1988……………………………………………..116

Chapter 4…………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………143

Revival of party politics in Pakistan 1988-199……………………………………………………………….143

Chapter 5…………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………191

Party politics in the Era of Guided Democracy 1990-1993…………………………………………….191

Chapter 6…………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………247

Party Politics in the reign of Pakistan People’s Party 1993-1996…………………………………..247

Chapter 7…………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………287

Politics of Authoritarianism 1997-1999………………………………………………………………………..287

Conclusion…………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………323

Bibliography…………………..……………………………………………………………………………………………331
 12

Introduction

The research aims at analyzing the role of political parties in the country’s

political history during the period from 1985 to 1999. There were numerous major

and minor political parties participating in the national arena at that time, however,

the main political parties discussed in this research work are the Pakistan People’s

Party (PPP), Pakistan Muslim League (PML) (Junejo and Nawaz group) 1, Jamaat-i-

Islami (JI), Awami National Party (ANP), Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) and

Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) etc. These political parties had held power at

various levels in Pakistan from 1985 to 1999 and played a substantial and vital role

in the political affairs of Pakistan. This research, therefore, is an effort to highlight

the programs and functions of these political parties, role of their leadership, their

performance and presentation as ruling and as opposition parties, prospects and

problems of this longest instable democratic rule (1985-1999) and its effects on

Pakistan’s political culture.

Parties are an “ineludible part of democracy.”2 These are the political parties

which provide proper mode of functioning for the administration in a democratic

system so that the mainstream majority political party controls the government,

whereas, the other political parties play their role as the opposition and attempt to

check the shortcomings or abuses of power by the governing party. People, through

their political parties, demand for their basic needs, desires and problems to the

government. In fact, “political parties represent an essential and important tool that

acts as a bridge between a society and its government.” 3

Various scholars and

researchers have provided meanings and definitions of political parties. With the
 13

passage of time, different political scientists have probed diverse aspects of political

parties, comprising on their types, structures, nature and functions. Dissimilar

political party structures, such as the uni-party structure, the bi-party structure and

the multi-party structure, have also been defined. Various scholars have taken

multiple methodologies to study the political parties and their roles in democratic

development concerning the origin, structures and functions of a political party in the

democratic system. Numerous political scientist have examined the political parties

through their field of interest and they all have different views and draw different

outcomes about the functions of political parties, its performance in political system,

its role in political stability and its participation in political development.

Since independence, a few of democratic governments had accomplished

their democratic period in Pakistan and mostly who completed their tenure were

under the umbrella of a dictatorship. Unfortunately, the democratic system in

Pakistan had never performed competently in seventy eight years of liberation.

Unluckily, political system of Pakistan had handled four “military interventions” 4

during this period, and the Military Chiefs surpassed democratic governments and

enforced Martial Laws which partly cover the democratic system and boosted

political instability in Pakistan. In 1985, after the end of third Martial Law there was

a chance for politicians to develop political norms in Pakistan but different stake

holders of power especially political parties, created such a political situation at that

time, which led the country to Martial Law of 1999 and Pakistan again faced a

dictatorial rule for next decade. The key problems encountered by political

expansion are flaws and deficiencies within institutional structures, existence of

 14

corruption, dearth of liability, unawareness about people‘s basic desires,

requirements, needs and most importantly, lust of power in politicians and their

stress on increasing the personal assets. Gunther stated that; “It is also common in

Pakistan that when an electoral political regime is in power, it seeks to prolong its

control and satisfy key members by awarding them critical positions in important

institutions. Furthermore, many internal problems in political parties lead to

problems in the political system, such as lack of intra party election, an undemocratic

structure and a lack of political values and practices. These problems decrease the

popularity of political parties and reduce the trust of the leaders among the people of

Pakistan.”5

Various researchers and political scientist have taken diverse methodologies

to study the political parties and their roles in democratic system and they concluded

different theories. In this research, theory of famous sociologist Craig Jenkins will be

discussed who argued that “the penetration of the state by some non-state actors

provides political stability. They create awareness among the masses and mobilize

them on national issues.”6 Craig Jenkins belongs to USA and he has keen

observation on Asian politics. He wrote more than fifty articles on political party

system and I am sure that this theory can be applied on western political system

where political culture has developed but unfortunately this theory cannot be applied

on Pakistani political system where four military interventions in 1958, 1969, 1977

and 1999 had weaken the democratic system and after every military intervention,

military nourished political parties came into being and they not only accepted

dictatorship but also defended it. Formation of the “Convention Muslim League”
 15

(CML) of General Ayub Khan and “Pakistan Muslim League” (Junejo group) of Zia

ul Haq were the major examples of this sort of political parties. MQM 7 and PML

(Q)8 were also established on same pattern by dictator. In this research period

Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and Pakistan Muslim League (PML) performed a title

role in Pakistani political affairs and both ruled under the influence of agencies. Even

Benazir Bhutto, (Chairperson Pakistan People's Party) after taking oath as Premier of

Pakistan in 1988, compelled to say “I am not a free agent and I have to work under a

system.” 9
Trend of military interfering in Pakistani politics had weaken the

democratic system and created party-political instability in the country. Through this

definition the party politics of political leadership in the political affairs of Pakistan

between third and fourth Martial Law (1985-1999) will be studied thoroughly,

hoping that the study will bridge the gap found in available writings on the subject

and the others will take the task forward with the help of this research.

Review of Literature”

No academic work has been done so far on the topic mentioned in the above

stated research design. However there is a range of works in relation with the

democratic development after a long dictatorial rule. These works are not conducted

with the individual men to focus on the subject of Parliamentary form of power to

cope with the Presidential form of power. However they have sufficient leanings

towards our research design.

Despite their contributions to the partisan culture and account of Pakistan; the

political era of Zia-ul-Haq to Pervaiz Musharraf (1985-1999) have not yet received
 16

adequate attention of the contemporary scholars. The available literature on this

instable and weak democratic era is very limited and inadequate. The various

references one finds about this longest democratic period is mostly present in books

dealing with political parties, political issues, various regimes and bio graphics and

autobiographies of some politicians, civil and military rulers as well as in books on

party-political culture and history of Pakistan.

First name that comes into one’s mind is highly acclaimed works by Prof.

Ghafoor Ahmad. He is the important figure who evaluated the Zia period as well as

Benazir and Nawaz Sharif first and second tenor of government in different volumes,

first one consists on last ten years of Zia ul Haq’s period, 10 second one covers the

first tenure of BB as Premier of Pakistan from 1988 to 1990, 11 third one highlights

the mistakes and downfall of Nawaz Sharif as PM of Pakistan from 1990 to 1993, 12

fourth one deals with the second term of BB as Premier, 13 and this series accomplish

with last reign of Nawaz Sharif from 1997 to martial law of 1999. 14 These books are

one of the most valuable books on political history of Pakistan after Z.A Bhutto

regime. Most of the material in these books is supported with references. Prof.

Ghafoor focuses even single event from 1985-1999 and due to this characteristics

this reliable source for research purpose to an extent but not covering comprehensive

aspects of our research regime. It lacks certain very important facts as well as these

books are written in biographic style and covers only one aspects of the political

picture of our research period. He belongs to Jamaat-i-Islami so his sympathies and

affiliation for his Jamaat can be seen in his books which created doubts for the

authenticity of his work.

 17

Lawrence Ziring15 has a keen eye on “Pakistani politics and he liable the

politicians, belonging diverse party-political gatherings for the instability of the

democratic structure of Pakistan, quoting the absence of concentration of the partisan

festivities in the expansion of the party-political structure. That caused in the

dodging of the civilization into political structure of the nation. He claimed that

parliamentary and dictatorial government, as a substitute of the political parties, still

supported the political procedures. Further he stated that “the parties on the other

side were not yet capable of providing disciplined expressions of societal ambitions.

He pointed out that in Pakistan, the political leaders of Punjab mostly dominated the

political reforms, the structure of the administration, the economic structure, and the

general decision making power.” Ziring’s this book is attentive on excerpt facts and

figures about the struggles of all party-political gatherings prevailing in Pakistan. He

concentrated not only on the effort of the political leaders, but on the “development

of the political system too.”

16
Another name dealing with political history of Pakistan is of Ian Talbot.

His book is an informative work about the political history of Pakistan. Talbot very

carefully collected the information about all prominent political parties of Pakistan

but this book does not cover all period of Benazir and Nawaz Sharif regime. M.

Rafiq Afzal17 is one of the most prominent historians across Pakistan. His work on

party politics consists of three volumes, in which he covers almost all history of

Pakistani party politics from beginning to 1958. Although this book has no direct

concern with our research period but it provides us the background of all political
 18

parties of Pakistan. He has enough references about political and democratic

development in Pakistan.

Safdar Mehmood18 is a prominent research scholar in our country. In his

volume he covered the party-political growths in Pakistan from independence to

1988. It tried to propose clarifications in harmony with the public’s ambitions. A

core study is made of the numerous issues tangled in the contemporary crisis;

character of political festivities, legitimate progresses, and external policy

apprehensions, among others. The book is an appreciated adding to the dominant

works on political history of Pakistan. It has enough references about political and

democratic development in Pakistan during 1947 to1993. However, this book is not

directly related with the subject of party politics and political instability in our

research era and especially the role of political parties for development of weak

political culture in Pakistan.

Hassan Askari Rizvi19 is focusing the ascendancy of the military in Pakistan

with perspective of military coups and regimes. Related to our concern research the

author focuses all the perspective of military regimes resemblance of various steps

prior to Zia’s fair play. The author also obvious the resistance against with the

concern of the restoration of democracy when military expended its role and had

dictatorial status in the boundaries of Pakistan, which was observed more than one

decade in the political affairs of Pakistan. The book is supported with references

which made it more authentic. In the same series of writings on Benazir Bhutto a

well added and fine reference exertion is by Dr. Saeed Shafqat 20 He in his book

designed and strained his apprehensions more with the affairs of the Army and civil
 19

bureaucracy and it’s shifting comparison around them during the era of Z.A. Bhutto

later, BB. While arguing about the functioning of civilian management, book

emphasis stays behind the depiction of role of endless players of the Pakistani

political matters and control sharing between them and political role played by

Bhutto is overlooked and put in corner again. Tahir Kamran’s21 book is very

important manuscript on political history of Pakistan. This volume covered the

period of 1947 to 2007. The book comprised on the grounds of political instability in

Pakistan. Authors used secondary type sources instead of primary sources. The main

focus of this book is discussion of Power structure.

Sartaj Aziz’s22 book is reviews the subjects that weighed down the political

developments since the inception of Pakistan. The language is appropriate and

details are to the point. The book emphasizes some of the subjects associated to four

elected governments. However, it covers awful proceedings of Nawaz Sharif

governments. It defines selected positives events and does not touch the negatives

parts of Nawaz Sharif government. Being a colleague of Nawaz Sharif, he could not

remain impartial and several important events, which could present negative impact

of Nawaz Sharif he intentionally ignore in his book.

Another prominent name on Pakistan’s history is Jachen Hippler 23 who

comprehensively discussed the Pakistan political government of the first and second

regime of both PPP and PML (N). He blamed that due to lack of ideology,

corruption, financial greed in politicians and lust of personal benefits forced the

politicians to fight each-other. He used term “internal dictatorship” and “no internal
 20

democracy” for politicians and political parties for their dictatorial behavior in party

and the absence of intra-party elections.

Quyyom Nizami24 is a journalist and he also wrote his book in journalistic

style. Author highlighted the different causes of political instability in Benazir tenure

of Premiership. He used the references of Benazir Bhutto’s interviews and blames

the agencies for the political instability in Pakistan especially in first and second

phase of Benazir Bhutto’s Prime Minister Ship. This manuscript is a good basis of

information but due to biasness of author with Pakistan People's Party and lack of

authentic reference this book is not reliable source of history.

“Hamid Yusuf25 in his book elaborated the Legitimate and political growth

and proceedings for the duration of the diverse democratic and military rule. The

similar way adopted by Khalid B Syeed, 26 who defined political values, clashes,

stresses and faintness of political culture of Pakistan in parliamentary and military

rule. Similarly, Mushtaq Ahmad27 stated the political affairs in parliamentary regime

and under dictatorship. He also deliberates the partisan and legitimate encounters

during different regimes. Keith B Collard28 argues the complications handled by

newly born state and causes of political instability in 1947-1958. G.W. Choudhry29

wrote in his book a brief history of legitimate growth and factors behind the delay of

Constitution making. Allen McGrath,30 talk over the dissimilar proceedings which

ruined the democratic norms and political confrontations in constitutional making.

Ahmed Shuja Pasha31 was of the view “that people themselves are largely

responsible for choosing the wrong leaders as their democratic representatives. He

believed that the inefficiencies present in the political system of Pakistan are largely
 21

due to the fact that people associate democracy with one particular person who takes

advantage of the situation and manipulates their powerful position for their own

gains.” Ahmad’s opinions was a little prejudiced as he does not study the continuous

scuffling of the rule as much of a badly behaved for the nonexistence of persons

receiving familiar to the mechanisms of a egalitarianism. Ahmad’s opinion was in

the favor of Army as he concluded that Army having the most controlled set up

throughout the period whenever it took power.

Sehar Siddiqui’s32book on Ghulam Ishaq Khan is basically a biography.

Author narrated the history in simple manner. He described the services of former

President for the political stability in Pakistan during his President ship. In his book

he point out the mistakes of political headship especially, “Benazir Bhutto and

Nawaz Sharif” for creating the political instability in Pakistan during 1988 to1993.

Author claimed that it was 58 2B who forced President Ishaq Khan to exercise

presidential authorities to control politicians.

Kalim Bahadur 33 in his book studies the appearance of military setting up in

Pakistan, as a novel phenomenon. He elucidates that after 1988 the restoration of

institution emerged with change in its structure. According to Bahadur’s view, the

establishment is consist of groups; civil bureaucracy, feudal lords and armed forces

elite. He deliberates that 8th amendment had changed the existing legislative structure

into a strong “Presidential form of government”; even after the annulment of 58 (2)

(b) the process of institutionalization and democratization in Pakistan stayed feeble.

Remarkably, the army elites had played a central role in the policymaking for the

duration of 1988 to 1999. Another researcher Muhammad Ali Shaikh34throws light

 22

on the life of Benazir Bhutto as a politician. The author converse with the different

political figures including Benazir Bhutto’s relatives and this book is consisted on

the collection of their views. This book is not fully authentic because author favored

Benazir Bhutto and accused Nawaz Sharif for terminations of assemblies and did not

give any impartial analysis.

Sohail Mahmood35 tried to highlight the causes of military intervention and

disappearance of representative rule from Pakistan. He stated that notwithstanding of

the point that the country is underneath legislatorial or Executive structure “the

country has never truly been a democratic country because of the highly centralized

nature of governance.” He further stated the current “semi-parliamentary system of

Pakistan in comparison with a more Presidential system like governance.” He

examined both advantages and disadvantages. Even though Sohail offered an

impartially stable opinion about the circumstances, he simply referenced

chronological partisan state of affairs as facts devoid of his views being strong

concerning them.

M.R. Kazimi36throws light on Pakistani politics but author used simple

narration. Without analysis, references, and comparison this book gives us just

information around the “political and democratic history of Pakistan.” Haider Javaid

Syed37and Maqbool Arshad38 partially cover our research period. Both author throws

light on the dictatorial character of Army in weakening the democratic system

particularly, the part of military head and blamed the Army to create the political

instability in Pakistan.
 23

Ilhan Niaz’s39book is a good source for researcher to know why political

culture in Pakistan could not develop. Author used different terms to define the role

of Military, Bureaucrats, Judges, Politicians and Businessmen to create political

instability in different democratic phases of Pakistan. He argued that it was British

ruler who made such a policies in British India, which remained in practice even

after their departure. Pakistani People adopted this British culture of Power and

governance and used their powers for remain in power. M.P.Singh and Venna

Kukreja40 in their book, “Pakistan: Democracy, Development and Security Issues”

analyzed the Pakistani political system and stated it as “a nation still in the making”

even since the creation of Pakistan. The authors describe the political history from

1988 to 1999 in biographical style and covered all the ruling periods of PPP and

PML. The authors did not analyze the causes of termination of governments and

dissolvent of the Assemblies during this period. “In fact, it is a collection of scholar’s

opinions about process of democratization in Pakistan.”

Ayesha Jalal41 the author of “Modern South Asia; History, Cultural, Political

Economy” elaborated the role of military in her book and pointed out that Army

played a major role in the political affairs of Pakistan especially for the period of

1988 - 1999 and she alleged that it was Army in the background of terminations of

the elected governments during 1988-1999. She argued that General Aslam Baig and

General Waheed Kakar played an important part in the dissolution of elected

assemblies of Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto.

Dr. Muhammad Wasim’s42book is very informative and written in

chorological style but most of information in this book is about election 1993. Only a
 24

short introduction is consists on our topic. Tariq Ismaeel Sigher’s 43work is consists

on election information. Author collected most of information from newspapers. It

has been written in chronological style and all information are date wise. Tariq

Ismaeel Saghir has written another book.44 This book is also written in same pattern.

Infect this book is second part of first book. These books are full with elections

information but none of these is focused on political development. These books are a

good source of primary importance but these books are consists on lack analysis and

multi-thematic conduct which is essential for our research design.

Zahid Hussain Anjum’s45book is an informative book. It deals with last year

of IJI government. Without references, it is not an authentic book. It has written in

journalistic style without any analysis and references.

Muhammad Javaid, Akhtar’s46book narrates the political relation between

elite and poor class of Pakistan. He argued that “Political growth of Pakistan is

constructed on the safeties of privileged class of the society. Communal plans are

originated and communicated according to the desires of the controllers of this

republic while the glitches and problems of ordinary people are deserted in this

atmosphere. All the wealth and assets were used according to this elite class will and

the masses were deprived from their real rights. “Political parties are combination

and association of elites and powerful people of the country for fulfilling their own

goals and objectives.” 47 The book is very helpful for our topic but it does not cover

our research period. It touches only one part of our research period.

Salim Younas’s48 book is one of the valuable books on political alliances and

most of the material in this book is supported with references. However, it lacks
 25

certain very important facts as well as it covers a limited period up to 1990 election.

Only one chapter consists on IJI which cannot cover the whole period of our research

design. Another book dealing with our research period is of Muneer Ahmad. 49 He is

an eminent journalist and his book is very informative about political alliances of

Pakistan. Author very carefully collected the information about all prominent

political alliances of Pakistan. This book is written in a journalistic style and can

rightly be termed as a propaganda book. All entries of this book have ample

information regarding the alliances but lack serious analysis which our project is

designed for. Mehdi Hassan’s50work is relevant with our research topic but his book

covers only one aspect of this period. This book did not touch the failure and

achievements of PPP and PML during this research design.

Apart from the above mentioned books there are some unpublished thesis on

political alliances of Pakistan made in 1988 and in1990. Among these, one is of

Sabir Ahmad. 51 He did a good research work but it deals only with IJI’s role from

1988 to 1993. Another thesis of Abdul Qadir Mushtaq52deals with our research

period but his main focus is Political leader not political parties. Akhtar Husain.53

Thesis is a good attempt but descriptive in nature and emphasis is only the political

struggle of alliances leaving out other relevant information. In this thesis author

discussed all political alliances of Pakistan and provide very short information about

the causes of political instability in 1988 to 1999. Apart from these, there is no

specialized study focusing on political instability of this period.

Significance of the Study

 26

i. It highlights the circumstances and consequences of political instability from

1985 to 1999.

ii. It also produces a comparative analysis that why different political parties of

Pakistan could not make any harmony between them and thus again created a

political space for fourth martial law in 1999.

iii. It investigates why no considerable resistance was offered by political parties,

their leadership and from people.

iv. It recommends how better political culture can be developed in Pakistan so

that democracy should not be derailed in future.

Research Questions / Objectives

This study examines the role of political parties in weak and instable political

system of Pakistan; following research questions have been addressed in this study.

 “What was the role of political parties in the politics of Pakistan from 1985

to1999?”

 “What roles did political parties play when they were in government or in

opposition?”

 Why our politicians could not develop a refined political culture in Pakistan?

 How do political parties represent the population and integrate the populace

in a political system?

Methodology and Research Design

The study has been produced under a historical descriptive method. So that is

why it has used a number of primary and secondary sources. It also used oral history

as a complementary source. Interviews have been conducted with the prominent

 27

leaders of not the same political parties to measure their part in political growth and

in expansion. It has used the new technique of “semi-structured approach” in

interviewing rather than the usage of old style of conducting formal interview based

on fix questionnaires. In-text Citations and List of References, Turabian system has

been followed with utmost care.

This research consists of the following parts and partition by using the

sources which are available during the process of the research:

The First Chapter consists of conceptual study of party politics. The chapter

consists of the introduction to political parties, democracy, and party politics in the

developed and undeveloped countries of the world. Introduction of political parties

according to the ideas of different scholars and researchers is the main topic of this

chapter. Discussion on different definitions, objectives, functions, kinds, categories

and ideologies of the political party is the core subject of this chapter. This chapter

also highlights that in modern countries how a political system developed and how

they trained their political parties and its members for the establishment of a

democratic system. It is also discussed that how modern countries brings social

change in the society through political parties.

The Second Chapter consists of the history of political parties of Pakistan.

The first Constitutional Assembly was established without any electoral process and

dissolved by Malik Ghulam Muhammad without any mass resistance. After this

dictatorial act other five Prime Ministers of Pakistan including Muhammad Ali

Bogra, Ch. M. Ali, Husain Shaheed Soharawardy, I. I. Chundrigar and Malik Feroze

Khan Noon also forced to vacate the Prime Minister House in only five years. It was
 28

the start of political instability. The result of this anarchy was first Martial Law in

1958. The first dictator Ayub Khan introduced new form of democracy named Basic

Democratic System and made Convention League to run the political affairs of the

government but it failed and after eleven years dictatorship, Yahya Khan imposed

second Martial Law which remained till down fall of Dhaka. After Yahya Khan, Z.

A. Bhutto came into power with PPP and made “Constitution of Pakistan” in 1973

creating harmony in main political parties. A new democratic era began with new

Constitution and “first time in the political history of Pakistan an elected government

Pakistan People's Party completed its tenure” but due to dictatorial behavior of Z. A.

Bhutto it ended with third Martial Law and again Pakistan faced a dictator for eleven

years.

The Third Chapter studies Zia’s period especially on his referendum for

President Ship, 8th Alteration in Constitution, which bestowed power to President

under which he could dissolve the Parliament. His first election of 1985 on non-party

basis, revival of political party system and end of Martial Law, rehabilitation of

Pakistan Muslim League, Establishment of Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) in

Karachi to cope power of PPP in Sindh, Practice of Eighth Amendment by Zia on

Junejo government and finally demise of President Zia in an air-plane crash in 1988.

This period is very important because 1985’s election was the start of new controlled

egalitarian period. Junejo under the umbrella of dictatorship re-established PML. On

his demand Zia lift the Martial Law but when Junejo demanded more democratic

powers, Zia terminated him and dissolute the Parliament, so it was the start of

political instability and anarchy in Pakistan which remained till next Martial Law.
 29

The Fourth Chapter focuses on the first phase of controlled democratic

reign which started from 1988 and ended in 1990. In this short span political

instability was on its peak. Pakistan People's Party with its popularity in masses,

won election in 1988 against largest conservative political parties’ alliance named

Islami Jamhori Ittihad but due to conflict with President, Prime Minister Benazir

Bhutto sent to home by termination of his government with the implementation of 58

2B by Head of state Ishaq Khan. In this era, PPP, IJI and its major political partner

PML arose as the mainstream party-political gatherings of Pakistan. It was beginning

of democratic era so a bundle of political errors happened by politicians which gave

the President a chance to used its powers.

The Fifth Chapter starts with the triumph of Islami Jamhori Ittihad in 1990.

PML was the main political party of this alliance and Nawaz Sharif the head of IJI

was appointed as Head of Cabinet of Pakistan who was also head of PML. He

remained with this portfolio only three years and again due to conflict with

President, he also sent to home on same allegations. In only five years two selected

Prime Minister sent to home which boosted political instability in country. It was

amazing that both time opposition parties welcome this act of dissolvent, the

question is why? No resistance came from any walk of life, is it not weird? What

were the causes and allegations of Ghulam Ishaq Khan for dissolvent of two elected

Assemblies? Who supported and guided President? How this act of President

instable the whole political structure of Pakistan. The answer of these questions is

the core topic of this chapter.

 30

The Sixth Chapter studies the second phase of controlled democracy which

started in 1993 after the triumph of “Pakistan People's Party” in election and ended

in 1996 with the dissolution of assemblies by President Farooq Leghari. In this era

party politics and confrontation between ruling and opposition parties was on its

peak. Throughout period, Pakistan Muslim League continued its agitation movement

against PPP and he arranged long march and train march against ruling party, which

boosted political instability in the country and President Farooq Leghari get a chance

to use the axe of 58 (2) (B) against Benazir Bhutto’s government and announced new

elections.

The Seventh Chapter starts with the new administration of “Pakistan

Muslim League” (N) which gained the election with heavy mandate in 1997 and got

a historical victory in elections, securing absolute majority in National Assembly.

Pakistan Muslim League also made its provincial government in all four provinces

which make her the most popular political party in Pakistan. In this period Nawaz

Sharif became Prime Minister and he adopted such confrontational policies with

other institutions which led him towards another Martial Law which imposed by

General Pervaiz Musharraf in 1999. This span of democratic era is very important

especially second term of Nawaz Sharif because in this era democratic system in

Pakistan was developing. Nawaz Sharif abolished Eighth Amendment from

constitution and now President was symbolic without any powers. Nawaz Sharif won

the heart of Nation by Atomic explosion. Indian threat of war is now ended because

Indian Prime Minister had already visited Lahore. New Chief of Army Staff was

appointed by himself. Everything was in favor of Nawaz Sharif then what happened
 31

with his government? What was in the mind of Nawaz Sharif? What were the causes

behind fourth Martial Law? These are the major questions of this chapter.

The Eighth Chapter is the last chapter of this research work which consists

on analytical conclusion of this research period. In this chapter, a comprehensive

analysis of all democratic governments which established during 1985 to 1999 has

been presented.
 32

Chapter 1

Political Parties: Conceptual Study

Pakistan is a developing country and has had a parliamentary democratic

system based on the British lines. The democracy in England or in any other

developed country is very different from the democracy we have in Pakistan. It is

fact that democracy cannot be flourished without the support of political parties

because they are an ineludible part of democracy. They conveys proper way of

working for the administration so that mainstream party command the government

while other parties made opposition which check the deficiencies of reigning party. 54

These are the political parties which fulfill the basic needs and desires of common

People through government. In fact, the “political parties represent an essential and

important tool that acts as a bridge between a society and its government.” 55Different

scholars and researchers have presented the various descriptions of political parties

and have probed their diverse aspects, comprising their types, structure, nature and

functions. The several kinds of political party system like, one-party system, bi-party

system as well as the multi-party system have also been defined. Multiple methods

can be applied to study the political parties and their role in political development.

Different scholars have examined the political parties and they all have different

interpretations and have drawn different outcomes about the functions of political

party, its performance in political system, its role in political stability and its

participation in political development. This chapter consists of the conceptual

frameworks and finding of the role of political parties in the democratic system. The

questions, what is a political party? What is its role in a political system? How did
 33

political parties involve in party politics and how did political parties integrate the

populace in a political system? These were the main questions of this chapter and in

the light of these questions a comprehensive details about political parties and

political systems have been highlighted.

1.1 Democracy and Importance of Political Parties

Politics is the procedure to organize how we live together in a society. In a

democratic system, people can participate in politics as a voter or as a contender. In

democratic system every person can give his opinion on public concerns and can

engage himself in societal organizations. Abraham Lincoln defined the meanings of

democracy in his famous words that “Democracy is government of the people, by the

people, and for the people.”56 And it is a fact that modern descriptive democracy is

not credible without political parties; only the political parties can make sure that the

people are permanently skillful to act politically and capable to integrate different

interests, visions and opinions. In this connection Akhtar stated that; “In order to

participate successfully in elections, the political parties have to be the voice of

broad sectors of society.”57 The political parties are lifeline of contemporary politics

and are indeed critically important in democratic systems. They contest elections

over the years. They encourage people daily through the different means of mass

media particularly radio, television and press. Their actions and reactions, their

direction and control, become more significant for government at work, than

legitimate structures and series of Cabinets.

The current method of “representative democracy” brought party system as

an essential part in every political culture. The political parties, in one form and
 34

other, are creatures (offshoot) of modern political system. Whether one considers of

Anglo-American democracies or Latin American Republics, they exist everywhere.58

Therefore, political parties of some kind exist from Norway to New Zealand and

from Brazil to Burundi. They may be totalitarian or representative, which may get

power through election or revolution and they espoused philosophies of the right, left

or center or, indeed disown political thoughts overall. “The growth of political

parties as well as the attainment of party schemes derived to stand documented as a

spot of political upgrading.”59 The evolution of political parties, clearly proposes that

the people must be occupied in explanation through ruling elites.60“A system of

political party is an essential disorder of the existence and operation of modern

radical system, which provides indispensable link among the people in addition

characteristic apparatus of administration. The people cannot govern themselves

freely unless it has freedom of choice between different candidates. The citizens

must have alternative before it and these alternatives offered by different political

parties.”61

1.2 Meanings, Definition, Objectives and Functions of Political Parties

Meanings of a Political Party: The word party derived from term faction; means

number of citizens; who are united and actuated by some common impulse of

passion. 62 The term party arises from Latin verb “partier”, which means “to divide”.

In French terminology word “part” converted in “Partager” in seventeenth century

which means sharing. In English political vocabulary it called as Partaking which

means participation or partnership.63 According to Wikipedia “A political party is a

 35

systematized group of people; having common views; come together to take part in

election and get power in the government.64 Encyclopedia of Britannica describes

political party as “a collection of people prepared to achieve and exercise political

power.”65 In Collins English Dictionary party means “A group of people who share

the same views about the way power should be used in a society (through

government, policy-making, etc.).66 In German political vocabulary party means “a

battle fellowship in the form of a permanent association, to obtain power over the

state to realize political aims.”67 In short words, we can say that political party is a

cluster of individuals, who had planned themselves, with the aim of coming in power

by election or other tactics.

1.2.1 Definition of Political Party

There are numerous ideas, views and concepts on political parties, which are

given by different prominent scholars, notably De- Tocqueville, Lord Bryce,

Ostrogorski, Max Weber, Maurice Duverger, Robert Michel, Sigmund Neumann,

Myron Weiner, Giovanni Sartori and David Apter etc. from time to time, according

to circumstances that prevailed their respective periods . These Scholars defines

Political parties in different ways. 68A renowned description of political party comes

from the American political scientist Antony Downs, who wrote: “A political party is

a team of men seeking to control the governing apparatus by gaining office in a duly

constituted election.”69 The Italian researcher Giovanni Satori stated that party is a

political group which identified by an official label that presents at elections, and is

capable of placing through election, candidates for public office”. Another famous
 36

political scientist Edmund Burke states that “political parties are group of men,

united for providing by their just endeavors, the national interests upon particular

principles to which they are all agreed.”70For Schlesinger, Aldrich and Epstein

“parties are most of all the tool to get into the office of government” while Downs as

well as Key define the party as “instruments that simplify the choices of voter” while

Blondel stated that party is a group of people which can control political

confrontation within society by giving them voice in public debate.” 71A very

comprehensive definition come from Sigmund Neumann who defines political party

as “the communicative body of society's active political agents, those who are

concerned with the control of governmental power and who compete for popular

support with another group or groups holding divergent views.”72 Friedrich

characterized political party as a “collection of people, firmly prepared, organized

and ready to rule over political community.”73Schumpeter stated a different view

about party; he defines that political party is a group whose members propose to act

in concert in competitive struggle for political power.” 74 Max Weber gives

sociological explanation of the party. He states that “party is an associative kind of

communal relations, associations, which rests on formally free recruitment. The end

to which, its activity is devoted to secure power within a corporate group for its

leaders, in order to attain ideal or material advantage for its active members.”75Jean

Blondel states; “Political parties are groupings, but groupings of a particular kind.

We shall consider a political party as any group, which is both, open in its

membership and concerned potentially with the whole spectrum of matter, which

related to the polity. Moreover, there are various groups’, having different characters,
 37

some are religious, economic, and educational or some are even political bodies,
76
which distinguish them from other groups of the society.” Ernest Barker gives

another explanation; We may rather call party a ‘channel’ analogous to a channel of

water, which serves a mill and turns the water-wheel, which works the mill; and we

may say, the party collect the currents of opinion formed in water shed of society,

direct them along its channel towards the wheel of the state and supplies the motive-

force of thoughts, ideas and policies, that make the wheel revolve. 77Maurice

Duverger, a well-known authority on the topic throws light on another aspect of

political party by defining that “A party is not community but a collection of

communities, a union of small groups, dispersed throughout the country (by

branches, caucuses and local associations, etc.) and are linked by coordinating

institutions.”78

In general, political parties might be defined in positions of actors, actions

(activities), consequences and domain. The political party can also be defined with

exclusive respect to its functions, to its structure or to both, or in the light of the

input-out scheme, and in still other ways.79From the above analysis; the definitions

of political party are limited to its one aspect or another. However, Joseph La

Palombara and Myron Weiner give very comprehensive and detailed definition of a

political party. They states; “When we speak of political parties, we do not mean a

loosely knit of group of notables with limited and intermittent relationships to local

counterparts. It is crystal clear that political party without a well-knit organization, is

nothing and is neither able to present, nor to promote its programs. 80 Therefore,

without the proper organization, the people just make disorganized crowd. It is the
 38

organization, which turned into permanently cohesive body that enables them to

acquire strength, so as to act in concert.

From the above discussion, it is observed that the notion of party vary from time

to time and country to country. Generally, the old conception that party is group of

men professing the same political doctrine is not true, now. The emphasis shifted

from principles to organization.

1.2.2 Objectives of a Political Party

Political parties are a typical form of societal organization. They should not be

confused with federations, social clubs and associations. Political parties can

therefore be understood as permanent organization of public that are based on free

participation, membership and a program, and which are apprehensive to conquer

through the way of elections, the politically conclusive positions of the country with

their team of leaders, in order to materialize suggestions for resolving outstanding

problems. A party strives to influence the formation of political opinion and aims to

have a general political impact. The active influence of political opinion-making is

aimed at a longer period of time as well as a wider region and should not be

concentrated on a local level or a single issue. A party is an association of citizens

holding individual memberships, and shall have a minimum number of members, so

that the seriousness of its targets and the prospects of success remain clear. A party

has to demonstrate the will to consistently take part in the political representation of

the people during elections. It, therefore, distinguishes itself from unions, non-

governmental organizations and other initiatives that does not want to carry any

political responsibilities for larger sectors but only try to have selective influence,
 39

and that do not participate in elections. A party has to be an independent and

permanent organization; it shall not be formed only for one election and cease to

exist afterwards. A party must be willing to appear in public to aggregate and

articulate interests of the society. A party does not necessarily need to win a seat in

parliament, but it has to fulfill all the other criteria. A party has to organize the

chaotic public will. It also has to organize voters into majorities behind platform and

leaders. A party has to educate citizens to political responsibility (political

education). A party is representative of the social interest groups, which help in

bridging the distance between individual and the great community. A party has to

represent the connecting links between government and political opinion.

(Democracy is pyramids built from below). A party has to select the leaders and do

political socialization and recruitment. A Political party is the broker of ideas,

constantly clarifying, systematizing and expanding the party’s doctrine and it has to

work as broker, who arranges deal between different sections and finding

compromise that split the differences.”81Above all, parties make democracy

workable, successful and true representative by selecting candidates for elections,

organizing election campaigns; maintaining party discipline, the formulating of

policies and short term programs. The prime objective of party is to capture power

and control governmental machinery.

1.2.3 Functions of a Political Party

The main purpose and role of a political party is to take part in election for

fortified the democratic system. In this way democracy can be consolidate. Below is

the detail of some functions of Political parties.

 40

a. Political opinion-making: In a democratic country; political parties uses for

making the public opinion for societal interest. A party deals with the

demands of public and presents the expectations of different societal groups

in the shape of democracy.

b. Selection: Parties give training to political personnel and in this way she

raise the future generations of politicians. After political grooming parties

select these experienced and trained persons and present them as contenders

in elections.

c. Integration: Parties develop political programs. They integrate various

interests into a general political project and transform it into a political

program, for which they campaign to receive the consent and support of a

majority.

d. Socialization and participation: Parties promote the political socialization

and participation of citizens. Parties create a link between citizens and the

political system; they enable political participation of individuals and

groupings with the prospect of success.

e. Exercising political power: Parties organize the government. They

participate in elections to occupy political charges. Normally in party

democracies, a good part of government authorities arise from political

parties.

f. Legitimating: Political parties contribute to the legitimacy of the political

system: in establishing the connection between citizens, social groupings and

 41

the political system, the parties contribute in anchoring the political order in

the consciousness of the citizens and in social forces.”82

1.3 Kinds, Categories and Ideologies of Political Parties

The total group of parties in a country forms the political party system. The

party system reflects the pattern of relationships between individual parties in

relation to each other. Party systems can be classified by different criteria. Most

frequently it is the number of parties that are fighting for power that serves as the

criteria for the description of a party system. In this way, one can differentiate one,

two and multi-party systems.

1.3.1 Kinds of Political Parties

In a single party system only one party dominates and there is practically no

political race between parties. A single party system is, as mentioned before, a

contradiction in itself since a party, should only be part of a larger group. Single

party systems are therefore characterized by the oppression of political competition

and democratic freedom. Bipartisan system means that two parties primarily

dominate the political competition, while other, smaller parties only play a

subordinate role. In a multi-party system, more than two parties have an effect on the

political competition. The existence of bipartisan or a multi-party system depends on

several different factors for instance; the development of political institutions,

political traditions, the relevance of regional cleavages, the socio-economic

circumstances and confessional or ethnical conditions. 83 The specifications of the

electoral law can have certain, but not decisive, influence on the composition of the

party system. The majority voting systems rather favor the evolution of a bipartisan
 42

system (or a system comprising only of a few dominant parties), whereas a

proportional voting system is more likely to favor a multi-party system. However,

there is no distinct connection between electoral and party systems. The system of

government influences the development of parties and party systems insofar as a

parliamentary system offers more influence for political parties because the

government emerges directly from the parliament, which is dominated by the parties.

In a presidential system, President is the head of government, who is directly

elected by the people and thus its legitimacy is based not primarily on the parliament.

In addition, he mostly exercises, beside the parliament, also legislative and other

functions, and he normally has a right to veto parliamentary decisions or even has the

authority to dissolve the parliament. So, at first glance, in presidential systems parties

play a minor role. On the other hand, in presidential systems the separation of

powers is usually more evident because the parties are not linked so closely with the

government. In parliamentary systems, however, the identity and especially the

relationship between the government and the ruling party or parties is greater. Even

so, in a presidential system the president also needs the approval of parliament and a

parliamentary majority. The relative independence from the government which the

parties enjoy in a presidential system is of considerable relevance. The number of

parties represented in parliament is only slightly influenced by the system of

government. This is rather a question of social cleavages, eventually also the ethnic

and other cleavages in a country, the structure of conflicts and interests and the

electoral system.84

1.3.2 Different Categories of Political Parties

 43

Parties can be classified according to a number of different criteria; according to

their socio-political targets, their level of organization, their positioning towards the

political system or the social classes that they want to represent and approach. Some

parties can be classified also by their names, which often express special socio-

political objectives that the parties want to be identified with. By their names, parties

demonstrate how they want to be perceived, and that means how they want to be

classified. This confirms that the classification or construction of typologies is not a

mere academic exercise, but part of the political competition of parties. 85 Several

typologies like electorate parties, Membership parties, Parties Differentiation by

socio-political objectives, Conservative parties, Liberal parties, Social democratic

parties, Socialist parties,86Parties defined by religion, Extreme right-wing parties,

Communist parties, Popular parties, Parties of special interest and Parties opposed to

the political system 87 are working in the different political system of the world.

1.3.3 Ideologies of Political Parties

An Ideology is a collection of normative beliefs and values that an individual

or group holds for other than purely epistemic reasons. The term is especially used to

describe a system of ideas and ideals which forms the basis of economic or political

theory and policy. Ideologies are comprehensive visions of societies and social

developments, which contain explanations, values, and goals for past, present and

future developments. Ideologies inspire and justify political and social action. They

are an essential element for political orientation. The term “ideology” has been and is

still used mainly by leftist, communist and socialist parties to characterize their

worldviews and political positions.88 Nevertheless, other streams of political thinking

 44

can also be denominated as “ideologies”, like, for instance, liberalism, conservatism,

nationalism or fascism.89Sometimes, there are comments about a supposed “des-

ideologization” of politics. This refers to the fact that nowadays many parties are

stressing their ideological roots less than their pragmatic approach with regard to

social and political challenges. The above-mentioned concepts, however, make it

clear that ideologies still are of considerable relevance for the identification of

worldviews and political positions. We never reached the “end of ideologies” as has

been proclaimed by the American political scientist Yoshihiro Francis Fukuyama at

the end of the Cold War. He supposed that liberal democracy would finally be

enforced against all other forms of governance, and therefore all ideological debates

could come to an end. Those who are, or will become, politically engaged should

know the different ideological strands. This is relevant not only for defining one’s

own political position, but also for evaluating other political positions and eventually

for combating them.90

1.4 Manifestos and Programs of Political Parties

Party programs fulfill different functions. The basic party program constitutes

the identity of the party and offers a general orientation to the citizens and voters on

the guiding principles and ideas of a party. With its program, the party justifies its

existence and explains how it differentiates itself from others. The party program

illustrates the political ambition and basic values, demands and suggestions of a

party. The party program differentiates itself from other party documents such as the

election program, which contains specific suggestions and demands in view of a

particular election and therefore has to be redesigned each time. A party program has
 45

a long-term character. It does not refer to issues of an actual political debate. This

has to be done by the electoral or special action program, which is written with a

short-term perspective for electoral or other purposes of actual political debates.

Any political party should dedicate special attention to the elaboration of its

basic program. It should invite the highest number of affiliates to participate in its

elaboration or at least in its approval. The more the members get integrated in the

process of the elaboration of the party program, the better they will know and defend

the basic party lines in public discussions. Beside their general programs, some

parties also have special programs or position papers that define their political views

with regard to certain policies, including, for instance, economic policies, energy

policies, policies for women, youths or families, rural policies, and cultural policies.

In many countries, a lot of parties do not put much effort into the development of a

party program and pay little attention to it, as they are mostly identified more

through their representatives than through their programs. Nevertheless, they should

not underestimate the role of a comprehensive program for the profile and

identification of its members with the party. The party program reveals towards the

party members and representatives, as well as towards the citizens and voters, the

basic views of the party and it proves whether a party can actually translate social

concerns into political suggestions and programs. Every party should, therefore,

attach great importance to the elaboration of a coherent program. Moreover, the

discussion on the program of a party should take place in a longer time frame, with

the purpose of updating the party program, thus providing an opportunity to lead the

programmatic debate internally and with other social groupings.

 46

1.5 Party Organization and Funding

The party organization is the formal structure of the political party, and its

active members are responsible for coordinating party behavior and supporting party

candidates. It is a vital component of any successful party because it bears most of

the responsibility for building and maintaining the party “brand.” It also plays a key

role in helping select, and elect, candidates for public office. Political parties are

bottom-up structures, with lower levels often responsible for selecting delegates to

higher-level offices or conventions. Thus, even the county party can be said to be

directed from smaller units, down to the precinct level. In some states, the county

chairperson is selected by the precinct chairs who are themselves elected through

primary elections of the party voters.91 There is no unique basic pattern for the

organization of political parties. In some countries, there are party laws that define

some basic requirements which parties have to meet. Mostly, these particularly refer

to the respect of intra-party democratic procedures for the selection of party leaders

and some general organizational elements. With regard to the composition of the

party and its competences, there is a wide range of organizational solutions. The

hierarchical organization of a political party often corresponds to the administrative

division of a country, i.e., the parties have local organizations, municipal or district

organizations, provincial or regional organizations, and finally a national

organization.92 Numerous parties have, in addition, functional divisions, which are

similar to the division of the three powers of the state: the intra-party party tribunal

for the resolutions of conflicts (Judiciary), which can punish and even expel party

members for acts that may damage the public image of a party; the general assembly
 47

or party conventions (Legislature); and the party executive (Executive). 93 Some

parties have, furthermore, an extended board with representatives of the subordinate

party organizations. Besides its general committees, many parties have other

committees, commissions, technical committees and working groups for specific

tasks; for example, for the discussion of programmatic questions (economic policy,

domestic policy, foreign policy etc.) as well as for the participation of specific

groups (youths, women, unions, local politicians, middleclass citizens, entrepreneurs,

seniors etc.). These committees play an important function for the inner life of

parties and their external image. On the one hand, they complement or rectify the

regional principle of membership and integrate members according to their specific

interests, their professional qualifications or their social status. Within the party,

these committees play a part in the development of technical capacities and the

formation of political opinion. On the other hand, the committees contribute crucially

to contact with a variety of social groups, to whom the contact demonstrate that their

concerns are taken into consideration and are represented by the parties. 94

The local organizational structures of parties play an important role in party

politics, which are close to the citizens. Without them, members and consoler of a

party would perceive leaders and other key representatives of the parties only from a

very distant view. The local organizational structures are the “grounds of party

democracy”.95 In addition, at the district levels, there is usually an elected Executive

Council, comprised of the chairperson, one senior vice chairperson, one or two vice-

chairs and a treasurer. The next higher levels of party organizations (regional or

national) usually have a secretary or general secretary, elected by the respective party
 48

convention. While party leaders, sometimes as a result of their numerous other

activities as members of parliament, ministers, prime ministers or presidents, are

acting more in a role of the “dignified part” of the party, the general secretary is the

“efficient part” of a party. The general secretary runs the party headquarters and the

everyday party business; is responsible for party communications to the outside as

well as the inside, and is also responsible for the promotion of program discussions

and the organization of electoral campaigns. 96

Parties should be led professionally and should be equipped with modern

techniques of communication. The party headquarters is at the top of the party

organization. The basis for the party president and the party council is the party

headquarters. This should have some “technical” departments that concentrate on

certain issues to prepare the party’s positions on actual themes of the political debate

and to provide party members and representatives with information and arguments.
97
Additionally, the party headquarters has to care about the communications and

public presentation of the party. Last but not least, the headquarters has to organize

and realize the electoral campaigns. 98

Political parties need funds in order to pay rent; purchase airtime or space for

advertising on television, radio, and in print; and train and pay their staff. While the

use of volunteers can reduce the need for skilled, paid staff, an individual party’s

access to resources is likely to have a direct effect on its ability to carry out its

representative functions and may be affected by a number of systemic and

organizational factors.”99 How parties fund their activities can vary greatly, even

within a country. Some parties may rely on wealthy candidates, leaders, or other
 49

domestic or international benefactors; others may rely on public funding or may

operate largely using funds collected in the form of membership dues. Membership

fees, Financial contributions of parliament members and similar regular dues of

officials from the parties, Revenues from capital, events etc., Party donations,

Income from party assets and Loans are main source of party financing. 100 There is

an increasing tren of institutional provision of public funding for political parties. In

Australia, Germany, Canada, Israel, Sweden, South Africa, Zimbabwe and Canada

were the country where political parties get state funding. In some countries like,

Germany, South Africa and Sweden political parties also get Party Operating

Expenses. In few countries like Australia, USA and Canada individual candidates

also get public funds.101

Government funding of political parties or candidates serves many

objectives. One central aim is to level the playing field for parties by ensuring more

equal access to funding. Particularly for smaller parties, state funds are often the

main source of financing, essential for the party to run even a modest campaign. In

addition, government funds can support party development in places where political

parties are tradit ionally weak and underfunded.102 Furthermore; public subsidies

are used for seeking to limit the need for donations from unlawful soureces and to

prevent corruption in the fund raising process.

1.6 Education and Training of the Party Members

The members are the fundamental part of any party and its most important

connecting link to the society. Modern and successful parties seek a large stem of

members that preferably originate from large portions of social groups. The member
 50

strength has a direct effect on the formation of opinion inside the party. The direct

membership of persons is nowadays the common way of membership in a party.

However, there was and are parties with other regulations on membership. The

members of a party have greater political influence than citizens who do not belong

to any party. They can participate in the formation of opinion within the party, which

might even be or become the governing party. 103A precondition for this form of

participation is that the parties offer sufficient possibilities for intra -party

discussions and formation of opinion. Even if inner party democracy and formation

of opinion function perfectly, not all party members will be able or willing to

participate actively in all the important decisions of a party. Furthermore, at the local

level, active participation and contribution to party work is mostly carried out by a

smaller group of the members. These are mostly the “office holders” that occupy

political positions in electoral mandates, having more detailed information as well as

political (co-) decision-making power due to their mandate. Nonetheless, there are

various options for active participation by “normal” party members that go beyond

pasting billboards during election campaigns. Party members can inform themselves

better on political matters and positions, and usually have easier access to party

representatives and political office holders. They have the opportunity to take part in

internal political discussions and can organize political forums themselves. Last but

not least, they elect the party candidates for elections (Unfortunately, this is not the

case in all parties, but in democratically organized parties the party members should

really participate in the election of candidates!) and obviously, any party member

should have the chance to compete for electoral mandates. 104 Local politics has
 51

already been mentioned as the area where party members actively contribute most

frequently and directly to the party organization. Moreover, local politics are an

important “learning environment” of politics, where party members qualify for

higher positions. Parliamentarians and members of the government are usually the

outstanding members of the party. This is the case at the national and local level.

These politicians usually exert a direct and, in many parties, dominant influence.

Differences in opinion between mandate-holders and party leadership as such are

quite frequent at all levels of a party. In cases of conflict, delegates and government

officials can temporarily withdraw from party guidelines due to constitutional

provisions (for example, the “independent mandate”). In political practice, however,

this conflict is solved through the personal union of party and mandate. The leading

parliamentarians and representatives of a government (whether they are ministers of

a central government or mayors and directors of local authorities) are normally also

present in the executive board and other leading committees of a party.

1.7 Intra-party Democracy

Intra-party democracy is necessary in order to increase the influence and

contribution of the politically involved citizens in a party. A democratic state cannot

be governed by parties with undemocratic structures. 105 Legal guidelines exist,

therefore, in many countries, obliging the parties to also respect democratic

procedures in their inner processes. However, in reality this is often disregarded. In

many countries, the constitution, or laws, obliges the parties to shape their internal

processes according to democratic procedures. However, despite all such legal

provisions the influence of “ordinary” party members is relatively restricted and the
 52

circle of members who are actually powerful and influential is usually rather small.

The reason for this is the lack of interest among members to participate more

actively. In other cases, the bureaucratization of the party apparatus has resulted in a

certain distance if not alienation between party leaders and party members. 106 This is

at least in part due to the particular nature of modern mass democracies that demands

fast decision-making processes, which in turn does not allow for long voting

procedures within the parties.107 Nonetheless, experience shows that those who

invest time and effort in party work can actually gain influence within the party.

1.8 Political Parties and Social Change

Democracy has a different face in every country and in every society. The

concrete shape of democratic order depends on the national history, tradition and

culture, social, ethnic and religious particularities of a society, its economic potential,

the weight of regional factors, and more.108Nevertheless, there are several basic

elements that have to be present in each democratic system. Basic elements of

democracy are: Free and fair elections have to take place regularly; the governing

bodies have to be occupied by elected authorities, who are accountable to the voters;

all adults have to possess the right to vote and to be elected to political office;

freedom of opinion has to reign without anybody being persecuted for freely

expressing his opinion and free access to alternative and pluralistic sources of

information should be guaranteed.

The right to form independent associations, groups of interest and political

parties must exist so that the previously mentioned rights can be executed.

Independently of its organization in different countries, democracy needs institutions

 53

that ensure its consolidation, stability and projection and which protect “young”

democracies from contestation or even major setbacks. 109 The chance for

stabilization and consolidation of democracy highly depends on how the respective

democratic orders are institutionalized, what level of potential is offered by the

democratic institutions to meet the challenges of political and social change and how

they provide legitimacy to the political system. 110

No matter how democracy has been organized in any individual case, and in any

political system, the political parties are the main institutions of democracy. Without

parties, there can be no democracy. The basic functions of political parties have

already been discussed. However, the parties do not have a monopoly in carrying out

these functions and are nowadays—more than in the past—in competition with other

organizations that also carry out these functions, at least in certain areas, and thereby

compete with the parties. The essential differentiating characteristic of a party is and

remains therefore its participation in elections. Even though parties fulfill essential

functions for the political system and democracy, they also face special challenges in

modern democracies. Social change and the efficiency (or inefficiency) of dealing

with the consequences of changing societies in the area of politics are the main

reasons for these new challenges for political parties.

Conclusion

Political parties have to be continuously striving to perform their functions

under changing social circumstances. Independent of the regional or national social

peculiarities, or the electoral and government system, there are several criteria that
 54

every party should respect and fulfill, in order to participate successfully in the

political competition.

The political party system of developed countries is very different from the Pakistani

political system. In modern countries, political system, democratic norms and values

are very strong so people chose the government without any pressure. Pakistan is a

developing country and has an instable, corrupt and weak political system. The

norms of real political system which are the fundamental part of modern democracy

are rare in Pakistani political culture. The objects, functions, ideologies, organization

and program of the political parties in developed countries are good examples for us

but unfortunately feudal lords, political elites, corrupt politicians and lust of power

did not provide a chance for democracy to flourish its roots in Pakistan. In Pakistani

democratic system political parties’ works under the politicians who run the affairs

of country according to their personal will instead of country’s demands. Without

appropriate Manifesto and in the absence of intra-party elections democracy and

political system cannot root in Pakistan. The chapter discussed the modern political

party system comprehensively which showed that how political system is working in

developed countries and how we can amend our political system according to

modern demands. In modern world political parties used to educate the people, to

create harmony between other parties, to point out the faults of ruling party, to

formulate state policies, to represent the country’s soft image and to run the

governmental affairs but unluckily, in Pakistan political parties always used for

electoral purpose and after election they became ruling party or opposition and

unfortunately, if it became ruling party she started to snub opponent party and if it sit
 55

on opposition benches she began agitation movement against ruling party. No party

in any condition is ready to make policies for people which show the fault of our

democratic system. Now it is necessary to introduce modern political system in

Pakistan to remove the faults of Pakistani democracy.

 56

References and Notes

1
Muhammad Khan Junejo re-established Pakistan Muslim League in 1985 and became the president
of PML. After the dissolvent of National Assembly by Zia ul Haq, PML divided into two factions
PML (J) and PML (N).
2
Jose Richard Gunther, Ramon and Juan., Political Parties Old concept and new challenges (Oxford
University Press, 2002), 43.
3
Andrew Heywood. Politics (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002), 247.
4
First Martial law was imposed by Ayub Khan, second by Yahya Khan, third by Zia ul Haq and
fourth by Pervaiz Musharraf.
5
Jose Richard Gunther, Ramon and Juan.. Political Parties Old Concept and New Challenge, 54.
6
J. Craig Jenkins., Handbook of Politics: State and Society in Global Perspective (books.
google.com.pk, 2010), 13.
7
Muttahida Qaumi Movement established by Altaf Hussain with the support of General Muhammad
Zia ul Haq for counter the politics of Pakistan People’s Party in Sindh.
8
Pakistan Muslim League Quaid e Azam group, which separated from PML (N) in 1999 and this
Party supported the Musharraf’s dictatorship.
9
Qayyom Nizami., Jo Dekha Jo Suna (Urdu) (Lahore: Jahangir Book Depot, 2004), 56.
10
Prof. Abdul Ghafoor Ahmad., Zia Kay Aakhri Das Saal (Urdu) (Lahore: Alqamar Publishers
Rehman Market Urdu Bazar, 2001), 211.
11
________________________ Wazir e Azam Benazir Bhutto, Namzidgi say bertarfi tak (Urdu)
(Lahore: Alqamar Publishers Rehman Market Urdu Bazar, 2001), 197.
12
________________________ Nawaz Sharif ka Pehla Dor e Hakomat (Urdu) (Lahore: Alqamar
Enterprises, 1997), 312.
13
________________________ Nawaz Sharif, Iqtdar say ataab tak (Urdu) (Lahore: Alqamar
Publishers Rehman Market Urdu Bazar, 2004), 278.
14
________________________ Benazir Bhutto Hakomat ka arooj o zawa, (Urdu) (Lahore: Alqamar
Publishers Rehman Market Urdu Bazar, 2001), 119.
15
Lawrence Ziring., Pakistan in the Twentieth Century: A Political History (Karachi: Oxford
University Press. 2003). 113.
16
Ian Talbot, Pakistan: A New History (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2012), 97.
17
M. Rafiq Afzal., Political Parties in Pakistan. (Islamabad: National Institute of Historical and
Cultural Research. 1998), 212.
18
Safdar Mahmood., Important Political Parties of Pakistan (Lahore: Vanguard Books, 1993), 123.
19
Hassan Askari Rizvi., The Military and Politics in Pakistan 1947-1997 (Lahore: Sang-e-meel
publication, 2000), 127.
20
Dr. Saeed Shafqat., Civil-Military Relations in Pakistan: From Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to Benazir
Bhutto (Boulder: Westview Press, 1997), 88.
 57

21
Tahir Kamran., Democracy and Governance in Pakistan (Lahore: South Asia Partnership, 2008),
27.
22
Sartaj Aziz., Between Dreams and Realities: Some Milestones in Pakistan’s History (Karachi:
Oxford University Press, 2009), 344.
23
http://www.jochenhippler.de/html/problems_of_democracy_and_nation-building_in_ pakistan.html
(accessed on 14 March 2017)
24
Qayyom Nizami., Jo Dekha Jo Suna, 67.
25
Hamid Yusuf., Pakistan A study of Political Development 1947-97 ( Lahore: Sang-E- Meel
publications,1999), 178.
26
Khalid B Syeed., The political system of Pakistan (Karachi: Oxford university press, 1967), 162.
27
Mushtaq Ahmad., Government and Politics in Pakistan (Karachi: Royal Book company, 1970), 28.
28
Keith B Callard., Political Forces in Pakistan (New York: Institute of Pacific Relations, 1959), 88.
29
G.W. Choudhry., Constitutional Development in Pakistan (Lahore: The Ideal Book House, 1969),
27.
30
Allen McGrath., The destruction of Pakistan’s Democracy (Karachi: Oxford university press,
1996), 95.
31
Ahmad Shuja Pasha., Account of the Scenario of the Pakistani politics (Lahore: Sang-E- Meel
publications,1995),
32
Sahar Siddiqui., Ghulam Ishaq Khan (Islamabad: Ali Publishing Bureau, 2008), 77.
33
Kalim Bahadur., Democracy in Pakistan: Crises and Conflicts (New Delhi: Har-Anand
Publications Pvt Ltd, 1998), 56.
34
Muhammad Ali Shaikh., Benazir Bhutto: A Political Biography (Karachi: Orient Book Publishing
House, 2000), 40.
35
Sohail Mahmood., The Musharraf Regime and the Governance Crisis (Lahore: Nova Publishers,
2001), 264.
36
M. R. Kazmi., A Concise History of Pakistan (Karachi: Oxford, 2009), 77.
37
Syed Haider Javaid., Journali Hakomat (Karachi: Nazar Publishers, 1999), 28.
38
Maqbool Arshad., Journaail Beeti (Lahore: Sang e meel publications, 2008), 213.
39
Ilhan Niaz., The Culture of Power and Governance of Pakistan 1947-2008 (Karachi: Oxford
University Press, 2010), 73.
40
M.P. Singheds and Veena Kukreja., Pakistan: Democracy, Development and Security Issues
(Karachi: Paramount Publishing Enterprise, 2005), 44.
41
Ayesha Jalal., Modern South Asia; History, Cultural, Political Economy (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1995), 212.
42
Dr. Muhammad Waseem., Election 1993 (Urdu) (Lahore: Maqbool sons, 1998), 93.
43
Tariq Ismaeel Saghir., Election 88 (Lahore: Maqbool Academy,1988), 54.
44
_________________Election 90 (Lahore: Maqbool Academy 1990), 329.
45
Zahid Hussain Anjum., Pakistan 1992-1993 Aik Nazar Main (Lahore: Book Talk Mian Chambers.
1993), 94.
46
Muhammad Javaid Akhtar., Dilemma of Political Culture: Case Study of Pakistan (1988-1997)
(Multan: Bahaud din Zakariya University, 2010), 398.
47
Ibid.
48
Salim Younas., Siyasi Ittehad or Pakistan Per un ke Asraat (Urdu) (Lahore: Jang Publishers, 1993),
124.
49
Munir Ahmad., Pakistan ke siyasi ithad (Lahore: Frontier Post Publication, 1993), 54.
50
Mehdi Hassan., Pakistan ki Siyasi jumaetain (Lahore: Sang e Meel publications, 1998), 288.
 58

51
Sabir Ahmad., Islami Jamhuri Ittehad and its Struggle (Unpublished M.A thesis) University of
Sargodha. 322.
52
Abdul Qadir Mushtaq., Political Alliances and Movements in Pakistan (unpublished Ph.D. thesis)
Quaid e Azam University Islamabad.
53
Akhtar Husain., Politics of Alliances in Pakistan 1954-1999 (unpublished Ph.D. thesis) Quaid e
Azam University Islamabad.
54
Khursheed Kamal Aziz., Pakistan's political culture: essays in historical and social origins
(Lahore: Vanguard, 2001), 344.
55
Nadeem Akhtar., Role of political parties in the democratic system of Pakistan (Karachi: Oxford
University Press, 2011), 43.
56
Wilhelm Hofmeister and Karsten Grabow., Political parties, Functions and organization in
democratic societies (Singapore: National Library Board, 2011), 7.
57
Nadeem Akhtar., Role of political parties in the democratic system of Pakistan, 43.
58
Joseph La Palombara, and Myron Weiner., Political Parties and Political development (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1972), 3.
59
Andrew Heywood., Politics, 248.
60
Palombara and Weiner., Political Parties and Political development , 4.
61
Ernest Barker., The Party system (Bombay: Casement Publication, 1953), 8.
62
Giovanni Sartori., Parties and Party Systems, A Framework for Analysis (London: Cambridge
University Press, 1976), 63-64.
63
Sarangi Prakash., Political Parties and Party System: A conceptual Analysis (New Delhi: Oxford
University Press, 2011), 19.
64
https://www.wikipedia.org/ accessed 22th December 2018.
65
https://www.britannica.com/ accessed 28th December 2018.
66
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/ accessed 28th December 2018.
67
Andrew Heywood. Politics, 248.
68
Giovanni Sartori., Parties and Party Systems, A Framework for Analysis, 64.
69
Anthony Downs., An Economic Theory of Democracy (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957), 25.
70
https://thegreatthinkers.org/burke/ accessed 10th December 2018.
71
J. K. White., What is a Political Party? (London: Sage Publications, 2006), 6.
72
Sigmund Neumann., Modern Political Parties (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955), 64.
73
Carl J. Friedrich., Constitutional Government and Democracy, the Theory and Practice (New
Delhi: IBH Publishing, 1974), 430-431.
74
Joseph A. Schumpeter., Capitalism and Democracy (London: Allen and Unwin,1966), 283.
75
Max Weber., political writing (London: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 127.
76
Jean Blondel., An Introduction to Comparative Government (London: Cambridge University Press,
1995), 129.
77
Ernest Barker., The Party system, 12.
78
Maurice Duverger., Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in Modern State (translated
by Barbara and Robert North, London: Methuen and Co, 1967), 17.
79
Giovanni Sartori., Parties and Party Systems, A Framework for Analysis, 63.
80
Palombara and Weiner., Political Parties and Political development, 37.
81
Wilhelm Hofmeister and Karsten Grabow., Political parties, Functions and organization in
democratic societies,10.
82
Ibid., 60.
83
Arend Lijphart., Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-six
Countries (London: Yale University Press, 1999), Chapter 5.
84
L. W. Pye, & S.Verba., Political culture and political development (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 2015), 32.
85
Richard Gunther and Larry Diamond., Species of Political Parties, A New Typology (London: Sage
Publication 2003), 188.
86
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/americangovernment/chapter/the-shape-of-modern-political-
parties/, accessed 2nd February 2018.
 59

87
Wilhelm Hofmeister and Karsten Grabow, Political parties, Functions and organization in
democratic societies, 20.
88
Hans Noel., Political Ideologies and Political Parties (New York: Cambridge University Press,
2014), 146.
89
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Political_Theory/Ideologies_of_Government. Accessed 2nd January
2019.
90
Wilhelm Hofmeister and Karsten Grabow., Political parties, Functions and organization in
democratic societies, 24.
91
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/americangovernment/chapter/the-shape-of-modern-political-
parties/ accessed on 11 October 2018.
92
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/americangovernment/chapter/the-shape-of-modern-political-
parties/ accessed on 23rd April 2018.
93
Ibid.
94
Kay Lawson., How Political Parties Work, Perspectives from within (Westport: CT. Publication,
1994), 22.
95
http://personal.lse.ac.uk/hopkin/apsa2004ivbjh.pdf. accessed 4rth February 2019.
96
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/americangovernment/chapter/the-shape-of-modern-political-
parties/
97
Kay Lawson, “How Political Parties Work, Perspectives from Within, 211.
98
https://www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/american-government/political-parties/the-structure-of-
political-parties accessed 1st January 2019.

99
https://www.ndi.org/files/Political_Party_Programming_Guide.pdf, accessed on 28th October,
2018.

100
Ibid.

101
Nazeer Ahmad., Political Parties in Pakistan: A Long Way Ahead (Pakistan: Khursheed Printing
Company, 2004), 4.
102
Ibid.
103
Veena Kukerja., Contemporary Pakistan: political processes, conflicts, and crises,” (New Delhi:
AGE Publications, 2003), 22.
104
Ibid.
105
Ibid. 27.
106
Jawad Tariq., Democratizing Political Parties – A Case Study of Intraparty Elections and
Factional Politics fromPakistan, ”Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
107
Ibid. 28.
108
Patrick Kollner and Matthias Basedau., Factionalism in Political Parties: An Analytical
Framework for Comparative Studies (Hamburg: Edited by the German Overseas Institute, 2005), 10.
109
Ibid. 15.
110
Veena Kukerja., Contemporary Pakistan: political processes, conflicts, and crises,34
 60

Chapter 2

Emergence of Political Parties and Party politics in Pakistan

1947-1985

According to M. Weiner “political system of any country depends on the fact

that who is controlling and allocating the resources.”1 In democratic countries

political parties should have the authority on all resources but it was not the same in

the case of Pakistan. In the democratic system of Pakistan, beside political parties

and Prime Minister the other institutions like the Chief Executive, the Military Chief

and the Judiciary had equal, or in some ways more, authority in the workings of the

state institutions and on the country’s resources. Their interference in political affairs

has often caused instability in the workings of the democratic system. This chapter

attempts to appraise the reasons behind political instability in Pakistan during the

period 1947 to 1985. This period consisted of the first parliamentary rule, the first

Martial Law regime which morphed into the first military-dominated democracy of

Ayub Khan, second parliamentary rule (PPP) and Islamization policies of the second

Martial Law regime. During the decade of seventies, political leadership of

prominent political parties got several chances to strengthen the democracy but they

played such party politics which led them to an-other dictatorial rule. This chapter

intends to cast a sharp eye on the role of the political parties as well as party politics

of its leaderships to get power in Pakistan from 1947 to the time-period of Prime

Minister Junejo. The research intends to explore the respective roles of the armed

forces, the civil bureaucracy and the judiciary in Pakistani politics and it will also
 61

define that why and how the armed forces-led governments had helped to establish

political parties like the Convention League, MQM, Muslim League (J) and political

groupings like the Islami Jamhori Ittihad? What were the real motives of Armed

forces behind the creation of these political parties? The response of these queries

had been the theme of this section.

Pakistan’s political history was an instance of state dominance over political

parties. In first Parliamentary Phase2 Pakistan faced seven Premiers,3 Four Governor

Generals,4one Army Chief and one President.5Later, two dictators ruled over

Pakistan for 22 years,6and had formed and support several political parties to legalize

their dictatorial rule as constitutional. 7This difference shows the attitude of masses

about their interest in democratic system. In this atmosphere there was no chance for

political parties to flourish political norms and values in the society through

democratic system. However, only first government of PPP could complete its term,

from 1971-1977.8In Pakistan, Political party system was too weak that it had failed

to take root and flourished its norms.9 Rizvi analyzed this system that;

“The political structure of the newly created Pakistan and concluded

that less organized and less integrated political parties led to the
development of the military regime. Most of the political dealings
were regional, factional and prejudiced, which was against the
political standards of any political system, sabotaging the political
culture of the Pakistan. These less developed and less established
political parties failed to compete with the Punjab based civil
bureaucracy as well as the military bureaucracy and their political
leaders instead of competing with the civil and military
bureaucracies, and they became flunkies in the hands of these
bureaucracies.”10
 62

Though main political parties comprising, Pakistan People's Party and

Awami League raised their voices against General Ayub Khan’s and General Zia ul

Haq’s long dictatorial regime but their resistance movements were very weak, while

other main political parties of that dictatorial period, as well as Pakistan Muslim

League, Convention League and MQM were labeled as production of dictatorship.

These parties not only supported Martial Law but also become the part of dictatorial

regime.11

2.1 Party Politics and Political Parties in Pakistan

Political activity relating to political parties named Party politics.12Further,

“the party politics revenues, the actions tangled in receiving in addition to via control

in public life, also being to inspiration choices that touch a civilization or a

country.”13 It labeled as fight of control. “Party politics refer to actions or political

behaviors motivated by what is best or right for the political party, rather than for the

people. When a politician passes a bill that is beneficial to his political party or his

political career but harmful to the people he is representing, this is an example of

party politics.”14 If political leadership is alleged of playing party politics “they are

being accused of saying or doing something in order to make their party seem good

or another party seem bad, rather than for a better reason. Usually when opposition

question Ministers they are just playing party politics.”15

Two instantaneous but contrary political tendencies were existing in the

modern world. First the democracies are increasing while institutions of political

parties are on declining. This phenomenon can be applied on developing and

 63

developed both democracies.16In Pakistan, frequent military intervention in

democracy made the political parties feeble and stuck in glitches. 17Pakistan was the

consequence of incessant fight of Muslim Political leaders of subcontinent. It had

been amongst the first of the innovative countries to be instinctive after the World

War II. Of the then self-governing Muslim situations, it had been the biggest in

populace then intended to performance a noteworthy part in Islamic world as fine as

in the altering worldwide instruction. 18Jinnah was selected as the “Governor

General” of this afresh born republic. 19 Muhammad Ali Jinnah selected as the chief

Director Over-all of this afresh born republic. 20Unfortunately, Pakistan has coped

with critical crisis in political lifetime in the column self-governing ages then owing

to which, instability in politics and government in newly born country was emerged.

Since birth, Pakistan has weak political system with only one political party

named Muslim League.21It played a significant part in political fight of Muslims in

India. Muslim league provided the political podium to the Muslims of India to attain

their boxes. “It was a national movement which turned into a political party and

never been into government before partition in 1947.”22Thus, “it did not have any

experience of governing a state through government.”23After Partition ML made

government in Pakistan but due to lack of political experience it relied on

bureaucracy which braced it in country and had weakened the position of political

system.24In pre-partition era Muslim League had been the party of the privileged.

Unfortunately, it could not convert in mass party even after partition which created a

chance for other dogmatic festivities to derive headlong in addition plug the political

gap. Beforehand the burden of first Paramilitary law, there had been scarcely one or
 64

two disagreement parties which can disparage the government policies as well as

Pakistan National Congress of East Pakistan was one of them. Its role in politics was

very minimal and she had only eleven members in the house of seventy nine. 25The

absence of opposition made the PML the only authoritative and sole representative

political party. Safdar Mehmood stated; “the nonappearance of an actual antagonism

that we bargain a one party rule healthy rooted in the political system. In the first

seven ages after individuality, when the Muslim League detained unopposed power,

the antagonism had not been neither large nor robust sufficient to effect policy

creation.”26According to Aziz “In that retro of periodic catastrophes, the hurry of

expatriates, the Kashmir question, Jinnah’s death, Liaquat Ali Khan‘s murder as well

as furthermost central the incredible fervor for the once additional own kingdom,

disparagement of the government had occasionally associated with treason.”27The

only noteworthy involvement of the hostility in the initial years was its real

antagonism to the “Objective Resolution” in 1949. The same year, when Muslim

League started to split into different factions; the other Muslim opposition political

parties got opportunity to make their space in political system and about thirteen new

parties emerged. Nine of them were from former Pakistan Muslim League.28 In the

end of 1949, over all there were approximately 20 political parties working in

Pakistan.29

M. A. Jinnah with his companions gave the Muslim a vision which could be

achieved after the political struggle. Unluckily, after M. A. Jinnah no political leader

could fill the gap of political leadership. Party politics started and regional, local and

power capturing politician occupied the political system, which did not have
 65

nationwide appeal.30It localized and regionalized the politics. 31Rizvi stated; “It

resulted in difficulty for the political parties and leaders to pursue a coherent

approach towards the problems and issues of the early years. They were unable to

develop consensus on the operational norms of the polity and took eight and half

years to frame a constitution which did not enjoy the unqualified support of all the

major parties, leaders and regions.”32In the meanwhile, the composition of 1956

familiarized and a sturdy custom of defilement of parliamentary averages had

previously been recognized, the political parties alienated and the Assembly had

been powerless to emphasize its importance. The actual control had loosened to the

Governor General/President.33 Repetitive Martial laws; discontinuity of political set

up, internal weakness in the organization of political parties has also played a

significant role in decreasing their position in the political structure of Pakistan.

Rizvi stated;

“There is no democracy within the structure of political parties and these are
groups of elites only instead of political institutions. The structure of political
parties has promoted dynastic politics instead of true democracy. These political
parties have created a network for protecting the interests of elites by gaining
power through political process of the country.” 34

The real objective of a political party was to “promote democracy” train real

political actors” to cope with the problems of general public whereas in Pakistan,

political parties were to shelter the interest of feudal and elite class. The part of

political parties in policy creation procedure was so inadequate. “The low knowledge

base, lack of experience and low level of skills and expertise of political elites have

further made their position weakened in the policy making process of

 66

Pakistan.”35Skills, knowledge, experience and art of policy making were the virtues

of bureaucracy so Pakistani political governments always relied on them.

Political parties in Pakistan have generally worked out of power, as an

oppositional force in an anti-structure frame work, and repeatedly under highly

exploitive circumstances. Occasional limitations on political parties had contrary

effected their growth as institution in Pakistan. Minor blocs and split groups were

created to deteriorate larger political parties, to weaken or oust them from National

Politics. This trend gave a birth to local, regional, ethnic and biradairy or caste based

politics which could be harmful for national integrity. The weak internal set up,

absence of intra party elections, lack of knowledge about legislation process,

shortage of funds and nonexistence of political training were the chief reasons of

political uncertainty in Pakistan. Further, in Pakistan almost all political parties relied

on Central body of the party for every-thing especially for funding, which made

them highly Centralized.

In democratic system, ruling and opposition parties had to work together but

in Pakistani political system ruling parties never allow the opposition to participate

in policy making procedures. Ruling parties always tried to curb opposition while

opposition’s first demand was always remained on the termination of that current

ruling government and after dismissal of the assemblies, conduct of new elections.

This confrontational and hostile politics damaged the political system in Pakistan.

2.2 Phases of Party Politics 1947-1985

Pakistan had faced different phases in its political and democratic system,

during 1947 to 1985. The first phase had started from its creation and lasted till first
 67

Martial Law of Ayub Khan. In this phase party politics was at it peaks and weak

democratic system gave the opportunities to the ruling elites to use Muslim League

according to their wishes. Constitutional Assembly under the supervision of

Governor General remained busy in making first Constitution of Pakistan. The rapid

changing of Prime Ministers weakened the democratic system and sole political

party Muslim League could not introduced political norms in democratic system and

Governor General used her as a hand puppet. Second phase started from Ayub era

and ended with next Martial Law. In this phase political activities were minors and

political parties under the Presidential system could not flourish. The ruling party

split into several factions even military dictator made his own political party to run

the affairs of country. The third phase saw a better and independent political system.

Under the Premiership of Z. A. Bhutto democratic system flourished and Pakistan

made its third and final constitution in 1973. In 1977 this phase ended with new

Military Rule of General Zia and again political activities were banned. Zia

introduced Presidential system of government and curb the political activities

strictly. But now he faced resistance from MRD which was the indicator that people

of Pakistan were aware of their rights so Zia announced election and new National

Assembly came into being in 1985. The detail of these phases as under:

2.2.1 First phase of Party Politics 1947-1958

Since creation of Pakistan, there was a massive gap of conceptual and

ethnical dissimilarities which made the government very hard to tackle. Quaid e

Azam with his charismatic leadership dealt with initial problems of Pakistan and

announced the separation of politics from government policies. And set a guideline
 68

for politicians that head of any political party could not assume any government

portfolio. He himself left the membership of Muslim League after assuming the

charge of Governor General and appointed Ch. Khaleeq uz Zaman as the first

President of “Pakistan Muslim League.”36But unfortunately after his demise a severe

vacuum of leadership generated. Although Liaquat Ali Khan, a sincere companion of

Quaid e Azam, tried to fill this vacuum by strengthen the parliamentary system but

failed and after his assassination in 1951, crisis of political leadership emerged again

and resulted in military cop.37The murder of Liaquat Ali Khan deteriorated the vision

of legislatorial democracy. It provided a chance to civil bureaucracy to intervene in

government affairs and rollback the role of political parties and politicians. 38

However another point of view prevails that there is no lack of robust leaders in

Pakistan, somewhat there are too numerous but they had continued sturdy for every

one of them. The thing which required is the faithfulness as well as genuineness near

the country as well as their gatherings. 39 Pakistan endured a government of

countryside as labeled by T. Hobbes, in which each group contest to the other

collection. There is a boundless also callous fight for control improvement. These

leaders had been self-centered too selfish in flora in addition to only canister see the

district or cluster assistances as well as not of the realm. 40

During 1947 to 1954 three Federal Cabinets of sole party (Muslim League)

were formed. First cabinet completed through Jinnah underneath the management of

Liaquat Ali Khan.41 It was the composed Cabinet rendering to prestige of the

participants and their portfolios. The same cabinet sustained during 1951-53 under

the second Prime Minister of Pakistan (Kh. Nazim ud Din). During this period
 69

language dispute was one of the topmost issues and law besides order condition had

been worsened in Punjab because of the Ahmadi disagreement. In April 1953 Malik

Ghulam Muhammad cut short his period and removed him from his office. 42

“Situation was very critical as six out of thirteen members of Nazim ud Din’s

cabinet, majority belong to western wing, showed their eagerness to work in the new

Cabinet, which shows their concerns about their-self than democracy.”43After the

dismissal of the Nazim ud Din government by Malik Ghulam Muhammad, Bogra

was nominated as Prime Minister who was in America as diplomat. Malik Ghulam

Muhammad himself selected new cabinet, including 06 Ministers from former

cabinet. It is interesting to discuss here that representation of Eastern Wing in this

cabinet was very minor and only one Minister out of ten was appointed from the

Eastern wing.44 Maj. Gen. Isikandar Mirza, M.A. Isphahani, Ayub Khan, Hussein

Shaheed Suhrawardy, Dr. Khan Sahib and Choudhury Muhammad Ali were included

in this cabinet. On October 24, 1954 this cabinet was terminated and first Legislative

Assembly was also dissolved. One of the major incidents in this term was

announcement of Bogra Formula.45

After the dissolution of first constituent Assembly, indirect elections were

held in 1955 and second constituent Assembly was elected. It totally changed the

party position in Parliament as Muslim League lost its strength in the house and

United Front, Awami League with other negligible factions of political parties got

seats in the Assembly. This split mandate made it unbearable for any lone political

party to make its management alone. After making alliance with each other, a

coalition government was established. Meanwhile Governor General Malik Ghulam

 70

Muhammad got sick and went on two months leave. In his absence, he was declared

permanently retired and Major General Sikandar Mirza, who was even now working

as nominal Governor General, declared as permanent Chief Overall.46Four alliance

governments were form from 1955 to 1958.

First coalition government was established with collaboration of United Front

and Muslim League. Ch. M. Ali was the Prime Minister of this coalition government.

Five cabinet members were selected from Muslim League and four Ministers were

appointed by United Front. It was happened first period in the antiquity of Pakistan

that together East then West part of Pakistan got equivalent participation in the

government. In 1956, Ch. M. Ali submitted his resignation from Premiership and

new government was established. Hussain Shaheed Suharwardy from East Pakistan

nominated as Prime Minister. Hessian Shaheed Suharwardy selected his own cabinet

which showed political maturity and presented much improved presentation from the

previous administration. Due to split mandate and confrontational politics among

East and West Pakistan political figure, that administration also terminated in

October 1957. Now I. I. Chundrigar was selected as afterward Premier of Pakistan.

He was the representative of four coalition parties. The different nature and

ideologies of these coalition parties could not survive long last and after only 59 days

severe difference arose between coalition parties which resulted in the termination of

Ibrahim Ismail Chandrigar government. The last government in this phase was

established by Republican Party with the support of its coalition parties. Republican

Party nominated Feroze Khan Noon as Head of Cabinet who received the “vote of

confidence” from Parliament and become the Premier of Pakistan. This political
 71

government tried to save the political system and Awami League supported without

any condition but the confrontation between the political parties and in political

leadership was so severe that Prime Minister could not save its government from

Martial Law. According to Ziring; “all the cabinet personals were opportunist and

remained to gain their personal benefits. This government was also ended in the time

span of under ten months only,”47by Isikandar mirza in 1958 as Martial was

imposed.

The decade of 1950s is full of “power abuse” as Chief Executive of Pakistan

to form or terminate administrations by Malik G.M. and later General Isikander

Mirza. Equipped Armies are to guard the boundaries of the government but in

Pakistan Army continued investor in control in addition to pouch from chosen

legislatures in the political doings of the country, It is only with the pledge in

addition provision of the military in Pakistan that Ghulam Muhammad (GG)

detached Nazim ud Din (Premier) in 1953, once he must be relishing the provision of

Constituent Assembly, as well as once over same event ensued with the sustenance

of army in 1954.48 Custody these conditions in attention, it is not amazing that

General Ayub Khan, in adding to his obligations of Military Chief, rumored the

everyday jobs for preacher of protection in the original administration. 49 Judiciary

always played a title role in political and egalitarian stability in any country of the

world. A list of fundamental rights about every person living in any country of this

world had provided in the democratic constitutions of the world. Judiciary was the

real custodian of these fundamental rights and any violation could be challenged in
 72

any court. But in Pakistan, unluckily, the superior Judiciary under the umbrella of

executive did not perform its duty and became an instrument of Premiers.

Malik G. M. terminated the first Legislative Assembly of Pakistan and

rationalized the Ministers Council. The Speaker of that Constituent Assembly,

Moulvi Tameez ud Din Khan dared the termination of Constituent Assembly and

filed an appeal in Sindh High Court contrary to the unconstitutional action of

Governor General and the members of the Efficient Ministers Council. Sindh High

Court professed the action of Malik G.M. Illegal nonetheless, later the “Federation

of Pakistan” put the case in Supreme Court where Justice Munir Ahmad heard the

petition and issued his historical verdict and sustained the action of Malik G.M. (as

GG) of dissolving first Legislative Assembly under “Doctrine of Necessity”. The

verdict of Chief Justice Munir Ahmad showed a new way to undemocratic powers to

interfere in political matters and subsequently, the most powerful institution Military

used this Doctrine of Necessity for imposing Military Rule in Pakistan. 50 K.K.Aziz

stated;

“The political history of Pakistan and the way the game of politics has
been played so far have ensured a weakening of the democratic spirit and a
corresponding strengthening of the dictatorial ghost.” 51

2.2.2 Party politics under Dictatorship 1958-1971

The confrontation between political parties weakened the representative

system in addition the verdict of Justice Munir Ahmad provided a chance to Military

to take over government. On October 7, 1958 Malik Feroze Khan Noon’s

government was toppled by Governor General Isikandar Mirza who through an

emergency order annulled the 1956’s Constitution, Federal besides Provincial

 73

Cabinets were terminated and Lower House of the Parliament and all four Provincial

Assemblies were dissolute, Federal and all Provincial Cabinets were terminated.

According to “Declaration of Martial Law” all act ivit ies of political parties

were expelled. It was the first stage of Military Rule.52Justice Shahab ud Din was

requested to brand a newfangled constitution extra fitting to “the genius of the

Pakistani people.”53It had been the politicians themselves who, more than anyone

else was accountable for making the pulverized for the Military rebellion. By their

massive and widespread malpractices, they gave the impression to the general public

that perhaps none of them was sincere to the country besides the state. In this

assembly, the cancelation of the anti-smuggling decree through the Awami League

also the Republican government can be named as a classic example. 54

The Army Chief had keen interest in political affairs from beginning. He was

one of the most trustworthy companions of Malik G. M. (Governor General).

Mushtaq Ahmad has rightly pointed out that he had compiled in written form, his

views about “the future Constitution of the country” in 1954. 55After assuming the

power, Ayub Khan introduced two critical issues in Pakistani political system.

Chiefly, governmental egalitarianism would not be allowable to purpose in

Pakistan.56Additionally, a robust Central Decision-maker would control the

provinces.57Pakistani government has never got free of from these hindrances. On

October 24, 1958, after the dissolution of Assemblies, Isikandar Mirza nominated

General Ayub Khan as Premier of Pakistan and merely after three days Ayub forced

Isikandar Mirza to resign from Governor Generalship. “It was the turning point of

the history of Pakistan when military-bureaucracy oligarchy started power

 74

game.”58At that phase, local activities and indigenous matters were on escalation and

Ayub Khan was supposed to be impartial or with no partisan affiliation with any

political power. On that occasion Prime Minister Ayub Khan argued that; the

attitude of the political parties has ruined so little that I am powerless some extended

to trust that votes will recover the current disordered interior state. 59Working on this

hypothesis he enforced two new ordinances to remove the old politicians from the

political arena. They were known as “Public Offices Disqualification Order”

(PODO)60 and “Elective Bodies Disqualification Order” (EBDO)61 to silence

prominent and senior political leaders. Under these ordinances, the politicians who

were found guilty of bribery, involvement in any rebellious activity, dishonesty,

campaigning of any policy or obligating any performance which added to political

uncertainty, nepotism, favoritism, corruption and willful maladministration or willful

misapplication could be disqualified for contesting elections for fifteen years.

Moreover, they could also be heavily fined. However, if a political figure willingly

declared his superannuation from political affairs for six years, trial contrary to him

was stopped. There is slight hesitation that in the request of the rule then the minutes

of the law court, political figure of nationwide standup in addition complete status

had been purposely chastened. With this instruction additional than six thousands

politicians who detained public workplaces or places were disqualified from

revelry politics.62 Dozens of senior politicians including Nawab Ifthikhar Hussin

Mamdot, Qayyum Khan, Hussain Shaheed Suharwardi, Ayub Khuro and

MakhdoomZada Hasan Mahmood63benefitted from this concession. Their departure

from politics paved the way for the new politicians especially for those, who had
 75

been willing to cooperate by the Paramilitary Decree regime and President General

Muhammad Ayub Khan.

Ayub Khan was of the view that current democracy and political system had

not been appropriate for people of Pakistan. In fact he did not belief on parliamentary

democracy and desired to have ruling power with new style. He tried to introduce a

new structure, grounded on his “knowledge of the people and the soil of Pakistan.” It

was his old desire of implementation a structure of Controlled and Guided

egalitarianism. He announced a new structure of local bodies which was named as

the basic democracy.64In 1962, General Ayub Khan prepared second Constitution of

Pakistan and according to that composition, elections were held and in June 1962,

after composing of National and Provincial Assemblies, Martial Law was elevated.

Moulvi Tamiz ud Din, a renowned politician, was picked out as Speaker of new

National Assembly and a cabinet comprising M. A. Bogra, Sh. Masood Sadiq,

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and Nawab Amir Muhammad Khan of Kalabagh was formed to

run government.65 Ayub Khan was in need of a political party to run the government

so he established Convention Muslim League. Some veteran Muslim League did not

join this new Muslim League and formed the Council Muslim League (CML). After

three years, Presidential elections were held in 1965 and Fatima Jinnah participated

in that election contrary to Ayub Khan. Ayub Khan won election and became

President of Pakistan. In 1966 opposition political parties including Muslim League,

Awami League, Jamaat-i-Islami, National Democratic Alliance and Nizaam i Islam

Party made an alliance against Ayub Khan named Pakistan Democratic Front (PDM)

which started agitation against Ayub rule. This agitation boosted up when Z. A.
 76

Bhutto joined it and after a long struggle Yahya Khan toppled the Ayub’s

government and imposed Martial Law in March 25, 1969.

Yahya Khan’s period can be defined as the most crucial period and due to

short tenure and more problems he could not perform independently. The results of

elections in 1970, the split mandate of political parties in both wings, the

confrontational party politics between PPP and Awami League and war against India

in East Pakistan could not spare him to prepare of impose his policies in Pakistan. He

like Ayub Khan wanted centralization of Political sovereignty with bleak Provincial

power. It proved to stand unique of the major causes of the leave-taking of East

Pakistan.

2.2.3 The Regime of Pakistan people’s Party 1971-1977

The Chairman PPP, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto had been energetic, bold, visionary

and pragmatic leader.66He had set up “Pakistan People’s Party” (PPP) in 1967 at

Lahore and with his charismatic leadership with in few years it converted in the

second biggest political party of the Pakistan. Election held in December 1970. The

result was that;

Party Name Seats in National

Assembly

“Awami League” (AL)

160
“Pakistan People’s Party” (PPP)
81
“Qayyum League” (QL)
09
“Jamiat Ulema e Islam” (JUI)
07
“Jamiat Ulema e Pakistan” (JUP)
07
 77

“Pakistan Muslim League –Convention” (PML-C) 07

“National Awami Party” (NAP) 06

“Jamaat-i-Islami” (JI) 04

“Pakistan Muslim League –Council” (PML-C) 02

“Pakistan Democratic Party” (PDP) 01

“Independent (IND) 16

In elections 1970, PPP bagged 81 seats from West Pakistan and appeared as

leading political party in Lower House from West wing. However, it could not get

sufficient seats from NWFP and Baluchistan, where NAP and JUI won the majority

seats, While, Awami League clean swept in Eastern part of Pakistan and secured

almost all seats of National Assembly. Now President of AL Mujeeb ur Rehaman

was in position to make its government in Centre. Unfortunately, Bhutto maintained

his cordial ties with Yahya Khan but he could not resolve his differences with

Mujeeb ur Rehaman and after severe political confrontation East Pakistan became

Bangladesh. After fall of Dhaka, Yahya Khan gave the ruling powers to PPP’s

Chairman Bhutto, who took the responsibility as “Civil Martial Law Administrator”

(CMA) on December 20, 1971. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto remained with this portfolio till

April 20, 1972 and after the promulgation of third Constitution of 1973, he became

the head of Cabinet of Pakistan.

Bhutto’s policy towards his political opponents was that they should either be

persuaded to cooperate or they should be crushed. The politician who differed with

Bhutto could not survive, many injured and several assassinated and dozens were

abducted. On the other side, Bhutto appeared as a symbol of resistance for those

masses and communal classes “who were not direct beneficiaries but always cut the
 78

fruits behind Bhutto.”67During initial years Bhutto concentrated on the problems

linked to worker, agrarians beside middle farmers. He introduced reforms for poor

and lower class which made him very much popular among middle and lower class.

Throughout his regime feudal landlords, bureaucracy and capitalists were the main

foes and rivals to his societal manifesto and Army was also shelved and they were

under fire also. But now circumstances changed and these under fire areas got

importance. Policies of societal reforms could not be delivered and all above

mentioned “foes” got power. According to Zaidi

“Class that emerged under the Bhutto era eventually got united with the urban
middle class, bureaucracy and also with military for removing him in 1977. So,
the beneficiaries became the cause of his downfall as they were in the Ayub
Khan case.”68

In 1972 under an agreement with NAP and the JUI, the governors of NWFP

and Baluchistan were taken from the NAP. Beside this three members of Muslim

League were included in Bhutto’s Central Cabinet. 69It was efforts of Bhutto to

satisfy his coalition parties. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s authoritative attitude created

problems for PPP and its popularity starting to decrease. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto

announced new elections. Opposition political parties shaped a coalition “Pakistan

National Alliance” (PNA) against Pakistan People's Party and participated in

elections. Elections were held in March 7, 1977 for the Lower House of the

Parliament and PPP bagged one hundred fifty five seats out of two hundred total

seats. On the other side, PNA bagged only 36 seats in Lower House of Parliament. 70

This difference of seats created doubts in the mind of opposition and they refused to

accept the result and start severe agitation against PPP for bulk rigging. 71PPP tried to
 79

negotiate with PNA but they demanded new elections. The big processions, rallies,

sit-in and huge protest demonstration worsened the regulation plus directive situation

in all over Pakistan. The deadlock between ANP and PPP invited third power and

Chief of Army Staff, General Muhammad Zia ul Haq step forward and on July 4,

1977 Military Rule was imposed in Pakistan. Pakistan People's Party’s government

and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s administration was terminated and all Assemblies were

also dissolved. Z.A.Bhutto was arrested and sent to prison.

2.2.4 Party Politics under Second Martial Law 1977-1985

On July 5, 1977 General Zia announced Military Rule and assured that next

poll would be held in three months but later elections were postponed. Emergency

was enacted and ban was enforced on all radical festivities and on their activities. 72

Zia announced that on public‘s demand “accountability process” would be finalized

first as well as election would be held. The Political Parties Act 1962 was modified.

Now it was compulsory for every political party to present the detail of her account

and apply to it for registration. Without adopting the procedure no political party

could continue its political activity. Later, on protest condition of registration was

relaxed and Election Commission issued and questionnaire instead of registration.

But few parties filled this questionnaire and most of parties including PPP did not

respond it. Zia announced the date of next election but later, once again he postponed

election without giving any next date.

In February 8, 1981 nine political parties including “Pakistan People’s Party,

Tehreek i Istiqlal, National Democratic Party, Jamiat Ulema i Islam, Pakistan

 80

Democratic Party, Pakistan Mazdoor Kisan Party, Qoumi Mahaz e Azadi, Pakistan

Muslim League and Azad Jamu Kashmir Muslim Conference form a united front to

restore democracy in Pakistan named Movement for Rehabilitation of Democracy.”73

The main object of this alliance was exciting of Paramilitary Regulation,

refurbishment of the 1973 make-up, land of universal election for representative and

democratic government and issue of all political prisoners74to ended Martial Law and

renovation of self-governing system in Pakistan. It was not an electoral alliance and

it policy was to create awareness in masses against Zia’s dictatorial regime. It was

amazing that five political parties75 included in this alliance were remained the part

of PNA against PPP but now they were in MRD with PPP which showed the

creditability of this alliance. This movement continuously resisted against the

policies of Zia. The rallies, protest sessions and resistance campaigns were launched

by MRD parties which gave tough time to President Zia. Hundreds of political

workers of MRD was arrested and imprisoned; dozens of them were badly injured by

police gas shelling and brutal “Lathi charge.” But they remained affirm on their

cause and Zia could not curb their voices.

In 1985 Zia once again announced the date for next election and before

election constitution was again amended Ahmad quoted that;

“The amendments provided that any person who had at any time after December 1, 1971,
been an office-bearer or even a member of the executive committee at the National or
Provincial set-up of a political party which had neither been registered nor declared
eligible to participate in elections by the Election Commission by October 11, 1979, would
not be qualified for a period of 7 years to be elected or chosen as a member of parliament
or a Provincial Assembly. However, members of the Federal Council Majlis-e-Shura were
not to be affected.”76
 81

It was also mentioned that some being that had been a member of Central

Cabinet or remained Federal Minister or had equivalent portfolio 77 in the reign of

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto would be ineligible for a “period of seven years” for

participation in elections or apply for the membership for National or Provincial

Assembly. Badar stated that “it was obvious that these amendments were introduced

by Zia only for kept PPP away from election.”78 Further Benazir Bhutto challenged

these amendments in Supreme Court,79 and Court announced its verdicts on June 20,

1988 after the termination of Junejo administration.

Election held in 1985 on party-less foundation. In National Assembly, a Sindhi

politician, Junejo was nominated as Premier by President Zia. The new era of

controlled democracy had started with hopes and expectations in the supervision of

President Zia.

2.3 Introduction to Mainstream Pakistani Political Parties

From the inception of liberation, Pakistan had implemented a “multi-party”

political structure. The traditional multiplicity, ideology and diversity designed this

multi-party structure.80In this Pakistani multi-party system, no sole party is expected

to achieve unconditional supremacy single-handedly, and the political festivities

effort with each-other to make an alliance government. There had been numerous

categories of political parties in Pakistan such as “Religious, Liberal, Socialist,

Democratic, Conservative, Capitalist, Labor and Communist.” 81 Few of them have

been established on ethnic, regional and linguistic basis, whereas some others are

either established on the basis of ideology or in the name of religion. However, a few

of them represent themselves as symbol of democracy. At contemporary there had

 82

been about 288 party-political festivities prevailing in Pakistan which have recorded

through the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). 82

It is a matter of sorrow that in Pakistani party politics there are no rules or

ethics for politicians. In Pakistani democratic system, the trend of individual party

politics is at its peak. Any politician of any political party can leave or join any other

political party on any issue and at any time. And if he thinks that existing political

parties are not in a position to fulfill his requirements, he not only leaves his party

but also established a new faction too. We can see a lot of factions in every political

party of Pakistan on account of the above tradition. According to Safdar Mehmood,

“18 parties are bearing the name of Muslim League in their official

nomenclature.”83The PML-N and PPP are regarded as two main political festivities

in Pakistan. The PML being founder party enjoyed an exclusive position in partisan

structure of Pakistan and was the “natural heir to state power after the

independence.”84There are some religious based political festivities like Jamaat-i-

Islami, Tehreek i Nifaz Fiqah Jafaria, Jamiat Ulema i Islam (F), Jamiat Ahl i Hadith

and Jamiat Ulema e Islam (S). There are certain ethno-regional political parties in

Pakistan representing a specific community like Baluchistan National Party,

Muttahida Qaumi Movement and Pakhton Khwa Milli Awami Party. 85These political

parties signify different traditions and customs in the National Politics of Pakistan.

Here is a brief introduction of Pakistani mainstream political parties which

contributed an important role in this research period.

2.3.1 “Pakistan Muslim League (PML)”

 83

The Pakistan Muslim League had been the founder party of Pakistan which

played a significant part in the making of Pakistan. PML identified as the All India

Muslim League (AIML) before partition. 86In United Hindustan, before the

foundation of AIML in 1906, a British based political party was already working

since 1885, stated to as the All India National Congress. 87Later, in decades of 1900,

it gradually converted in Hindu political party and after the Second World War it

converted in the most influential Hindu political party in Hindustan. Being a Hindu

political party, the attitude of All India National Congress towards Muslims was not

positive. By that period, Indian Muslims desired an appropriate political medium for

the projection and security of their partisan safeties. 88On December 30, 1906 the

yearly convention of the “Muslim Educational Conference” was detained at Dhaka.

All prominent Muslim political leaders were present in that conference. After the

long discussions, Saleem ullah Khan described the significance and need of the

Muslim political party. He also suggested the foundation of a political party for

Indian Muslims and proposed the name “All India Muslim League” for that party. 89

Moulana Zafar Ali Khan and Hakim Ajmal Khan supported this proposal and in this

way, “All India Muslim League (AIML) was established on December, 30 1906.”90

Nawab Wiqar ul Mulk was nominated as Chairman and Mohsin ul Mulk was

selected as Secretary General of this new born “All India Muslim League.” 91After

the formation of Pakistan, the name of AIML converted into Pakistan Muslim

League and being a Governor General, Quaid e Azam decided to separate the

portfolio of political party from executive so he resigned from PML and Khaleeq-uz-

Zaman was made its first President.92

 84

In initial phase, PML as founder party took the charge of government and

M.A.Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan both were the member Pakistan Muslim League.

Beside these two main portfolios, the majority of the representatives of first

Constituent Assembly were also consisted on PML members so in this phase

majority party and ruling party was PML. But soon after the demise of M.A. Jinnah

and murder of Prime Minister Khan Liaquat Ali, PML lost its popularity in masses

and divided into several factions. Before partition, the landholders and elite class

both equally had their hold on this party. “In the League Council, for example, out of

503 members the landlord’s numbers were 163.”93A large number of feudal and

landholders were the representative of this party and in elections their tenants served

as their voters. The situation remained unchanged even after partition and PML

became the party of elites.

In the earlier era, leadership of Pakistan Muslim League was hesitant to let

the establishment of some other Muslim partisan party, and in this era, antagonism to

the Pakistan Muslim League measured as the disagreement to the conception of

Pakistan. Prime Minister Khan Liaquat Ali, in opinion of the significance of the

numerous post partition issues, disheartened the advent of party-political gatherings.

He honestly believed this would create anarchy in the new born state where a strong

antagonism would have presented an alternate program to the common people and

introduced the method of “checks and balances” truly required to control the

performance of the ruling party.94 After the murder of first Prime Minister Liaquat

Ali Khan, Pakistan Muslim League could not recover its robust place because of its

party-political discrepancies and nonexistence of party discipline. “It became the

 85

handmaid of the government,”95associating Army and civil administration and get

together using the sacred components. Its damage of reputation came conspicuously

into emphasis as Malik G.M. who was government servant and develop the

Governor General of Pakistan, terminated the Prime Minister Nazim ud Din despite

the fact that he was also head of the PML and the party without any protest accepted

this decision. The leadership of PML also acknowledged the premiership of M. A.

Bogra, then serving diplomat in USA. The unconstitutional act of Malik G.M.

(Governor General) and PML’s lenient and weak response abundantly showed the

nonexistence of political will in the party. 96

Diverse offshoots of the PML had, ended the decades, maintained dictatorial

rules and civil establishment to govern the country. During first Martial Law when

the Pakistan Muslim League was legitimately obsolete, Ayub Khan alienated her into

two groups, “Convention League and Council Muslim League” and after announcing

the “Presidential form of government” he introduced “Convention Muslim League”

(CML). In 1963, President Ayub Khan was selected as Chairman CML, which

became the ruling party. Ayub Khan was willing to get support for himself from this

handmaid political party in the next Premier elections which would be expected to

hold in 1965 against the opponent Fatima Jinnah. 97In this way, Convention Muslim

League became a puppet in his hands. The other half, the Council Muslim League

(CML) went to opposition side and became the coalition partner of united front and

other political parties as well as the JI.

 86

Similarly, when after winning the non-party based election of 1985 Junejo

restored Pakistan Muslim League, she was also chosen by General Zia. 98According

to the eighth Alteration, familiarized by President Zia in 1985, it was the discretion

of President that he could nominate any representative for the portfolio of Prime

Minister. Consequently, Junejo was designated with the portfolio of Premiership by

President Zia, and he acquired a vote of self-assurance from the National Assembly.

When democratic structure activated in the National Assembly under the

Premiership of Junejo, the Parliament was separated inevitably into two factions; one

ruling group presided by Prime Minister M. K. Junejo that included in governmental

group; and the other divided faction went to act as opposition role. Prime Minister

Junejo re-named his ruling party as Pakistan Muslim League which consisted several

new and old politicians. Different small factions of Muslim League also merged in

that parliamentary party named Pakistan Muslim League and surprisingly, PML

becomes the ruling party in a house which was came into being by part-less

elections. President Zia terminated the M. K. Junejo’s government in 1988. As he

left the premier house the ruling party Pakistan Muslim League, again split into

several major and minor groups. Nawaz Sharif was appointed as the head of the new

major faction of PML who was already head of Punjab Muslim League and serving

as Chief Minister in the Punjab. After few years he became the prominent leader of

the country and he made PML (N) the largest faction of PML and in 1997 largest

political party of Pakistan. Later when Junejo government was terminated, Nawaz

Sharif was the President of “Punjab Muslim League” and as Provincial head; he

greeted the dismissal of the M. K. Junejo’s Central Government. Nawaz Sharif

 87

supported Zia’s unacceptable action, which was accordingly compensated and

President Zia nominated him the Caretaker “Chief Minister of the Punjab.” 99 After

the demise of President Zia, next elections were held in 1988. PML participated in

those elections from the platform of “Islami Jamhoori Ittehad” which was pull

together by Military to counter the socialist “Pakistan People's Party.” The major

political party within the IJI’s alliance was the PML headed by Nawaz Sharif; and to

counter socialist Pakistan People's Party, Military fully supported Islami Jamhori

Ittihad. Although in elections 1988, IJI could not secured majority seats but it got

success in election 1990 and made its government in Centre.100

2.3.2 Introduction of Different Factions of Pakistan Muslim League

Khaliq uz Zaman was the first head of PML. Unfortunately, it could not

create any unity in it under the President ship of Ch. Khaleeq uz Zaman and was

divided into many factions just after the death of Jinnah in 1948. This trend is

continued till present. Below is the introduction of its different faction which came

into being after 1947. Inner conflicts inside the reigning Muslim League started

almost instantly after Quaid’s death in 1948. Later the in-fighting turned acrimonious

and the party began to split. The main factions of Muslim League in different eras

are as under:

a. “All Pakistan Awami Muslim League (APAML)”

APAML was the first offshoot of the Pakistan Muslim League. This group

was come into being in 1949 by Husain Shaheed Suharwardy, a senior leader of

Muslim League from Province of Bengal. Suharwardy had clashes with the
 88

leadership of Muslim League that the party desired to maintain the democratic

intention of AIML. Suharwardy had criticized the domination of elites in party and

alleged that party was “losing contact with the masses.” He left the PML in 1949 and

established his own political party.

b. Jinnah Muslim League (JML)

Iftikhar Husain Mamdot was a senior politician of Muslim League. He had

been served as the first CM of Punjab province. Beside this, Mamdot also performed

as President “Punjab Muslim League.” He was a trustworthy associate of Jinnah; and

known to be a harsh and blunt tyrant. Later Quaid’s death, he was expelled from the

Chief Minister Ship of the Punjab for “disobeying party directives and Prime

Minister’s instructions.” In 1949, Iftikhar Mamdot left the PML and established

“Jinnah Muslim League.”

c. “Jinnah Awami Muslim League (JAML)”

This faction of PML established in 1950 in the result of unification of

Suharwardy's All Pakistan Muslim League and Mamdot’s Jinnah Muslim League. In

fact, it was an alliance of three different group of PML.

d. Azad Pakistan Party (APP)

All India Muslim League had a “vocal left-wing”, which was working under the

headship of Mian Iftikhar. Afterwards the formation of Pakistan and demise of

founder of Pakistan, this wing of AIML lost much of its power in Muslim League. In

the middle of 1949, Mian Iftikhar left Pakistan Muslim League, the ruling party and
 89

announced a left-wing political party named Azad Pakistan Party. A large number of

socialists which were the part of AIML left the party and joined this new offshoot of

Pakistan Muslim League. Later APP merged with some other left-wing political

parties and in 1957 it converted into National Awami Party (NAP).

e. “Sindh Muslim League (SML)”

After partition of Subcontinent, Ayub Khuhro was chosen as the first CM of

Sindh; who had already been headed Muslim League as President Sindh Muslim

League. After the murder of Liaquat Ali, a severe confrontation created between

Ayub Khuhro and former prominent officials of Sindh Muslim League; and officials

of Central Muslim League asked Ayub Khuhro to resign. Ayub Khuhro left Muslim

League and made a new league named Sindh Muslim League (SML).

f. Jinnah Awami League (JAL)

In 1953, Husain Shaheed Suharwardy removed the word Muslim from his

party’s name and selected the new name Jinnah Awami League in its place of Jinnah

Awami “Muslim” League. With the changing of name of the party, Jinnah Awami

League became a secular party and joined the group of leftist political parties in

Centre government. On the other hand, Nawab Mamdot Husain left this newly

established secular party and rejoined Pakistan Muslim League.

g. Republican Party (RP)

Republican Party came into being in 1955, with the support and help of

Governor General of Pakistan, Iskindar Mirza. It had a governmental political party

 90

and established to support the administration’s policies. Its ideology was secular and

in National Assembly it was rightist wing political party. With the backing of

Military establishment and under the supervision of the government, it became most

influential and active political party. A large numbers of Muslim League’s

representatives in the National Assembly joined this newly created political party

and soon it became largest political party in house. After the formation of

Republican Party in Parliament, power of Muslim League decreased and it reduced

more when Iskindar Mirza adopted the portfolio of President instead of Governor

General in 1956.

h. Awami League (AL)

Jinnah Awami League got marvelous victory in Provincial election of 1954 in

East Pakistan. Gradually it became the party of Bengali Nationalists and in 1956, it

skipped the word “Jinnah” from its original name and after shortened it adopted new

name with Awami League. It frolicked an imperative part in the formation of

Bangladesh in 1971 as its founding Party.

i. Pakistan Muslim League – Convention (PML-C)

In 1958, President Iskindar Mirza and Military Chief General M.Ayub Khan

enacted first Military Rule in Pakistan. After some months Ayub Khan terminated

Iskindar Mirza from President Ship and imposed sanction on all partisan parties

including PML and enforced restriction on political activities. In 1962, after

promulgation of second constitution of Pakistan, Ayub Khan lifted the ban from

parties and their political activities. Muslim League was divided into different small
 91

factions. Ayub Khan decided to revive the Muslim League to generate a harmony

with partisan parties. Safdar Mehmood stated:

“He called for a convention of some leading Muslim League and Republican Party
members. The convention announced the formation of a new Muslim League. The
word Pakistan was added and the party became Pakistan Muslim League (PML).
However, it became PML-Convention when some other Muslim League leaders
refused to join it and formed their own faction.” 101

Soon, this faction converted into the mainstream political part of the

legislature which was selected by the members of “basic democratic system”. Ayub

Khan had elected President of this newly formed Muslim League.

j. Pakistan Muslim League – Council (PML-C)

Immediately, afterward the formation of Convention Muslim League by

Ayub Khan, two senior leaders of Muslim League, Mumtaz Daultana and Sardar

Abdul Qayyum Khan separated from PML and founded their separated partisan party

named “Pakistan Muslim League Council (PML-C).” The members of this newly

created party left the treasury benches and started to play the role of opposition.

According to Mehmood:

“The two main candidates for the 1965 Presidential election were: Fatima
Jinnah, the sister of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, and Ayub Khan, who was
running to be re-elected as President. Ms. Jinnah was requested by Pakistan
Muslim League (Council) to be its candidate for the 1965 Presidential
election. Soon, other opposition parties such as the left-wing National
Awami Party, the centre-left Awami League, the right-wing Nizam-i-Islam
party, and the right-wing Jamat-i-Islami pooled with Pakistan Muslim
League (Council) to form the Combined Opposition Alliance. Ayub
received 64% of the total votes and Ms. Jinnah bagged 36%. Even though
Ayub’s victory was convincing, he lost badly to Ms. Jinnah in the country’s
two main urban centers, Karachi (in West Pakistan) and Dhaka (in East
Pakistan). Ms. Jinnah also managed to sneak past him in Hyderabad. Rest of
the cities and towns all went to Ayub and his Pakistan Muslim League
 92

Convention.” 102”

k. Qayyum Muslim League (QML)

Awami League and Pakistan People’s Party were the prominent political

parties in the decade of seventies. To face them, an effort for the amalgamation of

two main groups of split Muslim League, PML Council and PML Convention was

made. It was interesting that instead of PML Council head Sardar Qayyum all

members joined the Convention League. Sardar Qayyum left the Council Muslim

League (CML) and made his own party named Qayyum Muslim League.

l. Pakistan Muslim League - Functional (PML-F)

In 1973, after the dictatorial era of Ayub Khan, Pir Pagara, (a senior

politician and head of religious faction “Hur” tribe in Sindh), tried to form a new

faction of Muslim League named Pakistan Muslim League Functional (PML-F) by

merging two main groups of Muslim League PML Convention and PML Council.

PML-F was backed by capitalists, feudal, businessman and industrialist due to the

nationalization policy of “Pakistan People's Party”. This political party could not win

the support of masses and lost all by-elections which held during 1972 to 1976. PML

(F) joined electoral coalition Pakistan National Alliance (PNA) in 1976 which was

made against Pakistan People's Party. After election 1977, PML (F) participated in

protest against poll rigging in election beside PNA. The agitation was resulted in

termination of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto government. Zia expelled all political activities

and imposed sanctions on political parties as well as PML (F) which had welcomed

the Military Coup.

 93

m. Pakistan Muslim League - Qasim (PML-Q)

Malik Qasim, a renowned politician and senior Muslim Leaguer. He was

appointed as General Secretary of PML Functional group. He gave resign as protest,

from his post when his party welcomed the Zia Coup in 1977. In 1978 Malik Qasim

established a new partisan party named “Pakistan Muslim League Qasim (PML-Q).”

Several senior members of Muslim League joined this faction of Muslim League.

Malik Qasim made an alliance with PPP and contested election with the coalition of

PDA.

n. Pakistan Muslim League (PML)

In 1985 general voting detained under the supervision of President Zia on

party less-basis. All opposition political parties including MRD boycotted those

elections. Zia nominated Junejo as Prime Minister who was a senior member of PML

Functional. After assuming the charge of Prime Minister, Junejo formed a new

united Muslim League named “Pakistan Muslim League.” Soon it converted in

ruling party and selected M.K. Junejo as Prime Minister after giving the vote of

confidence.

o. “Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz Group (PML-N)”

In 1985, Nawaz Sharif was affiliated with PML headed by Junejo. In election

1988 PML became the part of Islami Jamhori Ittehad and contested election with the

coalition of IJI. PPP won elections and IJI have to play oppositional role in

parliament. In election 1990, IJI got success in elections and leader of the alliance

Nawaz Sharif became the Premier of Pakistan. However, one part of PML showed
 94

their reservations on Nawaz Sharif appointment as PM instead of Junejo. In 1993,

the differences arose and that part of Muslim League left away from united PML.

The remaining part elected the Nawaz Sharif as its head and renamed PML as PML-

N. The newly formed PML (N) presented outstanding performance in next elections

and in 1997 got absolute majority in the Parliament and converted into the most

popular political party.

p. Pakistan Muslim League – Junejo Group (PML-J)

That group of PML formed by Hamid Nasir Chattah in 1993. He was a senior

member of PML. This group came into being when Junejo died in 1993 and Nawaz

Sharif declared himself President of PML. This group dissent with him and made its

own political party in the headship of Hamid Nasir Chattah. Surprisingly, in election

1993, PML (J) supported PPP and made an alliance with her.

q. Pakistan Muslim League – Jinnah Group (PML-J)

Mian Manzor Watto was a senior leader of Muslim League. He had been

associated with Junejo Muslim League as well as he participated in election 1993

with the coalition of PPP. After winning elections Watto was nominated as Chief

Minister of the Punjab but soon clashes and confrontation arose between them and

Benazir Bhutto removed his government in 1995 and consequently, Same year he

formed new party “Pakistan Muslim League Jinnah group (PML-J).”

2.3.3. “Pakistan People’s Party (PPP)”

 95

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto had been the originator of “Pakistan People's Party.” 103It was

established on December 1, 1967 at the house of Dr. Mubashar Hassan in Lahore

where other senior and prominent politicians like Miraj Muhammad Khan, Mumtaz

Bhutto, Rafi Raza, J.A. Rahim, Ghulam Mustafa Khar, Hayat Muhammad Sherpao

and Mubashar Hassan accompanied him.104 Zulfiqar Bhutto was selected as head of

newly created political party. The initial objects of this party were;

“Islam is our faith, democracy is our politics; socialism is our economy

and all power to the people.”105

Meanwhile its substance, the PPP elevated its speech for privileges of normal

people and disapproved the government policies. The PPP participated in election

1970 raising the slogan of “Roti (bread), Kapra (clothes), or Makan (house).”106This

slogan of PPP attracted the ordinary peoples. It remained the first occasion in

democratic history of Pakistan that a party was speaking about the fundamental

rights of the ordinary masses. PPP argued that feudal class had been exploiting the

rights of peasant, farmer and labors for several decades. Now PPP would fight for

their equal rights and would remove the dominance of feudal class from Pakistani

politics. PPP presented new concept of “Islamic Socialist Economy” in Pakistan. 107

According to Rizvi;

“This was different from the original political and philosophical concept of
socialism as developed by Karl Marx because as against the original socialist
system, the one introduced by Bhutto was to be called Islamic Socialism. This
was designed in accordance with the religio-cultural traditions of the Pakistani
society.” 108

Even though, the attitude and ideology of the PPP attracted mainly to the farmer

and laborer and lower class. The people heartily greeted that newly emerged political
 96

festivity as every person was nourished of the notion of despotism. And

consequently, on the call of PPP, a big mob came out from their houses against

General Ayub Khan’s dictatorship. PPP fool around a key role in activating the

ordinary people for democracy. The pressure of mob forced General Muhammad

Ayub Khan to step down from Premiership and he gave resignation in 1969. Yahya

Khan took the charge and he announced the date of new election which was

December 1970.109

Though Bhutto had been faithful companion of President Ayub Khan from the

very beginning of his political upbringing from 1958 to 1966, yet, he detached

himself from the Ayub’s cabinet on the subject of “Tashkent Declaration” 110 which

happened in June 1966 after the war of 1965. At the time he was uncertain about his

future political planning. He was analyzing different options available for him. Few

options were evidently available to Bhutto and he had chosen to establish new

political party of his own.111 Because of taking hard stance on the subject of

“Tashkent Declaration” by Bhutto, Ayub government launched a comprehensive

strategy to malign his image. S. Waqar stated that;

“He was personally harassed and his public meetings were often disrupted.
Bhutto eventually decided to form a new party and indicated that it would be
radical, reformist, democratic, socialist and egalitarian party.” 112

The timing and focus of Bhutto on anti-establishment stance approached the

minds of the masses within no time because of the ills prevalent in the urban middle

classes, students, university and college faculty, labor, Ulema and government

employees with low-income who were suppressed for long under the regime. 113 The

movement had spread throughout Pakistan by 1969. By the compulsion of

 97

unbearable political pressure, Ayub showed his consent of step down and on March

25, 1969 he gave the authority to Yahya Khan who decided to announce general

elections just after assuming the charge as President. The elections were decided to

hold in December 1970.114 The PPP invented new political fashion during the

election campaign by attracting the people at large through posters, banners and

party flags. The articulation of the leadership was evident through the plan of

organizing the processions and public meetings extensively. The canvassing catch

word was Socialism based slogan of roti, kapra aur makan. The party intellectuals

had contributed a lot by writing articles in newspapers and magazines for the

propagation of party ideology.115 In this regard, the party organs “Nusrat” and

“Musawat” had a significant contribution in disseminating PPP‟s political

philosophy.116 Moreover, the focus of the campaign was to address every cadre of

society. The election manifesto of the PPP was a comprehensive effort to attract each

and every tier of society by providing an essential way out of Pakistan’s socio-

economic and political ills. The party manifesto was mainly, a critique of the then

existing system, ideas and general status quo. While the sole remedy to all crises

suggested was adoption of socialism. The Rizvi stated that “In the document it was

affirmed that the ultimate objective of the party’s policy is the attainment of a

classless society, which is possible only through socialism in our times. This means

true equality of the citizens, fraternity under the rule of democracy in an order based

on economic and social justice.”117

In a religious-based society like Pakistan, spreading of such a philosophy was

a herculean task. The general perception was its linkages to the atheist and
 98

materialistic approaches. The crude socialism of PPP attracted the wrath of religio-

political parties, Jamat-i-Islami in particular, which was on fore-front in criticism and

discarding the concept of Socialism. 118 The accusations on Bhutto by religious right

were very strong, i.e. “secular socialist”, “atheist” and even “champion of an anti-

Islamic ideology”. Jamiat Ulema i Islam (Thanvi group) and Jamiat Ulema i Pakistan

also joined the band-wagon.119 Whereas, Jamiat Ulema i Islam (Hazarvi Group) was

in favor of socialism and justified it by declaring as mere economic formula to get

rid of capitalist dominance. Furthermore, different groups of Pakistan Muslim

League also confronted socialism. Bhutto responded;

“If we don’t pay attention to economic exploitation and to change the present corrupt
system then it will not be possible to check Communism in this country. The only
way to check communism is Islamic Socialism. It is necessary to implement this
system of equality for the safety of ideology of Pakistan and service of Islam.
Equality and Democracy have been stressed the most in Islam. If you do not object
word “Democracy” for “Jamhooriyat” then why there is objection on word
“Socialism” for “Equality”. 120

Bhutto’s slogan of Islamic socialism initially attracted the masses. The

bewildered educated class congregated around him. The tillers and tenants along

with jobless urban masses rallied surrounding him to get rid of the tyranny of

capitalism. 121 However it generated a controversial debate subject in the press and

subsequently bundle of columns in its support and against appeared. PPP‟s point of

view in support of „Islamic Socialism‟ was so dynamic that the sacred political

festivities decide to circulate a “Fatwa” against it to keep the public away from the

PPP.122 Philip stated that “One hundred and thirteen Ulema signed the Fatwa against

PPP which appeared in the press on February 26, 1970, declaring socialism as the

utmost threat to the security and ideology of Pakistan.” 123 They argued that “Islamic
 99

Socialism” was an imprecise explanation of Islam. But in spite of their hostility the

strategy of the PPP to Islamize the concept and term of socialism was effective in

receiving the provision of the masses in West wing of Pakistan over the motto of

“Islamic Socialism” and further transforming it into “Musawat and Musawat-i-

Muhammadi.”124

The results of elections were eye-openers for everyone, particularly, for the

right-wing parties. PPP’s energetic headship and robust communication caused in the

triumph of PPP in the elections and she secured 81seats out of total 138 seats from

West Pakistan in the Parliament and became mainstream party in West Pakistan

wing, and became second largest political party of Pakistan. While Awami League

white washed in East Pakistan and won almost all National Assembly seats. 125The

narrative of opposition political parties had flopped. The most prominent opponent

Jamaat-i-Islami, could only bagged four seats126 The PPP adopted multi-dimensional

approach to get support of the masses in various parts of the West Pakistan127 and

succeeded. Afterward pending to control on December 20, 1971 as well as remaining

in control till July 5, 1977, the administration of PPP meaningfully donated to the

socio-economic growth of the country. The most important of its charities near the

political growth of the country was to present a new-fangled Composition to

Pakistan.128 Furthermore, as cited before, the PPP in calculation, Z. A. Bhutto

familiarized the scheme of nationalization of banks in addition to life assurance

concerns. It was the PPP that first announced the Kahuta Scheme for creation

Nuclear Bomb.129 In 1972, PPP also presented Land Reforms. 130 1977 was the last

year of PPP in the assembly as on July 4, 1977; the Army once over hurled a coup as
 100

well as conquered the self-governing setup. A process cypher called Fair Play

implemented by the then Military Chief, General Zia and Z. A. Bhutto’s regime

malformed as well as a Martial Law obligatory once over. 131 The chief claim had

been the engineering in election’s 1977. The designated Premier of the PPP

imprisoned as well as advanced suspended on April 4, 1979. His daughter BB

designated as the president of the PPP in 1982. She reserved to house capture as well

as was later banished to the UK. She came back to her homeland in 1986 in addition

to trigger the party. The details have been given in the upcoming next chapters.

2.3.4 “Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM)”

The Muttahida Qaumi Movement, commonly recognized as the MQM,

consuming liberal-secular political thoughts, is a regional, linguistic based political

festivity in province of Sindh. The party grips huge activating latent in the

metropolitan parts of Sindh. MQM is the 2nd biggest political festivity in Sindh.

Altaf Hussain, a Mohajir student, founded a student federation in 1978, called

“All Pakistan Mohajir Student Organization (APMSO)” to revitalize the strength of

Mohajir community. 132 On that time, Urdu speaking students were deprived from

their due rights in academic institutes of Sindh. “Jeeyai Sindh Students Federation

(JSSF), Pakhtun Students Federation (PSF), Baloch Students Federation (BSF) and

Punjabi Students Federation (PSF)” were already working in Sindh’s educational

institutes. Ethnic biasness forced Altaf Husain to make a student federation to defend

the constitutional rights of “Mohajir students.”133The MQM emerged from All

Pakistan Mohajir Students Organization, established by Altaf Husain in 1984. MQM

is a political party of Urdu speaking community consisted on middle and lower

 101

middle class. MQM had strong roots in Sindh especially in urban parts of Sindh i.e.

in Karachi, Sukkur and Hyderabad. Haq stated that; “

“The party workers have strong belief in their leader Altaf Hussain. Their motto is
unconditional support to the objectives of the organization and high spirit of
commitment to their cause for the achievement of common good. MQM
indoctrinated its message in the minds of the people through published
literature.”134

Haq further stated that “According to manifesto, the MQM is a progressive

organization in favor of land reforms, an end to the quota system, the preservation of

cultural heritage, lowering the age of voting from 21 to 18, the reorganization of

constituencies and other electoral reforms. It has favored the decentralization of

central and provincial powers by redistributing them among the elected local

councilors. In its manifesto and other policy statements, it has promised an

egalitarian taxation system, equal opportunities in education and reorganization of

transport system in urban Sindh. Moreover one of the major demands of MQM was

the extinction of the quota system. The quota system was implemented in all

provinces on the basis of their level of development to remove the inter-provincial

and intra-provincial disparities. In addition MQM also demanded sixty percent share

in the provincial jobs as they claimed to represent twenty two million voters in

Sindh.” Then the MQM headship sustained to maintain the succeeding

administrations in Pakistan for the settlement of Bihari Immigrants from Bangladesh.

But no actual steps were taken to this way.135

The political affairs of individuality in the province of Sindh highlighted the

indigenous division. It augmented the momentum of MQM activities in Sindh. The

management of the MQM arose as the winner of welfares of the refugee’s

 102

community besides busy for their anxieties with the upsurge allocation in civil

facilities for refugees.136 It increased admiration speedily in youngster of the middle

class. MQM tackled political disturbances since its advent. At first, the foremost

focus was the clash between original Sindhi refugees but afterward the 1972

language uprisings; its management slowly unstiffened their posture to the local

Sindhi. The appearance of PPI (Punjabi Pakhtun Ittehad) in 1987 to defend the

privileges of the Punjabis as well as Pakhtuns in the area was mostly accountable for

that alteration. Therefore, the MQM seemed the Punjabi as well as Pakhtun

associations as a main danger to supremacy of refugees in Sindh. They instigated to

disapprove the Punjabi domination in management as well as cloistered sectors.

They tinted the person of Mohajirs in all gaits of life particularly in the managerial as

well as financial expansion of the country. To pawn this bombast, the PPI

overestimated their influence in the socioeconomic development of the Sindh.

The relatives between refugees in addition Pakhtuns became stressed then

twisted vehement after certain clatters between two groups. According to Hassan;

“The Sohrab Goth Massacre (November- December 1986) was a significant

development. The controversy started with an Army raid on heroin distribution

Centre run by Pathans in Sohrab Goth;137 during the raid some mohajir house - holds

were also affected in the nearby Aligarh Colony but the action enraged them as they

perceived the action a deliberate act from administration to target and implicate the

Urdu Speaking Mohajir community by the establishment. This incident intensified

the mutual hatred and suspicion between the Mohajir and Pathan ethnic groups.

Following it the ethnic riots spread all over Hyderabad and Karachi. These ethnic
 103

riots provided an excuse to military government to intervene and take the control of

the province. The MQM and PPI continued to have clashes in the next two or three

years. Landhi, Malir and Saudabad were the most affected areas. On 18th July 1987

two people were killed and ten others injured in the clashes in Landhi Colony No. 6.

The indiscriminate use of force by security agencies against people aggravated the

situation. Police arrested many innocent people. 138 However, a significant feature of

the development was the mutually shared hatred on the part of the MQM and Jeya

Sindh towards the Punjabi establishment. Although Sindhi nationalists were critical

of Mohajir’s demand for a separate identity and took it as inimical to harmony in the

province. Nevertheless, both communities had contemptuous feelings against

Punjabis and Pathan alliance. Moreover, the Sindhi nationalists came closer to MQM

in a bid to counter the influence of the PPP in the province. Although both had

different motives behind this opposition but both had the blessing of military regime.

Therefore, division among the political forces in the Sindh helped the military

regime to perpetuate its rule. The MRD movement against military rule was more

vocal and had pronounced effects in the Sindh as compared to other provinces.” But

the absence of collaboration in addition to dexterity among numerous political

gatherings in the province of Sindh allowable the armed rulers to operate their

changes in the government’s welfares. Chandio quotes; “Zia encouraged the rise of

ethno-nationalist groups primarily, because political parties were not allowed to

function. In fact it has been suggested, that Zia deliberately encouraged the ethnic

and sectarian divisions to perpetuate his rule.” 139 It is a well- recognized fact that Zia

backed the formation of MQM exclusively with the impartial of discouragement his
 104

chief political adversary, the PPP. The MQM originated into existence at the period

when Sindh was in the middle of the movement for the refurbishment of equality in

1984. Zia also dated G.M. Syed, the front-runner of Sindhi separatist party Jeya

Sindh Mahaz, the pitiless opponent of the PPP.140

“The political range was in a way hopeful the Zia government to shadow the

oppressive strategies for continuance of his law in adding control the self-governing

militaries (political gatherings i.e. PPP besides other gatherings below the excellent

of MRD). Though he had often repeated his potential to grip elections but continued

unclear on particulars.141 He also strained to alleviate the strength of Sindhi

nationalism by spreading share for additional ten years. This rule of gulf in addition

to law on part of the administration shaped a political unpredictability in addition let

the Mohajirs to reinforce their location in the governments of Sindh. The field of

party a smaller amount elections in initial 1985, made the background the foremost

mouth of Pakistan politics. When the self-ruled armies are abridged by the ruling the

established direction then the traditional notice turn into more vivacious then people

progressively classify themselves with their specific area or cluster. They follow

their conferred welfares in addition challenge the procedure of nationwide adding. It

grows a considerate hazard to countrywide harmony also generates the glitches of

social disruptiveness. In the absenteeism of the prearranged political parties (symbol

of self-governing besides democratic procedure) the cultural originalities became

more marked, particularly in the city areas of Sindh (Karachi, Hyderabad). The

Mohajirs developed additional prearranged besides arisen as a prevailing power in

 105

the political stadium, beating the applicants of Jamat i Islami, Jamiat i Ulema i Islam

as well as Jamiat i Ulemai Pakistan.”

2.3.5 “Awami National Party (ANP)”

The Awami National Party linked with the headship to” Khan Abdul Ghaffar
“

Khan” who was a pre-partition Pashtun politician. He formed the NAP in 1956. After

his oust to kabal, party leadership occupied completely via his son Khan A. Wali

Khan who conquered the retitled party with his wife, Nasim Wali Khan. A

backbencher reportedly said that the “family factor” has reserved the party charming

more independent and operative. Confrontation among Asfandyar Wali Khan and

Begam Nasim Wali Khan resulted in resignations, dismissals and a restructuring of

the party.”

The ANP is considered as one of the foremost communist political party in

Pakistan. It had linked with the world renowned “Socialist International” (SI). ANP

was measured as strong supporter of the “Pashtun Nationalism”. Its major areas of

voting impact were Pashtun populated parts of the NWFP province, by means of

specific effect in Sindh beside Baluchistan. In 1986, the present ANP came into

being after the coalition of National Democratic Party (NDP) with several other

liberal political and indigenous autonomist groups. Khan Abdul Wali Khan the son

of Abdul Ghaffar Khan was nominated as its President while Rasul Bakhsh Palijo (a

Sindhi nationalist) was selected as Secretary General.

2.3.6 “Jamaat-i-Islami (JI)”

Jamaat-i-Islami was considered as the leading religious party-political

festivity in Pakistan. It was created by Syed Maududi on August 26, 1941, at Islamia
 106

Park Lahore. About 75 members attended its first convention and all of them titled as

the pioneer of the association. Molvi Naeem Siddiqui, Maulana Amin Ahsaan

Islaahi, Maulana Abul Hassan Ali Nudvi and Maulana Muhammad Manzoor

Naumanai were among the organizer member of Jamat i Islami. Maududi began his

career as a journalist in Jamiat ul Ulema e Hind’s jamaat wing in Delhi. He printed

two major books “Al Jihad fil Islam and Towards Understanding Islam”. Later book

developed in one of the energetic manuscripts for “Muslim Senior Matriculation

Learners” in all over India. In 1932, Maududi started his own publication Tarjuman

ul Quran. Nasr stated;

“Young Mowdudi established himself as a writer on Islamic topics. His book

on Jihad dealt with the topic from a new angle. He compared the Islamic rules
in Jihad with the modern laws of war and peace. This attracted the attention of
Mohammad Iqbal. Mawdudi criticized Jinnah and his movement for Pakistan.
The philanthropist objected to these political activities of Mawdudi, saying
that Dar us slam must remain apolitical. This happened in 1939, a year after
Iqbal’s demise.” 142

The main objects of Jamaat-i-Islami were to work in the direction of

formation of a government, constructed on the orders of “Sharia.” 143 Nasr stated;

“Jamaat-i-Islami took start as an Islamist social and political movement, which

desired to implement Sharia in the lives of Indian Muslims. In the early years of its

existence, the focus of this party was more on religious work.” 144Maududi had

defined that the partisan structure of Islam is constructed on three values; First,

Tawheed, Risalat and finally, Khilafat. Maududi elaborates;

“It is difficult to appreciate different aspects of an Islamic polity without fully

understanding these principles. This does not imply that Islam rejects the idea of a
democratic system; rather it demands that the system be framed with in the
worldview of Tawheed.”145
 107

“The Jamaat controlled by an Amir straight chosen by the members.

Nonentity can put onward his individual application. A group of the Shura Council

suggests three designations as applicants. The Amir Ampule employment an

inadequate Naib Amirs to assist him. Naib Amirs selected for the chief time in 1974

as the Amir’s errands augmented due to party rise. 146 Majlis e Shura is the prime

policy creation too administering body which is also directly elected by voting of

members. Rendering to the constitution21 the lowest number of Shurah members

should be fifty. At current the total quantity of Jamaat members are everywhere

38,000 than that of the Shura is seventy-five.147 The Amir also employs a Decision-

making Group of fifteen members from the Shura members. The day to

day management complete by the Secretary General who chosen by the Amir, in

discussion by the Majlis e Shura. Majlis e Shura is the greatest significant

component of the party. It brands policy choices and stretches general way. It also

permits the cheap then oversees spending. The bang of self-governing examiners is

yearly positioned already the Shura. The Shura conferences are chaired ended by the

Amir then the programmer equipped by the Secretary General. The Naib Amirs, the

Secretary General too the local Amirs are ex-officio memberships of the Shura. The

Amir jerry can asks the Shura to appraisal its choice but only when. If the similar

excellent occupied over by the mainstream of Shura memberships, the Amir will

have to receive it. The Amir container is accused by two third majorities of the Shura

members.148 The party prearranged at four heights; nationwide, local, local besides

area. Nearby is a Bait ul Maal at all periods which is beneath the separate Amirs. The

proceeds arises from gifts, Zakat, Sadqaat, charities ended by the minor Bait ul
 108

Maals, rummage sale of books also magazines, profits from party chattels, etc. It is

requisite for all memberships to stretch their Zakaat, Ushar too Sadqaat to their party.

Sovereign outside examiner chosen by the Majlis e Shura. The standards in addition

procedure for flattering a gathering associate is extended too boring. The party

receives only those people who are working Muslims then evade noticeable

iniquities. His bases of income should not be connected to attention, hard snacks,

Zina, humming then bopping, forced Shahadat, corruption then betting. 149 There are

three phases to be traversed for some complete member. The party retains an

appreciation on those who empathize with it. These baptized Hamdard. If a Hamdard

announces that he copiously approves with the party sequencer, he alumni to the

grouping of Mutefiq. When the party induced that a Mutefiq is fully watchful of

Sharia in adding to his revenue is from spotless bases, he measured for filled

association.

The Jamaat thus develops a carefully join body. Some spectators trust that its

squad founded construction is alike to that of the collectivist gatherings. 150 Maulana

Kawthar Niazi was a foremost associate of the Jamaat till 1965. He submissive when

the party obvious to sustenance Ms. Fatima Jinnah as a top-level candidate in

contradiction of Ayub Khan. While departure the Jamaat, he wrote,” After inflowing

this party, it is not laid-back to authorization it. Dealings, business welfares, and

salaries in addition draws built on these three developed manacles that are

problematic to disruption.”151 It is relevant to reference that some associates of the

Jamaat did not orientation in its arrangement. Islami Jamiat e Tulba is the student

annex of the party that is active in colleges then universities. In the 1960’s in
 109

addition 1970’s it careful to be the plant sales opening of the party. It also developed

recognized for its policy of vigilantism as it disparate inter fraternization of two

genders, melodic purposes, bopping etc. in educational institutions. Jamiat

management designated by the students in addition their cream of the yield retain in

communication with the get-together. Shabab e Milli is the youth section of the party

discrete the precincts. Individuals up to the phase of thirty five can be its affiliates.

The Amir engages its guidance. These two sections are the main fonts of Jamaal’s

street power. With their help, large gage protests then public meetings can be

prearranged at short sign. There is a female annex in the Jamaat which has its own 25

member robust Majlis e Shura. The Shura, similar its masculine complement,

designated for a retro of three years. The female extension has its own Typist

General who chosen by the Amir.152 The Jamaat entitlements to have a “Minorities

Wing” for the Non-Muslim sections in Pakistan but stated in the arrangement of the

meeting.

The Jamaat-i-Islami contrasting the formation of Pakistan on the pulverized

that if recognized it would be earthly in addition not an Islamic national.”153The

Jamaat did not competition the 1946 elections while the Muslim League retrieved its

applicants then gained a quantity of chairs. Jamaat-i-Islami was motionless very new

besides not prepared sufficient to competition votes at the nationwide level. The

formation of Pakistan only if superior working interplanetary for the spiritual parties.

The Jamaat-i-Islami, in specific, was in the frontline for the introduction of Islamic

sections in the constitution of this new state. In this second point of its expansion, the

Jamaat was more self-possessed about its separate of completing Sharia in Pakistan
 110

broad political adventure. The Jamaat prevented Pakistanis to yield oath of

faithfulness to the national pending it developed Islamic, quarreling that a Muslim

might in clear integrity render loyalty only to God.154 The Jamaat was now vigorously

employed to Islamize the state of Pakistan. It petitioned for the acceptance of the

Objectives Resolve by the Pakistani parliament. 155 In 1951, the Jamaat accepted its

strategy of action which comprised: Improvement the lifetime then minds of separate

Muslims; Group and exercise of good men; Social improvement then Improvement

of the government besides political construction. However the religious features

were still significant, politics was now very much share of the strategy of act. In

early fifties, Jamaat launch a movement against Ahmadi section and changed its

strategy about its old ideologies. Various others religious parties supported the

Jamaat and she adopted very strict policy to counter the Ahmadi Sect. 156The anti-

Ahmadi movement of 1953 developed so vehement that paramilitary law had to be

compulsory in Lahore. The Militia officer Azam Khan had detained Maududi and

Rahim ud Din Khan chastised him to death for troublemaking. Later, the death

condemnation overlooked by the plea in the court, but in the petition course Maududi

had previously consumed two years in custodial.

“In 1956, throughout a fifteen days long lengthy conferences, the opinion of

argument was whether spiritual effort should take superiority over political effort or

not. The traditional annex of the Jamaat, ran by Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi

supposed that spiritual work was more significant. Mawdudi supposed that politics

was similarly significant then that Sharia could not be imposed without haughty

political influence. There were extended in addition animated debates. Mawdudi’s

 111

location in the party had become stronger after serving two years in prison. He

definite that a result should be taken in the exposed by a display of hands. He stroked

self-confident that very rare can compete with his stance agreeably. Mawdudi’s

understands overcome to fifty-six important members of the party disparate him had

to leave.157

Jamaat-i-Islami’s association with numerous governments in Pakistan has

been altering. In the start the governments were doubtful of the gathering as it had

opposite the formation of Pakistan. “Liaquat Ali Khan the first Prime Minister of

Pakistan, wanted nothing government officials to develop memberships of this

party.”158Jamaat’s part in the fierce clatters in Lahore in 1953 supported the doubt

that it did not poverty a steady Pakistan. Pakistani military founding till that opinion

was mainly earthly in viewpoint then a military court gave the passing ruling to

Maududi. The first constitution of Pakistan was approved after accepting many of the

demands of the JI. Maududi recommended the constitution and claimed it “a victory

for Islam.”159 In 1958, JI made an alliance with Muslim League (Q) and Nizam i

Islami party. The alliance destabilized the premiership of Iskander Mirza and

Pakistan returned to Martial Law. Riaz stated;

“President Field Marshal Ayub Khan was liberal in his outlook. He

wanted a modern and progressive Pakistan free from the control of
clergy. He passed Family Laws Ordinance which, inter alia, said that no
Muslim male could marry more than once except under certain explicit
conditions. These included death of first wife or long ailment or lack of
issue. However, if the wife gave permission in writing, her husband
could marry again.” 160
 112

The Jamaat opposite the decree in 1962, a rally of this party excited upon in

Lahore besides one member slayed. The Jamaal’s political activities debarred, for a

while, in 1964. In 1965 the Jamaat categorical to sustenance Ms. Fatimah Jinnah in

contrast to Ayub Khan in the presidential elections. This finished its bond with the

administration not as good as. In his enthusiasm to oust Ayub Khan, Mawdudi

progressively mentioned to parity and fewer to Islam. The pro government group of

Ulema condemned Mawdudi for secondary the application of a woman to develop

president of Pakistan. 161 By the end of 1969, the Jamaat-i-Isami was organizing a

major “campaign for the defense of philosophy of Pakistan, which it supposed was

below threat from disbelieving collectivists then secularists.” 162

JI took part in general election of 1970. Its political podium supported

political liberty of the boonies plus Islamic law founded on the “Quran and

Sunnah.”163 Just before the election, Nasrullah Khan left the coalition leaving JI to

contest in contradiction of the PPP then the Awami League. The party had an

unsatisfactory performance when it bagged only 04 seats in the National Meeting

besides same figure in the Provincial Assembly.164 PPP won the election which was

muscularly conflicting by JI who supposed that PPP and its socialist beliefs were a

“threat to Islam.”165Soon afterward the 1977 votes, the JI with other disapproval

political parties launched a mass program in contradiction of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto

alleging that the election engineered. In those elections JI won 09/200 seats so she

considered the election rigged. Maududi named on Islamist Gatherings to launch a

movement of “civil defiance”. JI assisted the PNA to oust Bhutto besides

encountered with Zia on the nocturnal beforehand Bhutto hanged. 166

 113

“JI was the only political party to offer Zia consistent support and was
rewarded with jobs for tens of thousands of Jamaat activists and
sympathizers, giving Zia's Islamic agenda power long after he died.” 167

The Jamaat’s relationship with General Zia’s military regime was friendly

and three senior members of the Jamaat developed priests in the cabinet. This

presented that the Jamaat’s avowed policy of backup equality then opposite military

law had been cooperated. Though, JI did not donate in the MRD besides PPP

Crusade in contradiction of Zia. JI contribute in election 1988 beneath the banner of

Islami Jamhori Ittihad touching Pakistan People's Party but could not secure

sufficient seats in National Assembly.

Conclusion

The party politics during 1947 to 1985 was at on its peak. Pakistan Muslim

League the sole party in 1947 divided into dozens of factions in the next thirty-eight

years and turned into a drawing-room party by 1985, which made it extremely

unpopular among the masses. National Awami Party developed as the most

prominent political party in the NWFP but failed to make an impact at the national

level. Although it played an important role as a coalition partner at the center but was

forced to support other parties for keeping itself in power. PPP came into being in

1967 and within a small period emerged as a big political party, first in West

Pakistan and then during the 1970s, in the remainder of Pakistan. MQM had its roots

in Sindh and soon became the King’s party at both the center and the provincial

levels. Its regular quota of 20 to 25 seats in the National Assembly always played a

crucial role in helping to form many governments at the center. During this period,
 114

religious political parties could not get proper space in the political arena of Pakistan

and they played a limited part in Pakistani politics. Jamaat-i-Islami changed its

stance about the creation of Pakistan but could not get popular support from masses.

Jamiat Ulma e Islam became divided into two factions and contested almost all the

elections but could not get create enough space for a strong role in national politics.

Although religio-political parties tried to get attention of masses by making religious

alliances but people were not ready to trust them. Unfortunately, from 1947 to 1985

two Martial Laws take 22 years from 38 years and only one political government of

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto could complete its tenure which weakened the political and

democratic system of Pakistan.

 115

References and Notes

1
M. Weiner., The Politics of Scarcity: Public Pressure and Political Response in India (Chicago:
Chicago University Press.1962), 32.
2
From 1947 to 1958, till the imposition of first Martial Law by Ayub Khan.
3
Liaquat Ali Khan, Khawaja Nazim ud Din, Muhammad Ali Bogra, Ch. M. Ali, Hussain Shaheed
Suharwardi, I I Chandrigar, Faroze Khan noon were the Prime Minister who ruled in this period.
4
Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinah and Khawaja Nazim ud Din, Malik Ghulam Muhammad and
Major General Sikandar Mirza total five Governor General.
5
General Isikandar Mirza who after the constitution of 1956 assumed the charge of President
6
General Ayub Khan from 1958 to 1969 and General Zia ul Haq 1977 to 1988.
7
S. P. Cohen., The idea of Pakistan (Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 2004), 45.
8
Nazeer Ahmad, Political Parties in Pakistan: A Long Way Ahead. 31.
9
A. Jafri., The Political Parties of Pakistan (Karachi: Royal Book Company, 2002), xxi.
10
Hassan Askari Rizvi., Military, State and Society in Pakistan. 212.
11
A. Jafri., The Political Parties of Pakistan, xix.
12
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/party-politics. Accessed on 4th June 2018.
13
Mary Hawkes Worth and Mauriee Kogan, Eds. Encyclopedia of Government and Politics vol. 1
(London: Rutledge, 1992), 27.
14
https://www.yourdictionary.com/party-politics. Accessed on August 2017.
15
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-
d&q=playing+party+politics&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjLw82 CqarhAhV65eAKHWm7C N4Q1
QIoAnoECAoQAw&biw=1366&bih=65 Accessed on August 2018.
16
Nazeer Ahmad., Political Parties in Pakistan: A Long Way Ahead. 37.
17
Ibid.
18
Lawrence Ziring., Pakistan in the Twentieth Century: A Political History (Karachi: Oxford
University Press, 1997), 72.
19
Mushtaq Ahmad., Government and Politics in Pakistan (Karachi: National Publishing House, 1963),
140.
20
Ibid. 144.
21
Joseph La Palombara, and Myron Weiner., Political Parties and Political development. 3.
22
G. W. Chaudhury., Constitutional Development in Pakistan (London: Longman, 1969), 43.
23
K. K. Aziz., Party Politics in Pakistan 1947-1958 (Islamabad: National Commission on Historical
and Cultural Research, 1976), 211.
24
Ibid.
25
Safdar Mehmood., Muslim League ka Daure Hukoomat 1947-54 (Lahore: Jang Publishers, 1993),
124.
26
Ibid.128.
27
K. K. Aziz., Party Politics in Pakistan 1947-1958 (Islamabad: National Commission on Historical
and Cultural Research, 1976), 211.
28
Sajid Mahmood Awan., Political Parties and Political Development in the Punjab 1988-1999 (Ph.
D. Dissertation, Quaid-e-Azam University Islamabad. 2008)
29
Ibid.
30
K. K .Aziz., Party Politics in Pakistan 1947-1958, 263.
31
Ibid. 267.
32
Hassan Askari Rizvi., Military, State and Society in Pakistan. 212.
33
Ibid. 213.
34
Ibid.
35
Sajid Mahmood., Political Parties and Political Development in the Punjab 1988-1999, 237.
36
Safdar Mehmood., Muslim League ka Dor e Hakomat, 211.
37
M. A. Khan., We've Learnt Nothing from History, Pakistan: Politics and Military Power (Karachi:
Oxford University Press. 2005), 432.
38
M. Hassan., Causes of Military Intervention in Pakistan: A Revisionist Discourse, Pakistan Vision,
12(2), 2011), 389.
39
K. B. Sayyed., Collapse of Parliamentary Democracy in Pakistan (Middle East Journal, 13(4)
1959), 89.
 116

40
Safdar Mehmood., Muslim League ka Dor e Hakomat, 2.
41
he cabinet consisted on “three members from Bengal, four from Punjab, one each from Sindh and
N.W.F.P. Later, two more members each from Bengal and Punjab and one from N.W.F.P. were also
included.”
42
N. Kiran., Political Stability in Pakistan: Regionalism and Role of Cabinet (1947-1958) Pakistan
Vision, 13(1) 2012), 208-209.
43
Ibid. 208.
44
P. B. Soomro., Nawab Mushtaq Ahmad Gurmani's Role in the Politics of Pakistan (Pakistan Journal
of History & Culture, 27(2), 2006), 69.
45
Muhammad Ali Bogra announced his famous formula in the Constituent Assembly, by which seats
in the National Assembly will to be allocated on the basis of population while Senate will be the
symbol of equal representation from all the five units. While to combine, each wings would have
equal representation. This formula was appreciated by a wide section of people from both wings, but
the Punjabi members, rejected it. Their understanding was that unless West Pakistan was made into a
unitary structure, Bengalis, in alliance with Sind and the North-West Frontier Province, would
dominate the Central Government.”
46
Name of Suhrawardy was also suggested for new Governor General in the Cabinet meeting with
Sikandar Mirza. While in the voting, there was tie and the deciding vote was of Ayub Khan in favour
of Sikandar Mirza.” For further detail see N. Kiran, Political Stability in Pakistan: Regionalism and
Role of Cabinet (1947-1958) 210.
47
Lawranc Ziring., Pakistan in the Twentieth Century: A Political History, 232.
48
Umbreen Javaid and Amir Latif., Historical Analysis of Successive Governments in Pakistan: A
History of First Six Decades, 1947-2007, (Pakistan Vision Vol. 18 No. 1)
49
Ibid.
50
M. Hassan., Causes of Military Intervention in Pakistan: A Revisionist Discourse, 387.
51
K. K. Aziz., Party Politics in Pakistan 1947-1958, 344.
52
Hassan Askari Rizvi., Military, State and Society in Pakistan, 321.
53
M. M. Mirza., Dimention of Pakistan Movement, (Lahore: Fateh Publishers, 2000), 67.
54
This ordinance had empowered “Major General Umrao Khan of the East Pakistan High Command
to take necessary steps to curb smuggling. With his effective actions, he bought smuggling under
control. He also wanted to take action against those politicians who were behind this smuggling.”
55
Mushtaq Ahmad, “Government and politics in Pakistan.” 233.
56
Ibid.
57
Ibid.
58
M. Ahmed, “Legitimacy Crisis in Pakistan, A Comparative Study of Political Behavior,” (Journal of
Political Studies, 12, 2007). 8.
59
Ayub Khan., Friends not master. 244.
60
Hamid Khan., Constitutional and Political History of Pakistan, (Karachi: Oxford University Press,
2001). 284.
61
Shafqat Saeed., Civil Military Relations in Pakistan: from Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to Benazir Bhutto,
(Colorado: Westview Press, 1997).21.
62
Rafique Afzal., Political Parties in Pakistan 1947-1958, (Islamabad: National Commission on
Historical and Cultural Research, 1976), 88-89.
63
Ibid., 88-89.
64
Mushtaq Ahmad., Government and politics in Pakistan. 213.
65
Qudratullah Shahab., Shahab nama. (Lahore: Book Centre, 2004), 319.
66
M.Abid, & S. Qalb-i-Abid., Finding Balance between Unity and Diversity: A Major Challenge to
Democracy, Governance and National Unity, (Lahore: Punjab University Press. 2013), 28.
67
Shafqat Saeed., Civil Military Relations in Pakistan: from Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to Benazir Bhutto, 43.
68
S. A. Zaidi., State, Military and Social Transition: Improbable Future of Democracy in Pakistan,
(Economic and Political Weekly, 40(49) 2005), 5175.
69
Arbab Sikandar Khan, Ghos Baksh Bazzinjo and Khan Abdul Qayyum Khan” were included in
Central Cabinet.
70
Zahid Hussain Anjum., Election 1977, (Lahore: Maktaba imtiaz urdu bazar, 2001), 478.
71
A. Kapur, Pakistan in Crisis, (London: Routledge, 1991), 298.
 117

72
Jehangir Bader., Political Leadership: A Case Study of Benazir Bhutto, (Ph.D thesis, Pakistan Study
Centre Punjab University Lahore, 2013), 4-5
73
Ibid.,
74
Movement for the Restoration of Democracy, pamphlet published by Pakistan Democratic Forum,
May 1983, 7.
75
NDP, TI, JUI, PDP and Muslim League were the part of PNA.
76
M. Ahmad., Legitimacy Crisis in Pakistan, A Comparative Study of Political Behavior, 9.
77
A Federal Minister, or Minister of State, an Advisor or Provincial Minister any portfolio.
78
Jehangir Bader., Political Leadership: A Case Study of Benazir Bhutto, 8.
79
Benazir Bhutto, as co-chairperson of PPP, “challenged all such restricting provisions of the Political
Parties Act as unconstitutional and in violation of the fundamental right of freedom of association
under the constitution. As mentioned already, the Supreme Court clearly held that the Constitution
guaranteed every citizen (if not in service of Pakistan) the right to form a political party, and could
only be subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by the law in the interest of the sovereignty
or integrity of Pakistan. Compulsory registration of political parties was declared as a violation of
Article17 of the Constitution for placing unreasonable restrictions on the fundamental right of
association, accompanied by penal consequences.”
80
Amna Mehmood., Regional Political Parties: Challenge to Political Stability of Pakistan, (Pakistan
Vision Vol. 15 No.2), 8.
81
Report of Election Commission of Pakistan, appendix 1.
82
Ibid.
83
Safdar Mehmood., Pakistan: Political Roots and Development 1947-1999, (Karachi: Oxford
University Press, 2010), 18.
84
Mohammad Waseem and Mariam Mufti., Political Parties in Pakistan. Organization and Structure,
(Lahore: Lahore University of Management Science, 2010), 36.
85
Ibid., 17.
86
Ishitaq Hussain Quraishi., Struggle for Pakistan, (Karachi: University of Karachi Press. 1969), 33.
87
Ibid., 23.
88
Syed Hasan Riaz., Pakistan Naguzeer Tha, (Urdu), (Karachi: University of Karachi Press, nd.), 167.
89
Ibid., 154.
90
Safdar Mahmood., Pakistan: Rule of Muslim League and Inception of Democracy, (Lahore: Jang
Publishers, 1997), 138-139.
91
Ibid., 138.
92
Ibid.,
93
Ibid.,
94
Ayesha Jalal., The Sole Spokesman: Jinnah, the Muslim League and the Demand for Pakistan,
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 179.
95
Mushtaq Ahmad., Government and Politics in Pakistan, 138.
96
Ibid.,
97
Ibid.,
98
Professor Ghafoor Ahmad., Aur Election Na Hoo sakay, (Lahore: Jang Publishers, 1990), 126.
99
A. B. S. Jafri., The Political Parties of Pakistan, (Karachi: Royal Book Company, 2002), 89.
100
Hussain Haqqani., Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military, (Lahore: Vanguard books (Pvt) Ltd.
2005), 281.
101
Safdar Mehmood., Pakistan: Rule of Muslim League and Inception of Democracy, 140.
102
Ibid.
103
A. B. S. Jafri., The Political Parties of Pakistan, 91.
104
Philip E. Jones., The Pakistan People’s Party: Rise to Power, (Karachi: Oxford University Press,
2003), 298.
105
Sayed Wiqar Ali Shah., Pakistan People’s Party: The Twin Legacies of Socialism and Dynastic
Rule, in S. Mitra, M. Enskat, C. Speib, (eds.), Political Parties in South Asia. London: Praeger
Publishers, 2004). 158.
106
H. A. Rizvi., Pakistan People's Party: The First Phase: 1967-71, (Karachi: Progressive Publishers,
1973), 1-30
107
David Robertson., The Penguin Dictionary of Politics, (Middlesex: Penguin Books Limited, 1985),
303.
 118

108
H. A. Rizvi., Pakistan People's Party: The First Phase: 1967-71, 26.
109
Foundation Meeting Document No 4 of the Pakistan People‟s Party, (Lahore: Masood Printers,
1967), 12.
110
The famous agreement signed between India and Pakistan after the 1965 War under the auspices of
USSR.
111
Sayed Wiqar Ali Shah., Pakistan People’s Party: The Twin Legacies of Socialism and Dynastic
Rule, 158.
112
Ibid., 159.
113
Syed Akmal Hussain Shah., Ideological Orientation of Pakistan People’s Party: Evolution,
Illusion and Reality, Journal of the Research Society of Pakistan, Volume No. 55, Issue No. 2 (July -
December, 2018), 28.
114
www.ppp.org.pk. Accessed on 4th January 2018.
115
Syed Akmal Shah., Pakistan People’s Party: The Twin Legacies of Socialism and Dynastic Rule,
156.
116
Ibid.
117
H. A. Rizvi., Pakistan People's Party: The First Phase: 1967-71, 1-30
118
Ibid.
119
Ibid.
120
www.ppp.org.pk. Accesses on 15th July 2018.
121
Syed Akmal Hussain., Pakistan People’s Party: The Twin Legacies of Socialism and Dynastic
Rule, 160.
122
Ali Raza., Election manifesto of the Pakistan People's Party, (Lahore: Classic Publishers,1970), 4-
14
123
Philip E. Jones., The Pakistan People’s Party: Rise to Power, 298.
124
Syed Akmal Hussain., Pakistan People’s Party: The Twin Legacies of Socialism and Dynastic
Rule, 165.
125
Ali Raza., Election manifesto of the Pakistan People's Party, 4-14
126
S. S. Hussain., Lengthening Shadows: The Story of Pakistan's Politics and Politicians from Advent
of Pakistan to Fall of Ayub, (Karachi: Mujahid Publications, 1970), 203.
127
Syed Akmal Hussain., Pakistan People’s Party: The Twin Legacies of Socialism and Dynastic
Rule, 170.
128
K. Bahadur., Democracy in Pakistan: Crises and Conflicts, (Dehli: Har-Anand Publications, 1998),
155.
129
Syed Akmal Hussain., Pakistan People’s Party: The Twin Legacies of Socialism and Dynastic
Rule, 167.
130
Menakashi Gopinath., Pakistan in Transition: Political Development and Rise to Power of
Pakistan People’s Party, (New Delhi: Manohar Book Service, 1975), 85.
131
Syed Akmal Hussain., Pakistan People’s Party: The Twin Legacies of Socialism and Dynastic
Rule, 172.
132
I. H. Malik., State and civil society in Pakistan, politics of authority, ideology and ethnicity,
(London: Macmillan Press.1997), 44.
133
I. Farooq., Realism and practicalism, (Karachi: Logical Printer, 2003), 213.
134
F. Haq., Rise of the MQM in Pakistan, Politics of Ethnic Mobilization, (Asian Survey, 35 (11),
1995). 990 – 1004.
135
Ibid., 996.
136
Ibid., 998.
137
A. Hassan., The Sohrab Goth Massacre. (Herald, February 18, 1987), 74-79.
138
M. Ziauddin, & Z. Hussain., Can Pakistan be South Korea – The war within, (Herald, August 18,
1987), 50-70.
139
A. A. Chandio., An analysis of Jeeya Sindh Tahreek as an ethno-nationalist movement of Pakistan,
(Pakistan Perspectives, 14 (1), 2009), 95-111.
140
Ibid., 104.
141
W. I. Richter., Pakistan in 1984 – Digging In, (Asian Survey, 25(2), 1985), 145-149.
142
Sayyed Vali Reza Nasr., Vanguard of Islamic Revolution-Jamaat e Islami of Pakistan, (New York:
I.B. Tauris Publishers London, 1994), 28.
 119

143
Seyyed Vali Reza Nasr., Islamic oppositions to the Islamic state: the jamaat e islami, 1977-1988,
(International journal of Middle East Studies, 25(2)), 261-283.
144
Sayyed Vali Reza Nasr., Vanguard of Islamic Revolution-Jamaat e Islami of Pakistan, 28.
145
Sayyed Vali Reza Nasr., Mawdudi & the making of Islamic Political Revivalism, 44.
146
Party Constitution, 25.
147
Ibid., 61.
148
Ibid., 33.
149
Ibid., 16.
150
Hussain Haqqani., Pakistan between mosque and military, (Lahore: Vanguard Books Lahore,
2005), 22.
151
Kawthar Niazi., Jamaat e Islami Awami Adalat Mein, (Lahore: Qaumi Kutab Khana, 1974), 23.
152
Party Constitution, 55.
153
Mohammad Munir., From Jinnah to Zia, (New Delhi: Akbar Publishing House, 1981), 33.
154
Sayyed Vali Reza Nasr., Mawdudi & the making of Islamic Political Revivalism, (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1996), 42.
155
This resolution was adopted in February 1949. Article 6 of this resolution says; “Muslims will be
enabled to organize their lives in accordance with the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out
in the Quran and Sunnah. This resolution was placed in the preamble of the 1956 constitution of
Pakistan. In 1985, when General Mohammad Zia ul Haq was the President, the resolution was made
part of the constitution. Thus its adoption in 1949 had long-term consequences. These efforts were in
accordance with the Jamaat slogan. The country is God’s, rule must be by God’s law; the government
should be that of God’s pious men.” Also see Hussain Haqqani, “Pakistan between mosque and
military, 23.
156
The “Ahmadis called themselves Muslims but believed that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad , a 19th century
preacher, was a prophet. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad said that he was Zilli Nabi and also claimed to be the
promised Mahdi. Ahmadis were registered as a separate sect of Muslims in 1901, at their own request.
Mainstream Muslim sects and religious parties considered Ahmadis to be infidels” (Kafir).
157
Sayyed Vali Reza Nasr., Vanguard of Islamic revolution, 39.
158
Hussain Haqqani., Pakistan between mosque and military, 28.
159
Sayyed Vali Reza Nasr., Mawdudi and Islamic Revivalism, 44.
160
Riaz Mohammad Khan., 251.
161
Sayyed Vali Reza Nasr., Vanguard of Islamic Revolution, 155.
162
Haqqani., Pakistan between Mosque and Military, 46.
163
There would be separation of the powers (judiciary and legislature); basic rights for minorities
(such as equal employment opportunities and the Bonus Share Scheme allowing factory workers to
own shares in their employers' companies); and a policy of strong relationships with the Muslim
world.”
164
Sayyed Vali Reza Nasr., Mawdudi and Islamic Revivalism, 211.
165
Hussain Haqqani., Pakistan between Mosque and Military, 69.
166
Ibid., 139.
167
Ibid.
 120

Chapter 3

Party Politics in the Reign of M. Khan Junejo 1985- 1988

This chapter deals with the Zia ul Haq era with major emphasis on the post-

1985 period. In the beginning, most of the political gatherings welcomed the military

rule and extended their support to the dictatorship. They considered it a good

alternate to the bad governance of the Peoples Party but later only a few political

parties supported Zia. Maximum number of them joined the “Movement for

Rehabilitation of Democracy” which started the resistance movement to send the

army back into their barracks but it was not successful. The main problem was their

disunity and disorganization and army used all this for its own motives. The chapter

explores why Movement for Restoration of Democracy couldn’t attain its goals.

How was the “doctrine of necessity” by judiciary, proved supportive, unsupportive

for the democratic future of Pakistan? Why General Zia decided to hold the local

body polls on time while National polls were not? It further seeks why Zia decided to

hold general polls on a non-party basis? The Chapter further discusses political

history with special orientation to process of democratization in Pakistan from 1985

to 1988. It also outlines the factors that tilted the political power in favor of the

establishment.

3.1 Pakistan under Zia ul Haq

Zia detained command on July 05, 1977 through imposing Military Rule.

Constitution was suspended; all Assemblies (National besides Provincial) and Senate

were dismissed but Fazal Elahi Chaudhary continued as President. 1 Chairperson PPP
 121

Nusrat Bhutto filed an application in Supreme Law Court and defied the validity of

Martial Law. 2 Supreme Law Court decreed that the imposition of Military Rule was

lawful on the foundation of “Doctrine of Necessity.”3 Supreme Court revised that

“the political developments subsequent to the elections of 1977 had brought the

nation on the brink of collapse.” 4 Further it stated that the Constitution did not tender

the solution so in these circumstances the Martial Law was valid. 5 Zia promised

elections and restoration of democracy within 90 days and no restrictions on the

authority of the judiciary. But later he took the plea that all political leaders had a

word with him and they insisted on delaying elections. He banned political activities

and postponed elections without giving a schedule. 6

Zia distorted the spirit of 1973 Constitution by introducing several critical

amendments. He attempted to exclude the culture of partisan festivities by means of

Article 14 of the “Provisional Constitutional Order” 1979 correlated to registering of

political parties. That article allowed those political parties to partake in political

activities that had registered themselves by October 11, 1979. It further stated that

after the issuing of this order, no political festivity should be made except the prior

approval from the Election Commission. That article authorized the President of

Pakistan to ban any political party which he deemed was working against the spirit

of Islam or national interests in consultation with the Election Commission. It may

be pointed out that in 1987 this Article was denied by Benazir in Supreme Court and

on June 20, 1988 Court stated it null and void. Political parties greeted the verdict.

This verdict enabled the democracy to grow and make possible the sense of publics’

partaking in the government apparatus.7 The second PCO of 1981 produced more
 122

stern amendments in the Constitution. The PCO contained 17 articles.8 The Article

six of the Constitution relating to nullification of the Constitution or attempt to do so

through exercise of power or by any other ultra-constitutional means was

suspended.9 The paramount reason of amendments in the 1973 Constitution was to

make presidency the core of authority.

Zia and politicians had differences on the nature of government. Zia deemed

Islamic democracy as the proper mode of government while politicians endorsed the

Parliamentary system. Neither politicians nor Martial Law authorities gave any

regard to put the ideals of democracy into action. 10 Zia elected himself as the Chief

Executive for next term through the “referendum” conducted on December 19, 1984.

In the questionnaire of referendum it was asked from voters: Do they endorse the

process of Islamization? ‘Yes’ meant vote for Zia as President. Majority marked

‘yes’ which was construed as mandate to Zia being President for following five

years; a unique method of election indeed. 11 “Presidential referendum was given

constitutional cover and Zia was permitted to hold the office of COAS following the

termination of Martial Law.” 12 Press and opposition leaders strongly deplored the

referendum.

Under the supervision of President Zia, the elections were conducted in

February 1985 on party-less base. Before elections, political activities were restricted

under Martial Law. All candidates were advised to participate in election

independently without show affiliation with any political party. On March 02, 1985

President Zia modified the Composition through an ordinance before the first

meeting of Parliament. This ordinance was named “Revival of the Constitution of

 123

1973 Order” (RCO).13That Ordinance made important withdrawals from its original

grounds and notions. According to this RCO more than 65 Articles of the

constitution were amended. These modifications were grounded on Gen. Zia’s

legitimate strategy which he proclaimed in August 12, 1983. 14After promulgation of

RCO, all ruling powers were shifted to President. The Head of Cabinet who was the

representative of masses was downgraded to a submissive and secondary position.

General Zia declared it balance of power between two premiers. 15 He argued that

these powers were bestowed to President in 1973 constitution in an insulting

manner.16 I would use new powers when government, National Assembly and Head

of Cabinet of Pakistan lose the confidence of common public. 17

The Ordinance presented in National Assembly in October 19985 to make it

a portion of Composition. National Assembly approved that 8th Modification

unanimously and now President was empowered with the several authorities. 18 Now

President could nominate Prime Minister, Panel of judges of the Supreme Law

Court, Judges of Central Shariat Court, Judges of all High Courts, Military highest

Personal “Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (CJCSC) and Chiefs of Staff

of Armed Forces (CSAF).” The most important authority was that President could

terminate the Central government without consulting PREMIER and could dissolute

the Parliament.19 Through this alteration President was bestowed the power to ask

Premier for promulgation of Ordinances and he could request the Premier to take a

vote of sureness from Parliament. Through this amendment, strength of National

Assembly was also increased and it enlarged from 200 to 207. All administrative

power bestowed to President and Prime Minister was bounded to inform President
 124

before taking any administrative decision. The most crucial part of RCO was about

the military orders which Zia issued after imposing Martial Law. The Parliament

endorsed and reimbursed all verdicts of the military courts, ordinance of the

President, laws, Martial law’s regulations, endorsement of Presidential referendum

and all orders of issued from July 05, 1977 to September 13, 1985 the whole period

of Martial Law.20

After the alteration President become most powerful person and General Zia

established a National Security Council comprising 11 members21 to deal the matters

of National Security. The members of this committee were appointed by President.

After this amendment a quasi-parliamentary form of government was came into

being.

3.2 “Party Politics of Movement for the Rehabilitation of Democracy

(MRD)”
”

The antagonism political festivities designed a coalition named “Movement

for the Restoration of Democracy (MRD)” to launch a resistant movement against

tyrannical rule of General Zia. MRD had been a merger of nine political parties that

strongly opposed Zia’s regime.22 In 1984 Zia held referendum and MRD boycotted

it. In 1985 General Zia held poll and MRD again stayed away from these general

polls. Before election a meeting of MRD parties held in Lahore from September 14

to September 16 to discuss the strategy about elections. All political parties including

in this alliance, unanimously decided to not participate in these elections. They

argued that under the headship of military dictator conduct of clean and fair election

would not be conceivable. It was also decided that MRD parties would participate in
 125

next election collectively and their alliance would remain till after the formation of

government. Later another meeting of central council of MRD held on January 18,

1985 in which MRD decided that would not contest election under the umbrella of

dictatorship. All political parties would boycott the election till the lifting of Martial

Law. MRD parties would not accept the election results and people would reject the

polls.

The election held and voters turn-out was stunning.23 People participated in

these elections beyond the expectations of MRD. Some PPP’s leader also took part

in election and disrupted the party discipline. Christina Lamb, stated about the

boycott of election that

“PPP later admitted that boycott was a mistake, and when Zia
announced elections in 1988, Benazir was quick to announce their
participation on whatever basis.”24

Some prominent political leader criticized the boycott decision of MRD.

They argued that PPP and MRD this decision generate a space for Zia’s supporter

and they get a chance to enter in political system. But it was fact that the pressure on

Zia was still there that after boycott the election MRD could support the anti-

establishment candidates. Even General Zia gave instruction to Governor NWFP

about election and stated.

“Do not underestimate the opposition. Despite the boycott, they

will support anti-establishment candidates. We have to disqualify
some of these candidates otherwise the agitation will become
unbearable.”25

Women wing of this resistance movement was also very dynamic. The

female members of MRD including PPP collected the funds from people and
 126

distributed fruits and drinks to the political prisoner of MRD in jails. Mehnaz Rafi

the President of Women’s Action Form demonstrated in Lahore with more than two

hundred women worker against the illegal detention of PDA workers and

deteriorated dictatorship. Police used tear gas against them but they remained sustain

and could not disperses.26

Zia took severe steps against PPP’s workers and after Martial Law a big

number of workers left Pakistan and settled in England. During Martial Law regime

London became the center of political activities and several PPP leaders gathered

there. Mir Murtaza Bhutto was also one of them even when Benazir Bhutto exiled

she went to London and settled there. She started to lead the MRD movement from

London. On August 14, 1988 PPP and MRD scheduled enormous public meetings in

all over the country. PPP and its allies criticized Zia’s policies and stated that their

speeches were not against army. Their protest was only against the dictatorial rule.

MRD continued its protest against Zia regime till the death of Zia and participated in

election 1988 with passion.

3.3 Party-less Election and Emergence of the New Democracy

On the pressure of MRD, Zia announced the date of new election and after a

long period of dictatorship the lovers of democracy saw good news. The elections

were announced after nearly a decade so the people took much interest in it. To

avoid from involvement of political leadership the election were announced to hold

on non-party basis. Election Commission issued strict instruction for the participants.

No candidate was allowed to show his affiliation with any political party. The

contestants were prohibited to hold public meetings and the use of loud speaker was
 127

disallowed.27 PDA boycotted this election so the major political parties did not

participate in it so the famous and re-known politicians remained themselves aloof

from the election process. The contestants of this election were regional or local

personalities and mostly were selected by General Zia. The opposition considered

party less elections as an instrument of Zia to paint his rule as democratic and not to

foster the civilian leadership.28 The most of political parties including MRD

boycotted this election but later they realized their mistake and took part in the bye

elections.29

According to the schedule, non-party based elections were conducted on

February 25 & 28, 1985 separately. On March 20, 1985 the inaugural meeting of the

newly formed Parliament was summoned. From then to onward General Zia expertly

launched horse-trading regarding the office of Prime Ministers and the Chief

Ministers. According to RCO, President Zia selected Junejo for the premier house.

The new Prime Minister was from Sindh and he was a gentleman, veteran, humble

and senior politician.30 Although the representative of the National Assembly were

elected through non- party base elections; Junejo evolved a group entitled as the

Muslim League Parliamentary Party (MLPP) which was later joined by bulk of

MNAs belonging to the Punjab, besides an Opposition Parliamentary group was also

formed. Zia expounded that although he was opposed to the party government but he

agreed to the formation of the MLPP in order to provide chance to the Parliamentary

democracy. Later the Senate was elected through Electoral College which constituted

the members of the Provincial Assemblies. 31

 128

Critics put up a theory around the notion of “invisible” power structure to

understand the politics of Zia. The thesis elucidated that factually Zia had produced

facade Parliamentary democracy with vital powers completely in his hand and least

effective powers embedded in the office of Prime Minister. They had put their points

in two steps. First; Zia picked up Junejo and he got elected to the National Assembly

as an individual rather than the member of Pakistan Muslim League (PML) which

was majority party in the Parliament. Junejo was junior partner to Zia in the business

of establishing facade democracy. Secondly; Zia did not renounce the office of

COAS even after assumed the portfolio of President through referendum. Through

amendments in the 1973 Constitution he created disequilibrium in the structure or

power between two premiers and then he armed himself with extended powers

through the amendments.32

President Zia conducted elections on non-party basis which showed his

political perception. In fact Zia realized this reality during the referendum that people

were with MRD and other political parties and they were not interested in military

rule. The successful boycott of referendum by MRD was creating an alarming

situation for the President. Therefore President Zia decided to go on non-party basis

elections. President Zia was also feeling threat of one more effective boycott which

could weaker his detested rule.33 The other main reason of party less election was the

attractiveness of PPP in common people. In party base election PPP could occupied

the Premier house which was unacceptable for Zia and last reason was that in party

less elections local and regional politicians become the member of house who were

considered non-committed and non-political and this type of people could easily
 129

control rather than politicians who were affiliated and committed with their political

affiliation and party’s thoughts and could not control easily. 34

In elections, feudal lords, waderaaz, sardars and heads of local political

parties participated enthusiastically. A large number of new elected representatives

were new entrant and most of them were unknown and common. 35 It was stunning

that a large numbers of voters came out and participated in election process and

unlike referendum the turnout of this election was satisfactory and more than 52

percent voters cast their votes.36 This turnout stunned every one even military itself

was not expecting such a response. Benazir Bhutto comments “The voting was a

resounding rejection of Martial Law and Zia’s policy of Islamization.”37

The President Zia was happy that people were supporting him and they

expressed their trust on government policies to refuse the boycott while political

parties including PPP and MRD take the participation of people in democratic

process as rejection of Zia rule. Most of the cabinet members 38 of President Zia lost

their seats even a large number of Majlis e Shora39 could not elect in this election.

The candidates supported by religious political parties also rejected by masses even

Jamaat e Islami could not get sufficient numbers of seats and she secured only 06

seats out of 61 nominated election candidates. 40 On the other side the candidates

backed by PPP leadership got 50 seats out of 52 total election candidates. 41 It was

obvious that elections were clean and fair and involvement and interference of

President Zia in this election could not trace. In fact President Zia has no need to

interfere in this election because he had already achieved his goal to force the PPP on

boycott.42 He has not political threat except from PPP which was on boycott so he
 130

remained impartial in this election and defeat of his Minister in this election was

proof of his impartiality. Secondly, President Zia was not eager to bring real

democracy in the country; he was just longed to get a democratic cover to show his

regime democratic.43

President Zia and his supporter were very pleased to see the results of

elections. The amazing turnout showed that masses had rejected the appeal of

boycott as well as MRD’s policies too. “Over twelve hundred candidate contested for

the 207 National Assembly seats for the Muslims.”44 The assurance of lifting Martial

Law encouraged the People to participate in election. This showed their attitude

towards democracy. They believe that election was the first step toward democratic

Pakistan rather it conducted on party-less basis. 45 According to Chandio,

“The convincing to voters by Candidates also played vital role in the participation. They used
their personal, brotherly, religious and ethnic relations to convince the people to cast the vote.
Some Waderras bought the votes from the local chiefs of clan and the little landowners. It was
one reason of turnout in Sindh province. The turnout changed between the Punjab and Sindh
also in the NWFP and Baluchistan. The landlord of the Punjab participated in the elections
themselves or put up the candidates on their own choice. The same position in NWFP, but it
was changed in Baluchistan and Sindh. The tribal chiefs of Baluchistan were not more
interested in the elections. And the landlord class of Sindh was divided into two camps. One
and large camp supported the line of MRD. And other camp was in trying to accommodate in
the proposed structure.”46

Elections 1985 were on non-party basis so the issue of political parties or

politics was not the agenda of election. Election contested on local issues and

politicians of district or regional level’s succeeded and filled the parliament house so

the sectarian and ethnic issues moved in central politics and they preferred to discuss

local issues in parliament rather than national and international policies. 47 It was

assumed that new Assembly would adopt the measures to Islamize the country but
 131

members of the Assembly did not discuss any agenda in Assembly except local

issues. According to Akhtar, “Elections primarily concerned with local issue and

seldom took up bigger national issue. Islam, Democracy, Martial Law, economy

foreign affairs, etc. was not part of electioneering. These elections reduced national

politics to municipal level.” 48

The social scientist and scholars were agreed on it that the party less election

left the destructive and negative impression on democratic system of Pakistan. It was

result of party less election that regional, ethnic and linguistic political groups

empowered. The PPI, Pushton Federation, Jiyay Sindh and Muttahida Qaumi

Movement were the instance of this type of political group who later played a key

role in the national politics of Pakistan. 49 Benazir Bhutto stated this situation in this

words that “The non-party elections held by the regime had furthered the country’s

fragmentation. By banning political parties, the regime forced candidates to

campaign not on a platform of political ideals, which transcended ethnic and regional

boundaries, but on the basis of individual identification. Vote for me, I am a Shiite

like you, candidate in these elections told their constituents. Vote for me, I am a

Punjabi.”50 Tahir quoted that “Opportunist local holders principally the land owning

rural class emerged victorious in the elections and the regime was more than happy

to make them a junior partner in the power game at center and provinces levels.”51

3.4 Junejo as Prime Minister and Gradual Rise of Differences b/w the Two

Premiers

Afterward election, President Zia nominated M. K. Junejo as Head of Cabinet on

March 23, 1985. After assuming power Junejo pledged to the nation for restoration
 132

of pure democracy on political party basis. He also expressed his contemplate for

abolishing of Martial Law, justice for all without any discrimination, rule of

Supreme Law in the country and end of sectarianism and corruption. 52 He stimulated

the political parties to reunify themselves. Junejo assumed the power as premiership

and soon after passing the Political Parties Act from the Parliament, a call sent to the

President to end Martial Law. He further said; “a political party would be formed

which would be the governmental.”53 In March 1985, about 56 alterations were

brought in the Constitution of 1973, amongst them only one was related with Islam

or Islamic system of administration which showed the seriousness of government

about the imposition of Islam as supreme law of the country. All other alterations

were made just for enhanced the powers of President Zia. According to amendments

the fundamental civil rights were adjourned without any say and role. 54 The foremost

assignment for the National Assembly was to incorporate the RCO in constitution of

1973. Some key amendments were integrated in shape of eighth amendment in

Constitution. In addition, President Zia also tried to recommend the formation of

National Security Council as a component of Constitution but took it back as it was

unanimously vetoed by the Lower House of Parliament.55

On the demand of political parties especially on the request of PM Junejo, on

December 30, 1985 Chief Executive Zia proclaimed the lifting of Military Rule. 56

The amended constitution of 1973 was restored and new democratic government

started the new phase of democracy in Pakistan. President Zia secured the future of

military Generals through amendment and empowered them with amended

constitution.57 President Zia restored democracy but did not decreased military
 133

involvement in new political system. President Zia did not reinstate the original

Constitution of 1973 but amended, which bestowed more power to President then

Prime Minister.58 According to amended constitution President could hold two

portfolios at same time. Now General Zia could serve as Army Chief and beside it as

President too.59 Which gave him authority to deal with the matters of military vis i

vis the matters of the parliament. According to amended constitution, President has

the authority to nominate any member of the Lower House of Parliament as Head of

Cabinet, who later bound to get the vote of sureness from the Parliament, so he used

this authority and chose the Junejo as Head of Cabinet of Pakistan who was a weak

and little-known leader of Sindh and could be controlled easily. 60

President Zia addressed with the combined session of legislature on

December 30, 1985 and announced the withdrawal of Martial Law. Addressing with

legislature he further stated that “The new order did not represent a departure from

the policies of the martial law period; It is no rival or adversary of the outgoing

system. It is, in fact, the extension of the system in existence for the past several

years.”61 The newly elected Prime Minister felt him not well under the authority of

President Zia. The following events enhanced the differences between these two

Premiers.

3.4.1 Decisions to Curtail the Power of Military

The first action of the M.K. Junejo which annoyed President was the

announcement that he would curtail the funds of Military and army officers would

not use precious and big cars he stated that “ I would put the Generals in SUZUKIS

(Small Cars).” 62
A series of debates started after the statement of Prime Minister
 134

about the General and other high rank military officers. It was very strange for

military officers that a civilian was discussing their lifestyle openly in media.

President Zia felt it as interfering in military matters and a silent hostility was started

between them. 63

3.4.2 Geneva Accord

Prime Minister M. K. Junejo as representative of Pakistan signed the Geneva

Accord on April 14, 1988. This act of Prime Minister was disliked by President

Zia,64 which enhanced the distance between these two premiers. Geneva Accord was

a pact arranged between Afghan Mujahedeen of Afghanistan and Pakistan while

USSR and USA took part in this pact as mediator. This pact was about the departure
65
of Russian Army from Afghanistan. President Zia wanted to postpone the

negotiations till the stable and perpetual solution of this Afghan issue but PM

M.A.Junejo called a conference of political parties including MRD and PPP for

political harmony. All political parties voted in the favor of settlement and forced the

Prime Minister to take step as early as possible. In fact all political parties were

watching the worsened situation of the country due to Afghan war and they

supported that Pakistan should detached himself from this war. Benazir Bhutto also

attended this conference on the condition that Prime Minister would not invite the

President and Junejo did so.66

3.4.3 Politics on Ojhri Camp Explosion

On April 10, 1988 a blast blustered the storehouse of ammo at “Ojhri

Camp”67 situated between twin cities of Islamabad and Rawalpindi. 68 On this

 135

occasion President Zia was visiting in Kuwait where a session of Organization of

Islamic Conference was going on.69 Prime Minister Junejo was on a tour of Sindh

when he heard about this horrible incident. He gave up all activities and rushed to the

capital to show his sympathy with victims of disaster. After blast law and

enforcement agencies took the charge of Ojhri camp and tried to satisfy the people

living in surrounding of that particular area. They declared it an accident and advised

the masses to remain calm. But people could not satisfy by this justification and no

one believed on official clarification. General K. M. Arif, in his book “working with

Zia” mentions that “on the ill-fated morning when some ammunition was being

shifted from one place to another by a rather untrained team, an accident took place.

At about 09:30am, a box containing 122 mm Rocket fell from the top of the stack

while the men were trying to slide it down. It hit the ground with a thud and

exploded on impact, starting a fire which panicked the workmen ... It was fitted with

an inbuilt percussion fuse, which, the experts claimed, could be activated by strong

impact. In simpler language, this fuse had a point-detonating mechanism without an

inbuilt safety device.”70

Ojhri incident caused heavy loss of life and penalty of property damages.

This incident defamed the Pakistan Army in all over the world. Pakistani political

parties and many politicians demanded the inquiry against the culprit military

officers whose negligence caused this terrible incident. 71 Junejo himself took strict

action and exclaimed that “concerned authorities would face the music.” 72
After

initial investigations he delivered special instructions for the saving and restoration

of targets. The most essential question was to probe the matter that what was the
 136

cause of the disaster and for this Junejo initiate an inquiry.73 On April 12, 1988 Prime

Minister formed an inquiry commission consisted on five members, 74 in the headship

of General Imran Ullah, Corps Commander Rawalpindi along with a Ministerial

Committee to hold an investigation to probe the causes of calamity. 75 In the light of

Ministerial committee’s findings Prime Minister would prepare a comprehensive

report and would present it in parliament. Prime Minister took these steps solely

without consulting with President which created tension between these two Premiers.

It was stated that Junejo intentionally formed these committees before the arrival of

President Zia in Pakistan. 76

The Aslam Khatak, head of the Ministerial committee presented his report to

Prime Minister and mentioned that “in war-like conditions that the nation was in,

accidents can occur and should be considered as a token of martyrdom in the path of

a noble cause; therefore, the four junior employees should be punished according to

law and the rest be forgiven, to end the fiasco.” 77

Lower House of Parliament

demanded that report should be public but Defense Minister opposed the proposal

which created tension and they transferred some harsh words to each-others.78 Rana

Naeem submitted another report in which he alleged that “since the Camp was under

the DG ISI, action should be taken against the former DG ISI Gen Akhtar Abdur

Rehman and the present DG ISI Gen Hamid Gul.”79 The situation becomes so tense

when Prime Minister gave all reports dully signed by members to President and

conversant him that he would discourse the matter after his arrival from the official

visit of Philippines and South Korea. According to Arif “When the reports were

presented, there was a lot of confusion in the Presidential house and the general
 137

wanted to solve the issue in a manner that could spare his close associates. The two

hi-profile military officers (General Hamid Gull and General Akhtar Abdul Rehman)

were expected to be trialed. President Zia wanted to protect them at any cost.”80 This

situation twisted the relation of two Premiers and enlarged the differences among

Junejo and Zia.81

3.4.4 End of Junejo Government

Benazir Bhutto returns from émigré with warm greetings by masses. On the

other side, MRD’s stress on Prime Minister Junejo for commencement of new party-

based polls enhanced the tension of President Zia. 82 He was already unhappy with

the policies of Junejo’s administration. The discussed activities of Junejo against the

will of President created a threat to Zia’s authority. It was obvious that adopting such

policies interests of the army were going towards the edge. Rizvi stated that; “Zia

realized that earlier Junejo’s government had removed and replaced some senior

officers, so this time it might blame and could pressurize him to leave the office of

Army Chief.”83 President Zia desired to retain himself in the office of Army Chief

vis a vis in the office of Premiership along with his military colleagues. He chosen

his military rule and overlooked the newly established political system. He

concluded that political government was not taking any notices of his advices and

continuously ignoring the interests of the army. So, in this perspective, Junejo’s rule

met its unexpected and stunning end while he was coming back from an official visit

to South Korea. On May 29, 1988 by using the axe of 58 (2-b) Chief Executive Zia

dismissed the Administration along with Federal and Provincial Assemblies. Further

he terminated all provincial cabinets along with their Chief Ministers and declared
 138

new elections.84 Only the Upper House was not terminated.85 General Zia exclaimed

“The armed forces of Pakistan are responsible for not only safeguarding the

country’s territorial integrity but also its ideological basis.” 86 It was not clear that

what were the benefits of ideological basis in the termination of the Parliament.

Junejo developed intolerable to Zia when he declared his expert; for a being who had

ruled the country for eight then half years with supreme controls, it was not likely to

part control to the PM.87 The extensive deviations that exploded amongst two

Premiers meanwhile March 1985 increased with period then accordingly the

organization was collapsed.88 The quandary of Junejo administration was that for

three years it writhed to retrieve its legitimate controls which fought by Zia as well

as lastly finished in notice of his administration. 89”

President Zia had chosen Junejo as Prime Minister at his own will and there

was no part of Junejo in his selection, but his presentation was praiseworthy. With

restricted limitations, Junejo did what he can do. He reinstated the Constitutional

rights of people that had been deprived of to them for more than a decade. Junejo

tried to place the country on the way of progress and no doubt several developments

were completed, mainly in the part of making of new roads in backward parts of the

country beside the provision of electricity to small towns. He was polite, truthful and

had a subdued political disposition, qualities which are rare in political leadership of

nowadays.

On June 1, 1988 the caretaker management was formed. The Pakistan

Muslim League had main part in that provisional cabinet. President Zia cursed polls
 139

in the time phase of three months then advanced announced that it would be also

non-party basis polls. All Political festivities including MRD demanded Party based

election.90 Before the commencement of next election, President Zia died in an

airplane crash and Chairman Senate Ishaq Khan nominated as new President of

Pakistan. General Aslam Baig promoted as Military Chief. After assuming the

charge of Chief Executive, Ishaq Khan imposed emergency in the country but

fundamental rights of the common people were not put off. 91”

3.5 Demise of Zia and new elections

On August 17, 1988, President Zia, who had ruled Pakistan for over eleven

years, was died in a Pakistani airplane bang along with 30 other peoples including

several senior Army officers.92 “General Akhtar Abdur Rehman (CJCSC), Brigadier

Siddiq Salik, Brigadier General Herbert M. Wassom, the Chief American Military

Attaché in Pakistan, and Arnold L. Raphel, the United States Ambassador in

Pakistan were included in those officials.”93 It came as a shock to the whole nation;

Benazir Bhutto called it “one of those moments in life so stunning, so unexpected,

that they are difficult to absorb. 94 General Zia’s death has removed the shadow under

which me and all those dedicated to democracy have been living.”95 This incident

created vacuum in the governing hierarchy. Vice COAS General Aslam Baig

succeeded as the new Military Chief and requested Chairman of the Upper House,

Ishaq Khan to take over the charge as Chief Executive of the Pakistan in accordance

with Pakistani constitution.96 Ishaq Khan took charge and in a televised address he

stated; “I have to declare a state of emergency in the country; I have established a 13

member special emergency council, including five senior Cabinet Ministers,

 140

province leaders and the heads of the three armed forces, to run the affair of the

country.”97 He further proclaimed that fresh polling would be held on November 16

1988.98

The new Caretaker President, Ishaq Khan was one of the confidants of former

President Zia. He was known as a highly-skilled technocrat, with no inclination to

politics, a re-known economist and former Finance Minister of Pakistan, who had no

political constituency.99 Although he had cordial relations with many of the army

generals, he was said to be without political ambition. The most notable in this

period was the role that the military played. The new COAS General Aslam Baig

assured the nation that “the army had no intention to intervene in the affairs of

country and that it would keep aloof from politics”100 saying that “it was the sole

domain of politicians.”101

Many of the political parties were expecting non-party elections and many

believed that the army will impose Martial Law. Because of such rumors political

parties did not concentrate on the preparations for the upcoming elections. 102

Moreover, by this time, “the army resented the police duties it had been repeatedly

called upon to perform. The generals felt that the prolonged military rule had

damaged their professionalism and wanted to restore their prestige. With the death of

General Zia, they have been relieved of a lot of liabilities and burdens.”103 It is also to

be noted that “the death of Zia’s senior key commanders in the same accident also

made the military’s retreat from politics easier.”104 Some argued that death gave

General an “honorable exit’’ from the political scene. 105 In October General Aslam
 141

Baig announced that the army and the judiciary had created the conditions for fair

elections and asked the politicians to “rid the country of the prevailing crisis.”106 It

became known to everyone that the military had decided to see peaceful conduct of

the elections.

Conclusion

The resentment in the political arena increased throughout General Zia’s

regime for its strict enforcement of martial laws than during the previous regimes.
Throughout the regime, President Zia never remained aloof from direct participation
in political activities. He imposed ban on political activities in 1979 and only
allowed small political groups which supported his regime to stay active. Jamaat-i-
Isami (JI), Pakistan Muslim League (Pagaro group) (PML-P) and many other
traditional religious clusters, were permitted freedom in political activities. Zia
government’s objective was to prevent the opposition from forming a strong nucleus
of opposition against his regime so he exploited their political differences for his
own ends This was done by severely limiting their access to media and imposing
severe limits on the activities of political figures. House arrest, imprisonment
without hearing, restraints on opposition figures going abroad--the politicians could
not leave their city or province of residence without prior permission-- were some of
the common restrictions on politicians, and consequently prevented them from
closely interacting with each other. Further the law-enforcement agencies kept as
strict watch on their movements which further circumscribed all their actions.
The period (August 1985-August 1988) was eventful politically. Zia’s
military rule depended heavily on civil servants. During all these years repeated
attempts were made to discredit the politicians, minimize their role and promote an
authoritarian one-man show but people and political leaders tried to resist it.
Pakistani bureaucracy being a highly skilled institution steered the politicians in
national affairs. Later it started to effect political decisions and took charge of the
government’s affairs. Military, realizing its indispensability for the defense of
Pakistan, also became a stakeholder in power politics and joined hands with the
 142

bureaucracy to run the country’s affairs and became the senior partner. Such an
alliance fulfilled military’s need for partnership with an institution familiar with
running the country’s affairs.
 143

References and Notes

1
Abdul Hafeez Khan., The Conspiracies Against Pakistan and the Women in the Lives of Politicians,
(Karachi: Royal Book Company, 1991), 82.
2
Sajjad Ali Shah., Law Courts in a Glass House: An Autobiography, (Karachi: Oxford University
Press, 2001), 110.
3
Ibid., 106.
4
Ibid.
5
Hafeez Khan., Women in the Lives of Politicians, 83.
6
Grover and Arora., Elections and Regionalism in Pakistan, 49-50.
7
Murtaza Anjum., Siyasat,Aain Aur Adalat, (Lahore: Fateh Publishers, 2001), 53-54.
8
Sajjad., An Autobiography, 121.
9
Sultana Uzma., Katil Kon? (Urdu), 154.
10
Grover and Arora., Elections and Regionalism in Pakistan, 45-46.
11
Raza., Perspective 1947-1997, 36.
12
Ibid., 38.
13
https://historypak.com/the-eighth-amendment-1985/ accessed on November 02, 2016.
14
Ibid.
15
General Zia argued that “lacunae discovered in 1977 in the power of the President had been
removed according to the constitutional and political requirements of Pakistan. He referred to the
Constitution of India and said that the provisions being incorporated through the RCO regarding in the
Indian Constitution.”
16
He was of the opinion that the expression used in the 1973 Constitution ‘the President will act on
the advice of the Prime Minister and such as an advice shall be binding on him’ was an insulting
manner of giving power to the President.”
17
Nawa e Waqt, March 12, 1985.
18
The President was given the authority “to nominate and appoint the Prime Minister at his discretion
from amongst members of the National Assembly. Similarly, the provincial Governors were vested
with the power to appoint Chief Ministers of their respective provinces from amongst the members of
the Provincial Assemblies.”
19
Dawn, October 06, 1985.
20
H. A. Rizvi., The Military and Politics in Pakistan: 1947-199, (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel Publications.
2000), 263.
21
It consisted of 11 members, “President, Prime Minister, Chairman of Senate, Chairman Joint Chiefs
of Staff Committee, Chief of Army, Navy and Air Force.”
22
Shahid Javed Burki., Pakistan under Zia, 1977-1988, (Asian Survey 28, no. 10, October 1988)
23
Asghar Khan has a different opinion about turn out in the elections of 1985. He mentions the names
of those districts where the turn-out was very low. Among those districts were Abbottabad, Karachi,
Lahore, Rawalpindi, Peshawar, Mardan, Quetta, Sahiwal, Faisalabad, Vehari, Multan and Sargodha,
where turn-out was near about 30 percent but the election commission announced that 52.9 percent.
Sartaj Aziz disputes the claim of Asghar Khan with the statement that the voter’s turnout was quite
impressive. Out of 33 million registered voters, 17.3 million or 53 percent cast votes for National
Assembly candidates and 18.5 million or 57 percent for provincial assembly candidates.”
24
Christina Lamb., Waiting for Allah, Pakistan’s Struggle for Democracy, (New Delhi: Viking
Penguin Book, 1991), 58-63.
25
Pumphelet on Movement for Restoration of Democracy (MRD), (Lahore: PPP information Cell,
1992), 123
26
“Amina, Zia, Shahida Nafis, Ameena Zaman, Nasreen, Ruksana Zahoor, Nafis Siddiqui, Mrs Tahira
Mazhar Ali Khan, Mumtaz Noorani, Aitzaz Ahsan’s mother and wife, Asma Jilani, Fahmida Riyaz,
Atia Dawood were the prominent personalities who with other women worker joined this protest
rally.”
27
Muhammad Ali Sheikh., Benazir Bhutto: A Political Biography, (Karachi: Orient Books Publishing
House, 2000), 95.
27
Rasul B. Rais., Pakistan in 1987: Transition to Democracy, Asian Survey 28, no. 2, part. 2
(February 1988), 128. also see http://www.jstor.org/stable/2644814
29
Ibid. 129.
 144

30
Hamid Yusuf., Pakistan A study of Political Development 1947-97,( Lahore: Sang-E- Meel
publications,1999), 207.
31
Hafeez Khan., Women in the Lives of Politicians, 90.
32
Rasool Bax Rais., Transition to Democracy, 127-128.
33
Amir Ali Chandio., Non- Party based General election of 1985: Causes an effect, (International
Conference on Social Science and Humanity IPEDR vol.5, IACSIT Press, Singapore, 2011), 86.
34
Ibid., 88.
35
Ibid., 93.
36
Politics without Parties, A Report on the 1985 Party less Election Pakistan, Lahore: Society for the
advancement of Education (SAHE).(n.d).
37
Makhdoom Sayed Ghyur Abbas Bukhari., Benazir: Beti Say Qaid Tak, (Lahore: Multi Media
Affairs, 2004), 134.
38
Six of his nine Cabinet Ministers who ran for the National Assembly were defeated, as were many
of his other associates.
39
Andrew K. Wilder., The Pakistani Voter Electoral Politics and Voting Behavior in the Punja,
(Karachi: Oxford University Press. 1999), 73.
40
Politics without Parties, A Report on the 1985 Party less Election Pakistan, 29.
41
Amir Ali Chandio., Non- Party based General election of 1985: Causes an effect, 83.
42
Ibid., 82.
43
Ghafoor Ahmad., Wazir-i-Azam Benazir Bhutto: Namzadgi Say Bartarfi Tak, (Lahore, Iqra
Enterprise, 1995), 224.
44
Politics without Parties, A Report on the 1985 Party less Election Pakistan, 32.
45
Ameer Ali Chandio., Non-Party based General election of 1985: cause and effect, 82.
46
Ibid.
47
Tahir Kamran., Sovereignty in Pakistan and the basis reasons of Power, (Lahore, Fiction House.
2000), 76.
48
Rai, Shakil Akhtar., Media, Religion and Politics in Pakistan, (Karachi: Oxford University Press,
2000), 178.
49
Tahir Kamran., Sovereignty in Pakistan and the basis reasons of Power, 79.
50
Benazir Bhutto., Daughter of East, An Autobiography, (London: A Mandarin (Paperback) London
UK, 1994), 313
51
Tahir Kamran., Sovereignty in Pakistan and the basis reasons of Power, 78.
52
Muhanmmad Ali Chirag., Tareekh-e-Pakistan” (Urdu) (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel Publications, 2001),
490.
53
Ibid., 495.
54
Sultana Uzma., Katil Kon? (Urdu), 158-159.
55
Hafeez Khan., Women in the Lives of Politicians, 90.
56
Dawn, Karachi, December 31, 1985.
57
Hassan Askari Rizvi., Politics in Pakistan 1947-1997, 265.
58
Dawn, Karachi, December 31, 1985.
59
the constitution was amended “to allow President Zia ul Haq to continue to serve as chief of army
staff after the restoration of civilian rule, making it possible for him to maintain the army as his
exclusive preserve and giving him a relatively free hand to deal with military and defense affairs.”
60
Hassan Askari Rizvi., Politics in Pakistan 1947-1997, 264.
61
The Muslim, December 31, 1985.
62
The Muslim, January 12, 1085.
63
Christina Lamb., Waiting for Allah, Pakistan’s Struggle for Democracy, 58-63.
64
Ahmad Salim., Tootati Banti Assemblian Aur Civil-Military Bureaucracy, (Urdu) (Lahore: Jang
Publishers, 1990), 325.
65
The “Accord contained provisions for the timetable of the withdrawal of Soviet troops from
Afghanistan. It officially began on 15 May 1988 and ended by 15 February 1989, thus putting an end
to a nine-year-long Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.”
66
Christina Lamb., Waiting for Allah, Pakistan’s Struggle for Democracy, 223-227.
67
Ojhri, “an old-fashioned, World War II storage of arms and ammunition, was mainly made of brick
barracks with thatched roofs. Previously used as temporary army units, after the Soviet occupation of
Afghanistan, the influx of arms increased manifold and in 1979 the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI)
 145

directorate chose the Ojhri Camp for temporary storage and disposal of weapons, as and when
required. Though not congested, the Camp certainly needed management.”
68
https://www.dawn.com/news/1237794 Accessed on February 13, 2017.
69
Dawn, April 11, 1988.
70
K.M. Arif., Working with Zia: Pakistan’s Power Politics, (Karachi, Oxford University Press. 1996),
43.
71
Dawn, April 11, 1988.
72
Nawa I Waqt, April 12, 1988.
73
Ibid.
74
The committee comprised “Qazi Abdul Majid Abid, Mir Ibrahim Baloch and Malik Naeem Ahmad
Khan, while Mohammad Aslam Khattak was to act as chairman.”
75
The Muslim, April 20, 1988.
76
K.M. Arif., Working with Zia: Pakistan’s Power Politics, 44.
77
Dawn, Karachi, April 13, 1988.
78
The defence minister, “Rana Naeem Ahmed, wanted to get the report edited so that it could become
more unanimous and acceptable. This ensued into an exchange of hot words and Aslam Khattak
clarified that the report cannot be altered at any cost. The defense minister started working on a new
report. When Gen Imran ullah was questioned, he blamed the director general of the ISI. After some
re-investigation Rana Naeem wrote the report in which he clearly held the ISI responsible. He wrote
that since the Camp was under the DG ISI, action should be taken against the former DG ISI Gen
Akhtar Abdur Rehman and the present DG ISI Gen Hamid Gul.”
79
Dawn, Karachi, April 14, 1988.
80
K.M. Arif., Working with Zia: Pakistan’s Power Politics, 89.
81
Wall Street Journal, February 16, 1988.
82
K.M. Arif., Working with Zia: Pakistan’s Power Politics, 92.
83
Hassan Askari Rizvi., Politics in Pakistan 1947-1997, 265-266
84
Benazir Bhutto., Daughter of the East, 366.
85
Ibid.
86
The Muslim, March 14, 1984.
87
Hassan Askari Rizvi., Politics in Pakistan 1947-1997, 265-266
88
Salim Younas., Civil-Military Bureaucracy, 322.
89
Ahmad., Taraqi Pazir Duniya May Jamhoriat Ka Bohran, 13.
90
Chirag, Pakistan, 496.
91
Muhammad Waseem., Politics and State in Pakistan, (Islamabad, National Institute of Historical
studies,1994), 435.
92
The New York Times, August 18, 1988.
93
Ibid.
94
Benazir Bhutto., Daughter of Destiny, (Simon and Schuster, 1989), 377.
95
Abdul Maali., The Twin Era of Pakistan, Democracy and Dictatorship, ( New York: Vantagwe
Press. 1992), 233.
96
Faqir Khan, Faqir Khan., Revival of Democracy in Pakistan 1988-1999: An Analysis, 322.
97
Elaine Sciolino., Zia of Pakistan killed as blast downs plane; Envoy, 28 others die, The New York
Times, August 18, 1988.
98
Sehar Siddique., Ghulam Ishaqe Khan, 312.
99
S. Abdul Maali., The Twin Era of Pakistan, Democracy and Dictatorship, 45.
100
Ibid.
101
Far Eastern Economic Review, September 1, 1988, 12.
102
Kimie Sekine., Benazir Bhutto: her political struggle in Pakistan, (Amherst: University of
Massachusetts Amherst, 2014), 12.
103
https://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses/2457. 11. Accessed on June 12, 2017.
104
Ibid., 12.
105
Ibid.
106
Dawn, October 1, 1988.
 146

Chapter 4

Revival of party politics in Pakistan 1988-1990

In this chapter effort has been made to highlight the causes for the formation

of the Islami Jamhori Ittihad (IJI) and the efforts by the Islamic political parties to

keep socialist political parties1 like the PPP away from the power. This chapter will

thus highlight political uncertainty in the period of 1988-1990. The study will seek to

discover the important reasons for the advent, growth and expansion of Islami

Jamhori Ittihad in 1988? It will also discover the relationship between the ruling and

the opposition political parties and to what level it affected the political affairs of

Pakistan? Additionally, what was the perception of opposition on key issues in the

internal politics of Pakistan? It further seeks to discover the role played by the

opposition in the Legislature and whether it helped in improving the overall political

atmosphere in Pakistan?

The decade of eighties witnessed crucial political changes in Pakistan which

altered the outlook of Pakistani government for the time being. First prominent

development that took place was the termination of the National and Provincial

Assemblies in May 1988.2 After a few months, President Zia was killed in an

airplane crash on August 17, 1988.3 The death of President Zia was considered as the

start of a new political period and the new dawn for egalitarianism by prominent

political parties of Pakistan. The decade long dictatorial rule (about 11 years) of

President Zia had ruined the “fabric of the democracy.”4 Next election held in

November 16, 1988. The right wing political parties having belief in conservatism

established an alliance named Islami Jamhori Ittihad. It was founded by Ghulam

 147

Mustafa Jatoi. It was the biggest traditionalist alliance consisting on right-wing

political parties, designed to compete with the “democratic socialism,” most

important the PPP, in coming elections. 5 Election 1988 created hope among masses

for strengthening democratic machinery but with the political instability, corruption,

fast changing government, unstable political parties, immature political leadership

and high executive authorities of the President in the form of 8th alteration,

democracy could not flourish its roots. The most notable was the role of the Army.

The new Army Chief, Aslam Baig, assured the nation that the military had no

intention to intervene and that it would keep aloof from politics, he declared that it

was the sole domain of politician.6

4.1 Election 1988: Political Parties and Alliances

With the announcement of the final date for elections by the caretaker

President, the momentum of political activities rose and political parties started

serious preparations through election campaigns. 7 This momentum boosted up when

On October 3, 1988 the Supreme Court ordered that “coming elections should be

held on party basis since party less elections were violation of the human rights.”8

Caretaker government made several arrangements to make the elections

impartial and transparent. Opposition leaders welcomed the constitutional transition

of the authority. The political parties especially PPP, JI, PML (J) with some other

smaller parties demanded the dismissal of the caretaker governments which were

formed under Zia regime, and requested the appointment of neutral government to

conduct fair and transparent elections, 9 arguing that neutral Ministers were necessary

to reduce the advantage of the incumbent politicians and thereby to ensure free and
 148

fair elections. President Ishaq Khan dismissed this demand as an attempt by

opposition leaders to find a new focus for attack. Conservatives groups continued to

look toward the military for guidance, “though none seemed ready to admit publicly

that they preferred a military government instead of the return of PPP.” 10 Despite

Bhutto’s effort to accommodate the conservatives by offering a more moderate line

of policies, many of them remained uneasy about the idea of the PPP ruling the

country again. The prospect of a PPP victory was extremely upsetting to those who

had suffered under the authoritarianism of her father. The frightening memories of

his period were hard for them to erase. 11Businessmen were also afraid from PPP’s

socialist policies which led to nationalization of industry, 12 while the religious groups

felt the PPP as a threat to traditional Islamic values. 13 The big landowners were also

worry of the possibility of large-scale, radical land reforms despite Bhutto’s

assurance that there would be no such reforms. 14 Many people also believed that

Bhutto would seek revenge of her father, which she repeatedly denied. 15 Despite the

assurance of the army for non-intervention and its apparent willingness to allow free

elections, PPP had to remain cautious. The military could change its position if

politicians failed to recognize its priorities or if law and order situation deteriorated. 16

It had already made clear its commitment to a continuation of the defense and

foreign policies. Bhutto admitted that no one in Pakistan was naive enough to believe

that an opposition party could come to power without the army’s tolerance. The

military viewed politician with contempt because of the latter’s corrupt and

inefficient manners in handling political affairs.

 149

4.1.1 “Pakistan People’s Party and Movement for the Rehabilitation of

Democracy”

PPP had to face trouble on two levels, one within the party and the other

among alliance parties of MRD. Most of senior members of PPP had left party’s

membership and joined other political parties during its resistance movement against

Zia regime. Some of them had contested election of 1985 as independent candidates.

Now Chairperson Benazir Bhutto allowed all such candidates to rejoin party. Former

MNAs and MPAs rushed towards PPP to get benefit from its nomination. Now PPP

had been filled with a large numbers of former and loyal (who did not left party)

election candidates and it was very difficult to distribute party tickets among them.

The loyal members were protesting against the rejoining of former MNAs and MPAs

who were influential politicians and could win their seats due to their personal

connections, influence, having large permanent vote bank and above all with their

wealth. PPP also wanted to secure some seats through those former members. But

when she tried to distribute tickets among them a frustration spread among the party

loyalist. They argued that PPP could not ignore their sacrifices against martial law

and the socio-economics program of the party should be more preferable and

valuable than the personalities. But Benazir Bhutto was eager to get success in the

coming election on any cast. She preferred the more influential former members and

ignored faithful and loyal members of the party. This policy created frustration

within the party too.

Announcement of elections created many issues among MRD’ alliance

parties and the most important issue was the “issue of seat distribution” which

became the main focus of the MRD squabbles. 17 The minor parties of this coalition
 150

were demanding major share of the seats. It was very difficult for PPP to satisfy all

these parties on seat adjustment. The main partner of MRD was PPP and she

deserved major share of the seats but smaller parties were not ready to accept it. 18

For instance, one constituent party demanded 26 seats out of the 48 National

Assembly seats in Punjab and 50 percent of them in the Sindh. In the NWFP, the

total demand of the MRD parties besides the PPP added up to more than the number

of seats in the entire province.19 The PPP protested that such claims by the MRD

parties were “illogical’’ and “unacceptable”. PPP suggested an acceptable formula

for MRD parties, and offered each of the smaller party not more than three or four

seats, which was rejected by them. 20 The parties felt that their cooperation was

compulsory for the PPP to ensure the victory. Finally, chairperson PPP decided that

her party should contest elections on individual basis so PPP parted itself from her

long-time allies of the MRD. The MRD was practically dissolved on October 19,

1988.21 Bhutto defended PPP by saying that they never accepted MRD as an electoral

alliance. MRD was established to restore democracy and now its objective had been

achieved. However, her argument could not satisfy the peoples. Being aware of the

need to reduce political polarization, however, Bhutto had decided not to field

candidates against the top MRD leaders.22 She also promised to include them in her

cabinet even if she won a majority but bitterness of break-up could not be reduced.

4.1.2 Pakistan Muslim League and Islami Jamhori Ittehad

Muhammad Khan Junejo revived Pakistan Muslim League in 1985. Although

Zia did not take interest in its formation nor he opposed it, but when it emerged as a

ruling party and was involved in parliamentary politics Zia immediately dissolved
 151

the government of Junejo in 1988. After the termination of Junejo government, PML

observed crisis and suffered from internal conflicts. The party split into two separate

factions on question of its President ship. One group remained attached with Junejo

and the other one supported the caretaker Chief Minister of NWFP. This split was

made visible when two separate meetings of the party were held. One group re-

elected Junejo as President of PML while the other group elected Fida Muhammad

Khan as their President. This group was stronger than Junejo group because Nawaz

Sharif was elected its general secretary who was Chief Minister of the Punjab.

In October 1988, Junejo group made an alliance with the help of Jamiat

Ulema e Pakistan and Tehreek e Istaqlal, named Pakistan People’s Alliance (PPA).

Soon Jamaat-i-Islami along with nine other smaller parties joined PPA and

established Islamic Democratic Alliance (IDA). The purpose of this alliance was to

cope PPP in election to consolidate the anti-PPP vote but PML(J) who was its major

partner quit that alliance after only eleven days of its creation and joined Islami

Jamhori Ittihad which was also made to prevent vote-splitting among anti PPP

parties. Now PML rejoined again and Junejo was nominated its President while G.M.

Jatoi was nominated the head of IJI.

PML with its weak political administration was not capable to cope up with

the PPP’s popularity alone so on October 6, 1988 nine right wing parties led by PML
23
established an alliance named Islami Jamhori Ittihad against PPP. The alliance

parties were Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan (JI), Pakistan Muslim League (Fida Group)

(PML-F), Nizam-e-Mustafa Group (NM), Jamaat Ulema-e- Islam Pakistan

(Darkhawasti Group) (JUI), Murkazi Jamaat-i-Ehle Hadith (Moulana Lakhvi group)

 152

(MJH), Jamaat-e-Mashaikh Pakistan (Sahabzada Fazle Haq Group) (JMP),

Independent Parliamentary Group (IPG), Hizbullah Jihad. (HJ) and National

People’s Party (NPP) 24

It mentioned that the army supported its formation and activities. 25 General

Hamid Gul, chief of ISI was the architect of this alliance and Brigadier Imtiaz and

Major Aamir supported him.26 “The IJI was combination of divergent ideologies but

all parties shared antagonism towards Pakistan People's Party.” 27 IJI chose bicycle as

its election symbol28 and presented its manifesto on November 8, 1988. 29

IJI faced a severe desertion among its member parties on the issue of ticket

distribution. IJI consisted of eight major and minor political parties and every party

wanted the ticket of every constituency. Even the smallest party was also demanding

biggest share of the seats.30 On the other hand main leader of IJI wanted to distribute

tickets among electable for securing more seats of National Assembly to form its

government in the Centre. Now the question is how they would satisfy all the

members of alliance on tickets distribution issue. Many of the Politicians who could

not get IJI party tickets announced that they would take part in election as

independent candidates. Such announcement could cause a division in the vote bank

of the IJI which could be harmful for the alliance in forthcoming elections to get

maximum seats.

It was a difficult task to choose the alliance candidates for tickets but still on Oct.

18, 1988 Ghafoor Ahmad general secretary of IJI, announced that “IJI parties had

distributed tickets for National Assembly in all the four provinces on merit.” 31

“Almost 65% seats of the National Assembly were allotted to the unified Pakistan
 153

Muslim League.”32 That was a major component of the IJI. Two other major

components of IJI; National People’s Party and Jamat e Islami got almost 15%

tickets for the National Assembly constituencies and remaining 5% were divided

among the other members of the alliance like JAH (Lakhvi), JUI (D) and IPG.33

“Most of the ex MNAs got alliance tickets from the PML platform which belonged

to both PML (F) and PML (J).”34 IJI manifesto consisted on these basic points.

Supremacy of Islamic laws, Provision of economic opportunity, Inexpensive and

equal system of Justice, Safeguarding of women rights, Support for Afghan jihad, Up

gradation of Nuclear program for nonviolent determinations, Struggle for Kashmiri

Muslims, Active involvement in the “Non Aligned Movement” (NAM) and finally,

Increasing collaboration with Muslim Countries. 35

36
The manifesto of IJI could not attract common people. IJI presented its

manifesto but most disagreement prevailed among alliance partners on various

points. Afghan Jihad was not the issue of PML, similarly “alliance partner had

difference of opinion about the basic principles of Islamization in the country as

well.”37 Jafri stated that; “even the Jamaat-i-Islami had also considered for more than

one time whether or not to remain with the alliance, though at the final stage it had

always decided to stay with it.”38

With the exception of National People’s Party, the other two mainstream

Nationalist political parties such as “Awami National Party” and Pakhtun-khwa Milli

Awami Party contested the elections independently. 39 Similarly, separately from the

Jamaat-i-Islami, two major sacred political parties including Jamiat Ulema i Islam

(Fazal ur Rehman group), in addition Jamiat Ulema i Pakistan (Noorani group) did
 154

not join any alliance.40 In Sindh Muttahida Qaumi Movement also stayed away from

alliances and its candidates participated in the elections as independent candidates. 41

4.2 Election 1988, Results and Formation of the Government

Many political parties started election campaign very late due to the petition

of the under hearing in the Supreme Court. On September 27, 1988, on the petition

of former PM Junejo, Lahore High Court had already affirmed the dismissals of

Parliament as unconstitutional but Court endorsed the judgment of holding fresh

elections in November 16, 1988. Now the petition was in Supreme Court, who could

give order to reinstate the Assemblies. Several prominent politicians and some

political parties were waiting for the final judgment of the Supreme Court. Later on,

Supreme Court endorsed Lahore High Court’s verdict but it was too late for those

politicians to start their campaign. In addition to that, heavy floods in Punjab spread

disaster in several districts of the province, which created rumors about

commencement of elections on time. On the other side, rule and command

circumstances in Sindh generated problem for Election Commission to hold free,

fair, smooth and peaceful elections. Beside this some prominent Political parties

especially President of Islami Jamhori Ittihad, Jatoi was openly demanding the

postponement of the elections. He argued that in this horrible situation, it was too

difficult to attract the masses towards the election activities. But President and

COAS were determined to hold election on announced date, so elections of NAs and

PAs were conducted on November 16 and 19, 1988 with the gap of three days.

Polling was held on 205 Muslims seats of NA out of 207. On two seats

polling was postponed due to the death of candidates of those constituencies. 4210
 155

seats for Non- Muslims and 20 seats for women were reserved. All Political parties

individually or through alliance enthusiastically participated in the elections. The

candidates organized public meetings and rallies to impress the voters. They spent

huge amounts to attract people. The followers of “Bhutoism” and “Ziaism” contested

face to face. The slogans in the favor of Socialism and conservatism were used in the

elections. In the end rightists were defeated by the leftists. The fallouts of Lower

House of the Parliament polls were as following:

Party Position National Assembly

Party Name Party Seats in National
Assembly
“Pakistan people’s Party “(PPP)
Islami Jamhori Ittihad (IJI) 92
Muhajir Qaumi Movement (MQM) 55
Jamiat up Ulema e Islam (JUI) 13
Awami National Party (ANP) 08
Pakistan Awami ittihad (PAI) 03
Baluchistan National Alliance (BNA) 03
National People’s Party (NPP) 02
Pakistan Democratic party (PDP) 01
Independents (IND) 01
Vacant” (VT)” 27
02
“Non-Muslim Seats” Party
Seats
“Pakistan People's Party” (PPP)
10
Women Seats Party
Seats
Pakistan people’s Party (PPP)
Islami Jamhori Ittihad (IJI) 12
Muhajir Qaumi Movement (MQM) 05
Jamiat up Ulema e Islam (JUI) 01
Independents (IND) 01
01

In Lower House of the Parliament no political party secured absolute

majority and PPP arose as leading party in NA and IJI got second position while

MQM occupied third position. IJI got majority of the seats from Punjab i.e. out of 55

seats 45 were from Punjab while it could not get a single seat in Sindh. IJI also
 156

bagged 2 seats from Baluchistan. The independent and MQM got position of the

king maker. Without the help of MQM or Independent, Pakistan People's Party and

IJI both were unable to make their government in the Centre. Another remarkable

features of the election result was that the religious political parties. They could not

win considerable seats. Other smaller alliances and political parties were completely

wiped out from the political scene. PPP was in much better position to make the rule

with association of MQM beside majority of independents.

In this election, politically heavy-weights politicians of different political parties lost

their seats. Muhammad Khan Junejo, Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi, Hamid Nasir Chattah,

Prof. Abdul Ghafoor, Naseem Aheer, Liaquat Baloch, Raja Zafar ul Haq, Maulana

Jan Muhammad Abbasi, Aslam Khatak and many other famous politicians lost their

seats which stunned every one.

Results of Provincial Assemblies and Formation of Provincial Governments

Provincial Assembly’s election held after the three days of National

Assembly elections. The results are as following:
{{
“
Party Name Party Seats in Punjab Assembly

“Islami Jamhori Ittihad (IJI) 108

Pakistan people’s Party (PPP) 94
Independents (IND) 32
Pakistan Awami Ittehad (PAI) 02
National People’s Party (NPP) 02
National People’s Party (K) (NPP-K) 01
Jamiat Ulema e Islam (F)” (JUI-F) 01

{{

Party Name Party Seats in Sindh Assembly

Pakistan People's Party (PPP) 67

Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) 26
Independent (IND) 05
Islami Jamhori Ittehad (IJI) 01
Punjabi Pakhtun Ittehad 01
 157

(PPI)

Party Name Party Seats in NWFP Assembly

“Islami Jamhori Ittihad (IJI) 28

Pakistan people’s Party (PPP) 20
Independents (IND) 15
Awami National Party (ANP) 12
Jamiat Ulema e Islam” (JUI) 02

{{

Party Name Party Seats in Baluchistan Assembly

Jamiat Ulema e Islam (F) (JUI-F) 11

Islami Jamhori Ittihad (IJI) 09
Independents (IND) 07
Baluchistan National Party (BNP) 06
Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) 03
Pakistan National Party (PNP) 02
Jamhori Watan Party (JWP) 01

In Punjab Nawaz Sharif made his government with the support of

independents and elected as Chief Minister of the Punjab. In Sindh the PPP and

MQM made their government in coalition partnership, and Syed Qaeem Ali was

nominated as Chief Minister of Sindh. In NWFP Pakistan People’s Party made an

alliance with Awami National Party and Aftab Ahmad Sherpao was chosen as Chief

Minister of the NWFP. In Baluchistan Islami Jamhori Ittehad made a broad band

coalition and Zafar Jamali was elected as Chief Minister of the Baluchistan. No

political party could acquire absolute majority in any province and coalition

governments were formed in all provinces which were very weak.

Army and President both were very disappointed from the result of elections.

They were not in the favor of PPP. They delayed the nomination of Benazir Bhutto

to pressurize her even she agreed to accept their demands. She promised that she

would nominate Ishaq Khan as the next President and would not interfere in the
 158

matters of security apparatus. Further she would design Pakistan’s foreign policy

with the consultation of Military Chief beside President. 43 She would not rollback

Pakistan’s atomic program, and would continue the support of Afghan Mujahideen.

She would appoint senator Yaqoob Khan as foreign Minister in her cabinet, 44 and

finally she would withdraw her candidate in Presidential election. These conditions

were very strict for Benazir Bhutto but she accepted them to reinstate the democracy

in Pakistan.

In the establishment of PPP’s government it is supposed that the USA had

frolicked a crucial mediator role. It was said that USA envoy Robert B. Oakley met

with President Ishaq Khan, Military Chief Aslam Baig and other leadership of the

prominent political parties to bring the PPP and military closer. The USA acted very

important role for the transfer of power. The US envoy visited Pakistan just after

elections, and it was reported that “he gave future policy guidelines to Benazir which

she had accepted without any hesitation.”45 Even the Federal cabinet was chosen

with the consent of the Robert B. Oakley, Ishaq Khan, and Aslam Baig. Later the

Assistant Secretary of Defense, Richard Armitage and Richard Murphy (his

counterpart in State Department) arrived Pakistan to give final shape to that

understanding.46

Another reason for delaying was the formation of provincial governments. IJI leader

Nawaz Sharif desired to form all provincial government first and the national

government later. He met with Ishaq khan and convinced him that if he nominated

Benazir Bhutto before the formation of provincial assemblies then all independent

candidates could flock to the Pakistan People's Party which could create trouble for
 159

IJI to make provincial administration with the help of individuals. He was successful

in his move.

The President had right to recommend any member of the house as a

candidate for Prime Minister under the Eighth Amendment. Who had to acquire

“vote of confidence” from the same floor. In newly chosen National Assembly, PPP

was the majority party and with the coalition of MQM and Independent candidates

she could get vote of confidence easily. So on December 1, 1988, President Ishaq

Khan asked PPP chairperson Benazir Bhutto to make the government. 47 According to

the agreement of MQM and PPP, BB formed the government on 2 nd of December.

After ten days, she got “vote of confidence” from the Parliament and received 148

votes out of 237.48 Next day election for “Speaker and Deputy Speaker” held and

Malik Meraj Khalid became the speaker of house. 49 Same day Ishaq Khan was

appointed as Head of state.50 The election was contested between four candidates

including Nasrullah Khan, Ghulam Ishaq Khan, Ahmad Jaffar and M. Nauroz

Khan.51 Senate, Lower House of the Parliament and three Provincial Assemblies

took part in the Chief Executive election. Baluchistan Assembly did not participate

in this election because it was dissolved by General Musa (Governor of Baluchistan)

on Dec. 15, 1988.52 Ghulam Ishaq Khan got 348 votes and was designated the

portfolio of President of the Pakistan.

4.3 Centre Province Relations

After the election’s result, party politics had started between the political

parties for the formation of their administrations in Centre and Provinces. Both two

major political contestant PPP and IJI were not in the position to form its federal or
 160

provincial governments without the support of smaller political parties and

independents so they started political maneuring to make coalition with other parties.

Both political parties PPP and IJI had offered even ministries to independents to join

their party for the formation of their governments and for this purpose they used

every method rather it was fair or not.

Punjab was the biggest province with highest seats in National Assembly

beside Provincial Assembly. Punjab was the hub of PPP but now PML (the biggest

coalition party of IJI) commanded by Nawaz Sharif was the main shareholder of the

province. In election, IJI got highest seats in Punjab Assembly but still formation of

government was not a smooth sailing for it. Pakistan People's Party tried its best to

form government in this largest province but failed and Nawaz Sharif was selected as

CM of the Punjab.53 Chief Minister Nawaz Sharif took a confrontational disposition

against the Federal government of PPP from the very beginning. When Benazir

Bhutto came to Lahore at the end of December 1988, soon after she was named

Premier, Sharif failed to give her a vvip protocol and didn’t hide his reluctance to

receive her in his own province. BB selected Tikka Khan (a retired General) as

Governor of the Punjab who tried to make things more controversial. 54 On the behest

of PPP Tikka Khan adopted a policy of confrontation with Chief Minister Punjab and

alleged Nawaz Sharif for rigging in the elections. 55 He also criticized Changa Manga

politics of Nawaz Sharif and alleged him for distribution of money between

independent candidates to gain their votes. On the other side, PPP itself tried her best

to buy the loyalties of independent and IJI MPAs. For this purpose Federal
 161

government sent prominent leaders of their party and transferred high official

bureaucrats as well.

In the start of 1989 confrontation between the Centre and Punjab increased,56

when Federal government launched People’s Program and Nawaz Sharif requested

the President to get it closed.57 Similarly on the deteriorating of wheat situation both

blamed each other.58 The tension intensified when Nawaz Sharif was appointed as

President of IJI instead of Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi. In same month, with the consent of

Premier 80 MPAs of Punjab Assembly launched a move of no confidence against

Nawaz Sharif. President called PPP chairperson to meet him immediately to handle

the situation. Benazir met with President on March 6, 1989 in the presence of Army

chief. President alleged her that PPP members were involved in horse trading and

conspiring in Punjab. Benazir refused to accept that allegation and blamed that

Nawaz Sharif himself was responsible for that situation. President offered her to

cooperate with IJI in Punjab and IJI would cooperate with her in the Centre. 59 Later

Nawaz Sharif and Benazir met and they agreed to remove their reservation. But that

honeymoon period could not last long and confrontation restarted when Nawaz

Sharif launched Punjab Bank and Punjab Television Network “to make Punjab more

self-governing province.”60 “Nawaz went beyond all the constitutional confines in

asserting the notion of full autonomy. In fact he intended to set a precedence of

rejection of Federal authority for the smaller provinces.”61

He also ordered the central officials serving in Punjab, not to obey the

Central orders or else their services could be suspended. PREMIER considered it

mutiny against the central authority. 62 Punjab demanded provincial autonomy and
 162

Benazir ordered to register corruption cases against MPAs to force them to oppose

Nawaz. Benazir government introduced cultural policy in Centre as well as in all

provinces. Nawaz Sharif rejected that policy and argued that it was against the

contrary of Islamic values. 63

It is said that main reason of the confrontation was the lack of adequate

political experience of Benazir and Nawaz Sharif. Both were new-comers and

inexperienced about party politics. Both were enjoying power for the first time and

both wanted to get full authority on all institutions including Army, President and

their political rivals and opponents but both were playing in the hands of Army chief

and President.

In Baluchistan none of the party won absolute majority to make its

government or to deal with the others. Zafar Ullah Khan Jamali, Nawab Akbar

Bhugti and Jamiat Ulema e Islam, all were candidate for the seat of Chief Minister. 64

JUI (F) and IJI tried to form a committee to contact with other parties and tried to get

benefit from that situation. Nawaz Sharif contacted with Bhugti and offered him IJI

support in Baluchistan and demanded his support in the Centre. It was surprising that

Mir Zafar Jamali who was IJI provincial chief was ignored in that consultation. 65

Before the nomination of Chief Minister, Speaker Sardar M. Khan Barozai was

already elected unopposed with help of ANP and IJI.66 Finally, Mir Zafar Jamali was

nominated as CM Baluchistan with the casting vote of speaker who belonged to

Pakistan People's Party. That act of speaker was considered as unconstitutional by

Akbar Bhugti, who was also a candidate for Chief Minister. So with the help of JUI

he planned to file no-confidence motion against Jamali. Bhugti, JUI coalition

 163

changed the political realities of the province. Defection of one member converted

Jamali’s simple majority into minority and on the instruction of Chief Minister,

governor terminated the Provincial Assembly. It was stunning party politics that this

Assembly worked only for fifteen days. 67

On the other side, Jamali defended himself by arguing that “he asked for

dissolution of the Assembly for a fresh mandate for the sake of political stability in

Baluchistan. The split mandate could never help to form a stable government for the

province that could be a hindrance in the progress of the province and he only tried

to avoid that. Jamali told that it was a must to pass the provincial budget till

December and he faced non-serious attitude of changing stances by Maulana Fazal

which made him take an early decision of the dissolution of the Assembly. He told

that central high command of PML and IJI did not respond him properly whenever

he tried to consult, so he took a solo flight while making dissolution decision.” 68

This statement of Jamali was rejected by critiques. Some of them considered

it PPP and IJI rivalry. Some declared it the plan of Federal government. Some

alleged Jamali himself for that severe action. But most of them agreed on one point

that Chief Minister was not able to take “vote of confidence” from Baluchistan

Assembly so governor had dissolved the Assembly. Nawaz Sharif alleged PPP for

the dissolution of Baluchistan Assembly but Benazir Bhutto denied about her part in

that process. She stated that Governor of Baluchistan Musa Khan belonged to IJI and

he had no connection with PPP so she was not responsible for this act. Akbar Bhugti

filed a request in the Baluchistan High Court contrary to dissolution of the

Baluchistan Provincial Assembly and on January 23, 1989 Baluchistan High Court
 164

issued the orders for the restoration of the Baluchistan Assembly. Akbar Bhugti took

the pledge as new Chief Minister of Baluchistan, leading a combination of

Baluchistan National Awami Party, Jamiat Ulema i Islam, Islami Jamhori Ittehad and

Pakhton khawa Milli Awami Party. Akbar Bhugti secured 33 votes out of 44. 69

The NWFP was not an easy province for the PPP or IJI to handle with. In the

November polls, the IJI won 28 out of the 80 seats, as opposed to 20 secured by the

PPP and 12 by the Awami National Party (ANP). 70 Most of the remaining seats went

to the independents. In this Provincial Assembly IJI got highest number of seats but

still she was not able to make her government without the help of the other parties.

ANP was the second largest party in the province and Fazal e Haq, leader of IJI tried

to get her support but failed. He tried to make coalition with the other parties but no

prominent party was ready to give him any support so he decided to vacate the

Provincial Assembly seat and chose to hold NA seat. This decision of Fazal e Haq

created more difficulties for IJI in NWFP. 71

Members of IJI chose Humayun Saifullah as their party President and

nominated him as the candidate for Chief Minister of NWFP Provincial Assembly.

PPP and ANP nominated Aftab Sherpao as their coalition candidate who defeated

the IJI candidate and was nominated as the CM of province NWFP. 72 This coalition

could not survive for a long duration because PPP could not fulfill her promises

which she made with ANP. Now IJI tried to make coalition with ANP but there was

a mixed response from both political parties about the formation of opposition

alliance in the NWFP Assembly. Badar stated; “Infect IJI and ANP were the parties

having different and opposite ideologies. IJI was based on Islamic conservative
 165

political thoughts while ANP believed in secularism. IJI was in the favor of Afghan

Jihad and its foreign policy totally based on enmity of Russia and India while ANP

had friendly relations with India and Russia. The contradiction of ideologies and past

policies of the two parties created differences between them and that coalition was

criticized not only by opponents but also by supporters.” 73

Nawaz Sharif’s sole decision created problems in IJI member parties. JUI (D)

and JI were not happy on this situation and they demanded a meeting of heads of IJI

to decide about the future of the alliance. Some prominent members of PML were

also not happy on that coalition. Ghulam Haider Wyne, opposition leader in NA, had

already submitted a resolution in the Parliament to announce Wali Khan as a

“traitor” for his letters written to Russian and Indian governments. When he asked to

withdraw his resolution, he strictly denied to withdraw and told that “he could not go

ahead with traitors.”74 On the other side Ameer Jamat e Islami, Qazi Hussain Ahmad

also declared Wali Khan a “traitor” for the same reasons. He stated that “If IJI and

ANP coalition was successful in making government in the province his party will

not accept any ministries.”75 Remaining parties if IJI like JMP, HJ, JAH (L), NPP

and IPG had no objection on that alliance with ANP because they were working with

her since long. 76 Nawaz Sharif tried to resolve their reservations. He assured them

that if their alliance was successful in toppling the PPP government, the portfolio of

Chief Minister and Governor would not handed over to ANP. 77

All members were not satisfied with this alliance in ANP, too. Different

statements were coming from the party members itself. Some members affirmed that

process of alliance and others vehemently rejected it. Some considered it positive
 166

step for democracy while others criticized its leadership and considered it a threat to

party ideology. Some members gave strict reaction on it and rejected to sit with IJI in

the Provincial Assembly. Some preferred to leave the party instead of forming

coalition with IJI. But still a satisfied number of members were with the party’s

decision and accepted that alliance to solve their problems. Some were so happy and

appreciated the decision because former alliance with PPP did not provide them the

desired facilities.78 President of ANP Wali Khan explained to his supports that “the

alliance did not harm the ideology of ANP but it was a set-back for IJI as the leaders

of IJI had dubbed the ANP as traitor and when they made alliance with it, they either

reverted from the previous statements or had made alliance with the traitors.” 79

After the formation of alliance a successful move of no-confidence against

Sherpao was launched and Arbab Jahangir was nominated as new Chief Minister of

NWFP by the newly established alliance. But situation was changed when PPP used

its tactics and succeeded to make a forward bloc in IJI provincial group under the

leadership of Ayub Tanoli and Shahzada Guastasap and with the help of the forward

bloc Sherpao saved his seat of Chief Minister.80 Sherpao offered Seventeen ministries

to IJI forward bloc out of twenty six. Humayun (Parliamentary leader of IJI) filed a

writ in Peshawar High Court contrary to horse trading under Political Parties Act (8-

B). Case was listened in high court and after a long proceedings high court rejected

his petition. Judge remarked:

“It stated that IJI was not a political party but an electoral alliance because none
of the component parties of the alliance withdrew their separate identity so any of
its members did not come under section (8-b) of the Political Parties Act.” 81

The decision opened a Pandora box of horse trading. A member of any party

could leave his party without any fear. That decision disturbed the political balance
 167

in the National and Provincial Assemblies. Same case was happened in Punjab

Assembly where Nawaz Sharif was ruling with the support of coalition government

and that decision could also become a threat for PPP coalition government in the

Centre. Immediately IJI leaders filed an petition contrary to that verdict in Supreme

Court who considered the IJI a political party and referred the case to Election

Commission of Pakistan for further elaboration. Election Commission did not give

any immediate response on this decision and in the meanwhile government of PPP

had dissolved by President Ishaq Khan and he announced the date of new elections.

Sindh was a difficult province to administer. It was divided in two major

urban and rural areas. In its urban cities like Hyderabad and Karachi MQM was the

popular political party and she had full hold in those cities. Besides Mohajir Qaumi

Movement (MQM), Jamaat-i-Islami and PPP also had a specific vote bank but it was

not enough to get seats from those cities. In rural areas PPP was considered as sole

political party and she bagged majority seats from those rural areas. MQM was

famous as “party of ruling party” which means that she never tried to sit in

opposition benches.

In Sindh Provincial Assembly, PPP was largest political party (67) and MQM

was on the second position. Islami Jamhori Ittihad, main rival of PPP got only one

seat in Sindh Assembly and rest of the seats were occupied by independents. 82 Being

a majority party PPP could form its government in Sindh without the help of any

other party but she preferred to make coalition with MQM because MQM had 13

seats in NA and without its support PPP was not in position to make its government

in the National Assembly. So she decided to share provincial government in Sindh

 168

with MQM. Secondly MQM’s participation in government could help the PPP to

defuse the ethnic tension which was very crucial matter in the politics of Sindh. PPP

and MQM signed an agreement of reunification of urban and rural population of

Sindh. The agreement was called “Karachi Accord”.83 IJI leaders tried their best to

create differences between PPP and MQM but failed. 84 Ch. Shujaat Hussain and Sh,

Rashid reached Karachi to convince MQM leaders but Altaf Hussain reaffirmed the

continuation of the alliance with Pakistan People's Party.

In Sindh beside Muhajir, Sindhi nationalist were also very prominent in rural

areas. Sindh National Front of Mumtaz Bhutto and Jiye Sindh of G. M. Syed were

the mainstream parties of those Nationalists. Karachi Accord satisfied MQM but

created problems for PPP because nationalist parties were against this agreement.

These Nationalist consisted of only fifty percent of the provincial population. They

were fearful to be converted in minority in their homeland. In urban areas like

Hyderabad and Karachi they were already in minority. The main threat for them was

mohajirs who were demanding separate nationality. This demand was creating

problems for Pakistan People's Party. If she acted upon Karachi accord and accepted

MQM demands, then she could lost the favor of Sindhi nationalists in rural areas

which were considered her support base; if she ignored the MQM demands then she

could face their unrest in urban areas. So it was very difficult for PPP to handle that

critical situation. In May 1989, “Karachi Accord” was surrounded in troubles when

all MQM Ministers resigned from the cabinet against the arrest of MQM workers.

PPP leadership tried to convince them but they refused to accept portfolios. So
 169

MQM declared that she would continue her support to PPP in the Federal

Government.

By the end of May, 1989 MQM showed her inclination towards IJI in the

debate on the national budget. This happened when Nawaz Sharif himself reached

Karachi and met with MQM leadership. The meeting prolonged for four hours. After

meeting, in press conference both leaders confirmed that main agenda of that

meeting was the strategy during the Federal budget session. Within 24 hours of this

meeting, Altaf Hussain also met with the PPP delegation and after meetings of

several days they prepared an agreement and PPP government agreed to release the

prisoners of MQM. Another key issue tackled by PPP in Sindh was escalation of

violence. Abid stated that;

“The ethnic violence, which has dogged Sindh for years continues to escalate. Armed
gangs, ethnic and purely criminal, dominate the streets of Karachi. The constantly
shifting alliances of these groups add to the violence and the daily toll of innocent
lives has earned the city the sobriquet of Little Beirut.”85

Beside other issues, PPP provincial government has to face this critical

situation and she need to take strong measures on this issue.

4.4 Party Politics at the Centre

After election of 1988, PPP with highest numbers of representatives in

National Assembly became the ruling party while IJI with second position in election

rose as the opposition party at the Centre. PPP made alliance governments in Sindh,

Baluchistan and NWFP beside the Centre, while IJI occupied Punjab, the largest and

the biggest province of the country. The party politics between these two political

parties mainly consisted of rivalry and confrontation. Both parties belonged to

 170

divergent ideologies. Both tried to dissolve the government of its opponent, as they

did not accept each-others, the governments of PPP stopped the funds of Punjab and

tried to terminate the IJI rule. Pakistan People’s Party did not take any encouraging

step to solve the complications as meetings of NFC and CCI were not summoned

which could help to resolve basic disputes. PPP did not hesitate in openly

announcing that Ghulam Mustafa Khar was appointed as head of “Nawaz Sharif

Hakoomat Girrao Tehreek” (terminate Nawaz Sharif Government movement).

Replying to that, IJI adopted the strategy to weaken and destabilize the government

of PPP in the Centre and in provinces too. Efforts of reconciliation were also made

by both the political parties but scarcely any concrete steps were taken in this regard.

The main disputed issues which created tension between these two mainstream

political parties were as under:

4.4.1 People’s Program for Development

PPP government allotted more than two thousand millions rupees for

People’s program for development to improve structure by activating local means

and producing jobs. The importance was given to such areas as health, education,

electricity, sanitation, water supply and rural roads in backward areas. The program

designed at enhancing the prevailing development programs and allowing the public

to choose themselves about its most-felt requirements. To elaborate this program

Benazir Bhutto emphasized that;

“The ultimate beneficiary should be the poorest segments of the population. The most
important part of each scheme is the end output of benefits received by village or
mohalla residents. Our program is to fight out poverty, develop confidence in people
at village level and restore self-respect among them to shoulder future responsibilities
rather than depending on others to solve their problems.” 86
 171

The Punjab government strongly condemned the program’s enactment

through these newly generated Federal committees, arguing that it would not only be

unproductive but would also be in violation of the provincial self-rule and that the

program was an open interference in provincial autonomy and local matters. The

Punjab government demanded “The schemes envisaged beneath the program were

primarily in the domain of local councils. If the Federal government was sincere it

should have involved the Punjab government by way of liaison committee

representing both the Federal and the provincial governments.” 87

The same reaction was come from Baluchistan and Chief Minister Akbar

Bhugti criticized it and stated: “No doubt it is a good program but it should be

executed by the provincial governments because this was their constitutional right.
88
We will not allow any infringement on provincial autonomy.” The method in

which the PPD is being applied leaves scarcely any doubt that the PPP is being

promoted at the cost of the public exchequer. 89 For PPP, it was not only an easy way

to give incentive to the party members. She saw the package as central to her

struggles to reach the people directly and promote their provision for the PPP.

Meanwhile, the provinces claimed that the funds should be given to the regional

governments which knew accurately what areas required to be developed. In short, it

was a matter of who should directly exercise its political effect over the electorate.

4.4.2 Eighth Amendment

The second issue which caused tension between PPP and IJI was abolishment of

eighth amendment from the constitution, under which the President was empowered

with several rights. President could terminate government if he felt that the State
 172

business was not functioning according to the constitution. President could appoint

Prime Minister. He could approve the names of provincial caretaker governments,

nominated by the governor. Nomination of Chief Election Commissioner of

Pakistan, Chairman of Federal Public Service Commission, and all heads of army

including Air Force and Navy was at the will of the Premier. President had authority

on legislation and he could return a bill to the legislature for review of the bill or any

of its part. 90 The amendment was included in the constitution by General Zia to keep

his authority over the civilian government as well as PM. None of the politicians

challenged or criticized it in the period of General Zia but now the democratic

government of PPP considered it a serious threat for the evolution of social equality

in Pakistan. PPP also assumed that it had created imbalance of power between PM

and President which made the constitution a source of creating misperceptions in the

smooth working of the legislatorial democracy. For these reasons PPP tried to repeal

the amendment altogether or at least, to amend some of its clauses. It was

compulsory to have 2/3 majority in parliament for any amendment in the constitution

and PPP did not have it, so she needed the support of opposition parties.

IJI adopted a strong stand and requested the PPP government to frame a

document of suggested amendments. IJI demanded to hold comprehensive

consultations of government and opposition leaders on proposed formula of PPP,

before bring forward it. Opposition desired to select the sections that needed

modifications. IJI also demanded to uphold the “balance of powers” between PM and
91
the President even after modifying the constitutional Eighth Amendment. Some
92
politician like Shujaat Hussain wanted to reinstate original constitution of 1973.
 173

Before the elections of 1988 Jamaat-i-Islami also demanded a return towards the

original 1973 constitution but after PPP’s establishment of government, she was

demanding balance of power. 93 Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi considered eighth amendment

as “a source to save people of Pakistan from civil dictatorship.” 94 On the other side

PM wanted to eliminate whole amendment instead of its some clauses. But after a

short period of time she realized that it could not amend the Eighth Amendment

individually it started dialogs with opposition but at that time opposition did not react

properly. To handle this situation PPP used another tactic of buying loyalties of IJI

MNAs, but failed. IJI constituted a committee to discuss this matter with other

parliamentary parties and finally decided to oppose it. 95 PPP disliked this decision

and eighth amendment remained intact with the constitution.

4.4.3 Shariah Bill

Enforcement of Shariah had been an argumentative issue from the inception

of Pakistan. At different occasions attempts were made to convert Pakistan to an

Islamic Welfare State. An effort had been made by Sami Ullah 96 and Qazi Hussain

Ahmad97 when they made a draft of Shariah bill and in July13, 1985 presented the

bill in Senate for approval. Senate did not take any action on it and was left as

pending. In 1990 this issue arose again and on the behest of majority in Senate,

opposition presented this bill again in upper house and it was passed unanimously on
98
May 13, 1990. Central government of PPP, which was famous for its socialist

thought, avoided to present this Shariah Bill in the National Assembly due to its

reservation on it. Promulgation of Islamization in Pakistan was one of the prominent

points of the political manifesto of IJI so its parliamentary committee decided to

 174

present new Shariah bill with some new modifications in the NA, 99 but due to apathy

of Federal government it could not be presented in NA for approval.

4.4.4 Construction of Kalabagh Dam (KBD)

“ ”

Kala Bagh Dam was a plan to stock water and to produce electricity. The

plan was initiated in 1948100 but till 1988 this project was just on papers. The Dam

could generate 2400 megawatts of energy in the beginning and in future could

produce more than 3400 megawatts of electricity which was more than the

production of Terbella and Mangla Dam both. The KBD dam could fulfill the need

of the all four provinces and its Lake could help irrigating fifty lac acres of land

which could get revolutionary growth in agricultural revenue. 101 Till 1988 the

construction of the KBD could not be started due to reservations of the provinces
102
especially ANP of NWFP opposed its construction. Sindh also showed its

reservations on the construction of KBD. Only Punjab was favoring KBD while

Baluchistan did not adopt any clear stance. When PPP came into power in 1988

Benazir Bhutto tried to create consensus on KBD but faced severe reaction,

especially from its coalition partner ANP and from her mother land Sindh. Both

believed that through this dam Punjab would absorb their share of water. IJI

propagated the importance of KBD but when NPP from Sindh and ANP from NWFP

joined the alliance with IJI the propagation of the construction of KBD decreased

slowly and this matter buried in files.

4.4.5 Kashmir Issue

Kashmir issue has importance in the politics of Pakistan and has a prominent

effect on the local politics. Political parties use this dispute to build up public attitude

in their favor. This issue is usually used by political parties to show the others as
 175

deceitful with the nation. Same kind of strategy was assumed by Islami Jamhori

Ittihad to prove Benazir Bhutto a traitor mainly during the PM of India Rajiv

Gandhi’s103 visit at the occasion of SAARC Session. The one-to-one meeting

between these two Prime Ministers held and after a general discussion Indian PM

Rajiv Gandhi clearly called Kashmir as an “integral part of India” and Pakistani PM

Benazir Bhutto did not appropriately present Pakistan’s point of view which was

criticized by the IJI parties. 104 Now IJI got a chance to show the PPP leadership as

traitor and deceitful with Pakistan because of its selfish attitude towards Kashmir

problem. Opposition including IJI took the stance that PPP leadership had an

opportunity to discuss the Kashmir issue on the SAARC meeting but it deliberately

did not avail the opportunity.

To counter the opposition’s propaganda Central government summoned a

“Kashmir Conference” on Jan. 1990. All provincial CMs, all heads of Parliamentary

Parties and PM AJ & K were invited in the conference. In the conference, foreign

Minister Sahibzada Yaqub briefed the participants that government could not take

the Kashmir issue in any international forum and it needed to solve it on bilateral

talk. Opposition parties did not accept his explanation and after the conference they

criticized the government for its weak stance on the Kashmir issue, 105 and continued

their criticism on the PPP stance about the Kashmir issue.

4.5 Pakistan People’s party’s Relations with Army

It was the Pak army that Benazir Bhutto had to watch and deal carefully. In

the past year of her father rule, after the war of 1971, Z. A. Bhutto dealt with a

defeated and demoralized army and dominated it. But a few years later, the army
 176

regained its confidence and not only ousted him from power but put him behind the

bar where he was awarded with death sentences. 106 By the time Benazir took office,

army played very assertive, crucial and positive role in the politics. “After three

decades of military intervention, the reality in Pakistani politics was that no

government, not even a popularly-elected one, could expect to stay in power without

the army’s backing.” 107

In 1988 every politician was mentally prepared for next

martial law but new COAS General Aslam Baig condemned such rumors and stated

that army had no concern with politics. Rasul Bax Rais stated on this situation that:

“The army is using this opportunity for the restoration of its prestige in
the eyes of civilians, Following Zia’s death; the generals had been relieved of
many liabilities and burdens. They now wanted an opportunity “to start again
with a clean state.” 108

Prime Minister Benazir’s relations with the army received their first jolt in

mid-1989 when she ordered to change the chief of the Inter-Services Intelligence

(ISI) Hamid Gul, on Afghanistan issue. 109 Though clashes over Afghan issue were

quoted as the main motive for Hamid Gul’s removal, it was the Inter-Services

Intelligence’s domestic intelligence role even after she came to power that had
110
particularly incensed Bhutto. Hamid Gul was substituted by Shams ur Rehman

Kallu, (retired lieutenant-general) who believed that the military should remain aloof

from politics. 111 The manner in which that affair was handled fueled controversy and

tension in the military. When General Aslam Baig, was informed of Bhutto’s

intention to replace Gul, he agreed and prepared a list of in-service generals and sent

to Benazir Bhutto to choose a successor of Gul amongst them. But Benazir

overlooked his list and picked Kallu instead. That act of Prime Minister fueled

controversy and tension in the military. Although it caused some friction with the
 177

military, the move against Hamid Gul was seen as a major success for Benazir

Bhutto in her struggle to consolidate her power. Her success in ousting a powerful

figure in the army caused the impression in certain circles that she had successfully

asserted the authority of her office.

In January 1989, Bhutto formed an intelligence organization committee,

comprising of four members and supervised by Zulfiqar Ali (retired Air Marshal) to

look into and possibly curb the ISI directorate. The committee was known to have

the intention to deprive the ISI of its role in domestic politics. One of Bhutto’s

Ministers expressed to a correspondent; “We have no control over these people.

They are like a government unto themselves.”112

On 23rd March, 1989 Benazir acknowledged the services and efforts of Pak

Army for the refurbishment and support of egalitarianism and announced “the Medal

of Democracy for the armed forces.”113 The medal was compulsory to appease the

Pak army as in Dawn stated; “without the support of army no government could be

survive in Pakistan, and Benazir wanted to complete her term.”114 Prime Minister

praised the positive role of army and stated “the Medal was for the aspiration of the

armed forces for supporting the process of democratization fully” 115 Opposition

considered it as an act of flattery. 116

4.5.1 Rise of Conflict, Formation of COP and Vote of No-Confidence

Afterwards the establishment of governments in Federal and Provincial level,

confrontation party politics had started between the political parties especially

amongst IJI and PPP. In the end of her first ruling year PPP’s Central Government

cope with a severe threat in the shape of “no-confidence motion from the opposition”
 178

political parties. The PPP secured highest seats in election but she could not acquire

absolute majority in the Parliament and made her government in Centre with the

support of coalition party MQM and independents. Before the no-confidence motion

basic seats of the PPP were 111 which were less than simple majority. In the mid of

1989, IJI had formed an alliance of almost all opposition parties named “Combined

Opposition Parties” (COP) in Federal Assembly. That was the alliance of fourteen

political parties including IJI and its nine alliance parties. It was a parliamentary

alliance and it had nothing to do outside the Assembly. 117 Prominent politician like,

Nawaz Sharif, Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan, Wali Khan, Nawab Akbar Bhugti,

Junejo, and Jatoi were the part of this alliance. Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi was elected as

its President. Different parties of COP gathered on one common goal, threw the PPP

out of power so for that purpose no-confidence move was tabled. On October 28,

1989, MQM due to its reservations left the PPP and joined this alliance 118 which

shocked the PPP. The MQM’s defection significantly encouraged the COP. On 23

October, COP submitted to the parliament secretariat bill of a no-confidence motion

against Prime Minister Bhutto and her Cabinet signed by 86 of COP members. The

next day, Nawaz Sharif shifted all the COP members to a hotel in “Muree Hill”

resort in the Punjab. The representatives were heavily protected by Punjab police and

were insulated from outside world so that PPP, the ruling party would not be able to

contact them and try to trap them away from the COP.

PPP alleged that COP was trying to buy the vote of PPP legislature and

offered them Rs. 20 million for each vote. IJI refused her allegations. On the other

side same tactics were adopted by PPP and Benazir Bhutto took her supporters Swat.
 179

The legislatures whose faithfulness with party was doubtful were disallowed to take

part in “No-Confidence Motion” and some members of the IJI were taken away from

the parliament to exclude them from voting process. Many of the IJI members were

persuaded through offers of ministries and huge sum of money. 119

Finally on first November, 1989 the “Motion of No-Confidence” was put to a

vote. According to constitution of Pakistan and under the rules of the National

Assembly, only the supporters of the No-Confidence motion were mandatory to cast

the vote. In the Assembly of 237 representatives, no-confidence move required 119

votes to bring down Pakistan People's Party government but received only107. It was

shocked for COP parties. At least thirty supporters of the movement remained aloof

from this process. After the voting in parliament Benazir Bhutto thanked the

representatives for given the opportunity to continue her policies of national renewal.

She stated;

“It will be the solemn duty of myself and the democratic government to live up to the
expectations and aspirations of the people, I will appreciate the opposition if she works
with my administration for the benefit of the country. Opposition was healthy and
proper in a democratic society, but opposition for opposition’s sake only was counter-
productive and could undermine Pakistan’s experiment in democracy. I have neither
rancor nor any ill will against those who have moved that no-trust motion against
me.”120

Benazir Bhutto further expressed the hope that “same elements in the House and

throughout the country would join hands to make democracy in Pakistan work.” 121

Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi, the President of COP accepted his defeat and

professed that the opposition would respect the verdict of the worthy House. He also

showed little sign that COP might reconcile with PPP. Nawaz Sharif stated on this

result “Things would be stabilize once she is out of power, the battle is on.”122 “The
 180

government is most inefficient and weak in the history of Pakistan, it cannot last for

long.” 123 IJI claimed that Benazir Bhutto survived the vote only because the PPP

members mostly stayed with the party and some independents apparently sold their

votes to her. Nawaz Sharif blamed that the move failed because of IJI itself. Four

members of IJI including, Makhdoom Ahmad Anwar Aalam, Shabbir Ahmad, Ch.

Anwar Aziz and Ghulam Ahmad Maneka were responsible for this defeat. It was

said that these members had signed the no-confidence motion but altered their mind

before voting was held. Due to that change some members of PPP who had agreed to

support IJI negated to do so and the number of IJI supporters reduced. 124 The PPP

was said to have contested with the opposition in the battle of vote-buying by

offering government jobs, plots of land and cash amount to legislators. The absence

of Wali Khan from parliament, whose vote in favor of the no-confidence motion

would have influenced others to vote against the government created a lot of

questions about the creation of COP.

The no-confidence motion exposed the weakness and flaws of democratic

institutions in Pakistan. The political pressures that led to the vote, as well as the

vote-purchasing by both sides were forming shadows over the existence of

democratic government. In the political battle leading up to the no-confidence

motion, both side blamed the other of bribery and hijacking allegedly committed to

acquire the votes. Trading of representatives’ votes had never been done on such a

scale containing millions of rupees disbursed to purchase or retain their loyalties. As

one analyst noted:

“We saw a kind of politics never witnessed before. Individual

Consciences were never so freely and in such broad daylight
 181

bought and sold.”125

Though Benazir Bhutto got victory and defeated the opposition but the

situation was still alarming for him and PPP had to remain careful in future. The

margin of success was very narrow, only 12 votes while she secured 25 more votes

when she get vote of confidence. During her 11 months in Prime Minister House,

Benazir had lost support of several independents and the smaller parliamentary

parties which had grown dissatisfied with her policies. Now it was compulsory for

PM that besides rationalizing the cabinet, she also had to mend her connections with

party members and political associates.

MQM participated in that motion according to its agreement with IJI. Failure

of motion caused a main modification in the political affairs of Sindh. MQM’s

collaboration with Jiye Sindh highly increased which enhanced problems in the rule

and command condition of the province. The situation worsened to such a level that

CM Sindh Qaim Ali Shah had forced to resign from the office on February 23,

1990.126 The military had dissociated itself from these political disputes and claimed

that it had ceased interfering in politics. For instance, before the no-confidence

motion, Nawaz Sharif asked for a meeting with the General Aslam Baig; he refused

the request to show and prove his political impartiality.

In September 1990, IJI again planned for a second “No-Confidence Motion”

contrary to Prime Minister but it could not table till the termination of the Federal

Assembly. 127 Later when Ghulam Ishaq Khan terminated PPP government he

declared that motion major cause of dissolvent the Assembly. He elaborated that

during no-confidence motion PPP used huge money to win over the sympathies of
 182

the members of opposition party. The method and techniques used to bribe them

were means and shameful. Legislatures were harassed, given plots, permits, licenses

and even ministries. Some members acquired land and loans. Those who remained

faithful and did not change loyalties got benefits from their own parties. 128 Among

many other reasons, instability in democratic system was a major reason of the

termination of the assemblies which was initiated by the horse trading inside the

assemblies.

4.5.2 No Confidence Motion against CM Punjab

The party politics between IJI and PPP members of parliament reached on the

peaks of hostility when PPP tried to oust the Nawaz Sharif from the Punjab Chief

Minister House. PPP had launched a no-confidence move against the CM Punjab to

terminate IJI’s government from Punjab. This was due to the enmity between the IJI

and the PPP which was boosted after IJI’s denial to support PPP to alter the Eighth

Amendment of the constitution. PPP considered it a great set-back for its government

as the largest province had denied to cooperate with it. In return, PPP started efforts

to terminate Nawaz Sharif rule in Punjab. 129 For this PPP required the provision of

thirty representative of Punjab Assembly for a successful no-confidence motion

against him. 130

To make the no-confidence move a success, different steps were taken. PPP

tried to create a forward bloc in the Punjab PA but only five members joined this

group. Many members of the Punjab PA were bribed through different means likes

Jobs and allotment of plots. Nawaz Sharif used different tactics to save his

government. Firstly he gave funds to members on the name of development work.

 183

Secondly he enjoyed support of Army Chief. 131

Thirdly he acquired “vote of

confidence” from Punjab Assembly before the launching of no-confidence motion.

He obtained 152 votes which ended the conspiracy against its government, 132 and it

had to plan something else to create hurdles for the provincial administration of the

Punjab. The opposition leader in Provincial Assembly of Punjab blamed that Nawaz

Sharif had disbursed more than three crore rupees to tackle the no-confidence move

against his office. 133 This claim was denied by Nawaz Sharif. He contended that if it

was so he could never get more votes than his first vote of confidence. He blamed

that his supporters were forced by centre but they did not accept any pressure. 134

4.5.3 Demands for Re-Election of Prime Minister

The party politics between IJI and PPP could not close even after the

unsuccessful presentation of no confidence motion. These two major parties with

their allies could not create any harmony between them for the sack of democracy.

One more hurdle come into the way of democracy when IJI demanded for a fresh

vote of confidence from PM. According to the modification introduced by Chief

Executive Zia in third Constitution, the Chief Executive had possessed the authority

to nominate PM and National Assembly was authorized to choose the Premier after

March 20, 1990. 135 The opposition claimed that Benazir had been selected by the

President under the RCO clause. 136 The senior IJI leadership claimed that according

to the Article 91-2 (A) the term of the existing Premier nominated by the President

would end on the night of March 20, 1990 and that a new Prime Minister would have

to be nominated. Alternatively, Benazir would have to acquire a fresh “vote of

confidence” from the Lower House.

 184

The opposition political parties had demanded the Central Government to

contact the court for holding of fresh elections. 137 The opposition was hopeful to

have President’s cooperation on that issue. Besides the power to nominate the Head

of the Cabinet of the Parliament , the Chief Executive was also authorized to dissolve

Parliament, although the provision had been understood by the courts as being partial

by “certain objective conditions.”138 The opposition needed the President to use his

powers either to ask Benazir to acquire a “vote of confidence” or terminate the

National Assembly and publicized the program for fresh elections. 139 The PPP, of

course, refused to accept the opposition’s explanation and contended that Benazir

was not need to get a fresh “vote of confidence” in the Lower House of the

Parliament. However, Benazir called the National Assembly to meet through the key

period while her party worked hard to plan defections from the opposition.

As March 20 come near, the IJI leaders increased their pressure on Ishaq

Khan to ask Benazir to take a fresh vote of confidence. The statements and the

counter-statements about the legitimate requirement for a new vote flooded in the

press and there was misperception all over. The argument lastly ended when the

Ishaq Khan affirmed that he was in no way bound to ask the PM to get a fresh “vote

of confidence.” He added that the question of holding new elections should be

decided by representatives of both sides in accordance with the public’s wish. He

stated that, if there was any misperception about any provision of the constitution

in anyone’s mind, they should take the matter to the worthy court. 140 This was a

setback for the IJI which had expected the President to side with them against PPP.

March 20, 1990 passed away without changing in the political scenario. Now it had
 185

to see interpretation from the court, the opposition’s only expectation was that the

bench would interpret the constitution in its favor, however most legal specialists

argued that it would be doubtful. PPP, on the other hand, appeared to have increased

some momentum in her struggle compared to the IJI.

4.5.4 Dismissal of Benazir Government

PPP and IJI enmity created problems for the democracy in the country.

Individual Party politics overcame on the politics for the nation and conflict between

two mainstream parties on minor issues damaged the concept of party politics and it

provided a chance to third party for intervention in democratic system. And now

third party was not military but President.

Due to horse trading,141 corruption,142 non-cooperative Centre-province

relations,143 favoritism,144 administrative failing,145 contempt towards the Senate and

courts of law,146 political hostility,147 violation of constitutional provisions, 148 and

failure to restore law and order in Sindh, 149 emergency was enacted under the Article

232 (1) by the President on August 6, 1990. 150 He also announced the termination of

governments and dissolvent of Federal Assembly under the article of 58 (2-B).151

NWFP and Sindh Provincial Assemblies were also dissolved, 152 but the Constitution

was not suspended. The emergency was imposed on the grounds that the internal and

external forces had endangered Pakistan and to deal with the situation obligation of

the emergency was essential. The President publicized the date of new general

election which was October 24, 1990.

It was usually believed that most of the charges imposed by Ishaq Khan were

the same to those, imposed by Zia against Junejo’s government. 153

Benazir asked
 186

Ishaq Khan that he had guaranteed for no such action then why it occurred. Ishaq

Khan responded that recently he had decided to topple her government. 154 Benazir

had described his action as “illegal” and “arbitrary” and rejected all accusations as

fake and spurious. She also termed the action a “constitutional coup d’etat” 155 and

severely criticized him for dismissal of her government. Later on the Punjab

Assembly and Baluchistan Assembly were also dissolved. 156 The PPP decided to file

a plea against the order of termination in the court. 157

With the decision of dismissal of PPP government a new phase of party politics

started with a fresh zeal to gain the election among the political parties where new

alliances were made and previous ones were further enhanced to avail every chance

to win the election by the political parties.

Conclusion

After a long period of dictatorship, democracy had been introduced in

Pakistan but due to party politics it could not flourish. In the game of power politics,
politicians themself created hurdle in the way of democracy and PPP’s government
was terminated by President just after twenty months of its establishment. In 1988,
when party-based elections were held and a democratic government was finally
established, the people of Pakistan had attached high expectations and hopes for the
restoration of democracy. On its termination they were, however disappointed.
During the democratic era of December 1988 to August 1990, different vested
interests and the establishment continued to interfere in the matters of the elected
government and severely circumscribed its actions and working. Even frictions
between the center and the provinces helped boost up political anarchy and opened
the doors for third parties’ intervention. The PPP government itself became
embroiled in severe frictions with the opposition, the President and the army. She
adopted policies which annoyed the President and the army. Despite repeated efforts
at ending these frictions they persisted only ended with her dismissal. Throughout
 187

this era the power game continued along with blackmailing, political horse- trading
and manipulation, assembly floor-crossing and political coercion and exploitation.
The inequality of power among two premiers created more problems for democracy.
All this led to political instability and unrest and allowed the army to
maintain its strength vis a vis the political arena as the press was also severely
curbed. The lack of confidence between government and establishment, highly
unsatisfactory governance and disturbed situation in Sindh helped in the
strengthening of non-elected institutions. The democratic and other institutions failed
to act within their prescribed limits and the government was sidelined as the
President and the military started managing various affairs of the state. All this
eventually came to a head and resulted in the Prime Minister’s ouster from office.
Besides all the above usage of government machinery for personal benefits and
various other malpractices by all were the major causes of political unpredictability
in the democratic era of 1988-1990.
 188

References and Notes

1
Especially Pakistan People’s Party, who was famous as a socialist democratic party.
2
Raza Rafi, ed., Pakistan in Perspective 1947-1997, (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2001), 45.
3
President Zia-ul Haq, “Chairman joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Akhtar Abdur Rehman,
Brigadier Siddiq Salik, US ambassador to Pakistan Arnold Raphel, General Herbert M. Wassom, the
head of the US military aid mission to Pakistan and few other army officers lost their lives in air crash
in 1988 while they were coming back from Bahawalpur to Rawalpindi.
4
Faqir Khan., Revival of Democracy in Pakistan 1988-1999: An Analysis, (Lahore: Pakistan Journal of
Social Sciences (PJSS) Vol. 35, No.1. 2015). 201-212
5
The alliance comprised “nine parties, of which the major components were the Pakistan Muslim
League, National Peoples Party, Jamaat-e-Islami and ANP with PML accounting for 80% of the IJI’s
electoral candidates.”
6
Life after Zia, The Herald, September 1988. 45.
7
Dawn, October 3, 1988.
8
Nawa-i-Waqt (Urdu), Rawalpindi, October 3, 1988.
9
PML (J) demanded “the appointment of neutral caretaker government, but this demand was
withdrawn when the PML got unified. Before the unification of PML, president of PML (J) Junejo
announced to play role of strong opposition in the Senate to pressurize it to prevent the caretakers to
contest the elections and if they wanted to participate in the elections they had to resign from the
government offices. Member parties of defunct MRD announced that the elections under existing set
up would not be acceptable to them. Wali Khan and certain other politicians were of the view that if
the caretaker government was allowed to participate in the elections it could influence the election
results. Imroze, September 28, 1988. He was of the view that in such a situation political parties
should not participate in the elections and should boycott it. But his suggestion was not accepted by
the leaders of other political parties considering that the boycott was no solution of the problem. Some
of them were of the view that the boycott could further exacerbate the political problem and could
raise feeling of dissatisfaction among the people. Dawn, October 13, 1988. Senators and ex-MNAs
and MPAs of Balochistan demanded the appointment of the non-political figures as caretaker
government to hold free and impartial elections.” Haider, Rawalpindi: September 20, 1988.
10
Far Eastern Economic Review, September 8, 1988. 18.
11
Benazir Bhutto., Daughter of Destiny, 377.
12
Ibid.
13
Jahangir Badar., Political Leadership: A Case Study of Benazir Bhutto, 264.
14
Ibid., 270.
15
Benazir Bhutto., Daughter of Destiny, 377.
16
Ghafoor Ahmad., Wazīr-i A‘zam Benazir, 84-85.
17
Kimie Sekine., Benazir Bhutto: her political struggle in Pakistan, 341.
18
Ibid.
19
The Nation Lahore, October 12, 1988.
20
Kimie Sekine., Benazir Bhutto: her political struggle in Pakistan, 332.
21
Ibid.
22
Asian Survey, February 1988. 128.
23
Ibid.
24
Hamid Khan., Constitutional and Political History of Pakistan, 706.
25
Report on the General Elections 1988, vol. 1 (Islamabad: Election Commission of Pakistan, n.d).
162, 164.
26
Muhammad Ali Sheikh., Benazir Bhutto: A Political Biography, 111.
27
Ibid. 109.
28
Pakistan Times, October 11, 1988.
29
Sayed Qasim Mahmood., ed., Encyclopedia Pakistanica, (Urdu) (Karachi: Shahkar Book
Foundation, 1998), 205.
30
“On Way to Next General Elections” The Frontier Post, October 7, 1988.
31
Jang, October 19, 1988.
32
Pakistan Times, October 27, 1988.
33
Rahat Zubairy,. Politics of alliance in Pakistan, a case study of IJI, 334.
 189

34
Pakistan Times, October 20, 1988.
35
Islami Jamhoori Ittehad, Manifesto, Islami Jamhoori Ittehad, 1988. 4.
36
I. A. Rehman., So Far, So Quiet, The Herald, November, 1988. 35.
37
Zahid Hussain., The Awami Darbar, The Herald, November 1988. 50-51.
38
Jafri, 1996, 26.
39
Subrata Kumar., the Post-Colonial State in Asia: Dialectic’s of Politics and Culture, (Lahore: Sang
e Meel Publication,1988), 64-65.
40
The Nation, Lahore, December 16, 1989.
41
Subrata Kumar., the Post-Colonial State in Asia: Dialectic’s of Politics and Culture, 65.
42
Election commission report on election 1988.
43
Naqvi., Mehallāti Sāzishain, 9.
44
Ghafoor Ahmad., Wazīr-i A’zam Benazir, 169-70.
45
Subrata Kumar Mitra., ed., “The Post-Colonial State in Asia: Dialectics of Politics and Culture, 64-
65.
46
Ibid.
47
M.H. Askari., Playing with Destiny, The Herald, Election Special, 1990. 11.
48
Electoral Politics in Pakistan: National Assembly Elections 1993,” Report of SAARC-NGO
OBSERVERS (New Delhi: International Centre for Ethnic Studies, 1995). 8
49
The National Assembly of Pakistan Debates: Official Report,” vol. 1, no. 3, December 3, 1988, 32-
35.
50
Dawn, Karachi, December 3, 1988.
51
Qurat ul Ain, “Parliamentary Democracy in Pakistan: 1988-1999.” 79.
52
Kessing’s Record of World Events, Volume 35 No. 12. 37150.
53
Abdul Ghafoor Awan., Tīn Muntakhib Wuzra’ei Ā‘zam kī Bartarfi, (Lahore: Unique Publishing
Company,1991). 219-20.
54
Khaleeq Naziri., Martial Law-Kaesei Āta hai, Kon Lagwāta hai, Weekly Zindagi, June 2-9, 1989.
25.
55
Intikhābi Dhāndli Sirf Punjab mein?, Roznama Kainaat, December 6, 1988.
56
Nasir and Aslam., the Decade, 37.
57
Ihtashamul Haque., The Meeting Season, The Herald, Karachi, May 1989, 36.
58
Altaf Khan., Battle Stations, The Herald, Karachi, May 1989, 50-51.
59
The Nation, Lahore, March 7, 1990.
60
Asghar Shad., Benazir Bhutto: Pakistan Aur Jamhooriat, (Urdu) (Rawalpindi: Sana Publishers,
2001), 123.
61
Iqbal Akhund., Trial and Error: The Advent and Eclipse of Benazir Bhutto, (Karachi; Oxford
University Press, 2000), 292.
62
Asghar Shad., Benazir Bhutto: Pakistan Aur Jamhooriat, (Urdu), 123.
63
Muhammad Waseem., Politics and the State, 455.
64
Rahat Zubairy.. Politics of alliance in Pakistan, a case study of IJI, 211.
65
Ibid.
66
Salim Shahid, “Pandora’s Box”, The Herald, January 1989, 80-81.
67
The Nation, Lahore, December 16, 1989.
68
“Subā’i Assembly Punjab, Mubāhithāt: Official Report,” December 17, 1988. 432.
69
Abbas Nasir and Talat Aslam, “Images of the Decades”, The Herald, January 1990. 37.
70
Kimie Sekine., Benazir Bhutto: her political struggle in Pakistan, 87.
71
“Electoral Politics in Pakistan: National Assembly Elections 1993, Report of SAARC-NGO
OBSERVERS” (New Delhi: International Centre for Ethnic Studies, 1995). 17.
72
Pakistan Times, June 5, 1990.
73
Badar, Mehmood, “ANP IJI Ittehad….Bu‘ad al Mashriqein”, Nawa-i-Waqt, June 10, 1989.
74
Mashriq, June 10, 1989.
75
Ibid.
76
Ashraf Mumtaz, “IJI’s CWC Meeting”, Dawn, June 30, 1989.
77
Raja Zulfikar, “IJI Endorses Alliance with ANP”, The Muslim, July 2, 1989.
78
Ghafoor Ahmad., Wazīr-i Ā‘zam Benazir, 306-7.
79
“Suba Sarhad Main Naye Ittehad ki Durgat”, Mashriq, July 13, 1989.
 190

80
Asghar Abdullah, “Doctor Israr Ahmad nei Apni Khidmāt Muslim League ko Paish kr dein”,
Zindagi, April 27-May 3, 1990. 43-44.
81
Ghafoor Ahmad., Wazīr-i Ā‘zam Benazir, 367-70.
82
Kimie Sekine., Benazir Bhutto: her political struggle in Pakistan, 39.
83
Munir Ahmad., Altaf Hussain, (Lahore: Gora Publishers, 1996), 344-51
84
Mujtaba Akhtar, “IJI High Command to Decide Future Strategy Today”, The Muslim, November
22, 1988.
85
Abid Ali, Far Eastern Economic Review, September 7, 1989. 38.
86
Viewpoint, January 11, 1990. 10.
87
Ibid. 12
88
May 4, 1989. 23.
89
August 10, 1989. 9-10.
90
Makhdoom Ali Khan, Constitutionally Speaking, The Herald, September 1989. 66-67.
91
Sultan Ahmad., Proper Stance for Opposition, Dawn, January 5 1989.
92
IJI, PPP Muzākrāt kī Andrōni Kahāni, Jang, January 23, 1989.
93
Sultan Ahmad., Proper Stance for Opposition, Dawn, January 5, 1989.
94
Kamran Khan., Jatoi Terms Idea of Mid-Term Polls Senseless, The Muslim, Islamabad September
3, 1989.
95
Jang, February 6, 1989.
96
President of Jamiat Ulema Islam.
97
Ameer e Jamaat e Islami
98
Rahat Zubairy., Politics of alliance in Pakistan, a case study of IJI, 218.
99
Jang, January 12, 1990.
100
M. A. Sufi., Pakistan ki Zarōrat: Kalabagh Dam, (Lahore: Ilm-o Irfan Publishers, 1998). 9 and 14.
101
“Subā’i Assembly Punjab, Mubāhithāt,” December 15, 1988. 330-31.
102
Ibid., December 15, 1988. 332.
103
Jang, July, 21, 1989.
104
Abdul Ghafoor Awan., Tīn Muntakhib Wuzra’ei Ā‘zam kī Bartarfi, 381.
105
Ibid.
106
Ghafoor Ahmad., Zia Kay Aakhri das saal, 279.
107
Viewpoint, May 11, 1989. 14.
108
Far Eastern Economic Review, December 1, 1988. 11.
109
Kimie Sekine., Benazir Bhutto: her political struggle in Pakistan, 72.
110
Ibid.
111
Viewpoint, June 22, 1989. 10.
112
New York Times, May 26, 1989.
113
Zafarullah Khan., Political Parties in Pakistan; Disabled by Design, xii
114
Dawn, Karachi, February 25, 1990.
115
Ibid.
116
Razi and Shakar., Martial Law Aur Jamhoriat, (Urdu), 84-86
117
Ghafoor Ahmad., Wazīr-i Ā‘zam Benazir, 295.
118
Attar Chand., Pakistan: Party-Politics Pressure Groups and Minorities, (New Delhi:
Commonwealth Publishers, 1991), 146.
119
Mushtaq Ahmad., Benazir: Politics of Power, 78.
120
Kimie Sekine., Benazir Bhutto: her political struggle in Pakistan, 48.
121
Asian Survey, Vol. xxx No. 2, February 1990. 132.
122
Washington Post, November 2, 1989.
123
New York Times, November 2, 1989.
124
Ghafoor Ahmad., Wazīr-i Ā‘zam Benazir, 401-2.
125
Viewpoint, November 2, 1989. 10.
126
Meezan, Nawaz Sharif, 31 and 48.
127
Zahid Hussain Anjum., Siyasat, Ā‘in aur ‘Addālat, 128.
128
Ibid. 140.
129
Meezan., Nawaz Sharif, 27.
130
“Kessing’s Record of World Events,” Volume 36 No. 12. 37150.
131
Ahmad Rashid., Allies, Opposition Mount Pressure on Benazir, The Nation, March 27, 1989.
 191

132
Subaee Assembly Punjab, Mubahsay, March 13, 1989, 10-17
133
Hamid Mir., Ilzām Tarāshi kī Siyasat”, Nawa-i-Waqt, July 22, 1989.
134
The IJI is Here to Stay, an Interview of Nawaz Sharif with Talat Aslam, The Herald, April 1989.
144.
135
Hasan Askari Rizvi., The Military and Politics in Pakistan: 1947-1997, 264.
136
The situation before the said date was that the Premier was the nominee of the President and had to
take the oath before the formation of the cabinet. After March 20, 1990 the power of the President to
nominate the prime minister ended and he was bound to summon the special session of the Assembly
to ascertain the majority. Besides the Article 130 -2 (A) suggested that Provincial Chief Ministers did
not need a fresh election after March 20, 1990 and could stay in office. The Article 91-2 (A) lacked
this provision so the Premier was bound to seek fresh elections by secret ballot.179 The government
understood the Article 91-2 (A) as: The provision that was being rallied upon only gives a cut-off date
for the President’s discretionary powers for the appointment of the prime minister.
137
Iftikhar Gilani, interview by Nasir Malick, The Herald, Karachi, April 1990, 38-39.
138
Jang, March 2, 1990.
139
Dawn, March 7, 1990.
140
Chaudhry Abdul Ghafoor, interview by Nasir Malick, The Herald, Karachi, April 1990, 40
141
Raza., Pakistan in Perspective, 45.
142
Nawa-i-Waqt (Urdu), Rawalpindi, August 7, 1990.
143
Baxter, and Kennedy, 1997, 28-29.
144
Qureshi., Aik Hukmaran-Aik Sayasatdan, (Urdu), 27.
145
Jung (Urdu), Rawalpindi, August 7, 1990.
146
Nawa-i-Waqt (Urdu), Rawalpindi, August 7, 1990.
147
Abbas Bukhari., Beti Say Qaid Tak, (Urdu), 162.
148
Raza., Pakistan in Perspective, 45.
149
Kimie Sekine., Benazir Bhutto : her political struggle in Pakistan, 173.
150
A summarized version of the grounds in the dissolution order is as follows:
(a) Insufficient legislative work on the part of, and internal dissensions and friction within,
the National Assembly. Persistent and scandalous horse-trading for political gain and
furtherance of personal interests, corrupt practices and inducement, in contravention of the
Constitution.
(b) Willful undermining and impairment of the working of constitutional arrangements and
usurpation of the authority of the provinces and of such institutions, by the Federal
government, resulting in discord, confrontation, and deadlock. Specifically the following acts
of the Federal government:
i. The Council for Common Interest not allowed to function;
ii. The National Finance Commission never called to meet;
iii. Constitutional powers and functions of the provinces deliberately frustrated; and
iv. The Senate ridiculed and its constitutional role eroded.
(c) Corruption and nepotism in the Federal government.
(d) Failure to protect the Province of Sindh against internal disturbances, resulting in heavy
loss of life and property.
(e) Violation of the Constitution in the following instances:
i. Public ridicule of the superior judiciary, attack on its integrity, and attempts made to impair
its independence;
ii. Misuse of government resources for political ends and personal gains;
iii. The undermining of the Civil Services of Pakistan; and
iv. Exercise of powers under Article 45 without the President’s prior approval. For details, see Tariq
Rahim, 44 PLD at 652-54.
151
A clause of General Zia-ul Haq’s eighth amendment to the1973 constitution which enables the
president to dissolve the National Assembly if a situation has arisen in which the government of the
federation cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the constitution and an appeal to
the electorate is necessary.
152
Dawn, Karachi, August 7, 1990.
153
M.H. Askari., Playing with Destiny, The Herald, Election Special, 1990, 11.
154
Ahmad., Khandan Ka Katal, (Urdu), 385.
 192

155
Rahat Zubairy., Politics of alliance in Pakistan, a case study of IJI, 345.
156
Nawa-i-Waqt (Urdu), Rawalpindi, August 7, 1990.
157
The order of dissolution of National Assembly was contested in all the four High Courts vis a vis;
Lahore High Court, Sindh High Court, Balochistan High Court and Peshawar High Court under the
Article 199. Two petitions were filed in the Sindh High Court; one challenging the validity of the
dissolution order of National Assembly and the other the dissolution order of the Governor of Sindh
and the President in relation to the dissolution of Sindh Assembly and National Assembly
respectively. The petition filed in Quetta High Court was move to the Sindh High Court199 while the
writ petitions pending in Peshawar High Court were shifted to the Lahore High Court at the command
of the Supreme Court. In Lahore High Court the petitions was heard by the full bench which validated
the dissolution order on October 14, 1990. In Sindh High Court the petitions were heard by the full
bench comprised of four judges and the Chief Justice. The hearing of petitions that commence on
September 24, 1990 was concluded on October 14, 1990 and the decision was reserved by the Court.
The ruling was announced on October 18, 1990 and the petition was dismissed by the unanimous
order of the Court. It was decided that the federation and Sindh had not carried out their mandates
according to the provisions of the Constitution and in this case the call to the electorate was necessary.
 193

Chapter 5

Party politics in the Era of Guided Democracy 1990-1993

This chapter studies parliamentary party politics from 1990 to 1993, which

can be defined as the era of “guided democracy” for the simple reason that the Army

persisted in behind-the-scenes policymaking, especially, in defense and foreign

policy issues. Military, along with its intelligence agencies (especially ISI and MI),

had played an important role in creation1 and termination2 of the governments. A

troika3 system developed wherein the President was converted into an easy tool for

use by the Army. Under the provisions of the notorious Eighth Amendment the Chief

Executive remained all-powerful and in alliance with the military he terminated the

elected government of PPP.4

In election 1990, a new term was introduced by IJI, which was called

“Election engineering”. This technique revealed the new trade craft learnt to

“manage politics”. The new technique was illegitimate and a severe violation of rule

of law, but it was in some ways compassionate because it ended several sorts of

election engineering through ballot boxes on the spot. The illegal theft of mandate

could be achieved through pre-poll, and if essential be, post poll engineering.

The era in this chapter consisted on the party politics of alliances. Two main

alliances named Islami Jamhori Ittihad5 and People’s Democratic Alliance6 contested

in the election of 1990 and IJI won with 106 National Assembly seats while its rival

PDA bagged only 45 seats. MQM emerged as third biggest party who obtained 15

seats. PPP declared these election fraud but due to noncooperation from others
 194

political parties she accepted the result and quietly sat on the opposition benches.

Nawaz Sharif became first Prime Minister of Pakistan who belonged to industrial

family instead of feudal lords. He took positive steps to boost up economy. He made

coalition with MQM and gave ministries to its coalition political partners. He faced

less threat by PPP but unfortunately he annoyed President who in April 1993

terminated his regime and suspended the Parliament. Case went to Supreme Court

who restored IJI’s government but Ghulam Ishaq Khan succeeded to split IJI

coalition parties in the National beside Provincial Assemblies and made Nawaz

administration very tough to stand and deliver.7 The confrontation created tension

business community which caused losses in the “economic sector” of the Pakistan.

To avoid more obliteration and anarchy the Chief of Army Staff General Waheed

performed as mediator in the settlement amongst two Premiers and now both were

terminated from their seats and new elections were planned on October 06, 1993. 8

The focus of this chapter is to probe what role party politics played in the failure of

our democratic system during 1990-1993? Why and how military interfered in

political matters of Pakistan and been dominated? What was the role of Troika in

party politics of Pakistan? This chapter is an attempt to focus the party politics in

democratic regime, its complications, prospects and reasons of its failure in 1993.

5.1 Caretaker Government and PPP

After the termination of Assemblies and announcement of the dates of new

election by President Ghulam Ishaq Khan on October 24 and October 27 1990, 9 the

enthusiasm in political parties boosted up and they started their campaigns for new

elections. The response of political parties on the termination of PPP government

 195

was mixed as most political parties endorsed the Presidential step while a few parties

considered it essential. The Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Pakistan (N) was the only political

party that condemned this Presidential step.10 Conferring to the Constituents, election

should be conduct within ninety days so political parties had short time for

preparation. On August 6, 1990 Chief Executive Ishaq Khan announced the

formation of the caretaker government and Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi11 was selected as

PM of Pakistan while the names of Ghulam Mustafa Khar, 12 Elahi Bux Somro, Sartaj

Aziz13 and Rafi Raza14 were included in the Caretaker Cabinet.15 Beside Central

Caretaker government, Provincial governments were also formed. In Sindh and

Baluchistan caretaker governments were selected from among the cadres of the

Federal opposition while in Punjab and NWFP previous governments were allowed

to continue. 16 Ghulam Hyder Wyne of the IJI in Punjab, Mir Afzal of the IJI in the

NWFP, Humayun Marri,17 in Baluchistan, and Jam Sadiq Ali in Sindh were chosen

as Caretaker CM by President. The main object of this caretaker government was to

conduct “free and fair” elections and to transfer power to the newly elected

legislatures of the masses at the earliest possible date. A common demand about the

nomination of the custodian government was that it should be neutral to perform

fairly during electoral procedure but new interim government did not work

accordingly. Caretaker government behaved like an opposition party to PPP and

played a significant role in the downfall of PPP in the elections 1990.

The new setup of caretaker government was criticized by public because

despite their statements to be an impartial party, the biased character of the

caretakers was obvious as the President deceptively had carefully nominated only the
 196

PPP’s worst and nastiest enemies to establish both Central and provincial

governments.18 The mainstream political parties, comprising JUI (F), PPP, JUP (N),

and JI criticized on the creation of caretaker setup.19 Even Mulana Shah Ahmad

Noorani compelled to say “under this caretaker government, the free and fair

elections were impossible as its members were contesting the elections

themselves.”20

Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi initially wished to form a “broad-based”

administration with the participation of others prominent political parties but could

not succeed in his efforts. His colleagues in the Combined Opposition Parties (COP)

were annoyed by the fact that he had accepted the Prime Minister ship without

asking them in advance. Many political parties did not want to be willingly

associated with his caretaker government because it comprised what they called

“tried and tainted’’ members, some of whom had worked for martial law

governments. Even the MQM deteriorated to join his caretaker government. To

curtail PPP, Caretaker government took several steps. The media was used

frequently against PPP to create its negative image. The names of Benazir Bhutto,

her family members, former PPP Minister, Senators and other key figures in finance

were put into ECL and ban was imposed on them not to leave country. Horse-trading

carried out on an enormous scale. PPP candidates were offered with the ministries,

and other incentives such as industrial licenses, financial credits, and exclusion from

the accountability process in response to leave the PPP and join hands with the

caretakers. The loyal party members faced accountability or they were pressurized,

harassed and arrested. Special courts consisting of the judges of High Court were
 197

appointed for the especial trial of previous PPP government on nepotism and

corruption. 21

PPP in response claimed that a high-powered commission including Supreme

Court judges be formed to explore the conduct of all Presidents and PMs since 1985,

and refused to accept the special courts. 22 On September 10, on the advice of

President the Accountability Cell filed a number of references in the ineligibility

courts against PPP chairperson Benazir including funding of consultancy of Karachi

Electric Supply Corporation and allotment of plot for the construction of a five star

hotel in Islamabad. 23 The compulsion to present in court made it difficult for Benazir

to carry on election campaign. She confessed that; “I have come here to show the

people the hollowness and maliciousness of the whole process. I have come here

because I want to make a point that the former Prime Minister and leader of

Pakistan’s biggest political party is being dragged from court to court, this is aimed

at keeping us from fighting the election.” 24 She was acquitted of all the allegations

after two years of trials. 25

The most prominent target of the corruption allegations turned out to be

Benazir’s spouse, Asif Ali Zardari, who was supposed to have used his wife’s

official position. Zardari was formally detained on October 10 for involvement in

extortion case and remanded to custody until October 23, which was the last day of

the election campaign.26 Several political parties and politicians demanding to the

caretaker government to complete the process of accountability before next election

but majority of politicians believed that the election itself is a procedure of

 198

accountability and election result will decide the future of such corrupt politicians;

and those politicians will not win the elections that had lost masses confidence.

5.2 Party Politics between Alliances before Elections

Two prominent alliances had been formed during the course of election

campaign. One was IJI the alliance of eight political parties and other was People’s

Democratic Alliance including PPP, TNFJ, TI and PML (Q).27 The later one proved

to be a coalition of strange collaborators including Benazir Bhutto, Allama Sajid

Naqvi, Malik Qasim and Asghar Khan. Beside these two mainstream political

alliances there were two others i.e. Pakistan Democratic Forum (PDF) and Pakistan

Islami Ittihad (PII). PDF consisted of six leftist minor parties and its formation was

announced on September 10, 1990. The PII was formed on September 18, 1990 by

the efforts of the President of Khaksaar Tehrik. This alliance was established with

the cooperation of seven other minor political parties. 28

5.2.1 Islami Jamhori Ittihad

Before this election IJI adopted such a policy which could keep unity

amongst the alliance parties. The member parties of alliance decided that they would

participate in the election under the banner of IJI. In every constituency only one

candidate of IJI coalition parties contested election and no individual candidate was

supported or allowed by any coalition parties to contest election independently. All

member parties of IJI deposited donations and election expenditures in the account

of the alliance.29 Nawaz Sharif was declared the President of IJI while Ch. Abdul

Ghafoor was designated as the General Secretary of the alliance. The election
 199

symbol of the alliance “bicycle” and flag remained unchanged. 30 If any party of the

alliance or individual candidate of any member-party of the alliance tried to violate

the instructions, rules and verdicts of the alliance, was liable to punished, even its

membership of the alliance could be terminated. In fact this time IJI tried to attract

the majority of the voters by its amendments in manifesto. In previous elections, IJI

faced severe problems about the nomination of the candidates in several

constituencies where more than one candidates contest election from the platform of

IJI or its member parties. It resulted in split of the votes of IJI and the candidates of

PPP got benefit from it. Now IJI decided to contest elections on one against one

basis. 31

The leaders of IJI member parties adopted a new strategy in this election and

they decided to plan an electoral adjustment with other political parties which were

still not the part of IJI. Further IJI was ready to make seat adjustment with MQM in

Karachi and Hyderabad, with Fazal ur Rehman and Bhugti in Baluchistan and with

Wali Khan in NWFP. But Jamaat-i-Islami and Junejo showed their reservations on it.
32
MQM Majlis e Ahrar and ANP showed their acceptance but they demanded free

hand in their constituencies to make election strategy at their own party level without

the interference of IJI leadership.33 To make IJI truly a broad based coalition, the

President of IJI Nawaz Sharif was authorized by member parties of the alliance to

contact with those political parties for seat adjustment who were still not part of the

IJI.34 A committee was constituted by Nawaz Sharif to consult these parties

especially with Tehrik e Istaqlal and Jamiat Ulema Pakistan (N). These two parties

were ready to cooperate with IJI in some constituencies on conditional basis but they
 200

refused to withdraw their all candidates against the coalition. Nawaz Sharif also

wanted to include MQM in IJI alliance but MQM was not ready to become a part of

this alliance and she did not attend the COP meeting held on September 9, 1990. But

later she agreed to cooperate with IJI and demanded at least one seat in every district

along with those seats which she had won in last election. Nawaz Sharif announced

that IJI would not contest election against MQM candidates in urban Sindh

especially in Karachi and Hyderabad which were the hub of MQM. Similarly Altaf

Hussain announced the withdrawal of its candidates from interior Sindh. Jamaat-i-

Islami opposed that decision35as JI had to withdraw their nominations from urban

areas of Sindh.36 Nawaz Sharif held negotiations with JI leadership to resolve their

reservations but its leadership refused to leave Karachi and Hyderabad open for a

regional-linguistic group. 37 After the clear refusal of JI at seat adjustment and threat

of losing JI from the alliance IJI called the session of Supreme Council (full bench)

of IJI which reviewed Nawaz Sharif’s decision and decided not to withdraw its

candidates against MQM candidates in urban areas of Sindh. Altaf Hussain criticized

the decision and non-cooperative attitude of JI38 and did not withdraw its any

candidate from urban Sindh but cooperated with IJI for other places. 39 On the other

hand, Jamiat Ulema Islam (N) was also annoyed with IJI on the issue of seat

adjustment. Even they allowed their candidates to start their election campaign

against both IJI and Pakistan People's Party.40

Before the commencement of election IJI was facing severe criticism from

Pakistan People’s Party, its own party members and from common peoples too. The

joining of secular Awami National Party in this conservative alliance was creating
 201

the questions on its creditability. Conflicts of JI (IJI coalition partner) with ANP in

NWFP and with MQM in Karachi raised the questions about its claim of unity

among the IJI coalition parties. The PML’s clashes with ANP in NWFP and JUI (F)

in Baluchistan also invited criticism. It was a serious question for IJI that if it secured

majority in Assembly then how it would run the government with the help of secular

ANP, religious JI and JUI, moderate PML and regional Quom Prast MQM. Beside

these differences of political thoughts IJI was facing a critical problem of tickets

distribution too.41 Although IJI authorized the Parliamentary board to distribute party

tickets but it was very difficult to satisfy all member parties of the alliance on this

matter. The differences between these IJI coalition parties could create serious

problems for IJI in future.

5.2.2 People’s Democratic Alliance

On the other side PPP was also preparing herself for the coming election. Its

alliance with other three weak parties was too ineffective that none of them were

able to get a single seat independently. Even in last election, the coalition parties

could not secure any seat. PPP alliance with these two parties was just an attempt to

keep itself away from isolation.42 PPP announced very little share of tickets for its

partners and they were satisfied on it. The performance of these parties was that

Allama Sajid Naqvi, the head of TNFJ along his party could not secure any seat in

last elections and had provisioned the Pakistan People's Party in various

constituencies. Now TNFJ had chosen to make alliance with the PPP directly. Since

the PPP had always attracted Shia votes, presentation the TNFJ at the polling stations

was not considerable. The case of Malik Qasim, who was leading his own small
 202

offshoot of the PML, was also not so different. His PML could not win single seat in

the elections of 1988. “He was the one scion of the redundant MRD” and patronized

by BB who appointed him firstly, as advisor to PM and then as “Chairman of Federal

Anti-Corruption Committee” (CFAC) in her previous regime.

The performance of the third and last coalition partner of PPP was same.

Tehrik-e-Istiqlal (TI) also could not win any seat in election 1988; even Chairman TI

“Asghar Khan, his son and all other nominees” defeated their seats very badly. Now

Asghar Khan chooses to make collaboration with the PDA with expectations that

such a coalition would go in its favor. The association between the TI and the PPP

was announced on August 29, 1990. A four member board including two members

from each party was formed and Farooq Leghari, Malik Hakmeen were participant

from the PPP and Zafar Ali Shah, Khursheed Mahmood Kasuri were from the Tehrik

e Istaqlal, to talk over the selection the modalities of the new coalition containing

division of seats, its title and other interrelated matters.

“The leader of TI Khurshed Mehmood stated that the coalition would not be

limited to participate in election alone. The main points of the manifestos of these

two parties were same which showed them as natural ally of each other. Both the

parties agreed to seek Pakistan as a state of welfare, nonsectarian society, deep

entrenched democracy, and a modern methodology to the resolution of diverse

glitches. He also stated “that his party was ideologically closer to the PPP than any

other political or religious party. Both the parties had also remained partners in the

MRD against Zia regime.” 43 Nasrullah Khan also communicated his inclination to

connect that coalition, but leader of TI, Asghar khan strongly competed against this
 203

proposal and held a meeting with Chairperson PPP to convince her not to take any

other party in the coalition.44”

“The chairperson of PPP Benazir Bhutto was nominated as head of PDA and

Khurshed Kasuri of TI as its Secretary General. The Supreme Council of PDA

contained of eighty eight members, holding four presidents of the member parties to

watch and guide the activities of coalition. The other administrative officials were

“S. Muneer Gailani (TNFJ) as additional secretary, S. Kabir Wasti (PML-Q) as

treasurer, Malik Hakmin (PPP) as coordination secretary and Iqbal Haider (PPP) was

appointed as information Secretary of PDA.”45”The Supreme Council of PDA

decided to choose “arrow” as election symbol which showed the strength of PPP in

PDA. The PDA election program for the elections 90, addressed almost all the

problems and issues of internal and external level. The manifesto consisted on these

points; Job opportunities for youth in public and private sector through rapid

industrialization; starting of “unemployment allowance and technical training

program” through initiation the KARGAR Bank; Introduction of contributory

changes for elevating the backward parts of the country by delivering them the

“Local Revenue Courts, Dehi Police, the Rural Courts, land ownership for Haries

and Kisan Bank” for peasants; Formation of Ward Courts, Public urban

transportation and special economic institutions for urban populaces; Especial

attention for the labor-class, teachers, students, public prosecutor and for the civil

servants; “Complete freedom of press and information media;” Effectual changes in

the dominant custom, excise and income; tax programs to make the modest and

fewer disposed to civil service interfering; Sufficient measures for industrial

 204

expansion; Introduction of agrarian developments to reduce the impact of feudal

lords and rectification of rough delivery of property; Special seats for women in

Parliament. Five percent quota of employment in public sector, and establishment of

Federal special Woman Police; Spare of “separate electorates” with a system of

“joint electorates” and comprehensive protection of sections rights for all the

marginal groups; Upsurge in educational budget at least up to 4.5 percent of the

GNP; Sovereignty of Islam with a guarantee of justice; Emergency steps for the

improvement of transport system; Enhancement of a peaceful Pakistani nuclear

program; Non-aligned foreign policy and peaceful friendship with the all

neighboring countries; Abolition of corruption and introduction of new anti-

corruption laws and rules etc.

As compare to 1988 elections, PPP was very careful about distributing of

party tickets among the candidates. It dropped almost 40 requests of previous party

members for party tickets including some former cabinet members. PPP also refused

to issue party ticket to those members who were already arrested or to be arrested.

Those who demanded high price to remain loyal with PPP were also ignored. It

introduced new candidates in PPP’s electoral list. PPP focused its campaign on the

sympathy factor, which she used in previous election and got victory. Now again

PPP was projecting Bhutto as a target of prejudice and state tyranny. With this tactics

Benazir drew huge crowds to her public and corner meetings which showed that

sympathy of common people were still with her. Benazir also change her strategy

about President. Now she started criticizing President openly. She declared Ishaq

Khan the President of IJI instead of Pakistan. She even declared that this election
 205

was not between PPP and IJI but between PPP and Ghulam Ishaq Khan.46 In fact PPP

was surrounded in crises and still suffering from different elements and was trying to

encounter them with different tactics. On one hand, she was replying the allegation

of her opponents and on other hand, facing the anger of President, One side she was

fronting the tribunals and other side she was addressing with election rallies. Media

was playing in the hand of caretaker government and presenting the negative image

of PPP.47Harassment and arrests of PPP activists was a routine matter.

The IJI had projected Bhutto as traitor; charging that she had bargained on

issues of Kashmir 48
and Pakistan’s nuclear program. The IJI also labeled her as

agent of India and USA.49 Nawaz Sharif frequently used government machinery

during his election movement.50 The national wealth was brutally used in pre-poll

engineering. The religion was taken into the politics to smudge the image of Bhutto

in upcoming elections and “moulvis” were asked to support the termination of the
51
Bhutto government. October 22, 1990 was declared the last day of election

campaign and the PPP and IJI had demonstrated their power and popularity through

rallies and public meetings in Lahore, Punjab. It was conveyed that the attendance of

public in the PPP rallies and meetings was more than that of the Islami Jamhori

Ittihad,52 which showed the popularity of Pakistan People's Party in masses.

5.3 Election, Results and the Party Position

On October 24, 1990 polling was held on 206 Muslims seats out of 207

because on one seat polling was postponed due to the death of candidates of those

constituencies.53 10 Non- Muslim and 20 women seats were reserved. All Political
 206

parties individually or through alliance enthusiastically participated in election. The

candidates organized public meetings and rallies to impress the voters. They spent

huge amounts to attract people. Once again, the followers of “Bhutoism” and

“Ziaism” contested face to face. The slogans in the favor of Socialism and

conservatism were used in this election. In the end leftists were defeated by rightists.

The result of NA was as following:

Party Name Party Seats in National

Assembly
“Islami Jamhori Ittihad (IJI)
104
People’s Democratic Alliance (PDA)
44
Muhajir Qaumi Movement (MQM)
15
Awami National Party (ANP)
06
Jamiat up Ulema e Islam-F (JUI-F)
06
Jamiat up Ulema e Pakistan -N (JUP-N)
03
Pakistan National Party (PNP)
02
Jamhori Watan Party (JWP)
02
Pakhton Khawa Awami Milli Party (PKAMP)
01
Independents (IND)
21

In National Assembly, IJI got simple majority and emerged as leading party,

Pakistan People's Party got second position while MQM occupied third position.

However, the independent candidates had also won considerable seats. 54 IJI got

majority of the seats from Punjab, it got 105 seats among which 91 were from

Punjab while it bagged 3 from Sindh, 8 from NWFP and 2 from Baluchistan. The

result showed that this time IJI clean swept Punjab. PDA secured only 14 seats from

this biggest province which showed the annoyance of the people of this province

with Pakistan People's Party’s former policies. In this election independent and
 207

MQM got good number of seats and they had friendly relation with IJI so it was

obvious that IJI will make its administration in Lower House with the help of its

alliance partner. Another mark able feature of the election results was that the

religious political parties could not win considerable seats. Other smaller alliances

and political parties were completely wiped out from political scene.

In this election, political heavy weights politicians of different political

parties lost their seats. Latif Afridi, Afrasiyab Khattak, Khawaja Tariq Rahim, Rao

Sikandar, Jahangir Badar, Malik Meraj Khalid, Mukhtar Awan, Dr. Sher Afgan55

Abida Hussain, Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan, Aftab Sherpao, Maulana Ahmad Shah

Noorani, Ahamd Saeed Awan, Pir Pagara, Ghafoor Ahmad, Asghar Khan, Sheikh

Rafiq Ahmad, Sheikh Rasheed Ahmad and Mumtaz Ali Bhutto. Benazir Bhutto, Asif

Zardari, Wali Khan and Fazl ur Rehman also lost their seat in the elections. 56 It was

amazing that Mulana Fazl ur Rehman and Wali Khan had lost election for the first

time in their political career at their home constituencies. 57 Beside them, many other

famous politicians lost their seats which stunned every one. The defeat of these

prominent politicians showed the political awareness of common people of Pakistan;

and their keen interest in Pakistani political affairs.

Result of Provincial Assemblies

Provincial Assembly’s election held after the three days of National

Assembly elections. The result was as following:

Party Name Party Seats in Punjab

Assembly
Islami Jamhori Ittihad (IJI)
214
People’s Democratic Alliance (PDA)
 208

People’s Democratic Party (PDP) 10

Independents (IND) 02

14

Party Name Party Seats in Sindh Assembly

Pakistan People's Party (PPP) 47

Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) 28

Independent (IND) 17

Islami Jamhori Ittehad (IJI) 06

Party Name Party Seats in NWFP Assembly

Islami Jamhori Ittihad (IJI) 32

People’s Democratic Alliance (PDA) 06

Independents (IND) 14

Party Name Party Seats in Baluchistan Assembly

Jamiat Ulema e Islam (F) (JUI-F) 05

Islami Jamhori Ittihad (IJI) 07

Independents (IND) 04

Baluchistan National Party (BNP) 02

People’s Democratic Alliance (PDA) 02

Pakistan National Party (PNP) 05

Jamhori Watan Party (JWP) 09

Pakhton Khawah Milli Awami Party” (PKMAP) 03

The result stunned everyone because most analysts and observers were

guessing a close call amongst the IJI and the PPP. The unexpected IJI landslide was

measured a political breaking point, in the sense that the voters had given a gigantic

mandate to a single political alliance. This irresistible victory could be seen most

prominent in the Punjab, the most populated and influential province of the Pakistan,
 209

which have more than 60% of the total populace of the country, with highest 115

National Assembly seats. The PPP, which had conceited itself on being the

Pakistan’s only national party with representation in all provinces, was practically

wiped out in the Punjab. The same happened in provincial election and IJI wiped out

PPP. It secured an overwhelming 208/234 seats in the Provincial Assembly of the

Punjab and won plenty of the seats in other provinces to make alliance government.

On the other hand, PPP could not succeed to gain even a simple majority in any

province including Sindh which was Bhutto’s home province and was prevented

from establishing the government there too. It collected only forty two seats in the

Sindh Assembly this time compared to 70 seats in the previous 1988 elections.

PDA accused that there was an “election cell” in the Premier House under the

supervision of President Ishaq Khan, whose approval was essential to declare the

results along with the consent of Hamid Gul and Asad Durrani. 58 Another election

cell, alleged by PDA was created in Raiwind as well to observe the IJI

performance.59 PDA rejected the election results as it had contested with the backing

of three other political parties and still was able to earn only 45 seats in the Lower

House of the Parliament. Bhutto blamed this victory as enormous rigging by the

caretaker government and the fact that all the key anti-Bhutto nominees won their

seats was providing some credibility to the PPP’s allegation of rigging. Ghulam

Mustafa Jatoi rejected the PPP allegations; he declared them bogus and baseless.

President of IJI also refused to accept the allegations of PDA. He stated that under
60
the observation of Judicatory and in the presence of foreign observer election

rigging was not possible and the endorsement of the results by these foreign
 210

observers was also negating the rigging allegations. He blamed that Benazir had

alleged rigging in last election in Punjab while she was in government at Centre but

could not prove anything against us and now she was again blaming for rigging

which showed that she was habitual of rejecting the election results.61

The 1990 election witnessed a vital change in political thinking and

understanding in Pakistan. In this election voters’ concern had moved from their

ideological attachment to local issues, mainly improvement of the lifestyle of an

ordinary man through welfare program and development projects. It was apparent in

most of the cases that public elected those people whom they considered to be

helpful to resolve their petty problems. 62 And this had mostly been observed in the

Punjab Nawaz Sharif, Chief Minister as Punjab had encouraged economic

development in his province, and received strong backing from the country’s

emergent urban middle class which had steadily distanced itself from the

“traditional” politics of landlord, feudalist and aristocratic political families such as

the Mazari, Leghari, Bhuttos and Jatois. Meanwhile, the PDA depended upon its

people support as it did in the elections 1988 and now again she was expecting their

sympathy for its exiled leader, but this approach failed. “The people of the Punjab

thoroughly rejected those who had failed to live up to their promises and voted for

those whom they felt were on the side of hope.” 63

Chief Election Commission of Pakistan asked to provide evidence for the

rigging complains to nullify the election results. Election Commission of Pakistan

received about 1,323 requests of misconduct in the polls but most of them were not

authenticated with evidence.64 One hundred and three objections were filed in the
 211

commission under the “Representation of the People Act 1976”. The claims were

disposed of by the commission after trial them at length according to the

constitution. 65

5.4 Formation of the IJI Government

The year of 1990 was very important for IJI. The clear majority in Federal

Assembly and alliance administrations in all Provinces made it a historical victory.

Having clear majority it formed administration in the biggest province, Punjab. In

Sindh, IJI and MQM and in NWFP ANP and IJI formed coalition governments while

in Baluchistan JWP formed government with the collaboration of other political

parties.66 Now it was very difficult for IJI to choose a contender for the office of the

Prime Minister as there had been many contestants in IJI. Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi,

Muhammad Khan Junejo, Qazi Hussain Ahmad, Nawab Akbar Bhugti, Ejaz ul Haq,

Abida Hussain and Ch. Shujaat Hussain were all candidates of premiership. But the

strongest candidate amongst them was Nawaz Sharif who had the support of the

Chief Executive and the establishment. 67 He ran the election campaign and reunited

the alliance in a manner that resulted in the marvelous victory. With the support of JI

and JUI (D) Nawaz Sharif was nominated as Head of Cabinet with more than 2/3

majority of the Lower House.68 On November 4, 1990 election for Speaker and

Deputy Speaker were held and Gauhar Ayub of IJI got 146 votes from the Lower

House of the Parliament and was elected as Speaker while Nawaz Khokar secured

143 votes and became Deputy Speaker.69 After two days Nawaz Sharif took the oath

as Head of the Cabinet of Pakistan and next day state of emergency was lifted by

President Ishaq
 212

Khan.70 On this occasion PDA members recorded their pr otest and put the IJI on

defensive.71

On November 6, 1990 nominated Prime Minister got vote of sureness from

the Lower House of the Parliament. He secured 153/193 votes against his opponent.

Afzal Khan who was the candidate of PDA could get only 39 votes. Next day Nawaz

Sharif make a speech to the nation in which he elaborated the objectives of his

government, its determination to boost up economic development, and his policy

about Kashmir and nuclear program.72

Nawaz Sharif formed his cabinet after the consultation of the President and

the Military.73 He constituted his Federal cabinet with 18 Ministers and 02 Minister

of the state, in which 09 were from Punjab, 06 from Sindh, 02 from Federal capital

and one from Baluchistan. On the recommendation of Military, Sahibzada Yaqub

Khan continued with the same portfolio as foreign Minister and on the

recommendation of President, Sartaj Aziz, a senator, was appointed on the most

important portfolio of finance and economic affairs. 74 Two former bureaucrats Ijlal

Haider Zaidi and Roedad Khan were also included in the cabinet and they were

appointed as advisors to the Prime Minister with the ministries of information and

religious affairs. 75 MQM was awarded with the ministry of production and housing

and works while Jamaat-i-Islami and Awami National Party were remained excluded
76
from the cabinet. Later some other Ministers were included in cabinet and it

expanded to 46 but it was surprising that no woman was included in cabinet. 77

Selection of the provincial Chief Ministers was another challenge for IJI

leadership. In Punjab three main leaders of PML were candidate for this seat. The
 213

contest between Ghulam Haider Wyne, Ch. Pervaiz Ellahi and Mian Manzoor Watto

was very close. All of three were protuberant leaders of PML and were considered as

close companions of Nawaz Sharif. But Nawaz Sharif picked Wyne as Chief

Executive of the Punjab. Manzoor Watto became Speaker of Punjab Assembly. The

similar situation was in NWFP where JI was not ready to cooperate with ANP. Both

have reservation with each other. The two parties parted away on the query of

nomination of Provincial Chief Executive. ANP was in favor of Mir Afzal while JI

was supporting Haq. In the end, Mir Afzal Khan was nominated as Chief Executive

of NWFP.78 In Sindh Provincial Assembly PPP was majority party but IJI decided to

make alliance administration with the help of MQM and independent candidates.

MQM showed its reservations with JI but JI’s cooperation encouraged MQM and

they made parliamentary coalition government with IJI. Jam Sadiq Ali became Chief

Executive of Sindh. In Baluchistan, Taj Muhammad Jamali made its alliance

government with the support of PNP, JUI (F) and PDA. 79 In this scenario IJI made its

administrations, and it happened for the first time in the political history of Pakistan

that one political party made its administration in Centre and in all four Provinces.

5.5 Internal Politics and Strife of IJI

A stunning victory in elections and after establishment of government in Centre

and provinces the party politics between IJI coalition partners started. In fact IJI was

a mixture of different Parties having different ideologies and agendas. There was

lack of common agenda or mutual interests after successful formation of the

governments, so various conflicts emerged among coalition parties on multiple

issues.
 214

In 1988, Islami Jamhori Ittihad consisted of eight political parties and got

defeated by single PPP but in 1990 it changed its strategy and for winning election, it

allowed the other parties to join IJI. So when ANP and MQM and others regional

political parties showed their consent to join the alliance it created reservations in

those provincial political parties which were already part of the alliance since its

creation and they had contested an election against the new partner of the alliance so

they openly criticized the decision. After winning the election the clashes arose

severely between them on different issues like IJI policy towards Gulf crises, Issue

of Afghanistan, enforcement of Shariat bill and water distribution among provinces.

These issues demanded full cooperation of IJI coalition partner to resolve them. The

contradiction between them could create problems because Iraq-Kawait war has

already increased economic crisis in Pakistan, which demanded unity among all

parties of alliance.

IJI was an electoral alliance comprises of eight political parties. It persisted

longer as compared to other political alliances. It remained in opposition from 1988

to 1990 and then it came into power in 1990 and ruled on Pakistan till 1993 and it

ended with the desolation of Nawaz Sharif government. Before its termination it

disintegrated gradually because of diverse thought and ideologies of member parties

and reservation among coalition partners on several issues. Smaller parties were

complaining about their fewer shares in the government. Some were expecting high

portfolio in government and refusal for those portfolios disappointed them. Different

members of alliance parties showed their reservation on different times and it

increased with the passage of time. It was not possible for IJI President to fulfill all
 215

requirements of the individual members of the alliance. The first political party who

quit this alliance was Hizb e Jihad. This party left the alliance in September 1991.

IJI called a meeting in 1991 and invited all alliance parties except JUI and

HJ. IJI expelled the membership of HJ in the meeting blaming that head of HJ was
80
participating in PDA public meetings and he had friendly relations with Nawab

Zada Nusrullah who was an opponent of IJI which was against the constitution of IJI.

After expulsion from IJI, Poya the head of HJ alleged the IJI government for

corruption in privatization, Cooperative scam and Toyota company scandal. He also

requested Premier to terminate the administration and constitute national

administration. Most of the prominent leaders of alliance disliked this decision and

demanded the appointment of Pir Fazal Haq in the place of Poya but in the

convention of heads of IJI, HJ was ousted from the alliance. 81There was an

impression that Prime Minister gave a silent message to all the member parties of

alliance to avoid criticism against the IJI government otherwise they could be

excluded.

The second party which quit IJI was National People’s Party headed by

previous Caretaker Head of Cabinet Jatoi. The allegation was same that NPP was

increasing links with Pakistan People's Party. Jatoi also developed relations with

Ghulam Mustafa Khar which was not acceptable for IJI leadership. Nawaz Sharif

warned Jatio82 but he refused to terminate relations with PDA so with the

consultation of JI83 Central Executive Committee of PML called the meeting of

alliance heads to take serious action against Jatoi84. So in meeting NPP was expelled

from alliance on March 1992. Jatoi was a senior politician. He left the ruling party
 216

85
not for PPP but on its reservations in Sindh government. On the contrary, IJI

believed that attitude of Jatoi had been problematical since he failed to become

PM.86 He created difficulties for the IJI government several times. Once he stated

that the elections were engineered and some partisan leaders were kept out of the

parliament through planning. These declarations reinforced PDA’s charges of

rigging in the elections. On these allegations NPP membership was cancelled by IJI

leadership. Ejection of NPP from alliance could not make any influence on Federal

government of IJI as well as on provincial government of Sindh. 87

The third party was Jamaat-i-Islami who deserted the IJI. NPP and JH were

expelled from alliance while JI left the alliance itself. JI had complications with IJI

government maneuvering about deal with the issues of Kashmir, Afghanistan,

Palestine, Islamization, Nuclear program, riba based economy and law and order

situation inside Pakistan. The differences started when JI rejected to join cabinet. 88 In
89
fact, JI had a long list of complaints against the leadership of IJI. Qazi Husain

Ahmad told that seemingly it was the Afghanistan issue that led the JI’s extraction

from the alliance with the consent of its “Shoora” on May 16, 1992, but actually

Shoora had decided to detach from the IJI in its April meeting due to numerous

issues, seeking to play a better part as opposition. 90 He added that even after leaving

the alliance, JI would not partake in any movement to remove the IJI government as

according to it, there was no replacement of Nawaz Sharif. 91 JI would not quit from

the assemblies and would cooperate with the government in its positive programs.92

Reacting to this IJI President, Nawaz Sharif decided to avoid policy of hostility for

which it announced the decision of not filing any reference of defection against JI in
 217

93
the courts. The three major political parties separated from the alliance. Others

remained part of the IJI till the termination of the alliance but they did not enjoy

friendly relations with the IJI particularly with its President Nawaz Sharif.

5.5.1 The Gulf Crisis and Afghan Issue

On August 2, 1990 Iraq invaded on Kuwait. United Arab Emirates and Saudi

Arabia felt it as a threat from Iraq and they requested Pakistan to send their troops to

provide them security. Caretaker First Minister Jatoi was not in position to take

decision without the permission of Army Chief and President. General Aslam Baig

hesitated to send more troops in Saudi Arabia while 5000 Pakistani troops were

already deployed there. Pakistani public and most of the political parties were in the

favor of Kuwait and they were trying for settlement of the issue but when USA

entered in war and supported Kuwait, the sympathies of these political parties turned

and in the opposition of USA they declared Saddam Husain a Muslim hero. The IJI

coalition partners Jammat e Islami, Awami National Party, Jamiat Ulema i Islam and

Jamiat Ulema i Pakistan with other political parties sided with Iraq. Beside this

General Aslam Baig who was criticizing Saddam Husain on its invasion in Kuwait

was not ready to support USA against Gulf countries. This political scenario created

problem for PM Nawaz Sharif and he was caught in problematic situation. Now

before making his policies towards Gulf crises he had to take care, the emotional and

religious thoughts of its coalition parties, Pakistan-Kuwait relation, Pakistan-Saudi

Arabia relations and Pakistan-USA relations. Any wrong decision could create

problems with these countries.

 218

Nawaz Sharif scheduled an official visit to Middle Eastern countries to check the

options to avoid war but could not find any valid solution. Another problem which

he faced was the attitude of Jamaat-i-Islami which was in the favor of Iraq while

other parties of the coalition were agreed to send troops in Kuwait against Iraqi

invasion. This created frustration in allied parties. Junejo 94 and Jatoi95 both believed

that Security Council should play its part and asked Iraq and USA to vacate Kuwait

and Iraq. PML working committee passed a resolution on this ground. 96 The impact

of Gulf war created economic problems in the country; increase in oil price and

returning of Pakistani from Kuwait enhanced the difficulties in economic sector. It

further created frustration in political parties too. Different point of view of

President, Army Chief and Prime Minister on Gulf crisis enhanced the differences

between them which affected future politics of Pakistan.

The Afghan issue also became a severe problem for Pakistan. After a long war

period Russia quitted Afghanistan according to Jeneua Accord. Pakistan declared

this war as Jihad and several religious political parties favored Mujahideen in

Afghanistan and their sympathy was still with Afghan Mujahedeen especially Jamaat

e Isalmi which was still favoring Afghan Mujahedeen instead of USA. IJI consisted

of rightest political parties in which Jamaat-i-Islami was the most prominent. After

making administration on Federal level, Nawaz Sharif was facing economic crisis

due to several reasons. Afghan war was one of them. On the issue of Gulf war USA

was annoyed from Pakistan. USA imposed sanctions on Pakistan and terminated the

aid in any shape. Pakistani Government had to sustain its defense proficiency for

which it had to acquire American arms restriction removed. One severe instance of
 219

tension was that maximum of F-16 were grounded because of non-availability of

their spare parts.97 Pakistan wanted to escalation its horizon to acquire arms but the

required funds for this purpose was not accessible. Due to the deferment of

American Aid financial issues exacerbated. The only choice available was the

improvement of affairs with USA for which it had to modification its Afghanistan

policy and backing American program in Afghanistan which was condemned by

Jamaat-i-Islami believing it a treachery of Jihad there.

5.5.2 Council of Common Interest (CCI)

The former PPP government was badly alleged that she did not hold the meeting

of Council of Common Interest. Nawaz Sharif announced its meeting on January 12,

1991.98It was decided that the construction of Kalabagh Dam would be postponed. 99

The royalty of the electricity, Sui gas and petroleum would be allocated to Provinces.
100
The working relationship between Central and Provincial Governments would be

enhanced. 101 Another unresolved issue, faced by Nawaz Sharif, was the allocation of

water among the four provinces. Smaller provinces believed that their share of water

was less than demand and big provinces were depriving them from their due share.

An agreement was signed among representatives about the distribution of water and

Punjab being an elder brother surrendered six percent of its water share which solved
102
the issue of water among provinces. Nawaz Sharif faced multiple responses of

different political parties and its leaders, after signing this accord. Muhammad Khan
103
Junejo appreciated this accord. Amir e Jamaat-i-Islami, Qazi Husain Ahmad

initially appreciated this accord but later he changed his arguments and started

criticizing it.104 There were perceptions that ANP could quit the alliance on this issue
 220

but ANP declared it a conspiracy to create distances between Prime Minister and

ANP. 105

5.5.3 Shariat Bill

The Shariat bill was passed in 1990 by the Upper House but it could not be

endorsed by Lower House in the regime of PPP. Nawaz Sharif won the elections in

the name of Islam but later he ignored his promises to please international anti -

Islamic forces. On the demand of religious political parties Nawaz Sharif constituted

a committee to review the bill. Fakhar Imam was nominated its head and one

member from the each member party of the IJI was deputed as its member. Liaquat

Baloch, Molana Lakhvi, S.M. Zafar, Qazi Latif, Syed Ghous Ali Shah, Sahibzada

Faiz Qadri and Iqbal were included in this committee. This committee prepared the

amended bill but it could not be presented in Assembly. Jamaat-i-Islami held a

meeting in Lahore in which she invited all religious political parties belonging to

diverse factions and call for the imposition of shariat bill. On the demand of allies

Nawaz Sharif presented the bill in Lower House with some changing. 106 It was

approved by the parliament on May 16, 1991. The government deleted all the

proposals added by Maulana Zafar Ahmad Ansari, Maulana Sami ul Haq, Qazi

Husain Ahmad and Qazi Abdul latif.107 The only purpose of this bill was to declare

Pakistan an “Islamic Welfare State”. The bill could not bring any change in

economic system which was still based on “Riba”. This bill was not acceptable for

Judiciary, military, economic manager and bureaucracy of Pakistan for their own

motives. Even people criticized this bill. 108

 221

The PDA had numerous fears on crucial features of the bill. The PDA presented

its apprehensions in the form of queries and few alterations. 109 When Shariat Bill

was tabled in the Lower House, PDA, ANP and the JUI (F) put forward their notes

of dissension. The PDA protested that this Shariat bill was a violation of the human

rights. Arbab Jahangir Khan (ANP) in his note of dissent stated, “I do not

recommend the bill in its present form as it does not provide protection to the present

political system and the existing democratic institutions.”110 The JUI (F)’s note of

dissention mentioned “the purpose of the new bill was to give the “interest-based

economy an unspecified period of life.” 111 On May 15, 1991 nine amendments were

amalgamated in the Shariat bill after long debates.112 On May 28, 1991 the Senate

had passed Shariat Bill. In the Lower House the IJI had supported the Shariat bill

whereas the PPP with its allies voted out the bill in the National Assembly and drop

to vote in Senate.

5.5.4 IJI Privatization Policy

Gulf war and restrictions imposed by USA affected Pakistan’s economy very

badly. Nawaz Sharif decided to introduce privatization policy in which government’s

sick institutions and Industries were privatized to run the economic matters of the

country. To avoid from corruption, Nawaz Sharif made four committees for

proficient opinion to examine the monetary structure with reference to the new

economic policies113 and plans of the government. First of all, government decided to

sale banks and Allied Bank Limited privatized by auction committee. Muslim

Commercial Bank was also given to Mian Munsha a bidder. Initially, government

decided to denationalize 115 units114 out of which only 10 were earning profits. Few
 222

were just working on no profit and no loss basis. Almost 70 units were sick and were

running in loss.115 There were many ambiguities in selling the units. Instead of

privatizing dead units government vended profit earning industries and institutes. 116

Government announced to privatize Pakistan Telecommunication and Thermal

power plant, without asking Privatization Commission, defense committee and

National Assembly, which was a risk for national security of Pakistan. The

government also allowed to Agha Khan Foundation to found a private airline which

could affect the monopoly of the Pakistan International Airline.

Leadership of NPP and JI criticized the denationalization policy of the

government as it was decided to sell only sick and dead units which were already

closed but government sold basic units and those related with defense of Pakistan.

Selling of Muslim Commercial bank and PTCL was criticized as it were earning

profits for the government. Later Saeed Qadir, the chairman of the privatization

committee accepted that the outcomes had been disappointing but government could

get profit in the process of privatization of state owned factories in the long run. 117

One thing was clear that government could not get the desired response from its

Privatization Policy as external investor could barely dare to spend at such a place

where there was hardly any political solidity and local manufacturer invested only

for its own profit.

5.6 Party Politics between Government and Opposition

IJI got clear majority in National Assembly and Nawaz Sharif had no fear of

opposition. Being small in numbers, PDA was not able to destabilize IJI government

in legal way so Nawaz Sharif did not give any importance to the opposition. Being
 223

the President of IJI and head of the ruling party, he never tried to establish good

relations with opposition parties even with IJI allies too. The Presidential references

against Benazir Bhutto were the main cause of this aloofness. The policies of Nawaz

Sharif were failed in Sindh where ethnic riots were at boom. PDA tried to get benefit

of his failure and started the criticism on IJI’s policies in Sindh. PDA alleged IJI for

selling the Muslim Commercial Bank which had deprived the innocent people from

their savings through bogus and fake cooperative societies.118 PDA alleged that PML

members and Ministers had drawn heavy amounts as loan from these cooperatives

which resulted in bankruptcy of these cooperative societies. 119

Since April 1991, PDA launched an incessant movement contrary to Nawaz

government to end it. Opposition established a big alliance consisted of 23 different

political parties.120 This alliance was entitled as All Parties Conference which

demanded new election in the country and warned the government that they could

resign from the membership of National Assembly. IJI declared that demand as anti-

democratic and unconstitutional,121 and asked them to resign. Nawaz Sharif declared

PPP as anti-Pakistan party and alleged her for disintegration of Pakistan. The

atmosphere was cloudy by allegation and counter allegation and interchange of tough

and hard words from both sides. PDA organized a big rally in Lahore to show her

street power and criticized the IJI domestic, foreign and economic policies. In return,

IJI celebrated Independence Day without invited opposition. 122

On May 31, 1991 Finance Minister had presented the budget 1991- 92. In a post

budget press meeting he clarified that the IJI administration had cut its expenditures

by 10 million rupees. The defense budget was enlarged due to severe geo-political
 224

circumstances. The Finance Minister explained that the increase was minor in

evaluation to the rate of inflation. 123 The budget was criticized by PDA that it had

protected the affluent agrarian from income tax and offered subsidized fertilizers to

them; the relief package publicized for the lower class was not enough;124 and it

obliged the benefits of the privileged class.

5.6.1 Struggle for Annulment of Eighth Amendment

Eighth amendment was the only enemy for IJI government which could be

used for the termination of Nawaz government. Benazir and Junejo had already

become the victim of this amendment and had lost their premiership and this axe was

still in the hands of the President. Nawaz Sharif was conscious about the authority of

the Chief Executive and desired to maintain equal “balance of Power between

President and Prime Minister”. He tried his best to repeal this notorious amendment

particularly the clause which authorized Chief Executive to nominate Military Chiefs

and the other which gave him authority to dissolute General and Provincial

Assemblies. But he faced severe hurdles in this respect; 125 even he could not get full

support of his party members to modify it. Several members of IJI did not support

the notion to revoke the 8th amendment. They believed that this amendment was a

source to uphold “balance of powers” between Chief Executive and Head of Cabinet.

They argued that the amendment had protected the country from dictatorship at least

twice.126 They also criticized Nawaz Sharif to take sole decision. Nawaz Sharif

constituted four members committee to ask political parties and advised them to

generate consensus over this issue. This team started its work and met with leader of

Jamaat-i-Islami and PPP. But in the meanwhile his three own cabinet Minister
 225

showed disagreement for the removal of 8th amendment. Ch. Shujaat Husain and

Malik Naeem also dissociated themselves from the committee. 127 Same reaction

came from Hamid Nasir Chatta and Muhammad Khan Junejo.128 Similar reaction

came from Qazi Husain Ahmad who was ready to amend the clause but with

consensus.129 Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi stated that Nawaz Sharif had been pleased with

this amendment when he was in opposition than how could he change his posture

after assuming power.130 Benazir Bhutto commented on this issue that through

annulment of 8th amendment Nawaz Sharif wanted to become all powerful. 131

Ghulam Ishaq Khan commented that this amendment could be modified through a

constitutional process. Due to criticism and opposition Nawaz Sharif kept on trying

to satisfy his coalition partners to alter the eighth amendment till his termination

from government on April 1993.

5.6.2 “Long March and Train March against the Government”

The confrontation between PPP and IJI increased and on November 10, 1992

BB announced “long march” contrary to IJI administration in Islamabad. The march

targeted to eliminate the IJI government. On November 13, 1992 in a press

conference she declared that

“The solution was possible by setting up an interim government based on national

consensus. The government should organize free and fair elections under the neutral
Election Commission. The PDA had called the march because of social and
economic discontent among the masses and people were looking for pragmatic and
talented leadership. Now IJI was in minority, because its partners including MQM
(A), NPP, JI and some independent members had left the alliance.” 132

Nawaz Sharif considered the projected long march as a harmful policy and

affirmed that he would deal with the destructive and hypocritical politics through

constructive and positive politics. 133 The IJI was determined to face the opposition
 226

with strong hand. In the Punjab PDA political workers were detained and later the

government levied ban on the PDA’s long march in Islamabad. In a meeting the

Army Chief conveyed his apprehensions to President on the political development

that appeared due to long march call of PDA. 134 It was elucidated that in case of

demonstration of the PDA and the NDA in front of the President House, 135 the Army

would confine its part to the safety of the public property. 136 The Federal cabinet of

Nawaz Sharif also divided into two groups on this issue of long march. One faction

was in favor of long march and considered it the part of democratic system while

other group was against this march and declared it as treason.

On the day of rally, Benazir (PPP) G.M. Jatoi (NPP) Asghar Khan (TI) and

several others PDA’s Senators, MNAs, MPAs, and former Ministers were detained.

Bhutto’s entry in twin cities was banned for one month. In spite of severe security

around Bhutto’s house she was successful to reach at Liaquat Bagh Rawalpindi, but

she was escorted by the DIG Police instantly to State Guest House in Rawalpindi.

More than sixty political workers were wounded due to clashes with police and tear

gas which was used by the police. Crowed was not allowed to enter in capital

through highway.137 The PDA leaders, Aitzaz Ahsan, Salman Taseer, and Naveed

Malik, were arrested by police.138 The government claimed long march a ferocious

activity but no arm or weapon was recovered from any of the twenty thousand

political workers which were arrested by the police.

Nawaz Sharif had made a speech on the day of long march, in which he

emphasized positive features of his government for instance, GDP growth, economic

policies, yellow cab scheme, loan scheme, and foreign investment. The IJI appraised
 227

Benazir for diffusion the feeling that Pakistan was going through civil war which

could disappoint the foreign investors. 139 Chairperson PPP Benazir met the Consuls

General and other high-ranking diplomats of Britain, France, Iran Afghanistan,

Germany, Japan, Holland, and USA to make sure their moral support for the

refurbishment of egalitarianism in Pakistan. 140

After the long march PDA announced train march on November 23, 1992 to

pressurize IJI government.141 To cope the Train March, government imposed

restriction on Benazir and forbade her to enter in NWFP. In Sindh the Article 144

was enacted. Demonstrations, rallies and gatherings were banned. 142 Later, the entry

of Benazir in Rawalpindi and Peshawar was also prohibited.143 The military

leadership was watching this political anarchy and was worried over the political

hostilities. General Shamim Alam, after a meeting with all services chief, sent a

direct message to the leaders of the House and opposition to give up their conflicts

and reach on positive terms.144 After termination of the marches BB extended

collaboration towards Nawaz Sharif which was in fact for enabling bail for Asif

Zardari. All stake-holders manipulated to get compensations from the march. The

PDA tried to pressurize government with crowds and IJI tried his best to declare it a

rejected show and to prove that the public was supporting his policies. A good

connection among the administration and the antagonism seemed to be not in Chief

Executive’s interest as it would deteriorate the significance of presidency.

5.7 Prime Minister, Military High Command and the President

Nawaz Sharif became Premier in 1990 as well as the part of troika which was

ruling on Pakistan for last two years. This troika was consisted of President, Army
 228

Chief and Prime Minister and Nawaz Sharif knew that most powerful among them

was the President who could nominate the Military Chief and could terminate the

government. In the system of this troika, President could blackmail the Prime
145
Minister. Moreover, Nawaz believed that the Military desired to maintain three

policy ranges; Kashmir, Nuclear policy and Afghanistan. On the issue of Gulf war,

the conflict arose between Army and Nawaz Sharif when General Beg favored Iraq

against USA and PM showed his clear leanings toward the USA. 146 One such

dissident was General Beg, who argued that after Iraq’s end, Iran could be the next,

followed by Pakistan147 Therefore, Hassan Askari Rizvi argues,

“These statements were viewed as an attempt by the general to cultivate the

political elements in Pakistan that were opposed to the government’s pro-
America policy, and thus build pressure on the civilian government of
Sharif.” 148

COAS Gen. Aslam Baig retired on August 15, 1991. Next day, Asif Nawaz

Janjua assumed the charge of COAS. His name was approved by the President and

the PM collectively. The new COAS, Asif Janjua, was “uncompromising about aid

to the civil power in that, if it was deemed necessary by the supreme commander,

then it should be introduced by the parliament and implemented vigorously by the

Army.” 149 He further stated that “Army had nothing to do with the politics. Let the

elected representatives do their job, while we concentrate on acquiring ever greater

professional excellences.” 150

“Nawaz Sharif had robust family backgrounds in the Military and, once in

thorough knowledge, was pushed into battle with Nawaz Sharif. First, Nawaz Sharif

intervened on behalf of Hamid Gul who was being shifted from a “force command

position to a staff position,” which Sharif deteriorated to alteration his mind on.
 229

Second, Sharif agreed to allocate Javed Nasir the portfolio of Director General of the

ISI which was formally appointed by Army Chief. 151Finally, the “civil-military

relationship” was stressed consequently of ferocity in Province of Sindh. The

Military launched operation cleanup at the demand of the provincial administration

of Sindh to round up robbers.152 Nawaz insisted that the bureaucracy be

consulted.153”Rizvi, notes, “The Federal and provincial governments were happy

because rural Sindh was the stronghold of the PPP and thus their opponents faced the

effect of the security operation.” 154

Understanding the dogmatic repercussions of

their operation, as well as the sustained development of retreat inside Sindh, the

Military stretched operation cleanup to the metropolitan parts, which carried the

Army in direct encounter with the militants of MQM which was associated with

Nawaz Sharif’s administration in Centre.

The MQM demanded the Nawaz Sharif to halt the “operation” against her,

though Nawaz Sharif could not ordered the military to roll back. Consequently,

several cabinet supporters of reigning festivity criticized the role of Army in

metropolitan parts of Sindh. According to Rizvi;

“The government tried to ‘buy off’ the Army Chief and high-ranking
commanders by presenting them significant substantial rewards. Effectively,
this converted Nawaz of the government’s effort to try and corrupt the Army
and use troops against its political opponents.” 155

In addition, the Army was also anxious with administration’s week enactment

in external matters, particularly about the association with the USA. On October 01,

1990 in reply to Pakistan’s atomic program USA had put off Army training

programs, financial assistance and military sales to Pakistan. As a result, in 1992, the

USA included Pakistan in the “watch list” of states that patron violence. Now Army
 230

realized that the civilian government was not taking sufficient steps to remove these

restrictions.”156 On the other side, Pakistan’s political and economic position was

gradually worsening. According to the Hasan Askari Rizvi;

“The Sharif government’s political and economic management was far from satisfactory.
It had a two-thirds majority in parliament and controlled all four provincial governments,
but its policy-making and policy execution lacked consistency and coherence. The
policies of economic liberalization, deregulation, and privatization were marred by
stories of favoritism, kick-backs and corruption. The government’s reputation also
suffered because of use of public funds and resources on personal and partisan
considerations, and grants of huge loans from banks and other financial institutions to the
power elite and their cohorts.” 157

In January 1993, Military Chief General Asif expired from a heart attack and

President Ishaq Khan nominated Abdul Waheed Kakar as new COAS. Meanwhile

President dissolved the assemblies and announced the date for new elections.

Two Prime Minister had already been victimized by the eighth amendment

and now third was ready to face it. Both Premiers were known as the products of

establishment. On December 20, 1991 Chief Executive Ishaq Khan spoke to the

combined session of the Legislature.158 Opposition in the headship of Benazir raised

slogans against President during his address. IJI’s leadership did not interfere in this

matter and even Nawaz Sharif kept silence which irritated Ishaq Khan. This was the

beginning of differences between the head of two strongest institutions. This hostility

enhanced during long march when Nawaz Sharif shifted Asif Zardari to Rawal Dam

guest house. This action annoyed Ishaq Khan and he declared it the arrangement of

meeting between Benazir and Asif Zardari.159 On the question of election of Chief

Executive of Pakistan, differences arose again when Ishaq Khan desired to come to

be Chief Executive of Pakistan for the second term and Nawaz Sharif refused to

bring him as collective candidate for presidency. 160 The draft of twelfth
 231

amendment161 also raised hostility between them and G. I. Khan declared it an

attempt to “curtail the powers” of Premier. Nawaz Sharif’s struggles to improve

associations with Benazir Bhutto were also not cherished by President. 162 Gulf war

issue163 and annulment of eighth amendment164 were the incident which bridged their

relation. The confrontation boosted up when in early 1993, on January 8, Military

Chief General Asif Janjoa expired in mysterious conditions. In Pakistan, Army Chief

has to play vital role in political affairs. The Army Chief being the head of strongest

wing of the Armed Forces is considered the strongest in the ruling troika. The

appointed of the successor to Gen. Asif Nawaz brought about dissimilarities amongst

Chief Executive and First Minister.

Nawaz Sharif was interested in one person for which he convinced the

President. But President selected General Waheed as new Military Chief. This act of

President drew a line between two. Ishaq Khan was a bureaucrat and aware of ups

and downs of the country’s politics. He had a strong lobby inside the ruling Muslim

League. He was also on the patrons of PM Nawaz Sharif who groomed him as

politician. President lobby comprised mainly of the supporters of PML President and

ex -premier Junejo; there was an internal struggle for power inside the ruling party.

When Nawaz Sharif tried to remove Junejo from President Ship pro-Junejo elements

resisted it with the backed by President, which created complications for Nawaz

Sharif inside the party. Due to activities of pro Ishaq lobby in parliament a faction

was established consisted on those MNAs who was in the favor of President. In

beginning its number was 16 but further it convert in 92 who tendered their

resignations before President.

 232

Meanwhile another issue arose against Nawaz Sharif when widow of Asif

Nawaz (former Army Chief) alleged that her husband’s death was political murder.

The allegation was allegedly directed against the Prime Ministerial camp. Nawaz

Sharif formed a three member “Judicial Commission” to investigate into the cause of

death of General Asif Nawaz.

In the midst of the growing tussle between President and PM came the demise of

Junejo, which brought to lime light another ugly face of politics in Pakistan. Nawaz

Sharif indulged in trying to grab PML President Ship and had not awaited even

burial of the deceased PML President Junejo. PM haste in the matter led to cause

instability in the party. Due to PML’s internal power struggle, four Federal Ministers

led by Hamid Nasir Chattah along with some parliamentary secretaries resigned from

the Federal cabinet.165 Nawaz Sharif took U- turn on April 4, 1993 when the Federal

Cabinet named the Chief Executive Ishaq Khan as his party’s contender in the next

Executive election. By the gesture, he tried to bury the hatchet but till then the

misunderstanding and mistrust between these two had reached a position of no

return. Ulema and well -wishers of both the parties tried their best to strike a deal

between the two warring camps but to no avail. On April14, 1993 President and PM

met but no progress was made in resolving their differences.

The confrontation reached its climax when PM delivered a nationwide

address on April 17. In his furious speech he leveled serious charges against the

President. Without delay, Speaker of National Assembly Gohar Ayub summoned the

NA to meet next day apparently for taking some action against the isolated

President.166 Prime Minister speech proved to be the foremost reason of the

 233

termination of the parliament by the President. 167 Ghulam Ishaq Khan declared that

he dismissed the Lower House of the Parliament in the best interest of the country.

He alleged in his order that:

“Nawaz Sharif did not respect the institutions as PM of Pakistan and interfered
in the administrative matters. Nawaz Sharif used to use abusive language as well. 168 The
subverting the Constitution and powers of armed forces, corruption, nepotism, failure of
economic policies, deteriorating law and order in Sindh, maladministration, political
confrontation, and creating imbalance of power between the Centre and provinces, were
the charges on Nawaz Sharif.” 169

Further Ishaq Khan specified that;

“He had no personal problems with Nawaz Sharif but being the custodian of
constitution he had to take care of many things. In parliamentary system cabinet has a
key role to play but for months cabinet does not meet. Nawaz Sharif had not time to
meet members of his cabinet, and above all being President he had the right to know
the important policy matters which Nawaz Sharif never cared.” 170

Government of IJI was the 3rd dismissal in five years under the 8th

Amendment but this time community’s response was altered towards the terminated

government. Generally the public came out to support Nawaz Sharif. On the other

end, Nawabzada Nasrullah and all the three minor alliances namely, the PDA, IDF

and NDA had unanimously decided to support President Ishaq Khan on the

termination of the Assemblies. 171

On April 25, 1993 head of IJI Nawaz Sharif filed a plea in the Highest Court

of law contrary to the directive of the Chief Executive about termination of the

Lower House.172 The trial of the plea took place before the full bench presided by

Chief Justice Nasim H. Shah.173 Majority of the judges of the Supreme Court

accepted his plea, holding that the discretion discussed under Article 58 (2 -b) was

not absolute. Supreme Court announced that in the immediate case the act in use did

not fall within the jurisdiction of this provision calling it a desecration of the Article
 234

17 of the Constitution. With this verdict premiership of Nawaz Sharif and the

National Assembly was reinstated after thirty eight days of its dissolution. 174 The

judgment was made by 10 to 1.175 All the adjudicators of the full bench excepting

Justice Sajjad Ali Shah had ruled that Chief Executive’s action of termination was

out of the orbit of authorities allowed to him in the Article 58 (2-B). 176

On May 27, 1993 Nawaz Sharif attained “vote of confidence” from the

Parliament obtaining 123 votes in the house of 203. The PDA and Pakistan Muslim

League (Chatthah) did not partake in voting. But five representative of PDA went

against party discipline and voted for Nawaz Sharif. 177 Later developments enforced

him to resign and opt for new election in Pakistan. 178 Military Chief played his role

in the situation and once again all assemblies were dissolved on the advice of PM to

hold new elections. 179

5.8 Party politics in Provinces after Dissolution of Assemblies

Party politics begin in all provinces as President dissolved the assemblies.

The most severe reaction came from Punjab where PML was in power. G.H. Wyne

was the Head of Provincial Cabinet of the Punjab and the strength of PML

Parliamentary Party in Punjab was 220/248. 180 After the demise of Muhammad Khan

Junejo, PML divided into two main factions. In Punjab Manzoor Watto, the Speaker

of Punjab Provincial Assembly, associated himself with Chattah Group and changed

his loyalty with Wyne. He encouraged the IJI representatives to elect another CM in

place Wyne to save the Punjab Assembly from dissolution. Wyne was asked to

resign from his designation otherwise no-confidence movement would be launched

against him. But Wyne refused to do so and a motion of no confidence was tabled
 235

against Ghulam Haider Wyne by 62 MPAs on April 25, 1993. The motion was

passed against Wyne and Manzoor Watto became the next First Minister of the

Punjab. He secured 151 votes from the house. Mian Muhammad Azhar, who was the

Governor of the Punjab on that time, also gave his resignation from

governorship.181The representatives of PDA in Punjab Assembly did not participate

in any matter and kept themselves away from the whole event. PDA leadership was

unexpectedly agreed to join hand with new Chief Minister for the sack of democracy

and in the interest of the province.182 Jamaat-i-Islami also shack hand with Watto

because he had the support of President and establishment. The basic aim to

empower Watto was to crash the power of Nawaz Sharif in Punjab which was

declared as the home of PML.

The new governor of the Punjab was Altaf Husain who was belonged to an

anti- Nawaz lobby. When Nawaz Sharif restored in center by Supreme Court and

PML tried to table a “no-confidence” movement contrary to Watto, Governor

dismissed the Punjab Assembly on May 29, 1993 on the recommendation of Head of

Cabinet of the Punjab. Ishaq Khan appointed Watto as caretaker Head of Cabinet of

the Punjab and Watto surprisingly same day took the oath of caretaker Head of

Cabinet of Punjab. The act of the dismissal of Punjab provincial Assembly was

challenged in Lahore High Court,183 and Court restored the Punjab Assembly on

June28.184 Hardly seven minutes after the reinstatement of Punjab Assembly, Head

of Cabinet of the Punjab, Manzor Watto gave fresh advice to the Governor and the

Assembly was again dismissed.185 Central government was watching all political

Maneuvering very carefully. Nawaz Sharif called the joint session of the Parliament
 236

and chooses to promulgate “Federal rule in Punjab” under the article 234 of the

constituents,186 and M. M. Azhar was chosen as the representative of the central

government in Punjab. 187

In Sindh the political instability was worsened. After the exclusion of NPP

from IJI and the death of former Chief Minister Jam Sadiq Ali, political instability

increased rapidly. Now Chief Minister Muzaffar Husain Shah was the only

representative in Provincial Assembly of Sindh by IJI, but still IJI was capable to

maintain its government in Sindh. The only alarming problem for IJI was the rule

and command situation in Sindh which was now out of control.

In Baluchistan IJI did not face any crucial problem due to the political

wisdom of Chief Minister Baluchistan. Zulfiqar Ali Magsi was the CM. when

President dismissed the assemblies. It was obvious that opposition will try to create

Political dismemberment in the province. Instead of waiting for some motion from

opposition Zulfiqar Ali Magsi himself asked for a “vote of confidence” from the

Provincial Assembly of Baluchistan and he obtained 22 votes which showed the

confidence of house on him. This act of Chief Minister Baluchistan gave a shut up

call to opposition. Through this action Zulfiqar Ali Magsi sent a message to

opposition that there was no space for anti-Nawaz elements in Baluchistan.

In NWFP provincial government was dismissed by Governor Amir Gulistan

Janjua on the advice of Provincial Head of Cabinet Mir Afzal Khan. This dismissal

was took place after the consultation between Provincial Head of Cabinet and

President.188 Dissolution of NWFP Assembly was also dared in Peshawar High Court

on the grounds that when Provincial Head of Cabinet Mir Afzal gave the advice to
 237

Governor NWFP Amir Gulistan Janjua, a “no-confidence motion” was already

presented in the Provincial Assembly contrary to him. So his act of dismissal the

NWFP Assembly was illegal. Peshawar High Court endorsed the Governor act by

giving ruling that the advice for dismissal of the assemblies was tendered before the

no-confidence motion was moved.189

5.9 Dismissal of Assemblies and End of Party Politics

After reinstating the Lower House and premiership of Nawaz Sharif by court

IJI administration could not handle the national and provincial problems. The

deepening political crisis forced the Armed Forces leadership gave a two week time

to beleaguered Chief Executive beside the Chief of State to sort out their differences

and pave the way for new elections. The opposition leader Benazir Bhutto found the

moment ripe to present demands for forming a national government, demanding a set

of legitimate improvements and holding of new elections. Despite the attempts made

by elder national political leaders, Ulema no improvement took place. Following the

Armed Forces warning, Chief Executive and First Minister met thrice but they failed

in striking out the deal. The final blow came to the already deteriorating political

situation when the opposition leader Benazir Bhutto called for a long march on

Islamabad from July 16, with the support of Pro-Ishaq provincial government of the

Punjab and NWFP, and threatened that they would surround the capital. 190 Benazir

already had tried to create reconciliation with Nawaz Sharif after offering him some

proposals.191 Nawaz Sharif did not give positive response. So PPP selected to initiate

a long march with the coalition of alliance and opposition political parties against

Nawaz government. This long march could invite military intervention because
 238

Pakistan was already facing economic crisis, violence in Sindh, law and order

deterioration, political instability and confrontation between two mainstream

political parties(PPP and IJI) as well as tussle between PM and President. To avoid

such situation, Army Chief asked the political leadership to solve their problems on

table not in streets and hold discussion sessions with PPP leadership. After

discussion, Benazir was ready to plummet the idea of long march.

The near collapse situation brought the Armed Forces leadership back to steer

the county clear through the crisis. Marathon negotiations started between two

Premiers, mediated by the Army generals. The series of meeting took place among

the troika.192 At last, a consensus was reached between the parties on a formula

whereby both Premiers simultaneously stepped down on July 18, 1993. According to

formula, Nawaz Sharif would advise Chief Executive to dissolute the Lower House

of the Parliament. Afterwards the President went on retirement for the rest of

tenure.193 Chairman Senate, Wasim Sajjad would take over the charge as acting Head

of state. An Ex-World Bank functionary Moeen Qureshi came from Washington to

take charge as Caretaker Premier. Ishaq Khan, Nawaz Sharif and opposition leader

BB had assented to appointment of Mr. Qureshi for the reasons unknown to the

general public. Caretaker set up also formed in all provinces and “Acting Governors

and Caretaker Ministers” took charge of the affairs. Under the agreed formula fresh

elections of all Assemblies were schedule on October 6 and October 9 Separately.

Conclusion

This era of guided democracy began in earnest with very strong political

norms and ambitious goals but it ended with confrontations, hostility and clashes
 239

between political parties and other stake-holders. In the beginning President Ishaq

Khan was supported by IJI and opposition political parties especially PPP alleged

that Ishaq Khan was the President of IJI instead of Pakistan and surprisingly, in the

end PPP himself supported Ishaq Khan. In this period Army remained silent

spectator behind the scene and it achieved all its goals through politicians by using

the President, political leadership of PPP and IJI. The bureaucracy became highly

authoritative and it was facilitated by the military in tightening its grip.

In his first term as the Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif committed a lot of

mistakes although with an absolute majority in Lower House of the Parliament while

PPP presented a strong opposition with limited seats in Parliament. IJI was a strong

alliance consisting of eight political parties but having different programs and

ideologies and developed centrifugal tendencies. The tussle between ANP, NPP, JI

and PML fragmented its unity. This tussle turned up Nawaz Sharif as the most

powerful leader of the alliance and he always used his authority without consulting

other member parties of the IJI. The role of Judiciary was relatively democratic and

it emerged as an independent entity. Its verdicts on the restoration of assemblies

showed that now there was no place for doctrine of necessity. The press was highly

controlled. Government used the electronic and print media to project its good image

and attack its opponents. This era perceived widespread use of such power tactic as

threatening of political opponents, arm-twisting, corruption, horse-trading of

assembly members, blackmailing, and undue interference in the government’s

functioning thus weakening it considerably. Eventually, the weak government

 240

provided sufficient grounds for the dissolution of assemblies by President thus

putting an end to the government.

 241

References and Notes

1
Formation of PPP government in 1988 when Benazir became Prime Minister.
2
Dismissal of PPP government in 1990 by President G.I. Khan.
3
Troika means three heads of three major institutions for policy making in Pakistan like “President,
Prime Minister and Army chief.”
4
On August 6, 1988 “president Ghulam Ishaq Khan dismissed the PM Benazir Bhutto and dissolved
the National Assembly under the 8th amendment.”
5
An “electoral alliance” of nine political parties headed by Nawaz Sharif.
6
An electoral alliance of three parties headed by Benazir Bhutto.
7
Umbreen Javaid and Amir Latif., Historical Analysis of Successive Governments in Pakistan: A
History of First Six Decades, 1947-2007, (Pakistan Vision, Vol. 18 No. 1)
8
Rasool Bax Rais., 1994.
9
Makhdoom Sayed Ghayur Abbas Bukhari., Benazir: Beti Say Qaid Tak, (Urdu) (Lahore: Multi
Media Affairs, 2004), 166.
10
Dawn, Karachi, August 10, 1990.
11
Jatoi, the biggest landlord of Sindh, had been known as the “perpetual prime minister-in-waiting.”
Although a big and old name in Pakistani politics, he could not even win a parliamentary seat from his
own constituency in the 1988 elections and had to depend on a seat Ghulam Mustafa Khar vacated for
him in a safe constituency in the 1989 by-election to return to Parliament.
12
“The most controversial among them was G.M. Khar who took over the ministry of water and
power. He and Jatoi had been friends since their early days in the PPP as the party’s founding
members with Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Khar became estranged from the PPP and the Bhutto women in the
early and mid-1980’s. He was ambivalent during Benazir Bhutto’s term as prime minister. He
publicly pledged loyalty to Benazir only a few weeks before he joined Jatoi ’s cabinet. At the end of
August, 1990, however, he repeated President Ishaq Khan’s corruption charges against Bhutto and
said that she should give the PPP’s leadership to him in the larger interest of the party. He claimed
that he was the ill true heir to the late Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s political legacy and that he could lead the
PPP to victory in the upcoming elections. He also charged Bhutto with being involved in anti-Pakistan
conspiracies and warned that her return to power would be a national disaster. Khar said that he had
all the respect for the PPP workers and that he was ready to support the PPP without Bhutto. “But if
the party is led by Ms. Bhutto, I will collaborate with any power to block her way”.
13
Both were the Minister in Zia’s cabinet.
14
Former aide to Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto.
15
Munir Ahmad., Bhutto Khandan Ka Katal, (Urdu), (Lahore: Takhliqat Publishers, 1998), 386.
16
“To conduct the elections and run the state system an interim setup was required that could fulfill
the responsibilities till the elections are held and the elected government takes the responsibility.
Usually opposition of the previous government is offered to form the government. Following this
principle head of COP in the NA, Jatoi was offered the office of PM till the elected government takes
its responsibility. Jatoi formed his cabinet with the help of IJI and gave different ministries to the
members of IJI and COP parties.”
17
Akbar Bhugti’s son-in-law.
18
Kimie Sekine., Benazir Bhutto: her political struggle in Pakistan, 112.
19
Appointment of Jatoi “as interim PM was criticized by many because he was one of the prominent
leaders of the opposition of the previous government. Many of his colleagues also had problems with
his selection due to different reasons. Qazi criticized the appointment of Jatoi as Caretaker PM
without any consultation with IJI or JI. He also criticized the selection of cabinet arguing that many of
the people who were accountable got appointments in the caretaker cabinet. Ghafoor was of the view
that Ghulam Ishaq Khan lost his impartial impression with the appointment of Jatoi. Junejo, president
of PML also criticized it in the grounds that this appointment proves that none other party had any
capable leader to be appointed as PM except PPP. He was also critical of the method of the
appointment of the cabinet as being president of PML” he was not consulted before the appointment
of his party members in the interim cabinet.
20
How an Election was Stolen: The PDA White Paper on the Pakistan Elections 1990, (Islamabad:
Mid Asia, 1991), 39-42.
 242

21
The president set up “six special tribunals, and the Federal caretaker government established five
special courts, to try and punish the misconduct of those in public office. The special tribunals, which
were originally set up by Zia-ul Haq after the coup in 1977 and resurrected by the caretaker
government, could disqualify those convicted from taking part in the elections and from assuming any
public office for seven years. The special courts of the caretaker government could punish legislators
if they were found guilty of any misdemeanor.” All courts were headed by high court judges.
22
Kimie Sekine., Benazir Bhutto : her political struggle in Pakistan, 113.
23
The president filed “two references against Bhutto in a special tribunal in Karachi. One of them
concerned the award of a contract for the sale of cotton at a rate far below the international market
rate to a firm in Karachi. The other accusation referred to the illegal use of an Asian Development
Bank loan to hire a foreign consulting firm for a Karachi power extension project. Two weeks later on
September 24, two more references were filed in a special tribunal in Lahore and the court ordered
Bhutto to stand trial on October 9. One dealt with the grant of over 200 acres of prime land to an
international company for a hotel project in Islamabad. The land was allegedly granted at a much
lower rate than the prevailing market rate.” The other concerned the grant of illegal marketing rights
for liquefied petroleum gas to her close friends.
24
New York Times, October 1, 1990.
25
Muhammad Ali Sheikh., Benazir Bhutto: A Political Biography, 199-200
26
It was alleged that “he, along with Ghulam Hussain Unar, kidnapped a Pakistani-bom British
businessman in April and robbed him of 17 million rupees. Zardari claimed that he was arrested just
because he was contesting elections against Murtaza Jatoi, the caretaker prime minister’s son, and that
its sole purpose was to prevent him from campaigning in the constituency which was home to both
Zardari and Jatoi clans.” Murtaza Jatoi was said to be in a weak position and the arrest of Asif Zardari
became inevitable.
27
Pakistan Times, September 11, 1990.
28
PDF was joined by Qaumi Mahaz-e Azadi Pakistan, Communist Party, Qaumi Inqilabi Party,
Mazdoor Kisan Party, Pakistan Workers Party and Proletarian Party, Tehami, Intikhābāt 90 kā White
Paper, 42.
29
PML donated 3 hundred thousand rupees, Pir Fazale Haq gave 1 hundred thousand rupees and Sami
presented 10,000 rupees. Jang, August 29, 1990.
30
Munir Ahmad., Bhutto Khandan Ka Katal, (Urdu), 393.
31
Tariq Ismaeel Sagar., Election 90, 58.
32
The Nation, August 9, 1990.
33
Jang, August 19, 1990.
34
Pakistan Times, August 21, 1990.
35
Nisar Usmani., Will the Alliance Work, Dawn, August 23, 1990.
36
Professor Ghafoor, Secretary General of IJI “rejected the decision of Nawaz Sharif because he was
of the view that Nawaz Sharif was authorized for holding discussions with MQM but he had no right
to make decisions on his own. He said that the final decision could be taken in the meeting of the
heads of the member parties of IJI. He believed that the decision of the seat adjustment was not even
according to the set pattern of the IJI which was decided in the meeting of August 19, 1990, so it
could not be appreciated by the member parties of IJI. Provincial president of JI Sindh said that if JI
was not provided its due share of seats it will decide its political future independently.”
37
Pakistan Times, October 9, 1990
38
Farooq was of the view that “the attitude of JI was a conspiracy against IJI and Nawaz Sharif. He
believed that if the decision was made in the meeting on August 19 that the winners of the election of
1988 will contest from the same constituencies than the problems created by JI were mere action of
supporting the PPP.” Dawn, October 7, 1990.
39
Ibid.
40
Pakistan Times, October 1 and 22, 1990.
41
Parliamentary boards of the member parties of IJI were authorized “to submit lists of suitable
candidates for NA and PAs to IJI parliamentary board that was headed by Nawaz Sharif. If there were
more than one nomination for any constituency, the IJI parliamentary board was authorized to make a
final selection. IJI decided to give alliance tickets to the winners and runners up of 1988 elections,
provided that the heads of the parties wanted them to contest the elections. Only those candidates
could not get the alliance ticket that changed loyalties after during previous years. IJI and its allied
 243

parties agreed to support joint candidates against the PPP candidates. In this way 50% of the seats
were decided quite easily. Candidates for remaining seats were selected on merit. Nawaz Sharif asked
the members of the alliance to submit their applications for the alliance ticket till September 5, 1990,
to finalize alliance’s candidates at an appropriate time. The seats that PPP won in the 1988 elections
were distributed among the COP parties. IJI got 78, ANP 6, JUI 4, PNP 2 and 8 to independent
members for the elections of 1990. According to the formula in the Punjab IJI got 51 seats won by
PPP in the 1988 elections and two tickets went to independent candidates. In Sindh IJI got 13 tickets,
PNP 2, ANP 1, and 6 tickets were given to the independents. In NWFP IJI got 6 tickets and ANP 5. In
Baluchistan IJI got one ticket. Ticket for the constituency in Islamabad was given to Nawaz Khokar of
PML. Lack of consensus was visible within the IJI and outside its fold. Each of the member parties of
IJI wanted a lion’s share in the alliance tickets. Provincial committees were formed to resolve internal
problems of the alliance and then proceed to discuss with other COP parties.” A Supreme Council was
constituted to decide all the problems regarding the party tickets.
42
It seemed that the PPP was a loser in this alliance. “It was for the first time since its inception in
1967, that the Pakistan People’s Party had relinquished its name and had opted to contest elections
from another podium. This it had not done even with the MRD which had lent a hand to bring the
party back to life after a long paralysis since 1977. Still Benazir was not willing to make any such
alliance but she had to take this unwanted decision mainly for two reasons. First, she wanted to curtail
the influence of her opponent alliance of the IJI especially in Punjab. Secondly, she wanted to secure
her party from the suspicion that if the PPP was banned its candidates at least would be there in the
field from another platform.”
43
Riaz Ahmad., Benazir’s Loyalty to Pakistan Doubtful, Pakistan Times, September 24, 1990.
44
Asghar Khan was austerely “against the further extension of the alliance whereas no member of his
party could succeed on any seat of the National Assembly or of the Provincial Elections of Punjab.
His party had no strength in any other province. Though he contested the 1990 election against the
main leader of the IJI, Nawaz Sharif from the constituency number N.A. 95, Lahore IV and held
impressive processions with the support of the PPP and the TNFJ workers, but even then he could not
fare well. The reason being his own stern behaviour with the political workers and that the PPP
workers had not accepted him whole heartedly as their candidate.”
45
Pakistan Times, October 9, 1990
46
Viewpoint, October 18, 1990. 19.
47
Ibid.
48
PPP’s foreign policy and “particularly visit of Indian PM Rajiv Ghandhi in 1989 was criticized as
Benazir adopted an apologetic attitude towards the Kashmir issue instead of highlighting Pakistan’s
point of view. This was something that was called an anti-national program of the PPP.” For more
details see, Dawn, September 17, 1991. Also Riaz Ahmad, “Benazir’s Loyalty to Pakistan Doubtful”,
Pakistan Times, September 24, 1990.
49
She was accused of “having links with the Zionist and Indian lobbies in the United States which
were said to have engineered the suspension of American aid to Pakistan. There had been some
concern in the United States whether Pakistan was building nuclear weapon. Pakistan had long
insisted that its nuclear program did not include weapons but this assertion had become less
convincing to the Americans. American law prohibited economic and military aid as well as any
delivery of military equipment to Pakistan unless the president could give a written certificate
confirming that Pakistan had no nuclear weapons. In 1990 Pakistan was the third largest recipient of
American aid, after Israel and Egypt, getting over 500 million dollars. In the absence of the required
certificate from President George Bush for the new fiscal year, the United States Congress suspended
aid to Pakistan on October 1. The IJI leaders, taking advantage of its timing, made the loss of U.S. aid
one of the major topics of its election campaign and accused Bhutto of sending her mother, Nusrat
Bhutto, to the United States to lobby for the suspension of aid. Bhutto was also criticized for hiring an
American public relations expert, Mark Siegel, whom the IJI described as a “well-known Zionist.”
The Federal information minister, Abida Hussain, accused Bhutto of paying Siegel nearly half a
million dollars from the government treasury to improve her image in the United States.” For detail
see Pirzada, “Rigging in 1990 Elections in Pakistan”, 118.
50
The government helicopter was “at his disposal and caretaker Chief Minister of the Punjab Ghulam
Haider Wayne had accompanied him throughout the course of campaigns. The Deputy
Commissioners and Superintendents of Police used to welcome him on public meetings.
 244

Administrative resources were also used extensively during the public meetings of Ghulam Mustafa
Jatoi and Jam Sadiq Ali. In this election every political party tried to make use of government
machinery, take control of media, appoint people of their choice in administration, get funds and use
government vehicles.” For detail see Qurat ul Ain Bashir, Parliamentary Democracy in Pakistan:
1988-1999, (phd thesis, Quaid I Azam University Islamabad 2015). 431.
51
For instance, “the imam of Badshahi Mosque, Lahore, Molvi Abdul Qadir Azad, a government
official of grade 18 was induced by the provincial government through bribe to declare that anybody
who supported Benazir would be thrown in hell on the “Day of Judgment”. For more information see
Shaukat Ali, Issues of Government and Politics, 71.
52
Munir Ahmad., Bhutto Khandan Ka Katal., 40.
53
Pakistan Times, October 25, 1990.
54
Source: Gilani's Index of Electoral Record (1970-2008) based on data provided by Election
Commission of Pakistan (www.gallup.com.pk)
55
1997: General Election, Election Commission of Pakistan, n.d), vi. For comprehensive details of
National Assembly results concern this report.
56
Iftikhar Bajwa.,“Winners Takes All”, The Herald, Karachi, November/ December 1990, 67.
57
Tariq Ismaeel Sagar., Election 90, 66-9
58
Munir Ahmad., Jarnæl Shahi, 59.
59
Naqvi., Mehallati Sazishain, 12.
60
Three teams of “foreign observers visited Pakistan to watch the electoral process. French group
consisted of two magistrates and two lawyers. The Washington based National Democratic Institute
(NDI) and Independent English language print media covered election campaign. SAARC mission,
Canadian team, French observers, Different newspapers, journals and individuals commented
differently about the elections. Comments had variation about the elections if they were free or not.
International media was appreciative for the whole process as it was completed a peaceful
environment and there were no signs of harassment visible.”
61
Pakistan Times, October 26, 1990 and Dawn, October 28, 1990
62
Tariq Ismaeel Sagar., Election 90, 66-9.
63
Rahat Zubair Malik., Politics of alliance in Pakistan, a case study of IJI, 334.
64
The applications “which had some solid grounds were taken up by the ECP and necessary action
was taken. Most of the applications were that of the general nature. Nothing was specified. It was
mentioned in the complaints that all sorts of corruption were done. Candidates used official transport.
Opposition members were harassed. Transfers were made and members of a party were provided
funds from government resources to bribe people in shape of welfare work on the eve of elections. It
allotted plots to non-deserving people; announced facilities to the Lumberdars and crores of rupees
were spent on the chairmen and councilors of district council, municipal committee and union
councils to get desired election results.”
65
“Twelve complaints were filed against the mal practices during polling and only four were accepted
and fresh polls were ordered at some of the polling stations of three constituencies. Re-poll in one
constituency was also ordered. Remaining eight complaints were dismissed as were unable to provide
any solid grounds to prove their point. Thirty three complaints were filed for recounting of ballot
papers. Four were ordered to be done so. Re-poll at three constituencies and thirteen polling stations
of one constituency were ordered after the proof of mal practices in those constituencies.” for further
information see Report on the General Elections 1990, Vol. I. 169-75 and 233-34.
66
“Report on General Elections 1993,” Vol. III. 4.
67
Waseem., Crisis of Dyarchy, 617.
68
Brain Cloughley., A History of Pakistan Army (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2008), 70.
69
Dawn, Karachi, November 5, 1990.
70
Ibid. November 8, 1990.
71
Waseem., Crisis of Dyarchy, 617-618
72
Dawn, Karachi, December 8, 1990.
73
Ibid.
74
Dawn, Karachi, November, 11, 1990.
75
Ibid.
76
Haq., Coup, 65.
77
Mumtaz., The Contours of State and Society, 225-226
 245

78
Dawn, October 29, 1990.
79
Dawn, Karachi, November 3, 1990
80
Raauf Tahir., Weekly Zindagi, March 14-20, 1992. 10.
81
Khawar Malik., “Blow Hot Blow Cold”, Frontier Post, March 17, 1992.
82
IJI and NPP “both were unhappy with each other and both had problems with the behavior of the
other. Jatoi had certain reservations against the IJI leadership; local bodies’ elections in the Punjab
and Islamabad-Lahore Motorway which according to him made him think to cooperate with PDA and
Nasrullah. Government did not entertain these reservations increased problems between Jatoi and
Nawaz Sharif.”
83
Qazi stated that there were no chances of reconciliation with Jatoi because of his improved
relationship with PPP without consulting the IJI leadership.
84
Tariq Butt, “Decision to Keep IJI Ship A float Reflect PM’s Thinking in Alliance Future”, The
News, March 16, 1992.
85
After the death of Jam Sadiq, “Jatoi wanted to get his son elected for the office of CM Sindh but
could not get required support for this and decided to support the IJI nominee. Although Jatoi
supported the IJI’s decision for the next CM Sindh but he could not reconcile with this decision and
continued his efforts get his son Masroor Jatoi elected as CM Sindh. After the election of Shah the
task of cabinet formation was delayed to check the decision of NPP as the cooperation of NPP with
PPP was evident.241 Jatoi wanted to get full benefit of his position as he got promise of newly elected
CM that he will include three nominees of Jatoi in the cabinet.242 This showed multiple layers of
political strategy of Jatoi. On the one side he tried to get his son elected as CM, later announced that
his son will serve the people as leader of the opposition in Sindh and got promise of CM Sindh as well
to include his three nominees in the Sindh Cabinet. Giving an afterthought to his decision, he denied
any representation of his party members in the cabinet arguing that like JI, his party decided to serve
the people without joining any cabinet.”
86
Jatoi was expecting “to become PM after the elections of 1990, but Nawaz Sharif’s role in the
election campaign and people’s demand as Nawaz Sharif PM made the IJI to elect him as PM.
Although Jatoi accepted the decision but his attitude at different occasions gave a contradictory
impression.”
87
Nawaz Sharif “did not have any “problems in surviving at Federal level as well even without NPP
because PDA and NPP after joining hands could get only sixty members’ support which was not
enough to remove his government” in the house of 210.
88
It was said by IJI leadership that “JI demanded Foreign and Finance ministries which were denied
by the government and it denied accepting any other while Qazi explained that his party was not
interested in getting any type ministries, it only wanted to appoint those who had deep commitment
with Islam in the ministries of foreign office, finance, education and information.”
89
According to the leadership of JI, “the government overlooked the manifesto and constitution of the
alliance. Meetings of the heads of IJI could not be held for long period of time. Nawaz Sharif ignored
to conduct elections of office bearers of the alliance. Cabinet members were ignored in the decision
making process and allied parties were expelled unconstitutionally from the alliance. He said that in
foreign policy matters, government did not listen to the point of view of the allies.”
90
Nawa-i Waqt, May 17, 1992.
91
Dawn, February 23, 1992.
92
Jasarat, July 21, 1992.
93
Muhammad Saleh Zaafir, “IJI Bid to Seek JUI, JUP Support”, The Muslim, June 5, 1992.
94
Junejo considered “Iraq’s attack on Kuwait a mistake of Iraq for creating such conditions which
allowed America to attack her. According to him American aggression against Iraq was not a solution
of the problem. It was the right of Muslim countries to keep their forces in Iraq and Kuwait till the
conflict is resolved and governments in Kuwait and Iraq are restored under OIC but America must
quit gulf region. Junejo affirmed that Superpowers only intervened for Middle East oil reserves.” He
declared that government and PML share similar views and appreciated Nawaz Sharif’s peace
mission.
95
Jatoi believed that “the Security Council had asked to help Kuwait to vacate it from Iraqi forces but
it did not allow ruining the whole Iraq. Jatoi opposed JI’s demand of calling the Pakistani troops back.
He stated that the troops were sent on Saudi request and Saudi Arab has always stood with Pakistan so
it was unwise and unjustified to call the troops back.”
 246

96
Khalid Sultan, “Junejo Condemns U.S. Aggression Against Iraq”, Frontier Post, January 24, 1991.
97
Zahid Hussain, “About Turn?, Newline, February 1992, 30.
98
Dawn, January 13, 1991.
99
Construction of “Kalabagh Dam had been a divisive issue for a long period of time. It is a general
perception that construction of this dam will not only fulfill the electricity requirements across the
country; it will also provide ample water to irrigate huge pieces of land in Punjab, Sindh and NWFP
and will be able to provide water for irrigation for limited areas of Baluchistan as well. The
construction of Kalabagh Dam was one of the promises made by Nawaz during his election campaign.
The Chief Ministers of Sindh, NWFP and Baluchistan opposed the plan of construction of Dam.
Nawaz gave up his promise by asserting that he could not make a decision regarding the matter
himself and construction of Dam would only take place with the consensus of all the provinces. While
taking the vote of confidence Nawaz had assured the House that he would implement the IJI
manifestoes but later in CCI meeting he postponed the issue of Kalabagh Dam instead to resolve it.
After the signing of water accord there was a perception that being coalition partner of IJI at center
and in NWFP, it will cooperate with the government in sorting the issues regarding the construction of
Kalabagh Dam but the case was different. ANP did not hesitate in threatening the government for
severe consequences against the construction of Kalabagh Dam. In a meeting of central working
committee, ANP passed a resolution that if the government approved the plan of the construction of
Kalabagh Dam, its members will resign from the assembly. Nawaz Sharif did not want to lose support
of ANP in NWFP and NA to maintain his provincial government and 2/3 majority in Centre.”
Kalabagh Dam was considered important for the economic survival of the Punjab but ANP announced
that if the Dam was constructed, it will demolish it through bombing.
100
Hassan, “Aik Dilchasp awr Khatarnāk Khail”, Weekly Zindagi, March 2-6, 1993. 8-9.
101
Safdar Mahmood., Pakistan Political Roots and Developments, 103.
102
The issue of “sharing water among the provinces is an ongoing issue since 1935. After the
inception of Pakistan Akhtar Hussain commission in 1960, Fazal-e Akbar Commission in 1969,
General Anwar ul Haq Commission in 1972 and Haleem Commission in 1977 were formed but
suggestions of none of these commissions could be implemented through consensus. However,
Nawaz Sharif was the PM who managed to create consensus among the provinces and the percentage
of the water share of all the provinces was decided.”
103
Waseem Ahmad., “Government-Opposition Talks Need of Hour: Jatoi”, The Nation, January 23,
1992.
104
The Muslim, March 26, 1991.
105
Nisar Usmani., “IJI Government Battered by Series of Crisis”, Dawn, December 15, 1991.
106
In March 1991 “he set up a committee of Senators, MNAs, judges, lawyers and ulema to formulate
a new version of the Shariat Bill. The committee was made up of eleven members headed by Law
Minister Chaudhry Amir Hussain.”
107
for example in that “Bill a method was explained to help the courts to take decisions according to
the injunctions of Islam and each and every law that was against Shari‘ah could be challenged in the
court. The clause that mentioned that President or the PM could not take any decision against Shari‘ah
was deleted. A clause that made it obligatory to follow the rules of Shari‘ah for all the members of
government and common people was also eliminated.”
108
K.K. Bhardwaj., Pakistan’s March to Democracy and Liberalism, (New Delhi: Anmol
Publications pvt. ltd, 1996), 169.
109
The details of inquiries were; “(1) Does the Holy Quran permit the existence of sects? (2) Will
non-Muslims be minister under the Shariat Law? (3) Does Islam offers a certain term for the Amir to
rule? (4) Does Islam accede to the practice of one man and one vote? (5) What would be the status of
the Bait-ul- Mal, a treasury or a welfare fund? (6) Could current Parliamentary democracy possibly
exist under an Islamic system? (7) Would insurance be Islamic? (8) Would Interest based financial
system be allowed to function? (9) What would be the procedure of election of Amir? (10) Could
Parliamentary system be challenged in the court of law after its implementation?” Dawn, May 9,
1991.
110
Dawn, May 9, 1991.
111
Ibid.
112
Ibid.
113
Meezan, “Nawaz Sharif: Ittifāq se Naffāq Tak.” 43.
 247

114
Ghafoor Ahmad., Nawaz Sharif kā Pehlā Dawr-i Hakōmat, 113.
115
Babar Ayaz., Pakistan: Up for Sale, 60.
116
Meezan., Nawaz Sharif: Ittifāq se Naffāq Tak, 43.
117
Keesings Record of World Events, News Digest for December 1991. 38683.
118
Waseem Ahmad., Crisis of Dyarchy, 617.
119
“Subā’i Assembly Punjab, Mubāhithāt,” September 30, 1991. 813.
120
Among them only 08 were prominent and had representation in National Assembly.
121
Sultan Ahmad, “Towards the Confrontation”, Dawn, Karachi, August 17, 1991
122
Dawn, Karachi, August 17, 1991.
123
Dawn, Karachi, June 1, 1991.
124
Shahid Kardar, “Budget: Waiting for Next Round”, Dawn, Karachi, June 8, 1991
125
Safdar Mahmood., Pakistan Political Roots and Developments: 1947-1999, 103 and 107-8.
126
Firstly when Junejo government was dissolved by Zia ul Haq and secondly Benazir government
terminated by Ghulam Ishaq Khan.
127
The committee comprises on “four members including Ch Shujaat, Ch Ameer Hussain, Ghous Ali
Shah and Ch. Abdul Ghafoor.”
128
Hassan., Aik Dilchasp awr Khatarnāk Khail, 8.
129
Qazi was of the opinion that “there was always room for the amendments in the constitution but
the government must form a committee to probe into the suggested amendments to keep balance in
the constitution. He told that there was no need to amend the clauses that were related to the Islamic
teachings and FSC. As far as the clauses concerned with the powers of President and PM, must be
debated properly and amended through consensus.”
130
Ashraf Hashmi, “NPP’s Identity to be Revived”, The Muslim, March 12, 1991.
131
Maleeha Lodhi and Zahid Hussain., “Is Nawaz Sharif’s Time up”, Newsline, March 1993. 31-32.
132
Dawn, Karachi, November 14, 1992.
133
The Frontier Post, November 12, 1992.
134
Nawa i Waqt, November 15, 1992.
135
Dawn, Karachi, November 11, 1992.
136
Nawa i Waqt, November 16, 1992.
137
Dawn, Karachi, November 19, 1992.
138
The Frontier Post, November 22, 1992.
139
Ibid. November 22, 1992.
140
Dawn, Karachi, November 21, 1992.
141
Ibid.
142
Dawn, Karachi, November 22, 1992.
143
The Frontier Post, November 21, 1992.
144
Dawn, Karachi, November 26, 1992.
145
Shuja Nawaz 2008. 436-7
146
Hasan Askari Rizvi., Military, State and Society in Pakistan, 12.
147
Ibid., 211.
148
Ibid.
149
Brain Cloughley., A History of Pakistan Army, 72-3.
150
Dawn, Karachi, August 18, 1991.
151
“Even he did not observe a panel of proposed name by the General Headquarters (GHQ). The
profile of Javed Naser was highly religious and at that point military was promoting its moderate and
liberal image. The changes in ISI took place when Afghanistan entered into the serious political
phase. The GHQ did not like it as it did not believe that it was the right time for such massive
changes.”
152
Nawaz suspended the “anti-dacoit operation in Sindh which restricted the role of military. The
operation was neutral and across the board in whole Sindh. The law and order was restored but Army
was called back before the completion of operation. Nawaz was threatened by the MQM because of
which he cancelled the operation.215 The Mehran Force (a paramilitary force) was deployed in Sindh
under the command of the civilian government. However when Mehran Rangers did not manage the
law and order in the province then Army was recalled again.” All these decisions widened the
differences between the government and the GHQ.
153
Brain Cloughley., A History of Pakistan Army,73.
 248

154
Rizvi., Military, State and Society in Pakistan, 211.
155
Ibid., 212.
156
Ibid., 213.
157
Ibid.
158
Munir Ahmad., The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 211- 212
159
Chaudhry., Tehri Rahon Ka Seedha Musafir, (Urdu), 169.
160
“The Guru has Feet of Clay”, Newsline, December 1991. 30.
161
The amendment had “offered massive authority to the Federal government. The proposed life span
of the amendment was three years and was to lapse automatically thereafter. According to the
proposed amendment the actions made by the Federal government in any affected area (any area
where heinous crimes and terrorism had been happening since long and could not be controlled by
any normal means) could not be brought before any court of law. The means to curb the terrorism was
undefined and left on the discretion of the government. It authorized the government to declare any
area as affected area for the time ranging from six months to a year.”
162
To curtail powers of President, “Nawaz Sharif did not hesitate to contact Benazir with an offer of
holding elections a year earlier than the decided time, a common presidential candidate and an
independent commission to conduct the elections. Nawaz Sharif offered PDA, the office of president
in the forthcoming election as well to get support to modify the eighth amendment. Appointment of
Benazir as Chairperson of the Committee on foreign affairs showed rapprochement among the
government and opposition which further increased ire of president against Nawaz Sharif.”
163
Nawaz Sharif also “criticized Ghulam Ishaq Khan’s attitude during the Gulf war as he did not take
any action against negative and parallel policy of Beg (COAS) about the issue.”
164
Nawaz Sharif believed that “the amendment could not co-exist with democracy. Ghulam Ishaq
Khan believed that the amendment was part of the constitution and being custodian of constitution he
had to stop any such changes that could change the outlook and balance of the constitution.”
165
Including, “Sardar Asif Ahmad Ali, Roedad Khan, Hamid Nasir Chattha, Anwar Saifullah, Jam
Mashooq Ali and Mir Hazar Khan Bajrani” were the ministers who gave resignation.
166
In routine “a session of the National Assembly is called by President.”
167
Jan Mohammad Dawood., The Role of Superior Judiciary in the Politics of Pakistan, (Karachi:
Royal Book Company, 1994), 120-21.
168
Ibid., 120-23.
169
Dawn, Karachi, April 19, 1993.
170
RaufTahir, “Buhran ki Kahani, Liaquat Balouch ki Zubani”, Weekly Zindagi, May 1-7, 1993. 10.
171
In fact “the opposition played a vital role in making the mind of Ishaq Khan about the ouster of
Nawaz. Ishaq Khan’s meetings with the opposition were signs of the dissolution. The opponents of
Nawaz had multiplied in a short period of time. Ishaq Khan did not want to remove the with the
support of all the stake holders vis a vis establishment, the opposition and fragmented factions of the
PML. The bureaucracy served as a bridge among the presidency, the opposition and the military. The
meeting of the Corps Commanders headed by the COAS was held on first week of July 1993 to
discuss the political situation of the country. In the meeting it was decided that Nawaz should suggest
to the President to dissolve the Assemblies. Roedad Khan conveyed the message of COAS to the
President that he would support any action of President according to constitution.”
172
Dawn, Karachi, April 19, 1993.
173
Jang (Urdu), Lahore, April 23, 1993.
174
“Ten out of eleven judges of the SC declared that the action taken by the president on April 18,
1993 was illegal and did not come in the purview of the Article 58 2(B) and other clauses of the
constitution. In the light of this judgment NA, Cabinet and the PM were re-instated at a position of
pre-April 18, 1993 on May 26, 1993. Only one Judge Mr. Sajjad Ali Shah opposed the decision of the
full bench of the Supreme Court.”
175
The News, Islamabad, May 27, 1993.
176
Sajjad., An Autobiography, 45.
177
The News, Islamabad, May 28, 1993.
178
“Politics in Pakistan: National Assembly Elections 1993,” Report of SAARC-NGO OBSERVERS
(New Delhi: International Centre for Ethnic Studies, 1995). 11
179
Bukhari., Benazir, 169.
180
Dawn, Karachi, April 21, 1993.
 249

181
Zahid Hussain, “Day of the General”, Newsline, July 1993, p. 30
182
Dawn, Karachi, April 27, 1993.
183
The petition is filed by “Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi on the ground that the dissolution took place after
the submission of draft of no-confidence motion to the Secretary of Provincial Assembly.”
184
Court gave the ruling that the recommendation of Chief Minister was mala fide.
185
Dawn, Islamabad, June 29, 1993.
186
With the enforcement of “Federal rule the administration of the Punjab came under the control of
Federal government. This raised a new constitutional issue as he President believed that only he could
issue such proclamation and, therefore, the matter should be referred to him. However, the Federal
government considered that as the proclamation was based on the resolution approved by the joint
session of the Parliament, no such formality was required.”
187
Dawn, Islamabad, June 30, 1993
188
The News, Islamabad, May 31, 1993.
189
Dawn, Karachi, June 6, 1993.
190
Mukhtar Hassan,“Long March Ya Quick March", Weekly Zindgi, July 17-23, 1993. 10.
191
Benazir sent a letter to Nawaz Sharif asking for recreation of election commission, announcing of a
date for fresh elections and constitutional amendments.
192
Troika means, Army chief, President and Prime Minister. Three head of major institutions, Ghulam
Ishaq Khan, Nawaz Sharif and Waheed Kakar.
193
Naseer Ahamad Saleemi, “Baghion’ ki Sargarmian awr Zimni Intikhabat”, Weekly Zindagi, April
18-24, 1992. 6.
 250

Chapter 6

Party Politics in the reign of Pakistan People’s Party 1993-1996

After the election 1993, PPP once again occupied the office of premiership

and Benazir Bhutto nominated as eleventh Head of the Cabinet of Pakistan. The

party politics in this era was at its peak. About four dozens political parties

participated in this election and surprisingly all of them became the part of one or the

other alliance except four,1 which remained aloof from any alliance. The important

questions which need to be asked in how Chief Executive Farooq Laghari, a PPP

stalwart himself for more than twenty years, turned against the PPP government?

Why did Chief Justice of SC Sajjad Ali Shah, who was also selected by Benazir,

sided with Farooq Laghari? Why politically experienced PPP failed in creating

harmony among the political parties? The answer of these research questions is topic

of this chapter.

The elections 1993 were named “election of alliances”. Surprisingly, that

people rejected these alliances and they voted majorly for the same rival political

parties which had been heading the government one after another since 1985. Before

election IJI faced a stunning misfortune when its major political party PML (N)

announced its departure from the alliance and decided to contest this election on its

own. On the other side religious political parties tried their best to form a grand

alliance consisting of religious parties but instead split into different alliance. JUP

and JUI joined the Islami Jamhori Mahaz while JI formed Pakistan Islamic Front. 2

Sami ul Haq established Muttahida Deeni Mahaz with the collaboration of twenty
 251

four other Sunni religious parties. 3 PPP and PML (N) remained aloof and decided on

seat adjustment with other coalition groups. Before elections, MQM divided into

three factions. It boycotted the election to the Central Legislature. After elections,

PPP became the ruling party by securing 86 seats while PML (N) bagged only 73

seats in Lower House of the Parliament. The small difference between the seats of

top parties led to confrontational politics in the Assembly. In such a situation,

President Leghari, using his special powers again dissolved the Assemblies.

6.1 Party Politics during Caretaker Setup

After the dissolvent of Assemblies by the President, and resignation of

President from Prime Minister’s office, Chairperson Upper House took the charge as

Acting Head of State and Moeen Ahmad Qureshi4 took the responsibility of

Caretaker Chief of the State on July 18, 1993. 5 Prime Minister Moin Ahmad formed

his cabinet mostly consisted of technocrats and educationists. 6 Beside it, he tried to

appoint neutral figures in every office to ensure the neutrality of caretaker

government in electoral process.7 Neutral caretaker governments were also formed in

all four provinces. Bureaucracy and administration of the provinces was reshuffled

by all Caretaker Chief Ministers. The Minister of Information was directed to

provide equal facility of coverage to all political parties. All local bodies in Punjab

were dismissed on August 15, 1993 and new administrators were appointed by the

government to ensure neat and clean elections. The funds of local government were

deferred by Federal government till the conduct of elections to avoid any allegation

of pre -poll rigging. The headship of PML (N) and PPP criticized such steps of the

caretaker government and declared such steps “beyond its mandates”8 Conduct of
 252

free and fair election on time was the priority of caretaker government, so Moin

Qureshi asked Chief Election Commissioner to make electoral reforms after

discussion with the major political parties. Election Commission discussed this

matter with the leaders of mainstream political parties and announced some changing

in electoral rules including, increase of one hour in polling time, fixation of election

expenditures,9 deployment of army in polling stations for maintaining law and order

situation and presiding officers were empowered with Magistrate authority to tackle

any problem from voters or candidates on the spot.

6.1.1 “Formation of PML Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz Group”

PML (N) was the most recent avatar of the party in 1993. It was formulated

in 1993 on termination of Nawaz Group. PML (N) was engraved out of the unified

PML, founded by Junejo. After the death of Junejo, Nawaz Sharif got a chance to

boost up his struggles for consolidating the Pakistan Muslim League. Since his

earlier efforts to become President of joint PML had failed. Now afterward the

demise of Junejo in March 1993, Nawaz Sharif and his cliques left the united PML

and called a distinct body convention at Islamabad at the house of Nawaz Khokher

instead of official PML secretariat and proclaimed the formation of “Pakistan

Muslim League Nawaz Group (PML-N).”Nawaz Sharif declared President of this

offshoot, Sartaj Aziz was selected as the General Secretary of this newly created

faction and Syed Mushahid Husain was appointed as the Information Secretary of

this new PML (N). Ghulam Haider Wyne, former CM Punjab, was designated as

President of PML (N) Punjab and Ch. Pervaiz Ellahi was declared Senior Vice

President. In September 1993, before the commencement of elections Wyne was

 253

assassinated and portfolio of the Punjab Muslim League was again changed. Now

Ch. Shujaat Husain was selected as the “President of Punjab Muslim League (N).”

On the other side Junejo’s stalwarts in the headship of H. N. Chatthah were

claiming themselves as real and the original PML. They declared Hamid Nasir

Chatthah as President PML (C) and Iqbal Ahmed Khan was appointed as General

Secretary. They claimed that PML (N) was not original and whole process which

was adopted by Nawaz Sharif for making PML (N) was illegal. The point was that

not any of the PML groups was competent to declare them real PML. The PML (J)

was also the result of party-less poll under General Zia regime in 1985 and it

participated in the elections 1990 under the banner of IJI.

Nawaz Sharif presented PML (N) as a moderate political party instead of a

societal egalitarian political party. The higher tiers of PML (N) were consisted of

entrepreneurs or Ex. officials who entitlement that this party was completely separate

from other customary feudal ruled radical festivities of the Pakistan. The greatest and

significant approach was that the PML (N) projected its appearance as a general

political gathering not an ethnic, linguistic or theocratic religious political party. In

election 1993 PML (N) made an electoral alliance with “Awami National Party”

(ANP) in NWFP which had undoubtedly distinct conceptual attitude from that of the

PML (N). That kind of democratic approach of the political parties indicated that

they could conciliation over their conceptual position to gain the communal support.

In Province of Baluchistan it presented good sign of adjustment with those political

parties which all the time communicated for a particular section of the general public

and were narrow-minded in their attitude. These types of politically aware festivities
 254

are labeled as regional political gatherings because of their sphere of influence and

association of supporters. These provincial political gatherings like “Pukhton khwa

Mili Awami Party” (PKAMP), Jamhori Watan Party (JWP) and “Baluchistan

National Movement” (BNM) were on one occasion considered by the dominant

powers as characteristically antagonistic-Pakistan gatherings. In the province of

Sindh, PML-N revealed its litheness to previous “Jiye Sindh” partisans and

connections which were known as anti-Pakistan politicians.”

6.1.2 Manifestos of PML (N), PPP and Religious Political Parties

Most of the politically aware gatherings including religious partisan festivities

had already started their election campaign after the announcement of new election

date but it boosted when PPP and PML (N) entered in this situation and they

arranged their especial rallies on Independence Day. Both mainstream political

parties presented their manifestoes and alleged each other for corruption and

conspiracies. Qazi Husain Ahmad chairman of PIF also started his election campaign

and blamed both PPP and PML (N) for corruption and political instability. He

threatened the nation that if any of them came into power, it would be very

dangerous for the future of the country and their political rivalry could invite the

Martial Law. Benazir Bhutto presented the manifesto of PPP for election 1993. The

main points of PPP’s manifesto were: New social contract which ensured balance of

powers besides functions of central, regional and local administrations, Private

Public partnership, Establishment of women helping center, 10 Provincial autonomy,

Implementation of new local body system, Introduction of New social contract

theory, Annulment of eighth amendment, Reforms in election commission, Reforms

 255

in health sector, Good relation with neighbor countries, Lady health workers

program,11 Formation of Ward Courts, Public urban transportation and special

economic institutions for urban populaces, Complete freedom of print and electronic

media, Special seats for women in Parliament; five percent quota of employment in

public sector, and establishment of Federal special Woman Police.

On the other side PML (N) presented its manifesto which consisted on:

Protection of women rights, Social action program, Establishment of teaching

hospitals, New reforms in health sector, Continuation of yellow cabs and yellow

tractors scheme, Protection of rights of labor including recommendation of their time

hours, 48 hours in a week and eradication of child labor, Inexpensive and equal

system of Justice, Annulment of Eighth amendment, Struggle for independence of

Kashmir and Palestine and Promotion of nuclear power for peaceful purpose.

Religious political parties also presented their manifestos. PIF introduced its

revolutionary manifesto and stated that; formation of the society with no any

exploitation, providing the same opportunities for each native, preservation of rights

of minorities,12 and rights for women were the main part of PIF manifesto.

MQM boycotted this election so it could not present its manifesto while religious

political parties presented their manifestos which were consisted of religious points

including interest free economy, separate Assembly for women, liberation of

Kashmir through Jihad and declaration of “Quran and Sunnah as Supreme Law” of

the Pakistan.
 256

The leader of PML and PPP was hopeful and confident about their victory. PPP

was confident because she was considering that Nawaz Sharif was the product of

establishment and now he had lost his support so it was impossible for PML (N) to

come in power without the help of military. While Nawaz Sharif was claiming that

his policies during the regime were matchless and he sacrificed his government only

for the sack of nation and now nation would not disappoint him. But political

analysts were presenting the other side of the picture. According to them Nawaz

Sharif had some disadvantages including losing the support of right wings parties 13

and alteration of election symbol from bicycle to tiger. 14

6.1.3 Elections Results and the Party Position

The elections were conducted on October 6, and 9, 1993 in the presence of

several national and international monitors, observers and representatives of media.

Common wealth observer Group, National Democratic Institute for International

Affairs, European Community Monitoring Team, South Asian Association for

Regional Cooperation and many other worldwide monitoring teams observed the

election and declared it transparent, non-partisan, freest, fairest, impartial and

peaceful.15 The voter' turnout for National Assembly was 40.5 which was less than

the previous elections. Elections for Lower House of the Parliament were held on

October 6, 1993 on 202 Muslims seats of Lower House out of 207 because on five

seats polling was postponed due to the death of candidates and some other technical

problems or due to severe security risk in those constituencies. 1610 seat for non-

Muslim and 20 seats for women were reserved and these seats were filled by the

elected members of NA after the completion of polling. All Political parties

 257

individually or through alliance enthusiastically participated in the elections. The

candidates organized public meetings and rallies to attract the voters. They spent

huge amounts to attract people. Almost all political parties presented their

manifestoes to impress the public and increase their vote bank. The followers of

“Bhutoism” (PPP) and “Ziaism” (PML -N) and Islamism (JI, JUI, JUP) rushed

towards polling stations to poll their votes. The slogans in the favor of Socialism and

conservatism and Islamism were used in this election. In the end rightist were

defeated by leftist. The election results of Lower House are as under:

i. Result of National Assembly”

Total number of seats 237

Date of election October 06, 1993

Party Name Party Seats in National Assembly

Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) 86

Pakistan Muslim League (N) (PML -N) 72
Pakistan Muslim League (J) (PML -J) 06
Islami Jamhori Mahaz (IJM) 04
Awami National Party (ANP) 03
Pakistan Islamic Front (PIF) 03
Pakhton Khawa Milli Awami Party (PKMAP) 03
Jamhori Watan Party (JWP) 02
Muttihada Deeni Mahaz (MDM) 02
Baluchistan National Movement (Hai) (BNM-H) 01
Baluchistan National Movement (M) (BNM-M) 01
National Democratic Alliance (NDA) 01
National People’s Party (NPP) 01
Pakhton Khawa Quomi Party (PKQP) 01
Independents (IND) 15
Vacant (VCT) 05

In National Assembly PPP got simple majority and emerged as leading party,

PML (N) got second position while PML (J) occupied third position. However, the

independent candidates had also won considerable seats. 17

 258

ii. Result of Provincial Assemblies

Provincial Assembly’s election held after the three days. The result was as following:

Party Name Party “Seats in Punjab Assembly”

“Pakistan Muslim League (N) (PML-N) 105

Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) 93
Pakistan Muslim League (J) (PML-J) 18
Independent (IND) 18
Pakistan Islamic Front (PIF) 02
Mutihada Deeni Mahaz (MDM) 02
Vacant” (VCT 02

Party Name Party Seats in Sindh Assembly

Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) 56

Muttahida Qaumi Movement / IND (MQM) 27
Pakistan Muslim League (N) (PML-N) 08
Independent (IND) 05
National People’s Party (NPP) 02
SBC (SBC) 01
Vacant (VCT) 01

Party Name Party Seats in NWFP Assembly

“Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) 22

Awami National Party (ANP) 21
Pakistan Muslim League (N) (PML-N) 15
Independent (IND) 12
Pakistan Muslim League (J) (PML-J) 04
Pakistan Islamic Front (PIF) 04
Muttahida Deeni Mahaz (MDM) 01
Jamiat Ulema e Islam” (JUI) 01

Party Name Party Seats in Baluchistan Assembly

Pakistan Muslim League (N) (PML-N) 06

Baluchistan National Movement (H) (BNM) 04
Pakhton Khawa Mili Awami Party (PKMP) 04
Jamhori Watan Party (JWP) 04
Jamiat Ulema e Islam (F) (JUI-F) 03
Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) 03
Baluchistan National Movement (M) (BNP-M) 02
Pakistan National Party (PNP) 02
Muttahida Deeni Mahaz (MDM) 01
 259

DIP (DIP) 01
Awami National Party (ANP) 01
Independent (IND) 09

The election results presented splitting mandate and no party could get clear

majority. PPP got a good numbers of the seats from Punjab; it bagged total 86 seats

among which 50 were from Punjab. PML (N) secured 72 seats in National Assembly

among which 52 were from Punjab. In previous election PPP participated in election

on the platform of PDA and secured mere 14 seats from this biggest province now 50

seats showed the confidence of people on PPP and their annoyance with PML (N)

policies and performance in her last period. In this election PML (J) and independent

got good number of seats and had friendly relations with PPP so it was obvious that

PPP would make its government with the help of these coalition partners. Another

re-mark able feature of the election results was that the religious political parties

could not win considerable seats. The mainstream religious political parties got only

13 seats in National Assembly. Three major alliances of religious political parties

Muttahida Deeni Muhaz, Pakistan Islamic Front and Islami Jamhori Muhaz could

not convince the voters to vote for them. 18 Other smaller alliances and political

parties were completely wiped out from the political scene. 20 The minor political

parties, minorities and independents gained significance in assemblies for formation

of the governments. After election results both Pakistan People's Party and Pakistan

Muslim League (N) alleged each other with the allegation of rigging in election but

Chief Election Commissioner strongly condemned their allegations and declared

these allegation as an attempt to discredit the election process. 21

 260

6.2 Formation of the Governments and Beginning of the Party Politics

The split mandate created problems in the political structure of Pakistan.

Both major political gatherings PML (N) and PPP were trying to form their

governments in center and provinces and for this, they indulged in horse trading.

Both offered millions of rupees to the elected legislators to buy their loyalties. The

first meeting of the newly chosen Lower House of the Parliament was held on

October 17, in which the house elected PPP candidate Yousaf Raza Gillani as

Speaker National Assembly and Yousaf Ali Shah as Deputy Speaker National

Assembly, who was the candidate from the same party. Yousaf Raza Gillani got 106

votes while Yousaf Ali Shah secured 115 votes.22 The papers for the portfolio of

Premiership were submitted and on October 19, 1993 Benazir Bhutto was designated

as Chief of State by securing 122 votes while her opponent Nawaz Sharif obtained

only 72 votes.23 PDA, JWP minorities and independents supported Benazir Bhutto

while IJM and PIF remained aloof from the voting process. 24 The PML (N) sat in the

opposition. The caretaker government transferred their powers to newly elected

government and Benazir started her second tenure of premiership with new

confidences and hope.

In provincial setup no political party gained considerable seats or simple

majority in three provinces i.e. Punjab, Baluchistan and in NWFP. In Punjab PPP

formed its administration with the support of PML (J) and independents and Manzor

Watto become the Head of Cabinet of the Punjab with having only 18 seats in Punjab

Assembly.25 In Sindh however, PPP made its government with her simple majority

and PPP appointed Abdullah Shah as Head of Cabinet of Sindh. In Baluchistan

 261

mandate was very splitting and independents were on the top with 09 seats. 26 PML

(N) secured only 06 seats and she made her government in Baluchistan with the

support of independent members. Zulfiqar Magsi was selected as Chief Minister

Baluchistan who belonged to independent’s group and ANP, MDM, BNM, PKMAP

were supporting him. It was amazing that in the house of 40 eleven political parties

were representing there. In NWFP Pakistan People’s Party was ahead with 22 seats

but PML (N) with 15 seats made a coalition with ANP which secured 21 seats and

shaped an alliance administration in NWFP, and Sabir Shah was selected as Chief

Minister NWFP who belonged to PML (N). 27

After the selection of Premiership in center and formation of governments in

all four provinces, the next phase in the transference of power was the Presidential

election which was commenced on November 13, 1993. In the beginning, twenty

four competitors had applied for the President ship but later, the competition was left

between two contenders, Sardar Farooq Leghari (PPP) and Wasim Sajjad (PML-

N).28 Before election, PPP promised its support for Ghulam Ishaq Khan as next

President in Presidential election but after becoming ruling party, it cast off his name

and presented Farooq Ahamd as the nominee of Pakistan People's Party. Farooq

Leghari belonged to Baloch Leghari tribe situated in Dera Ghazi Khan. 29 The

candidate of PPP won the Presidential election and Sardar Farooq Ahmad Laghari

becomes the next President of Pakistan. Sardar Laghari secured 274 votes against his

opponent Waseem Sajjad who obtained only 160 votes. 30 Now Benazir Bhutto

seemingly was in relaxed position as she had loyal “Jiyala” on the seat of President.

The new President assured his loyalty to Benazir Bhutto and expressed his
 262

determination that in any condition he would not use the power of 8 th amendment

against his leadership. 31

Benazir Bhutto started her second stint of Premiership in some different way.

She developed working relations with other stakeholders especially with her political

opponents. She not only met with the military establishment with smiling face but

also developed cordial relationship with the bureaucracy. She obliged her political

coalition partners not only in Punjab but in center too. She bestowed Chairmanship

of Foreign Affairs Committee to Moulana Fazal ur Rehman who belonged to Jamiat

Ulema Islam. Nasarullah Khan was chosen as the head of “Kashmir Committee”,

while Malik Qasim of PML (Q) was selected as Chairman Anti-Corruption

Committee. Similarly, son of G.M. Jatio, was selected as Provincial Minister in

Sindh Assembly and son of Mir Balkh Sher Mazari was nominated as Minister in

Punjab Assembly.32 In same way, son of Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan and son of

Ghulam Mustafa Khar were also appointed as Ministers in Punjab Government. 33

These steps increased the number of her Political friends. Beside this Benazir Bhutto

was very cautious in her dealings with the military. Dissimilar with her previous

term, Benazir Bhutto did not try to interfere in the internal matters of the Army and

generally appreciated its autonomy.34 She tried to elude any possibility of hostility or

conflict with the army.35 However her policy of reconciliation could not effect on

opposition leader Nawaz Sharif and reciprocal hostility between these two political

rivals remained continue. PPP administration started filing cases of misconduct and

corruption contrary to the leadership of PML (N). 36 However PPP’s government

avoided to arrest PML (N) leadership or workers on large scale. 37

 263

6.3 Party Politics, Conflict between PML (N) and PPP

PPP formed its governments in center along with Sindh. In National

Assembly PML (N) was in opposition while in Sindh MQM was sitting on

oppositions benches. PPP was facing the hostile attitude of these two parties from the

very first day. Leadership of PML (N) repeatedly criticized the PPP government on

the issue of Nuclear Program and Kashmir. Nawaz Sharif blamed that PPP

government was running on the dictation of USA. 38 Opposition parties requested the

Speaker Yousaf Raza Gillani to think through its list of items in the “requisitioned

session”. On the refusal of Speaker, opposition started strike strategy from the

Assembly meeting repeatedly on this undemocratic attitude of the government.

These protests, walkouts, shouting and allegation caused in chaos in National

Assembly. In practice, no tolerance and discipline was shown by the opposition and

the government benches. Harsh and rough language was used by the legislatures of

both the benches in emphasizing the misdemeanors of each other. 39

The PML (N) had already faced this severe agitation by PPP in her previous

regime. Now PML (N) was using same tactics for the government of PPP. From very

beginning PML (N) was trying to create hurdles in the way of PPP government.

Nawaz Sharif alleged PPP leadership to have connections with international drug

mafia.40 He criticized her on establishing good relations with India which was

affecting the cause of Kashmir. Benazir started her present tenure apparently with the

approval and support of the USA lobby. 41 Nawaz blamed that PPP government was

trying to roll back the nuclear program. Even Nawaz condemned the termination of

Nusrat Bhutto from the co-chairpersonship of the PPP and declared it dictatorial
 264

approach of PPP mindset. In fact, PPP chairperson as opposition leader in 1993 had

constantly adopted a sole point program to collapse the administration of IJI and for

this purpose she had used all tactics. As reprisal, President PML (N) was posturing a

much tougher antagonism to PPP government and was more eager for toppling her

government primarily through agitation politics and a severe movement through

print and electronic media. The causes and allegations on which PPP had alleged IJI

previous government and was demanding resignation from Prime Minister Nawaz

Sharif, now PML (N) was adopting the same tactics and blaming PPP government

with same allegations and demanding the resignation of Benazir Bhutto.

Unfortunately PPP government was also indulged in same complications such as

mega corruption scams, political victimization, horse trading and political bribery

which was used in her previous agitation movement against IJI, now Nawaz Sharif

was targeting PPP government and its administration with same allegation on same

agitation pattern. All these maneuvering badly devaluated PPP and her public image.

A further damage faced by PPP government was her strategy to used

judiciary to irritate opponent political figure by imposing charges of corruption and

fraud on them. These tactics had been used by IJI government on opposition (PPP)

and she had strongly condemned them by protest and agitations. Now Nawaz Sharif

adopted same pattern of agitation, walkout, protest and rallies against her

government which created disturbance for PPP administration to handle this

situation. To upset and pressurized PPP government, PML (N) started a movement

“Tehreek e Nijaat” against Benazir Bhutto. The main object of this movement was to

get rid of Bhutto government. This movement could not get success but it
 265

pressurized PPP government. Benazir Bhutto took another step and cancelled the

agreement of “Bayinder” which was settled by former Prime Minister Nawaz

Sharif.42 Benazir Bhutto also appointed Naveed Qamar as Chairman Privatization

Commission to scrutinize all private agreements of Nawaz Sharif’s regime.

Instantaneously, the PPP government continued to shut down various power

generation treaties of private sector, which were made by previous government. 43

The PPP government requested the opposition for positive and helpful

dialogue. On several occasions Benazir Bhutto invited the opposition leader Nawaz

Sharif to abandon the politics of hostility and confrontation particularly in the

44
National Assembly. It was on record that twice Benazir Bhutto invited Nawaz

Sharif to deliberate national concerns but Nawaz Sharif refused both the proposals.

President Farooq Leghari also twice requested Nawaz Sharif to meet him but he

denied.45 By January 22, 1994 approximately six times Nawaz Sharif was called

upon by the executive, both Premier to talk over the imminent working relationship

among the opposition and government; and each time Nawaz Sharif deteriorated.

Nawaz Sharif clarified that because of dual nature of Benazir Bhutto’s policies he

was unable to negotiate any issue with the ruling party and if there was a discussion

than it could be held only on solid basis. 46 This sustain attitude of Nawaz Sharif was

the main cause of deadlock between ruling party and opposition.

The ruling party had to discourse critical issues, containing nuclear program

issue, security challenges, law and order issues, Kashmir issue, the challenge of

revival of economic, social development issue and challenge to deal with political

instability in the country. It was the duty of opposition to support the reigning party
 266

in handling these severe national issues and challenges. But PML (N) deliberately

chooses the policy of confrontation and decided to not collaborate with the ruling

party on these serious national concerns. The public had given their votes to these

two mainstream political parties which was a substantial indication of their partisan

maturity. A coalition between these two political parties (PPP and PML N) could

have ensured solidity of the democratic system of the country. The ruling party

wanted the support of opposition especially on the matter of relations with India,

USA and Pakistani nuclear program but leader of the opposition was angry due to

PPP policies about the termination of their past projects and was not ready to

cooperate with government so absence of political harmony between these two

political parties created problem for the political democratic system of Pakistan.

Because of non-cooperation of opposition, PPP adopted the policy to govern the

country through ordinances instead of getting approval from National Assembly.

PPP government did it so time even President showed his displeasure on this

undemocratic act.47

Shahbaz Sharif the opposition leader in Punjab Assembly tried his best to get

maximum benefits from this political situation. He met with the Army Chief and

publicized this meeting to show the support of military. Nawaz Sharif announced

that PML (N) and army are on one page. Army chief felt embarrassment on it and he

issued his statement that military has no apprehension with politics. 48 PPP

government realized the purpose of PML (N)’s statement and warned that opposition

would be dealt with iron hand if anyone tried to topple the democratic system. While

PML (N) stance on this political situation was that if PPP government would not be
 267

terminated, army will impose martial law which would be dangerous for democratic

system.49

6.3.1 Mehran Gate Scandal

Mehran gate scam was one of the most atrocious financial corruption scam in

the history of Pakistan which established a new trend of fraud in the politics of

Pakistan. According to Military Chief Aslam Baig, “Younas Habib, President of

Mehran bank, had provided one hundred and forty million rupees to him and 60

million rupees from that amount spent on election purpose by ISI.”50 Confessions of

Aslam Baig had opened a Pandora box. The government formed a judicial

commission to probe the matter while Nawaz Sharif demanded a parliamentary

committee headed with neutral person. He alleged that some judges of judicial

commission were biased and had relations with PPP. He also demanded the

resignation of Chief Executive to have relation with Younas Habib. After the explore

of Mehran gate scandal, dozens of other financial cases were also opened against

Nawaz Sharif and PPP published a booklet names “Plunders by Nawaz Sharif and

looters of Nawaz league (part 1).”51 In this booklet PPP described the details of loans

taken by Nawaz Sharif or his relatives from Mehran Bank which exceeded more than

200 million rupees. Nonetheless the real facts, one thing was obvious; irrespective of

their status and repute all individuals in power and authority President Farooq

Leghari, Nawaz Sharif, Benazir Bhutto, Military Chief, DG ISI, Roedad khan, Ijlal

Haider, etc. were, directly or indirectly, involved in this unconstitutional, illegal and

undemocratic acts in 1990 elections.

6.3.2 Confrontation between PPP and Religious Political Parties

 268

The relations between Pakistan People's Party and religious political parties

were confrontational and hostile from very beginning. PPP was considered as a

socialist party and in many ways its policies were against the thoughts of religious

parties. In elections 1993, religious political parties formed different alliance against

PPP and PML (N) but could not secured considerable seats in National Assembly.

Being religious political parties and having different challenging political thoughts

against PPP these parties gave tuff time to ruling party. Although PPP tried to make

good relations with religious political parties52 but could not succeed. PPP conflicts

with Judiciary compelled religious political parties especially Jamaat-i-Islami and

Jamiat Ulema e Islam to launch an agitational movement against ruling party. On

July 1996 Jamaat e Islam gave a call of strike in Karachi along with PML (N). 53

Later, other political and religious parties joined this strike and the numbers of

parties reached to fourteen including MQM. 54 These opposition parties met in

Lahore and decided to launch “Save Pakistan Movement” 55 against ruling party.

Jamaat-i-Islami adopted a new tactic for agitation and introduced “Dharna” 56 (sit- in)

politics. Qazi Hussain Ahmad along with other religious political parties including,

IJI, JUI, IJM, PIF, and MDM called a sit-in against exploitation, bribery and

favoritism on June 24, 1996 in Islamabad. To prevent them from sit-in, PPP

government started crackdown against opposition parties and arrested dozens of

political workers of JI and IJI and two workers were shot dead. 57 Police registered a

case against the leadership of Jamaat-i-Islami on the allegation of kidnapping the

police officers and damaging the property of government. On October 29, 1996

religious parties including Islami Jamhori Ittihad and Jamaat-i-Islami observed as

 269

“black day”. Jamaat-i-Islami had claimed that Benazir Bhutto government was

dissolved because of her Dharna tactic. 58

6.3.3 Murtaza Bhutto’s Assassination

In Sindh, PPP government faced a crisis related to Murtaza Bhutto, the real

kin Benazir Bhutto, who was living abroad. His return in Pakistan created more

problems for Benazir Bhutto. Being elder brother of Benazir Bhutto and inheritor of

Bhutto family, Murtaza Bhutto was very popular in PPP leadership. On his return,

several discontented PPP supporters gathered around him which was alarming for

Benazir Bhutto and her support group. Murtaza Bhutto’s relations with his sister and

her spouse were not pleasant. 59 “It was very difficult for Nusrat Bhutto to support

Asif Ali Zardari instead of her elder son.” 60

A rift arose in Bhutto family when

Nusrat Bhutto decided to support Murtaza Bhutto. With the support of Nusrat

Bhutto, Murtaza Bhutto declared himself as real successor of his father Z.A. Bhutto.

Due to this support, BB as Chairperson of PPP ousted her mother Nusrat Bhutto

from the Co-Chairpersonship of the PPP. In the return, Nusrat Bhutto announced that

she would not let any member of ruling party to see the grave of her late spouse in

Garhi Shaho on his birth centenary. Benazir Bhutto announced to celebrate birth

anniversary as usual. A clash between PPP workers occurred and two workers died

on the spot. Nusrat Bhutto alleged Benazir Bhutto’s government as worse than Zia ul

Haq’s dictatorship while PPP official declared that it was Indian Intelligence agents

who were supporting Murtaza Bhutto in this clash.

 270

At other side, Nawaz Sharif, the President of PML (N) was watching this

political situation thoroughly. He decided to support Murtaza Bhutto and established

a political alliance with PPP (Murtaza Bhutto) to weaken PPP regime. During 1994-

5, Nawaz Sharif along with Murtaza Bhutto launched a “train march” contrary to

PPP government.61 A big crowd participated in this train march which enhanced the

problems of ruling party. Nawaz Sharif played a vibrant part in the success of this

train march and organized strikes by labors and industrial workers throughout

Pakistan. Several opposition leaders were arrested during protest but train march

could not be stop.62 PPP government was facing triangular attack from its opponents.

Nusrat Bhutto, Murtaza Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif continuously defaming her

government and now it was very problematic for Chairperson PPP to satisfy the

public. Beside this Nawaz Sharif also blamed Benazir Bhutto family, indulging in

money laundering which caught the President in embarrassing position. This scandal

drives a wedge amongst Chief Executive Leghari and Premier BB. 63 In September

1996, Murtaza Bhutto was assassinated in a police come across near his home in

Karachi. The murder of Prime Minister’s brother raised many questions about the

rule and command condition in Sindh. This murder also raised questions on Prime

Minister who declared it a conspiracy against her government. She also gave

indicators toward President to involve in this assassination which enhanced the rift

between these two premiers. This murder of Bhutto boosted up the incessant

agitation and protest in all over Sindh which showed that central government was

losing its control on Sindh.

Party politics in Sindh

 271

As described in previous chapter that Sindh was a difficult province to

administer.

It was divided in two major urban and rural areas. In its urban cities like Hyderabad

and Karachi, Mohajir Qaumi Movement (MQM) was the popular political party and

she has full hold in these cities. Besides MQM, Jamaat-i-Islami and PPP were also

has a specific vote bank in these cities but it was not enough to get seats from these

cities. In rural areas PPP was considered as sole political party and she always

bagged majority seats from these rural areas. MQM was famous as “party of ruling

party” which means that she never tried to sit in opposition benches.

Before the election 1993, MQM was split into three different groups. First

was Haqiqi group, led by Badar Iqbal and Afaq Ahmed, second was Azim group,

headed by Azim Tariq and third was Altaf Group commanded by the Altaf Husain

which was considered most prevalent group in Sindh. Altaf Husain had expatriate in

United Kingdom due to worsening the rule and command condition in the urban

areas of Sindh. Azim Tariq was assassinated in May 1994. The Haqiqi group was not

politically strong and it contested the election independently but it could not show

any presentation in election 1993, even it remained unsuccessful to secure a sole seat

in these elections. Perhaps it would be because of the call of boycott of National

Assembly elections given by MQM leadership. Haqiqi group successively stay away

from the Sindh Assembly’s elections which were compete by the Altaf Husain

group. After election 1993, MQM had loss its representation in National Assembly,

though it arose as the second leading political party in Sindh Provincial Assembly by

obtaining the 27 seats in elections. The PPP, which had hostile relations with the
 272

MQM in the first term of its government, showed harmony in the second term of its

government.

In Sindh Provincial Assembly, PPP was mainstream party (56/100) and

MQM was the second leading party with 27 seats. PPP could formed it’s government

in Sindh lacking the provision of any other partisan gathering but she knew that

MQM beside PML (N) had converted into a strong antagonism in the Sindh, which

could cause clashes between PPP and MQM political workers. Due to ethnic riots in

Sindh and violation of muhajir’s rights, MQM workers were demanding separate

province for muhajirs.64 The leadership of MQM stated that their claim for separate

province was constitutional because in Sindh muhajirs were treating like a second

grade inhabitant.65 The rule and command situation in Sindh was much worsened

from very beginning. Crimes like abduction, dacoits and target killing were common

in every city of the Sindh. It was said that political parties were involved in these

crimes. In the regime of Nawaz Sharif, army started operation in Sindh against the

gangsters and they snubbed them but their presence was still there. PPP government

decided to extend the stay of army in Sindh till June and later till 1994. Nawaz Sharif

alleged PPP government to target the MQM through this operation and suggested the

military to end the operation.

Benazir Bhutto knew that problems of Karachi were multi-dimensional. It

had social, economic, political and ethnic issues and linked with ethnic and linguistic

based political parties which were not possible to resolve without the involvement of

the political parties especially MQM. So she decided to talk with MQM. The

meetings held between MQM and PPP on this issue but they could not reach on any
 273

consensus,66 because still army did not stop its operation against the workers of

MQM and its leadership. MQM blamed the PPP government for this awful situation

in Sindh. PPP government tried to clarify the operation’s objects to satisfy public.

She stated that MQM has two wings, one militant and other political. This operation

was launched against militant wing which was trying to control the people through

by means of force.67 At the end of 1995, the peace of Karachi came back and law and

order situation became better. People of Karachi were so happy on this peace and

they appreciated PPP government for this step which increased the popularity of

Benazir Bhutto in Karachi.68

On December 1994, military operation in Sindh terminated which once again

gave a chance to criminal elements for deteriorate the law and order situation. PPP

government started dialogue with MQM who refused to talk with PPP, later on the

interfering of President Farooq Leghari MQM get ready to start the dialogue with

Pakistan People's Party. These dialogue ended with no solution and just after four

days, a MQM leader assassinated after abduction; five workers killed in encounter;

Dozens of students of APMO were arrested and police raided on the office of MQM

and arrested 18 workers. PPP declared it a routine matter and tried to continue

dialogue but all in vain. By the end of 1996, the rule and command condition in

Sindh for a second time worsened and target killing, assassination, snatching of

vehicles and dacoits were reached on its peak. 69 PPP and MQM did nothing for

Karachi except blaming each other and party politics for point scoring.

Party Politics in NWFP

 274

In election 1993, PPP got 22/80 seats in NWFP and emerged as leading

political party and ANP got second position secured 21/80 seats while PML (N)

occupied third Position and secured 15/80 seats. PML (N) and ANP was coalition

partner so PML (N) made its government in NWFP with the backing of ANP and

independent candidates. Pir Muhammad Sabir Shah of PML (N) was selected as

Head of Cabinet of NWFP, while Aftab Ahmad Sherpao of PPP was nominated as

opposition leader. In early 1994, within four months of the election, Benazir Bhutto

made a plan to throw out provincial government of NWFP through constitutional

maneuvering. On February 6, a “no-confidence motion” was launched by

antagonism leader Aftab Sherpao contrary to the PML (N) Chief Minister M. Sabir

Shah,70 with the support of eleven independent and two PML (N) members. 71 Nawaz

Sharif had warned the Prime Minister that if the alliance government of ANP and

PML (N) was terminated through this no-confidence motion, PML (N) would launch

a long march against this unconstitutional and anti-democratic act.72 He accused that

MPAs of NWFP Assembly were seized by the Federal government and kept like

prisoner in Sindh and other provinces. 73 He alleged that ten million rupees were

delivered to each MPA for supporting no-confidence motion against PML (N)

government.74 This horse trading will affect the PPP government’s political

credibility. Sherpao was claiming 49 votes were with him while Sabir Shah claimed

that PPP could not produce even 42 votes. 75 Acting governor called the Assembly of

NWFP to hold balloting on PPP’s no-confidence motion.76 But one day earlier the

central government requested the President to enforce governor’s rule in the NWFP

for two months under the Article 23477 of the Constitution to terminate the coalition
 275

government.78 The opposition, nonetheless, could not remain silent on this act of

PPP. PML (N) and ANP announced nationwide long march as a response to

deferment of NWFP Assembly.79 Protest conventions were held in all the country

from Peshawar to Islamabad.80 The unjust, dictatorial and undemocratic act from the

President started another round of aggressive politics between PML (N) and PPP

which could damage democratic discourse. The opposition political parties initiated

“Save NWFP” Movement. The antagonism stay away from the Assembly and

confronted the ruling party on almost every issue. Nawaz had convinced his party’s

representatives to make good relations with religious political parties especially with

Ulemas in their particular electorates and persuaded them that the PPP rule was a

security threat for the country. PML (N) blamed PPP and Asif Zardari for indulging

in horse-trading in NWFP. Nawaz Sharif also criticized President Leghari for

convincing “lotaaz” to join the PPP which showed his partial behavior towards the

reigning party. 81

President rule in NWFP also created a rift in PPP itself. Some senior

members disliked this act and demanded its withdrawal immediately while some

members were happy and wanted to prolonged it till the achievement of their

political objective in NWFP. Benazir Bhutto accused PML (N) and ANP for this

embarrassment and stated that Federal government did not play any part in this

situation while Nawaz Sharif continuously alleged central government involvement

in this President rule. On April 24, 1993 the period of President Rule expired and

Supreme Court ordered to reinstate the Provincial Assembly of NWFP, 82 and asked

the Governor to call the Assembly session in which PML (N) Provincial Head of
 276

Cabinet would take a “vote of confidence” from the house. PML (N) and ANP both

boycotted this session but Sherpao with the help of independent PML (J) and JUI

candidates elected as CM of NWFP.

The political crisis of NWFP also disturbed the National politics and different

political parties including ANP, PML (N) and PKMAP boycotted the Lower House

session which lasted for five weeks. 83 MDM, JI and JUI did not participate in boycott

and stay aloof from all agitation. Nawaz collected the resignations of its allied parties

legislatures to pressurized PPP but Benazir Bhutto did not feel any pressure and

challenged him to send these resignations to speaker National Assembly for further

action if he had actually.

“Party Politics in Punjab

As in Centre PML (N) and PPP appeared as major political parties similarly

in Provincial Assembly of the Punjab these two parties emerged as leading parties.

According to these results, creation of the administration was slight multifaceted and

extra amazing. For instance, PML (N) was the biggest political party with highest

seats in Provincial Assembly of Punjab but she could not make its government.

Surprisingly, the third party PML (J) having only 18 seats succeeded to select its CM

in Punjab with the help of Pakistan People's Party. It was a great instance of political

blackmailing and PPP itself accept it because she wants its government in Punjab on

any cast. In the result, Manzoor Watto (PML-J) elected as Head of Cabinet in Punjab

and he obtained 131 votes while his opponent Shahbaz Sharif could obtain only 105

votes and became opposition leader in Punjab Assembly. Hanif Ramay, a stalwart of

PPP elected speaker Punjab Assembly and Manzoor Mohal (PML -J) occupied the
 277

office of Deputy Speaker. Faisal Saleh Hayat from PPP was made as Principal

Advisor to Head of Cabinet of the Punjab. The presence of Faisal Saleh Hayat

created problems for Manzor Watto and he started feeling a bit uncomfortable. This

uneasy and unbalance alliance nonetheless, remained for almost two years and

during this period the clashes between PPP and PML (J) representatives arose and

they started to criticized on Manzoor Watto’s dictatorial and arrogant “style of

governance.” The PPP legislators were also displeased with Manzor Watto’s mode

of government, particularly, on division of authority and distributions of funds

between the representatives of Punjab Assembly. 84 The whole official machinery of

the Punjab management was in the grasp of Manzor Watto; the PPP with Majority

seats in Province was ignored in making provincial government. 85 Eventually, BB

decided to topple his government and ground was made to oust Manzor Watto from

Chief Minister House. Governor of Punjab, Raja Saroop Khan (PPP) initiated a

charge sheet contrary to Manzor Watto. Grounding upon this charge sheet, Chief

Executive of Pakistan delivered a declaration86 on September 05 1995, leading the

Chief Executive of Punjab to obtain the take over the governmental affairs of the

Punjab. 87”

After assuming control of the administration of the Punjab on behalf of the

Chief Executive of Pakistan, the Governor called upon Chief Minister Manzor Watto

“to get vote of confidence from the Assembly” in a hastily called Assembly on

September 12, 1995. Manzor Wattoo did’nt appear in this meeting of Assembly nor

he get vote of confidence from Punjab Assembly, so he was terminated from Chief

Minister Ship.88 Unfortunately PPP was still not in position to appoint any PPP
 278

worker in vacated office and “to keep PML (N) out of power; she had to take support

of the same party PML (J).” But this time, however Benazir Bhutto picked a feeble

and practical political worker, Arif Nakai from PML (J) as Head of Cabinet in

Punjab.89 Sardar Arif Nakai elected unopposed with 152 votes and he secured 148

votes in vote of confidence motion. On the other side, Manzor Watto filed a petition

against the Declaration of Emergency beside his dismissal from Prime Minister

Office in Lahore High Court. After hearing the case a High Court stated that both

acts of Proclamation of Emergency by President and new election for Chief Minister

ship as illegitimate and without legal authority. 90 Manzor Watto and its government

restored by Court and Manzor Watto again took the charge of his office as Provincial

Head of Cabinet on September 05, 1995. The Court directed Manzor Watto that he

would not direct the Provincial Chief Executive to terminate Punjab Provincial

Assembly before “getting vote of confidence” from the house during 10 days. The

same day a “no-confidence motion” was launched contrary to him with the signature

of eighty five members. Manzor Watto filed a plea in Supreme Court for a delay in

the period of taking vote of confidence. Court giving him relaxation extended the

period from 10 to 13 days. Ultimately, it was necessary to acquire a “vote of

sureness” before November 16, 1995 the matching date which was selected for the

no confidence movement.91 The motion for no sureness was taken away by the

house, however accommodating him to acquire a vote of sureness. On November 17,

1996 that very day, 93 representatives of PML (N) deposited their letter of

resignation from the Punjab Assembly, vacating no choice for Manzor Wattoo but to
 279

left his office. Later, Punjab Assembly was dismissed by the Governor on the same

day.

6.3.4 PPP’s Relations with the Military

Military always played a significant role in political affairs of Pakistan beside

guided the politicians remaining behind the scene. PPP won the elections, elected its

President, formed three provincial governments, but still she was not able to take any

step alone on National issues. In her first term, the relations between PPP and Army

were not so smooth but in her second term BB decided not to interfere in the core

matters of the Military and generally cherished their sovereignty. In return, army also

expressed good gesture to her government. Rizvi stated “The army was also willing

to extend the necessary support to the newly elected government”92 Instantly after

taking the charge of Premiership, Benazir Bhutto had to face with foreign policy

especially works toward renewal of the bilateral relationship with the USA. More

specially, she tried to re-open the access of Pakistan to USA weapons system,

particularly the release of F-16 which was held by the USA, while Pakistan had

already paid for them.93 The military was recognizing the efforts of PPP government

to ease the imposed sanctions by USA, however nuclear proliferation was still a

piercing point between them.94 Nonetheless, Benazir Bhutto visited the Washington

and she succeeded in regaining USA support and USA state department removed the

name of Pakistan from the list of terrorism sponsors. USA also released the F-16 and

other military equipment, and agreed to return the amount of F-16 which Pakistan

received by selling the aircraft to other countries and USA had freeze this amount
 280

through Pressler amendment. Benazir also denied to accept the instructions from

“IMF and World Bank” to levy cuts on the Security expenditure.

By 1996, the discussion between Benazir Bhutto and President started about

the appointment of new COAS because Waheed Kakar was going to be retired. The

relations between COAS and PPP government were so friendly that BB proposed

one year delay in the service of COAS but he refused to accept this offer. 95 Benazir

Bhutto favored Lt. General Javed Ashraf Qazi for the portfolio of COAS but

President Leghari disparate him and supported Gen. Tariq, who was on number five

in seniority list. Benazir Bhutto hesitated to choose him he stated his discussion with

President Farooq Leghari in an interview that:

“….I liked General Tariq, but when I looked at the list of seniority, and we had had all
that [to worry about] ….I didn’t like to go down so deep, although I personally liked Tariq
and would have been happy with him, but I thought superseding so many generals and
then retiring them was not right. And so then I said that ‘well, we should go for Karamat.’
Farooq said, ‘No…he’s retiring.’ And I said, ‘No, Farooq. You’ve said, ‘no’ to Javed
Ashraf Qazi. You said, ‘no’ to General Naseer Akhtar. If...General Tariq was [ranked
number] two or three, I’d happily make him. But he’s number five’. And I said, ‘The
army already has difficult perceptions about us. Let’s not worsen it’. So then I moved a
file promoting General Karamat. And Farooq agreed to make him chief.” 96

“On January 12, 1996 General Jahangir Karamat became the Military Chief.

It happened for the first time in the military history of Pakistan that the senior most

General has appointed as COAS.97 The selection of Jahangir Kramat as new Military

Chief enlarged the growing dissimilarities among Chief Executive and Head of

Cabinet.”

6.3.5 Politics between Two the Premiers

After assuming the charge of Premiership, Benazir Bhutto nominated Farooq

Leghari, (a senior associate of PPP and former bureaucrat) as candidate for President
 281

Ship. The intention behind the nomination of a senior PPP member was that she

wanted to save her administration from the adversaries of Military, opposition and

Chief Executive. She believed that in the presence of PPP’s President her

government would be secure. But with the passage of time, she felt that her decision

was wrong and Farooq Leghari was not a good choice for this post, because Farooq

Leghari also adopted same methods which were adopted by his predecessor Ghulam

Ishaq Khan. However differences between these two premiers could not be

converted into an open confrontation during initial period. Hostile political affairs in

NWFP and in Punjab was the initial stage of ruthless affairs amongst these two

premiers, yet both related to similar political party and had shared mutual political

objectives. All over 1996, relations between them remained stressed for the reason

that the arrogant and conceited conduct of BB in the direction of President who was

PPP’s appointee. Premier Farooq Leghari was infuriated of the interfering of Asif Ali

Zardari in the government affairs especially as he did not have positive repute.

“Stories of corruption and exploitation against Asif Zardari, had been spread

widely. The President Farooq Leghari took serious notice of such rumors which

spoiled the President-Premier co-relation.98A tug of war had sustained amid the

Premier and PM over selection in judicatory and flattened accusations in various

portions such as illegal expenditure of community funds, founding sole domination

on political affairs, and nepotism. The subject became argumentative when Sajjad

Ali Shah, along with Chief Justices of the all provincial High Courts, commanded

the acquittal of 24 adjudicators, all of whom had been selected in the PPP

administration. Subsequently, the Supreme Court’s ruling significantly reduced the

 282

authority of the premier to assign and dismiss the adjudicators of the judicatory.

Chairperson PPP, Benazir Bhutto, however, denied abiding by the verdict due to

which Chief Justice approached the Chief Executive for mediation in the matter. On

September 21, 1996 President Leghari sent a reference to the Supreme Law Court in

which he demanded the enactment of verdict of March 20 in the case connecting to

the power of appointing the adjudicators in the Superior Law Courts. 99 Benazir

Bhutto criticized the filing of reference, which led to interchange of letters amongst

her and Leghari.100 President Leghari appraised attitude of Benazir Bhutto and

criticized her government’s policies.101 Aftab Sherpao tried to bring settlement

between the two offices, but failed. 102”

In addition to the allegation of corruption, Prime Minister confronted the

accusation of misconduct was also raised. Till the last quarter of 1995, no solid step

had been taken to restore economy. 103 As the political position deteriorated, Prime

Minister sent Nuraez Shakoor, Khurshid Shah and Rao Sikander Iqbal, the most

senior representatives from PPP to discuss with Premier Leghari and talk over his

accusations from the administration. On the other side, opposition formed a grand

alliance consisting of 15 opposition parties to strengthen its agitation for dismissal of

the government. The grand coalition decided nationwide protests against the

government of PPP so that the President Leghari would have a legal ground to use

Article 58 (2) (b).104 The agitation rallies of the grand coalition were successful and

PML (N) called strike was entirely observed all over Lahore 105 and Jamaat-i-Islami,

another effective religious political force, counseled the people to continue

demonstrations till the removal of government. 106 In the time harmony developed
 283

among Nawaz Sharif and President Leghari and Opposition leader along with

Chauhdry Nisar, Abida Hussain and other senior Muslim Leaguers met with

President Leghari.107 They pointed out the deteriorating economic condition of the

country, and advised him for mid-term elections and requested to use Article 58 (2-

b) in the National interest.107

6.4 Dismissal of Benazir Government

The differences amongst two Premiers increased severely when BB was alleged on

her involvement in Murtaza Bhutto assassination. On this situation of Troika Shuja

stated;

“Leghari and Karamat began to see eye to eye (but separately) on the case
against Bhutto. Leghari states that Karamat never directly complained against
Bhutto. Karamat tried to get Bhutto to meet Leghari and resolve their
differences, but she refused, deriding Leghari….”108

After levitation the subject of illegitimate money-making by high-ranking

representatives of the PPP administration, comprising Asif Zardari’s participation in

different bribery scams, President Leghari told General Karamat that he was

planning to terminate PPP administration because “We had reached the point of no

return”109 On the basis of allegations imposed by President the government of

Benazir Bhutto was dismissed on November 5, 1996. Once again dissolvent of

assemblies by President proved that Prime Minister had the weakest position in

ruling Troika. President dismissed Benazir Bhutto on the same day when President

Bill Clinton was selected as 42th President of USA. According to Hassan Askari

Rizvi:

“Bhutto’s dismissal on November 5, 1996, was carried out in coup

style Essentially, President Leghari appointed a caretaker government until
elections could be held February 3, 1997, with the Army taking control of
 284

the Prime Minister’s house and government offices, arresting Zardari and
handing him over to the police, and placing more senior military officers
into the bureaucracy and civilian intelligence agency (IB) to minimize its
autonomy”110

President Farooq Leghari dismissed PPP government on these allegations; delay

and non-enactment of the verdict of the Supreme Law Court, efforts to abolish the

liberation of the judicatory through the new answerability law, destroying the

neutrality and impartiality of the law enforcing agencies and institutions, the tapping

of Phone calls of high-ranking executives and adjudicators, extra judicature killings.

(Assassination of Murtaza Bhutto), imminent economic collapse and indulging in

corruption and maladministration.

The removal by her hand –picked, party Chief Executive came as a bombshell to

BB. It was the 4rth elected Premier terminated since 1988 and Leghari became the

3rd Chief Executive to have applied the legitimate authority through 58 (2-B) in this

concern.111 Benazir Bhutto reacted that the removal of PPP administration was

deliberated and she was already well informed about this conspiracy. She also

claimed that her dismissal was illegal, unconstitutional and undemocratic. 112 Nawaz

Sharif considered the termination of government in national interest, and success of

his party’s three and a half years struggles. 113 Benazir Bhutto challenged the

termination of her PPP administration in the Supreme Law Court but Court endorsed

the President order and had decided in favor of the termination of National

Assembly.114

Conclusion

In her second term PPP obviously failed at creating any confidence in its

government and remained unsuccessful in creating optimism amongst its followers

 285

regarding its electoral promises. To address such concerns in the future Pakistan

People's Party should strongly push its supporters and workers to implement its

programs successfully and diligently.

In the PPP’s second term the opposition’s role was also more undemocratic.

The seriously hostile attitude of opposition particularly that of the opposition leader

Nawaz Sharif, kept the PPP government on the defensive position and it could hardly

focus on serious issues. The opposition wanted the termination of Benazir Bhutto’s

rule by any means. In PPP’s role in the opposition during the IJI’s previous

government was the expulsion of Nawaz Sharif from Premiership. Unfortunately, the

mainstream political parties similar to PML (N), MQM and ANP continuously

adopted the policy of confrontation which weakened the successive governments,

generated rift in the PPP and spoiled Benazir’s repute. The PPP leadership including

PM and Asif Zardari indulged in large-scale corruption which not only damaged

their personal and party images but also damaged Pakistan’s repute internationally.

Politicizing the judiciary for political interests and restrictions on media to

hide poor performance had been of great hindrance to democracy and has seriously

stunted the growth of democratic norms. PPP government intentionally enhanced the

involvement of civil bureaucracy in political affairs to reduce the intervention of

military establishment in government affairs. In PPP government the political

involvement of civil bureaucracy was greater than military bureaucracy. It was

Troika of President, opposition and military who dismissed Bhutto government.

Judiciary became involved in this matter later.

 286

References and Notes

1
Awami National party, Pakistan Muslim league (Q) Hazara Front and Pakistan National Party did
not enter in any alliance. Except these political parties, forty five other remaining political parties
joined electoral alliance.
2
The front was described as “a forerunner for Jamma’at’s political role in coming elections. It was the
brain child of Qazi Hussain Ahmed [in 1993 election] who was influenced by the Algerian Islamic
salvation front. It developed a personality cult and having no stress on its ideological program. It was
eulogized by the party campaigners that social justice will be delivered to people’s door steps. Qazi
himself accused the Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharief as corrupt and insincere and presented PIF as
a possible third alternative,” The Herald, Election Special,1993.19.
3
The Herald, Election Special,1993, 20.
4
The new caretaker PM “Moeen Ahmed Qureshi was born in Lahore on June 26, 1993. He acquired
degree of doctorate in economics from the University of Indiana. He had served the Planning Board
(1954-1957), International Monetary Fund (1958-1970), World Bank (in the capacity of senior
President) and International Finance Cooperation (IFC) (in capacity as Vice President of the banks’
affiliated with IFC). He was supporter of democracy and market economy.” He was internationally
established and a proverbial economist.
5
Moeen as “caretaker Prime Minister was recommended by Nawaz and accepted by Benazir. Nawaz
turned against Moeen when he issued bank defaulters list.” Dawn, Karachi, July 19, 1993.
6
One of “the steps included his effort to expose the misdeeds of the previous governments by
publishing the lists of defaulters of bank loans and taxpayers. These lists exposed a number of affluent
persons who were involved in abusing the banking system and dodging the tax collectors. Moin
Quraishi made the State Bank of Pakistan an autonomous body with an effort to keep out political
interference in the working of the bank. He took numerous other steps including the imposition of a
nominal tax on agriculture, making Pakistan Television and Radio Pakistan autonomous, downsizing
of the administrative machinery and abolishing the discretionary power of the Prime Minster and the
Chief Ministers of allotting residential plots to their favorites. It goes to his credit that he undertook
various endeavors in a short period of time and made a serious effort to recover Government dues.”
 287

7
Dawn, Karachi, July 20, 1993.
8
“Pre-Empting an Elected Government”, Economic and Political Weekly, 28, no. 38 [Sep. 18, 1993]
1962: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4400152
9
Election commission announced “the fixing of maximum election expenses at one million rupees for
National Assembly and six lakh rupees for Provincial Assembly seat. The election expenses were
restricted to stop the involvement of drug money in election campaigns also.” Also see The News,
Islamabad, August 5, 1993.
10
The Herald, Election Special, 1993, 29.
11
“The Lady Health Workers (LHW) program initiated by the PPP government has been the most
successful initiative in the preventive health sector in the last two decades; it increased contraceptive
prevalence and reduced mother and child mortality ratios. The PPP will further consolidate this
program and take the number of LHWs up to 200,000 in the next 5 years, extending it to Katchi
Abadis in urban areas. A scheme for inducting 10,000 male health workers will be introduced in parts
of NWFP and Baluchistan. The party will initiate a media campaign on various aspects of preventive
health measures to increase awareness on health, safe motherhood, hygiene and nutrition. Access to
quality drugs has eluded the poor citizens of this country.”
12
The Herald, Election Special, 1993.
13
“The right wing parties which had contested the earlier elections from the single platform of Islami
Jamhoori Ittehad (IJI) had been contesting elections from their party platforms.”
14
PML (N) had adopted a new party symbol “Tiger” and gave up his previous symbol “bicycle”
which in predominantly illiterate electorates was a disadvantage.
15
The NDI believed that “electronic media had provided equal exposure to all political parties which
were contesting elections. The NDI declared elections as non-partisan. The CWOG estimated
elections as freest, fairest, open and most peaceful than any other earlier elections. Human Rights
Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) stated elections impartial. The Commission did not report any
instance of violation by the officials. The ECMT termed the polls as free and fair and cited that all the
political parties had agreed with the transparency of polls. The South Asian Association of Regional
Cooperation (SAARC) acknowledged the holding of elections in neutral manner. The head of
SAARC observers group I. K. Gujral stated that “credibility of the caretaker government in
conducting the impartial elections is universally accepted”
16
Pakistan Times, October 25, 1993.
17
1997:General, Election Commission of Pakistan, n.d), vi. For comprehensive details of National
Assembly results concern this report.
18
S. A. Sayood, ed., “The National Assembly”, Pakistan Political Perspective, vol. 2, no. 2
(Islamabad: Institute of Policy Studies, November 1993), 11.
19
The News, Islamabad, October 12, 1993.
20
The News, Islamabad, October 13, 1993.
21
Dawn, Karachi, October 18, 1993.
22
The News, Islamabad, October 20, 1993.
23
S. A. Sayood, ed., “Pakistan People’s Party”, Pakistan Political Perspective 2, no. 2 [November
1993], Islamabad: Institute of Policy Studies,
24
JPUHS, Vol.28, No.2, July-December, 2015
25
Dawn, Karachi, October 11, 1993.
26
Dawn, Karachi, October 21, 1993.
27
The names of presidential candidates were; “Ghulam Ishaq Khan, Wasim Sajjad, Nawabzada
Nasrullah Baber, Akber Bhugti, Farooq Ahmad Khan Leghari, Aftab Sherpao, Aftab Shahban Mirani,
Sartaj Aziz, Gauhar Ayub Khan, Sayed Iftikhar Hussain Gillani, Abdul Majid Malik, Asghar Khan,
Balakh Sher Mazari, Haji N. A. Zairian, Yahya Bakhtiar, Mir Muhammad Umar, Sagir Hussain Safi,
Pirzada Mukhtar Saeed, Bashir Ahmad Meo, Syed Nazar Hussain Shah Gillani, Ghazi Shafiqur
Rehman Siddiqui, M. P. Khan. The 12 candidates out of 24 were independent and most of them were
from influential families. The Election Commission had rejected the nomination papers of fourteen
candidates on technical grounds, some candidates had withdrawn their names and eventually the two
candidates remained in the field.”
28
Sardar Farooq Ahmed Khan Leghari was born in 1940 to a landowner from the Baloch Leghari
tribe of Dera Ghazi Khan. Educated at Oxford, he entered Superior Sevices in Pakistan before joining
politics. He came to the political limelight as a PPP loyalist. After 1988 elections he led the PPP
 288

parliamentary party in the Punjab but soon after he preferred to take over the Ministry for Water and
Power at the centre. After Benazir’s dismissal, he acted as deputy opposition leader before briefly
serving as a Minister in October 1993 following the dismissal of Nawaz Sharif. He got elected as
President in November 1993.
29
The Electoral College for presidential elections comprised of members of Parliament and the four
provincial Assemblies. The total size of Electoral College was 464.
30
http://pu.edu.pk/images/journal/HistoryPStudies/PDF-FILES/17-Zahid_V28_no2.pdf Accessed on
July 12, 2017
31
Saeed Shafqat., Civil-Military Relations in Pakistan: From Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to Benazir Bhutto,
(Boulder, Westview Press, 1997), 225.
32
Tahir Kamran., Democracy and Governance in Pakistan, 229.
33
Hasan Askari Rizvi., Military, State and Society in Pakistan, 220.
34
“The retirement of JCSC Chairman, General Shamim Ahmed was managed smoothly and
efficiently, unlike the Sarohi affair. Similarly, the selection of Chiefs of Air Staff, Naval Staffs were
made without causing any ripples.” Saeed Shafqat., Civil-Military Relations in Pakistan: From
Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to Benazir Bhutto, 249.
35
Saeed Shafqat reveals that by December 1995, about 140 cases had been instituted against Nawaz
Sharif and his kins.
36
Saeed Shafqat., Civil-Military Relations in Pakistan, 240-41.
37
The News, Islamabad, December 1, 1993.
38
The News, Islamabad, December 2, 1993.
39
Ibid.
40
http://pu.edu.pk/images/journal/HistoryPStudies/PDF-FILES/17-Zahid_V28_no2.pdf Accessed on
September 11,2017.
41
This contract was with “Turkish Firm Bayinder granted by Nawaz Sharif government for the
construction of Peshawar-Islamabad Motorway. Eventually the firm was paid compensation and the
project had substantial over turn both in terms of time and money.”
42
This agreement was “unusual as deficit of power in Karachi was only 300 MW. Moreover, tariff
rate given to the company was three-times higher than any other project. Subsequently, Pakistan
Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) made desperate attempts to seek some relief but
the pressure of international financial institutions and so called sanctity of investment agreement
prevented them from securing a reduction in tariff.”
43
Once on the occasion of presidential address and second time on a meal.
44
The Pakistan Times, Islamabad, January 12, 1994.
45
The Pakistan Times, Islamabad, January 22, 1994.
46
According to the constitution ordinance could only be issued if the session of the National
Assembly was not scheduled in near the future; yet the ruling party had issued seventeen ordinances
just before a day before the scheduled session. Qureshi., Hakoomat Kay 100 Din, (Urdu), 8-9.
47
Ghazi Salahuddin., Will the Crisis Continue?, The News, Karachi, March 1, 1994.
48
Dawn, Karachi, April 12, 1994.
49
Hasan Askari Rizvi., Military, State and Society in Pakistan, 223.
50
Ghazi Salahuddin., Will the Crisis Continue?, 39.
51
Kukreja., Contemporary Pakistan, 240.
52
Dawn, July 19, 1996.
53
Hussain Haqqani., Pakistan Between Mosque and Military, 241.
54
Jang, August 11, 1996.
55
Malik Muhammad Azam, Jasarat, Karachi, October 31, 1996.
56
Abd us Smad nad Shafiq Ahmad belonging to Jamaat e Islami, for further detaile see Dawn, June
26, 1996.
57
Jang, Lahore, February 18, 1999.
58
James Wynbrandt., A Brief History of Pakistan, (New York: Facts on Files, 2009), 241.
59
Jahangir Badar., Political Leadership, A case Study of Benazir Bhutto, 223.
60
A tradition established by Z. A. Bhutto, against Ayub regime.
61
James Wynbrandt., A Brief History of Pakistan, 241-242.
62
Ibid., 235-36
 289

63
Hassan Mujtaba and Mohammad Hanif., Sindh: Divide and Rule?, Newsline , March 1994, Karachi,
37.
64
Ibid. 39.
65
Farhatullah Baber., Where Benazir is Going Wrong, Dawn, Karachi, March 31, 1994.
66
The PPP tried to differentiate between the MQM militant wing and the MQM political wing;
justifying that the PPP had launched anti-terrorist operation against militant elements due to which
relations between the PPP and the MQM became sour.
67
The bad law and order in Sindh had negative effect on the popularity of Benazir. For instance, the
expected visit of Benazir to the Sindh University Campus Jamshoro had caused serious trouble for the
district and university administrations. The news of Benazir’s visit had annoyed the students and they
warned that they would stage protest if she paid the visit. It was also reported that teachers’ support
was with students. The law and order situation worsened not only in Sindh but also in other parts of
the country such as in Malakand Division where fundamental Islamic movements created disturbance.
68
Dawn, Karachi, January 3, 1996.
69
The government of Sabir Shah was weak as it was a coalition of independents, the ANP and the
PML (N). The independents had supported the ANP-PML (N) led coalition on the term that they
would get the portfolio of their choice. Initially the MPAs were provided portfolios of their choice but
later Sabir Shah had changed their portfolios and interfered in their official duties. Due to Sabir
Shah’s act ten MPAs had immediately withdrawn their support for him. Finally he remained with the
support of 35 members in the house of 83. The resignations of the independents from their offices
caused the opposition to table no-confidence motion. The Pakistan Times, Islamabad, February 7,
1994.
70
A “vote of no-confidence” against Pir Sabir Shah’s government was moved and carried on 5
February 1994. For further details see, Sartaj Aziz (2009), “Between Dreams and Realities: Some
Milestones in Pakistan’s History,” Karachi: Oxford, 148.
71
The Pakistan Times, Islamabad, February 7, 1994.
72
Ibid.
73
Incidentally the PPP had tabled the no-confidence motion on the day (February 6, 1994) the floor-
crossing ordinance that was promulgated by the caretaker government (October 7, 1993) became
canceled.139 According to Sherpao it was just a coincidence that no-confidence motion was tabled
when floor-crossing ordinance stood null and void. He added that floor-crossing could not be stopped
even if the ordinance or legislature related to floor-crossing was present.
74
The Pakistan Times, Islamabad, February 10, 1994.
75
Previously, the requisitioned session (demanded by the opposition) for voting on the no-confidence
motion took place but voting did not occur due to unruly and commotion in the Assembly. The
Speaker disqualified two MPAs of the PML (N) namely; Shad Muhammad Khan and Sayed Akhtar
Hussain Shah because they left the PML (N) and joined the PPP. The session was adjourned till
March 31, 1994. These two MPAs were also expelled from the parliamentary party of the PML (N).
These MPAs had filed petitions against their disqualification in the Peshawar High Court which
reinstated both the MPAs.The Pakistan Times, Islamabad, February 26, 1994.
76
The Governor Rule authorized the Parliament to exercise all the powers of the Assembly and the
Governor was authorized to perform the functions of NWFP on behalf of the President.
77
Ravi Kalia., (Ed.), Pakistan: From the Rhetoric of Democracy to the Rise of Militancy, (London:
Rutledge, 2011), 151.
78
The Pakistan Times, Islamabad, February 27, 1994.
79
Ibid.
80
The News, Karachi, March 3, 1994.
81
The Court ruling stated “that President had exceeded his power which was provided to him under
the Article 234. The Court’s verdict had asked the Governor to summon the session of Assembly in
which Sabir Shah would take a vote of confidence.
82
Dawn, Karachi, April 28, 1994.
83
Dawn, Karachi, July 18, 1995.
84
Mohammad Waseem., Which Way Punjab is Moving?, Dawn, Karachi, May 8, 1995.
85
The Presidential proclamation mentioned that “in the light of reports received from the Governor
and other sources it was evident that the situation had arrived in which the affairs of the Punjab could
not be carried out according to the Constitution.
 290

86
PLD, 1997, 38
87
Sajid Mahmood Awan., Political Parties and Political Development in the Punjab 1988-1999, Ph.
D. Dissertation By Taxila Institute of Asian Civilizations Quaid-e-Azam UniversityIslamabad,
Pakistan, 2008, 287.
88
Dawn, Karachi, September 14, 1995.
89
Sajid Mahmood Awan., Political Parties and Political Development in the Punjab 1988-1999, 312.
90
Ibid.
91
Hasan Askari Rizvi., Military, State and Society in Pakistan, 220
92
Shuja Nawaz., Crossed Swords Pakistan Army and the Wars Within, 474.
93
According to Nawaz; “Bhutto’s ISI chief, General Qazi recalls that Bhutto kept the Army Chief
and the ISI chief fully in the picture on dealings with the United States, and thus the three had a
‘uniform’ view and response to efforts by the US to halt and roll back Pakistan’s nuclear efforts. None
of them trusted the United States explicitly. Waheed had decided that the nuclear program was none
of the U.S.’s business and that Pakistan would press ahead with its enrichment program regardless.
94
Hasan Askari Rizvi., Military, State and Society in Pakistan, 220
95
Shuja Nawaz., Crossed Swords Pakistan Army and the Wars Within, 481-2
96
Tahir Kamran., Democracy and Governance in Pakistan, 211
97
Zaffar Abbas., Where do We Go from Here?” The Herald, Karachi, November 1996, 25.
98
Muhammad Ali Sheikh., Benazir Bhutto: A Political Biography, 227.
99
Zaffar Abbas., Where do We Go from Here?, The Herald, Karachi, November 1996, 25.
100
Zaffar Abbas., The Pir, the President and the Pindiwalas, The Herald, Karachi, September 1996,
30.
101
Ibid.
102
Maya Chadda., Building Democracy in South Asia: India, Nepal, Pakistan, (London: Lynne
Rienner Publishers, 2000), 83.
103
Dawn, Karachi, July 27, 1996.
104
Dawn, Karachi, October 27, 1996.
105
Dawn, Karachi, October 30, 1996.
106
They met first time since Leghari got elected as President.
107
Dawn, Karachi, September 27, 1996.
108
Shuja Nawaz., Crossed Swords Pakistan Army and the Wars Within, 485.
109
Ibid., 486.
110
Hasan Askari Rizvi., Military, State and Society in Pakistan, 225.
111
Ibid.
112
Dawn, Karachi, November 6, 1996.
113
Nawaz Sharif interview by Z. Abbas, The Herald, Karachi, November, 1996, P.36.
114
Dawn, Karachi, January 30, 1997.

Chapter 7

Politics of Authoritarianism 1997-1999

That chapter deals with the party politics during last Parliamentary phase of

the 1990’s. It describes how the results of 1997 election led Muslim League (N) to

establish a very strong regime by securing 134/217 seats in National Assembly. It

 291

further evaluates what factors shaped the relationship between ruling PML (N) and

PPP-led opposition political parties, and what differences occurred between PML

(N) and MQM. The chapter also brings to light confrontational relationships between

the Prime Minister and the Judiciary, between Head of Cabinet and Military Chief

which all ended up in a new Martial Law in the country.

Nawaz Sharif, after obtaining a heavy mandate, started his second term with

full authority and power.1 The other political parties including PPP, Jamaat-i-Islami,

Muttahida Qaumi Movement and Awami National Party could not resist against

PML (N) policies and with his unilateral decisions and dictatorial attitude Nawaz

Sharif amended the Constitution, Expelled COAS and appointed President and Chief

Justice of Pakistan without any consultations. But in 1999 when his popularity was

on its peak, General Pervaiz Musharraf toppled his administration and enforced

Military Rule in Pakistan. Surprisingly, no resistance or call of agitation came out

from any corner of the country. As Nawaz Sharif exiled, the PML (N) which was

ruling and majority party in National Assembly, split into different factions

immediately and his loyal political companion shoock General Musharraf’s hands.

Now the questions arose that what were the policies of Nawaz Sharif which

led him towards a Martial Law? Why PML (N) interfered in the matters of others

institutions which resulted in confrontations and clashes? What was the role of

opposition parties in the Martial Law of 1999 and why political parties did not raise

their voices in the favor of PML (N) government when it was deposed? The answers

of these questions were the main topic of this chapter.

 292

7.1 Set up of Caretaker Government

On November 05, 1996 Chief Executive Leghari as per powers granted by

the 8th amendment, dissolute the Lower House of the Parliament and terminated the

administration of Benazir Bhutto on the allegations of Dishonesty, Corruption,

killing of Mir Murtaza Bhutto, disobedience of the orders of Supreme Court, extra-

judicial killings, financial mismanagement and serious violation of the Constitution.

PPP challenged that Act of President and filed a request contrary to the termination
2
of Assemblies in Supreme Court but this time Supreme Court by six to one

endorsed the act of the Chief Executive as per Article 58 (2-B). It was interesting

that the Supreme Law Court had already declared the same act of President, illegal in

his verdict against the case of Nawaz Sharif.

The date for the balloting was fixed on February 03, 1997. PPP senior

politician Meraj Khalid3 was nominated as Caretaker Head of Cabinet of Pakistan.

4
He was considered as the veteran politician of PPP. He was a high-ranking and

experienced politician. He announced his nine member caretaker cabinet initially

which later reached till nineteen. The cabinet mostly consisted of former bureaucrats,

technocrats and experienced politicians. To show the impartiality of caretaker

government and to satisfy mainstream political parties about the conduct of free and

fair election, he picked one representative from each party and included him in his

cabinet. The prominent Ministers including in his cabinet were Dr. Zubair Khan5 as

Commerce Minister, Shahid Javaid Burki6 as Finance Minister, Shahid Hamid as

Defense Minister, Syeda Abida Hussain as Education Minister and Sahibzada

Yoqoob Khan as Minister of Foreign Affairs. Mumtaz Bhutto was appointed as

 293

caretaker Chief Minister Sindh to curtail the power of PPP in Sindh. He made his

provincial cabinet and included anti-PPP politicians in that cabinet. MQM and PPP

both expressed their reservations on his appointment but nobody bothered their

reservations. Mumtaz Bhutto tried his best to gain the political support against PPP

and adopted such policies to weaken its electoral strength. 7 In Punjab, the case was

not so different from Sindh. Tariq Rahim was appointed as governor of the Punjab

who was also a controversial figure and many senior politicians opposed his

appointment.

The caretaker cabinet setup was very strange as most of the members were

partial and biased. They belonged to ruling party or relative or friend of the

President and it was the only eligibility criteria. Malik Meraj Khalid also belonged to

PPP and his impartiality was doubtful. All orders of these appointments were coming

from President Office. In fact, by all means, President Farooq Leghari wanted to

wipe out PPP especially its head Benazir Bhutto from the political arena. Conducting

the election within stipulated time was the first priority of caretaker government,

however, it issued an Ordinance named Ehtisab Ordinance 1996 and established a

Council on Defense and Security. After the formation of National Assembly PML

(N) government endorsed all step taken under that ordinance.8 The basic purpose of

that ordinance was the trial of corrupt and dishonest politicians, officers and

bureaucrats who looted the national wealth or used their authority beyond their

limitations. Two institutional reforms were also introduced as an amendment in

Constitution by Ordinance; first the introduction of “adult franchise” in FATA, 9

secondly, the formation of a “Council of Defense and National Security (CDNS).” 10

 294

Out of both these alterations, the first one was an appreciable step in the good way,

though; the formation of CDNS was expected to allocate a perpetual part to military

brass in the judgment making procedure. By doing so the two participants of Troika

(COAS and Chief Executive) could have legitimize their part in the concerns of the

administration.

On December, 1996 caretaker administration took another decision and

amended the Representation of the people Act 1976 through an ordinance and

disqualified the loan defaulters from contesting the election. 11 The leadership of PPP

criticized the Act severely and alleged that that modified Act would be used against

Pakistan People's Party and declared that amendment before election as a tactic to

pressurize the political parties.12 The PPP refused to accept that Act and accused that

a caretaker government had no authority to amend the Constitution or impose such

laws which banned the politicians to participate in election. 13 Secondly, PPP asked

the caretaker government that why they were imposing all laws on PPP’s candidates

especially in Sindh. 14

7.2 Election Campaign, Elections and Results

The date of election had been announced but political parties were still

hesitating to launch their political campaign. They were in doubt that Supreme Court

would restore the Assembly, especially PPP; the previous ruling party had assumed

that their government would be restored so their campaign was very slow. PML (N)

was also doubtful about the conduct of the elections on time. Restrictions on banners,

posters, party flags, use of loudspeakers and the date of the elections falling in the

month of holy Ramadan, made the entire procedure of the elections very dull and full
 295

of exhaustion.15 When decision of Supreme Court came and court endorsed the

President’s decision, PPP chalked out its plan and presented its manifesto to attract

the voters. In her campaign, Benazir Bhutto criticized the President and his

nominated caretaker cabinet who was trying to divide PPP and was creating “kings”

party. In her Party’s manifesto she described her future policies. Benazir Bhutto

stated that PPP government would bring political stability in Pakistan.

Accountability bill would be introduced and the process of accountability would be

started from the Parliament. New reform would be introduced in economic sector

and economic development would be the first priority of Pakistan People's Party.

Eighth Amendment would be abolished and Prime Minister would be bestowed with

full ruling power. Women would be empowered and their involvement would be

increase in every field of life. Human rights, minorities’ rights and women rights

would be preserved. Taxes would be reduced and new taxes would not be imposed.

PPP would continue its nuclear policy.

The manifesto of PPP was not much different from the previous one and it

could not attract the common voters. People had seen its previous two regime and

they were not ready to believe on its slogans for the third time. The allegation of

President and propaganda of PML (N) was working against PPP and it was very

difficult for PPP to come back in the power. On the other side, PML (N) again

decided to contest election without entering in any alliance moreover; she expanded

its support-base by broadening its accommodating relationships with smaller parties

in numerous regions. In these elections, PML (N) applied the exclusionary model16

of alliances to earn more seats especially in NWFP and Sindh. ANP was the electoral
 296

partner of PML (N) in NWFP for many years so PML (N) continued its electoral

alliance with ANP in the shape of seat adjustment. 17 The same case happened in

Sindh where PML (N) concluded a seat adjustment formula with PML (Functional) 18

PPP (Shaheed Bhutto)19 and MQM.20 Tehrik e Jafria Pakistan which was the alliance

partner of PPP in previous election decided to support PML (N) and a formula of

seat adjustment was settled between them. These electoral adjustments strengthened

the power of PML (N) and now Nawaz Sharif entered in the battle of election with

full hope and preparations.

After the dissolution of PPP government PML (N) was already preparing for

the elections. On January 1, 1997 Nawaz Sharif the President of PML (N) presented

his manifesto and future plans for the betterment of worsened economy, education

and health sector.21 PML (N) ensured in its manifesto that model school would be

established on district level under Social Action Program.22 Health card would be

issued to poor and needy people. Restoration of the women seats in National

Assembly, legislation to ban floor crossing, preparation of comprehensive program

for the revival of economy, bringing Peace in Karachi, revival of development

projects, formation of price control committees, establishment of health task force,

privatization of white elephant institutions, Sunday to be holiday instead of Friday,

ban on excessive expenditure on marriages and friendship with Muslim countries23

were the main point of PML (N) manifesto.

In urban areas of Sindh MQM was in alliance of seat adjustment with PML

(N) and had split into three factions. All factions were blaming each other and

clashes between them were a routine matter. The two mainstream religious political
 297

parties Jamaat-i-Islami and Jamiat Ulema i Pakistan had boycotted the elections and

remained aloof from election process and their candidates did not participate in
24
election. Pakistan Tehrik i Insaaf, a new political party under the headship of

former cricketer Imran Khan also participated in these elections. 25

All Political parties individually or through alliance enthusiastically

participated in election except Jamaat-i-Islami beside Jamiat Ulema i Islam

Pakistan,26 Which did not take part in election and stay away from the election.

Before elections candidates organized public meetings and corner meetings and

arranged rallies to impress the voters. Although election commission announced a

particular amount for election expenditures but they spent huge amounts on their

campaign to fascinate the voters. Once again, the followers of “Bhutoism” (PPP) and

“Ziaism” (PML (N)) contested face to face. The electoral slogans in the favor of

Socialism and conservatism were used frequently in that election. In the end, leftists

were defeated badly by rightists. Election held on third February, 1997 on 204

Muslims seats of Lower House out of 207 because on three seats polling was

postponed due to the death of candidates of that’s constituencies. 10 for Non-Muslim

and 20 seats for women were reserved. The result of NA was as following:

Result of National Assembly”

Total number of seats 237

Date of election February 03,

1997

Party Name Party Seats in National

Assembly
“Pakistan Muslim League (N) “(PML -N)
Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) 134
 298

Pakistan Muslim League (J) (PML -J) 18

Awami National Party (ANP) 12
Baluchistan National Party (BNP) 09
Jamiat Ulema I Islam (F) (JUI-F) 03
Pakistan People's Party (SB) (PPP-SB) 02
National People’s Party” (NPP) 01
Jamhori Watan Party (JWP) 01
Independents (IND)” 02
12

“Eight seats of FATA are not included in it. Therefore total are counted as 195. Seat of Federal capital
was won by PML (N). Elections on three seats were postponed.” 27

The result was so stunning and a shock for political experts and planners.

Pakistan People's Party which had been well rooted in the Federal, NWFP and

Punjab for previous three years got a defeat which she never anticipated. 28 In

National Assembly PML (N) got clear majority capturing 134 seats 29 and emerged as

leading party. Pakistan People's Party got second position while MQM occupied

third position. ANP the ally of PML (N) secured 10 seats. 30 However, the

independent candidates had also won considerable seats. PML (N) got majority of

the seats from Punjab, it got 134 seats among which 107 were from Punjab while it

bagged 15 from Sindh, 9 from NWFP and 3 from Baluchistan. 31 The result showed

that that time PML (N) had completely swept Punjab. No other political party as well

as PPP secured a single seat from the province which showed the annoyance of the

people of that province with Pakistan People's Party’s former policies. Tahir Kamran

analyzed;

“The inevitable happened on February 3. Misused and abused for over 10 years by
Ms Benazir Bhutto, the vote bank of the People’s Party refused to show up on
Election Day. A party which was always good enough for at least 40-odd seats in
the National Assembly, because of its consistent ability to poll over 35 percent of
country’s active electorate, was cut down to mere 18 NA seats against PML’s 136.
Foul, cried Ms Bhutto, but unlike 1990, there was no one to listen to her. For good
reason, the February 3, polls was not simply a defeat for the PPP in terms of
numbers; it was a death of a culture that had led an extremely tortured existence
 299

ever since Ms Bhutto’s return from exile in 1986.” 32

In that election independent candidates and MQM got equal numbers of seats and

they had friendly relations (seat adjustment) with PML (N) so it was obvious that

PML (N) would easily make its government in center. Although PML (N) had

secured enough seats to make government without any external help but she

preferred to take her friends in government making. Another remarkable feature of

the election results was that the religious political parties could not win considerable

seats and other smaller alliances and political parties were completely wiped out

from political scene.

Result of Provincial Assemblies

Provincial Assembly’s election also held on same day and date. The result was as

following:

Party Name Party Seats in Punjab

Assembly
“Pakistan Muslim League (N) (PML-N)
Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) 211
Pakistan Muslim League (J) (PML-J) 03
Pakistan Democratic Party (PDP) 02
(IND) 01
Independent (VCT) 21
Vacant” 02

Party Name Party Seats in Sindh Assembly

(PPP) 36
“Pakistan People’s Party (MQM) 29
Muttahida Qaumi Movement / IND (PML-N) 15
Pakistan Muslim League (N) (IND) 14
Independent (PPP-SB) 02
Pakistan People's Party (SB) (NPP) 04
National People’s Party”

Party Name Party “Seats in NWFP Assembly”

 300

“Pakistan Muslim League -N (PML-N) 32

Awami National Party (ANP) 30
Pakistan People's Party (PPP) 04
Jamiat Ulema e Islam” (JUI) 01
Idependent (IND) 11
Vacant (VCT) 02

Party Name Party Seats in Baluchistan Assembly

Baluchistan National Movement (H) (BNP) 09

“Jamiat Ulema Islam- F (JUI-F) 07
Jamhori Watan Party (JWP) 06
Pakistan Muslim League (N) (PML-N) 04
Baluchistan National Movement -H (BNM-H) 02
Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) 01
Pakistan Muslim League –J” (PML-J) 01
Pakhton Khawah Milli Awami Party (PKMAP) 02
Independent (IND) 08

According the tradition of Pakistani politics, loser political parties rejected

the election results and alleged the rigging in election. PPP and JUI (F) condemned

the election results and accused the Army, caretaker government and other law

enforcement agencies to manipulate the elections. MQM did not reject the election

results but she also blamed the law enforcement agencies to involve in election

process and rigging in some areas of Karachi. Caretaker government rejected all

these allegations and declared that election were clean, peaceful, neutral and fair. 33

Several national and international observers and monitoring teams including NDI,

SAARC, EU, HRC, HRCP and HRS watched all that election process very keenly

and they declared that election free and fair. 34

7.3 Formation of the Governments and Initial Steps

The election results showed that PML (N) was the sole political party who

secured clear majority in Lower House. It also got landslide victory in Punjab

Provincial Assembly similarly; it became largest party in NWFP. On February 16,

 301

1997 the candidate of PML (N) Pir Ellahi Bax Somro was selected unchallenged as

the Speaker of Lower House and Jafar Iqbal, candidate from the same party,

occupied the post of Deputy Speaker.35 PPP also nominated her candidate Khurshid

Shah and Naveed Qamar for the post of Speaker and Deputy Speaker but later, she

withdrew her nominations and let the PML (N) candidates elected unopposed. 36

Perhaps it had happened for the first time in the Parliamentary history that Speaker

and Deputy Speaker both had been chosen unopposed. 37

On February 17, 1997 Nawaz Sharif had been nominated as Head of Cabinet

of Pakistan by National Assembly. He secured 177 votes from the house while his

challenger Shaban Mirani of PPP could secure only 16 votes. The number of the

votes showed that all political parties including PML (N), MQM, ANP, JAH, PPP

(SB), JWP, BNM, minority members and the FATA members supported Nawaz
38
Sharif and expressed their confidence on PML (N) leadership. On February 25,

1997 Nawaz Sharif announced his cabinet which was consisted of seven members.39

Later it enhanced till 18.40 The Ministers in Federal cabinet were selected from three

main political parties, PML (N), ANP and MQM, as all these had contested the

elections under the coalition seat adjustment with PML (N).

After formation of government in the Centre, PML (N) established its

governments in all four provinces. Shahbaz Sharif in Punjab, 41 Sardar Mehtab

Abbasi in NWFP,42 Liaquat Jatoi in Sindh43 and Sardar Akhtar Mengal in

Baluchistan44 appointed as Chief Ministers. In Punjab and NWFP, PML (N) formed

its governments without any coalition partner while in Sindh PML (N) and MQM

made its coalition administration and similarly in Baluchistan PML (N) and BNP
 302

entered in alliance administration.45 The new government of Nawaz Sharif had to

face serious problems. Beside the tackling with axe of 58 (2) (B), which had been cut

the throat of four elected governments, he had to deal with terrorism, rule and

command state in Sindh, corruption, unemployment, defaulter of bank loans,

worsened economy, external debts, and with his political opponent which were not

only in opposition but in its government too.

7.3.1 Restriction on Freedom of Press

The first year of the Nawaz Sharif government was very hard for print and

electronic media. In March, Just after few months of assuming power, the PML (N)

circulated the Press and Publication Ordinance (PPO) which authorized government

to ban or forfeit any book, newspaper or any printing material which contained false

information, about Pakistan’s image or about army or police duties. PPP leadership

criticized the ordinance and alleged that through that ordinance government would

curb the freedom of press. And it happened when through that ordinance government

arrested dozens of journalists of different newspapers and cases were registered

against them. Several newspapers including Jang, Amn, Percham and Nawa e Waqt

were banned and cases of violation of PPO were registered against them. More than

two dozen cases of press freedom violation were mentioned in reports published by

Human Resource Committee for Press (HRCP). Several Journalists were attacked

physically. Raids in newspaper offices and suspension of newspapers were the

tactics of government to pressurize the opponents of government. Beside that

ordinance Nawaz government introduced “Lifafa” culture. 46 Several times combined

opposition staged token walk-outs in Senate to record its protest against the Press
 303

policy of government but all in vain. 47 Jamaat-i-Islami convened All Parties

Conference which demanded legislation to protect Journalist’s rights. 48

7.3.2 Media Trial of the Opposition

Nawaz government tried her best to defame the opposition. For that purpose

government launched a special political program named “Ehtisaab” on Pakistan

Television. Through that program the weaknesses of politicians of opposition parties

were highlighted in the shape of media trial. PPP criticized the government for

launching such a negative propaganda program which was used for the character

assassination of the politicians. On the other side, PTV was presenting the picture of

Nawaz Sharif as ambassador of Justice and peace.

7.3.3 Abolition of Eighth Amendment

That famous modification was announced by Zia in 1985; in which Chief

Executive had authority to dissolute Assemblies and terminated the administration.

Four Prime Minister had been terminated through that notorious amendment during

1988 to 1996. Nawaz Sharif was very cautious about that power of President because

he had lost his last government by President Ghulam Ishaq Khan through that

amendment. Now his government was in position to curtail that power of President

through legislation.49 On March 31, 1997 he addressed the nation and took them in

confidence. He declared that PML (N) administration was eager to remove that

amendment from Constitution through legislation. 50 He also disclosed that he had

met with President Farooq Ahmad Leghari and COAS General Jahangir Karamat and

they were agreed to abolish that amendment. 51 On April 1, the bill was presented in
 304

Parliament and two portions of 8th amendment were abolished from Constitution

which bestowed the power of dissolution of Assemblies to President and Governors.

Now Prime Minister could appoint Governors, chiefs of armed forces and JCSC. 52

After that amendment Prime Minister became the sole authority to exercise his

powers without any threat or interference of the President.

7.3.4 Accountability Act 1997

Nawaz government introduced Ehtesab Act 1997. That Act was the follow up

of Ehtesab ordinance issued in the period of caretaker government. After modifying

some articles in Ordinance, the PML (N) government imposed the same Act as

Ehtesab Act 1997. Opposition criticized that Act and alleged that that Act would be

used as a tool against opposition. Benazir Bhutto also expressed her reservations on

that Act and stated that government would use that Act for character assassination

and would create harassment for the opponents and her reservations come true when

government filed dozens of cases against PPP leadership especially contrary to BB

and her spouse Zardari. 53

7.3.5 “Central Government and Law and Order Situation in Sindh”

In Sindh, MQM was the coalition partner of PML (N) but the relations

between two parties were not reasonable cordial. 54 Rule and command state in Sindh

was much deteriorated and continued target killing and terrorist activities in Karachi

and Hyderabad instigated tension among the two coalition partners. It was said that

one militant wing of the MQM and PPP was involved in such criminal activities and

the ratio in these criminal activities boosted up when MQM divided in two main
 305

factions and both claimed their right on Karachi. The tension increased when five

workers of MQM shot dead and MQM closed all her offices in Karachi till the arrest

of assassins. MQM delegation met with Leghari and Nawaz Sharif and asked them

for mediation. Nawaz assured MQM not to impose governor rule in Sindh and

formed a judicial commission to probe the reality. The Supreme Court took Suo

Motu action on deteriorated law and order situation but extra judicial murders,

abduction and terrorism could not stop. Central government was ready to provide

absolute power to Sindh government on law and order issues, 55 but clashes between

MQM and MQM(H) could not stop. A number of rounds of dialogues took place

among the Central government and the MQM but result was same. 56 After all Central

government took final decision after negotiating with MQM and police and rangers

were installed under the combined power of Central and provincial government for

watching and implementing operation in sensitive parts of the Karachi. The Central

administration had constituted two committees to grab violence in Karachi. The first

advisory committee had to prepare an inclusive program for the reorganize of the

police force and the second administrative committee had to report the rule and

command condition on everyday basis. The ranger’s powers to arrest and search

were restored.57 Altaf Husain had condemned the operation and demanded the

resignation of Nawaz Sharif and mentioned that Nawaz had sworn under the oath

that if he could not eliminate target killings of MQM he would resign. 58

7.4 Government-Opposition Relations

The relations between opposition and government were hostile from very

beginning. PPP’s previous government had faced tough time from the then
 306

opposition and now that opposition was in administration and PPP was now in

antagonism so PPP was continuously criticizing on the policies of government and

was trying to create hurdles for him. PPP targeted three main issues including

worsened and gradually decreasing economy, Issue of Kashmir and relation with

India. PPP leadership demanded new election and new set-up of national government

included of political parties, bureaucracy, judiciary, intelligence agencies and armed

forces.59 Benazir Bhutto justified the involvement of establishment in political

system with arguing that it would create understanding and harmony between

politicians and the establishment which would bring stability in political system of

Pakistan. Government rejected her proposal and refused to adopt such policies. PML

(N) got benefits of its majority in the National Assembly and passed several bills

without consulting with the opposition. Family court amendment bill, Ehtesab bill,

and other three bills about recovering of bank loans was presented and passed in the

National Assembly without discussing them in house which irritated opposition and

PPP criticized it.

The continuous absence of Prime Minister from the Parliament was also

criticized by opposition. Nawaz Sharif attended only that session in the National

Assembly which was very important for instance, Joint session of the Parliament; the

session in which some bill had been table or budget session etc. The nonappearance

of the Head of Cabinet from Parliament was strictly appraised by the opposition. On

June 30, 1997 Parliament passed a bill which removed the horse-trading or floor

crossing. On August 13, 1997 government passed Anti-Terrorist Bill 1997.

Opposition protested against the bill even they walked out from the session. 60 On
 307

August 18, 1997 that Act was challenged in Courts and On May 15, 1998, Supreme

Court cancelled twelve provisions of that Constitution. 61

On March 18, 1998 opposition political parties formed an alliance against

PML (N) named Pakistan Awami Ittehad (PAI). That grand opposition alliance

demanded new general elections and adopted the strategy of agitation in the shape of

rallies against government.62 On April 13, 1998 PML (N) announced 427 “Khidmat

Committees” countrywide. These committees consisted of five thousand members. 63

The committees had full authority to examine the performance of different

departments including police, health, sports, Anti- corruption, metropolitan etc.64

The members of committees could initiate inquiry against any crooked officer from

grade 1 to 16. PPP criticized the formation of committees and declared that PML (N)

government established these committees to weaken the role of Judiciary. 65 On

December 4, 1998 ANP made an alliance with PAI against ruling party. After one

week PONM also joined that alliance. MQM was also infuriated with PML (N)

policies and started developing working relationship with opposition parties.

On March 11, 1999 President Rafique Tarar address the combined session of

the Legislature. During the address all opposition parties particularly PPP had

showed their annoyance with ruling party. All members of opposition parties raised

slogans against President, thumped the desks and showed disrespect to the President.

In the start MQM too joined the opposition’s protest but later she walked out the

President’s speech and left the house. During President’s Speech ANP remained

silent which showed its inclination toward ruling party. Throughout speech

opposition raised slogans and shouted at President. After speech Nawaz Sharif
 308

declared the opposition’s behavior as unethical and undemocratic. 66 After

Presidential speech Benazir Bhutto talked with the press and announced agitation

against PML (N) government and requested the nation to support her in removing the

government.67 On April 15, 1999 Ehtesab Bench sentenced Asif Zardari and Benazir

Bhutto in the Society General Surveillance case and banned them from taking part in

political activities. They also penalized for five years imprisonment. 68 The PPP

supporters protested against that verdict and started agitation against the conviction

of their leadership. The PPP along with PAI launched agitation movement against

the conviction of Benazir Bhutto. Rao Sikandar Iqbal President PPP Punjab asserted

that army should interfere in that matter otherwise situation could be out of control. 69

In last week of the March 1999, confrontation emerged between PAI and

PAT. Awami Qiadat Party, Pakistan Awami Tehrik and Pakistan Muslim league (Q)

demanded to decide all issues instantly. 70 Due to confrontation in PAI parties, two

factions emerged. One faction consisted of Awami Qiadat Party, Tehrik Ulema e

Pakistan, Markazi Jamaat Ahle Hadith and Markazi Jamaat Sawad e Azam while

other faction comprised on PDP, PPP, Jamiat Ulema e Ahle Hadith, Pakistan

Solidarity Front, Hizb e Jihad, UDF, Islamic Deeni Front, Pakistan Christian

National Party, PML (C), PML (J) PML (Q), Muttahida Ulema Forum and Pakistan

Mazdoor Kisan Party. On November 28, 1998 PAI held a rally against government

which addressed by Benazir Bhutto and Mualana Tahir ul Qadri. 71 In the last week of

September 1999, opposition parties including PDP, PAI, PPP, PTI, MQM, ANP,

IDF, JUAH, HJ, MKP, JM, MUF, PCP, PML(Q), PML(J), PML (C), PSF, PAT and
 309

UDF announced Grand Democratic Alliance72 against government. That grand

alliance staged nationwide protest, rallies and marches to pressurize the ruling party.

7.5 Differences among Ruling Parties

A lot of differences had been raised among ruling political parties beside conflicts

between the major ruling party and the opposition group. The differences between

ruling political parties created political anarchy in the country which not only

weakened the political system but generated political instability in the democratic

system of Pakistan.

7.5.1 Differences between PML (N) and ANP

In NWFP an alliance administration of PML (N) and ANP was established.

ANP was the alliance partner of PML (N) for more than one decade but now with the

beginning of 1998, the differences arose in these two coalition partner on various

subjects. ANP desired to change the name of province replacing NWFP with

Pakhtunkhwa but she had no support from other coalition parties. MQM, BNM, and

Jiyay Sindh were not in the favor of renaming the province. PML (N) supported the

proposal of Kalabagh Dam instead of renaming the province.73 ANP who had severe

reservations on the construction of Kalabagh Dam decided to end the coalition with

PML (N) in Central and provincial levels. On February 26, 1998 all Federal and

Provincial Ministers of ANP resigned from the Central and Provincial governments

and announced to sit on oppositions benches. Sudden Quit of ANP from alliance just

affected the two third majority of ruling party in Upper House 74 and with 30 seats she
 310

was not in a situation to make its administration in NWFP alone while PML (N)

established its administration in NWFP with the help of the individuals. 75

Construction of Kalabagh Dam was important point of PML (N) election

manifesto. On June 11, 1998 Prime Minister made a speech to the nation and

declared the “construction of Kalabagh Dam.”76 The smaller provinces have

reservation on that mega project. On June 17 a rally was held by “Anti-Kalabagh

Dam Action Committee” contrary to premier statement and resolutions against

Kalabagh Dam were passed in Sindh, Baluchistan and NWFP provincial

assemblies.77 On August 1 PPP and ANP hold combined rallies against that

announcement. Benazir Bhutto and Wali Khan demanded the resignation of Nawaz

Sharif and establishment of national government.78 The severe agitation forced the

Nawaz Sharif to review his stand on Kalabagh Dam. 79

7.5.2 “Differences between PML (N) and MQM”

MQM was the alliance partner of PML (N) administration in Sindh as well as

in the Centre. On February23, 1998 President addressed with the joint session of the

Parliament. On that occasion, political situation in National Assembly took a turn

when Parliamentarians of the MQM along with PPP legislatures raised the slogans

against the ruling party and walked out of the Assembly as a protest. The stunning

anti- government attitude of the MQM mortified the PML (N). The President of

MQM, Altaf Husain gave a threat to ruling party that if they could not fulfill their

promises,80 MQM would quit the alliance. Beside MQM’s threat, Benazir Bhutto

also alleged the government, incompetent and demanded new election to get the
 311

country out of crisis.81 Now PML (N) the ruling party surrounded in difficulties.

After losing one alliance partner (ANP) she could not afford the loss of second

coalition partner in the presence of political rival (PPP). MQM again threat the PML

(N) that if government did not fulfill their demands they would leave from coalition.

Negotiations were started and after many rounds a new pact between two parties

came into being. On April 30, 1999 the administration extracted all cases contrary to

MQM workers and paid the recompenses to families who misplaced their families. 82

That act of government was criticized by opposition who argued that if the MQM

workers were right than what would be the credibility of operation. Is it unjust or

not?

On August 14, 1998 once again the rift between MQM and PML (N) arose

and MQM decided to take herself away from the Central Government. Chief

Minister Sindh tried to convince MQM and on his struggle, MQM agreed to sit on

treasure bench without joining Federal government. That rift enhanced when one

MPA with seven other MQM workers were arrested by Federal government in the

case of murder of Hakeem Saeed.83 On October 30 Central Government enforced

“Governor Rule in Sindh” and Provincial Government was suspended. MQM

criticized that act of Federal government and alleged that Central government was

trying to convert Karachi into a Federal colony. 85 After imposing Governor Rule

Federal government started operations against terrorism. MQM and PPP criticized

that operation. That governor rule suspended the power of Speaker and D. Speaker

too. Sindh legislature criticized the Federal government to interfere the provincial

matters. They declared that action against autonomy of provinces, violation of

 312

Constitution and endangered the federation. 86 On November 16 the session of Sindh

Provincial Assembly was scheduled. Government tried to stop that session but

legislatures cross the obstacles and staged a sit-in in front of Assembly. On January

12 1999 Supreme Court restored the power of Speaker and Deputy Speaker 87 which

appreciated by all opposition political parties of Sindh Assembly. On 23 rd January

central government announced to form military courts88 throughout the country

because these courts had worked in Karachi very well and had played an important

and major role in peace making in the city. A petition was filed against these military

courts in Supreme Court and a nine member bench of Supreme Court declared in

their verdict that these military courts were illegal, unconstitutional and unlawful.

The opposition especially MQM and PPP appreciated that verdict of Supreme Court.

On June 9, 1999 Mamnoon Husain appointed as Governor of Sindh while

Ghous Ali Shah was appointed Premier’s advisor on Sindh affairs. Federal

government launched a new setup in Sindh and authorized premier’ advisor instead

of Governor to imposed policies. Acting Speaker of Sindh Assembly had declared

that new set up, unconstitutional and against the provincial autonomy. PPP and

MQM also criticized that undemocratic set up.89 On June 24 Ghous Ali Shah

presented the provincial budget in a press conference instead of Sindh Assembly and

opposition parties PPP, PTI, MQM and JI condemned that executive budget. 90

7.6 Conflicting Issues

With getting marvelous triumph in election, Nawaz Sharif became the Head

of Cabinet of Pakistan which gave a new birth to old rivalry among PML and PPP.
 313

Being an opposition party PPP adopted the policy of confrontation with ruling

parties especially with PML and intentionally, decided to oppose every step or policy

of government. It created conflicts between these two parties. PPP strictly opposed

the policies of government which she adopted after the nuclear explosions even

when PML tries to impose Quraan and Sunnah as supreme law of the country PPP

again opposed it which created conflicts between them which could not be settled till

the end of PML government.

7.6.1 Quran and Sunnah as Supreme Law

Nawaz Sharif wanted to get absolute political and religious power. He was

eager to imposed Islamic laws in Pakistan. Although once, in previous tenure, he

tried to make Islamic laws as supreme laws of the country but due to lack of two

third majority, he could not do so. Now he had clear majority in Parliament so on

August 28, 1998 he announced to bring fifteenth amendment in Constitution under

which “Quran and Sunnah” would be the declared as supreme law of the country.

The bill suggested modifying Article 239 of the Constitution for providing several

measures for the way of the amendment in the Legislature. 91 It had distant the

condition of two-third majority to amend the Constitution in the matters of Quran

and Sunnah.92 Prime Minister desired to amend the Constitution but was also afraid

of criticism from opposition. He required the moral and political support of religious

political parties and their leadership especially support of Ulema to hold the

opponents. His reservations came true when the bill was cruelly appraised by the

NGOs, human rights organizations, opposition and even some members of his own

ruling parties.93 ANP declared the bill against the provincial autonomy. Justice
 314

Sajjad Ali Shah declared that amendment useless because all prevision mentioned in

that bill were already part of the Constitution and there was no need to new laws.

However Nawaz Sharif tabled the bill and after adoption in National Assembly it

sent to Senate for further procedure.94

7.6.2 Nuclear Tests and Reaction of Political Parties

India exploded three nuclear devices on May 11, 1998 and after two days two

more atomic tests were piloted by India. These nuclear tests disturbed the balance of

power between India and Pakistan. After explosion Indian attitude converted into

aggressiveness and Indian Ministers started threatening Pakistan. In response eleven

political parties including PPP demanded instant nuclear tests from Pakistan side. 95

President of USA tried his best to prevented Pakistan from conducting nuclear test

but on May 28, 1998 Pakistan exploded five nuclear devices at the hill of Chagi.

According to Dr. Faqir Khan;

“Muhammad Arshad, who had designed the trigger mechanism and therefore

had been selected for that job, pushed the button. Within thirty second, the black

granite of the RasKoh Hills at Chagai turned white as a result of the tremendous heat

of the explosion. Pakistan had matched the Indian five to five.” 96

After nuclear explosion Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif affirmed “Today we

have settled a score.” 97 Before explosion emergency was imposed and fundamental

rights were suspended with Presidential order. Opposition parties including PPP,

BNP, JUI, PPP (B) and ANP criticized the Presidential order. On June 10, 1998

joint session of Parliament approved the Presidential order. Farooq Leghari, Imran
 315

Khan, Ajmal Khatak, Ghulam Qadir Jatio and Manzoor Watto challenged that

proclamation and Supreme Court endorsed the imposition of emergency but

suspension of fundamental rights was declared illegal. 98 Sanctions were enforced on

Pakistan by international community after the explosion.

7.7 Conflicting Relationship among Institutions

The confrontation between political parties and other institutions was remained at its

peak during the whole ruling period of Nawaz Sharif. After taking the responsibility

of Premier he tried to snub every prominent institution of the country which had

challenged his authority in previous regime or could challenge his present regime.

He deteriorated every institution to show parliament’s supremacy. Judiciary,

Military, President even opposition tries to resist against his aggressive attitude but

failed. This confrontation not only created problems for his own government but also

created political anarchy in the country which resulted in imposing of Martial Law in

1999.

7.7.1 Confrontation between Judiciary and Ruling Party

The rift between PPP administration and Judicatory on the selection of

Supreme Court adjudicators was the main issue in the regime of PPP, and that

confrontation continued till the arrival of Nawaz Sharif as Prime Minister. On

August 20, 1997 Justice Sajjad Ali sent the name of five High Court judges for their

promotion through a letter to Federal Law Secretary. On same day, Central

government issued a notification and reduced the numbers of the judges in Supreme

Court. That notification was issued without the consultation of Chief Justice
 316

Supreme Court99 who declared it unconstitutional100 and challenged it in the Supreme

Court. The meetings between Judiciary and Premier started and in the last, Premier

agreed to withdraw his notification and on appointment of Supreme Court

nominees.101 In October, the Premier-Judiciary confrontation increased when CJ

Sajjad Ali left to Saudi Arabia to perform Umrah and Justice Mian Ajmal took the

oath as Acting Chief Justice of Pakistan and exposed that CJ Sajjad Ali did not

discuss the name of judges with other judges for nominating the Supreme Court

Bench.102 Moreover, seven judges of Supreme Court had summoned the meeting of

full court to talk over different issues. Justice Sajjad cut short his stay and ordered

the annulment of meeting. After few days these seven judges submitted same

requisition again and Justice Sajjad again rejected it. The split between judiciary

itself increased when five defied judges conveyed their divergence with Chief Justice

through a letter to President.103

On October 25 Nasrullah Baber with another companion filed a plea in

Supreme Court in which he challenged the legitimacy of Fourteenth Amendment

passed by PML (N) government.104 After four day’s hearings Supreme Court

adjourned the Fourteenth Amendment. On the same day PML (N) government

approved a resolution highlighting the sovereignty of the Legislature over all the

structures of the state. National Assembly approved that resolution by sidestepping

the rules of business and many legislatures criticized the annulment of Fourteenth

Amendment which was the destruction of Article 68. 105 Prime Minister himself

criticized that decision and declared it unconstitutional and illegal which was

considered as contempt of court.106 On October 31 the confrontation between

 317

Premier and Judiciary resolved when PML (N) government accepted the approvals

of Chief Justice.107 But soon PML (N) government passed a bill in the Lower House

which amended the Contempt of Court Act 1976. Next day upper house passed the

bill and sent it to President for final signature that refused to sign it. In the meantime

bill was challenged through petition and President pleaded that he would sign the bill

according to court advice. On November 20, court advised him not to sign. Ruling

party decided to impeach President but COAS met with Chief Executive, Chief

Justice and Premier to resolve the matter. Hamid Khan stated that;

“In the meantime on November 18 a petition was filed against the

unlawful appointment of Chief Justice in Quetta Circuit Bench of Supreme
Court. Same petition were filed in Peshawar Circuit Bench of Supreme
Court and in Peshawar High Court. Quetta Circuit Bench of Supreme
Court seized Chief Justice in abeyance till further order and next day
Peshawar Circuit Bench of Supreme Court endorsed that orders and Saeed
uz Zaman Siddique (as most senior judge of Supreme Court) was
appointed for the hearing of important cases. New Chief Justice
constituted a 15 member full bench to hear all appeals against the selection
of Chief Justice Sajjad Ali Shah.” 108

On November 28 contempt cases against Nawaz Sharif was set in Supreme

Court and on hearing time PML (N) political workers attacked on the Supreme Court

and tried to step down the Chief Justice. The proceeding was suspended after 45

minutes due to turmoil.109 Justice Sajjad Ali demanded to President and COAS for

deployment of military in Supreme Court for security of Judges. President referred

that demand to Head of Cabinet and asked him to deploy security guards for Chief

Justice’s security. Nawaz Sharif refused to accept President’s orders and make a

speech to the nation on November 30 and alleged the President and opposition for
 318

that crisis. On December 2 a three member Bench Presided by CJ Sajjad Ali Shah

after brief hearing, deferred the 13th amendment and at the same time, ten members

bench headed by saeed uz Zaman Siddique detained the said order in abeyance and

ordered the Chief Executive not to act on ruling. President sent a message through

Chief of Army Staff to Chief Justice of supreme Court, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah not to

suspend 13th amendment. The full bench also delivered detached order to assign

Mian Ajmal as the Chief Justice who took the oath on December 23.110 Same day

Premier Farooq Leghari met with Military Chief General Jahangir Karamat and

informed him about the confrontation between Head of Cabinet and Chief Justice.

He also accused ruling party and stated that he could dissolve the assemblies if Chief

of Army Staff agreed but General Jahangir refused to accept that idea. On the other

side ruling party decided to impeach President and prepare a motion with hundred

signatures of members of Parliament. When President heard about that motion he

himself resigned instantly.111 The next Presidential election held on December 31,

1997.112 Twenty Nine candidates participated in that election including Rafique

Tarar (PML -N) and Aftab Shabaan Mirani (PPP). Rafique Tarar obtained 374 votes

and elected as President of Pakistan while his opponent Aftab Shahban Mirani could

secured only 58 votes.113

7.7.2 Confrontation with Army

Nawaz Sharif with his landslide triumph in election wanted to become sole

power. After getting clear majority he adopted dictatorial and authoritative attitude in

politics and in government affairs. On October 5, 1998 COAS General Karamat,

while delivering a lecture to Navy officials at the “Pakistan Naval War College” in
 319

Lahore,114 proposed the establishment of “National Security Council”, maintained by

a group of mentors and think tanks. 115 Several political parties appreciated that

suggestion but reigning party PML (N) disliked that idea. Nawaz Sharif felt that

COAS was interfering into the matters of his government by signifying army

involvement in civilian administration. 116 In fact, the Army high command, at that

point was distressed by Nawaz, exclusively the mounting alienation in the smaller

provinces and division along regional lines….and the worsening economic

conditions that had started harmfully disturbing the professional and corporate

benefits of the Army.117 Confrontation increased and Nawaz Sharif compelled COAS

General Jahangir Karamat to initiate request for premature retirement from the

services. Jahangir requested and Prime Minister accepted his request for premature

retirement. On October 7, 1998 General Pervaiz Musharraf was selected as COAS by

superseding the Lt. Gen. Kuli Khan who was most the senior officer in the army. 118

Kargil was a mountain area in occupied Kashmir. In May 1999 a group of

Mujahedeen acquired the control of few Indian mountains peaks in district Kargil.

India alleged Pakistan for interfering into the Kargil’s Peaks through so called

Mujahedeen which was violation of line of control. The Indian diplomats used that

battle for defaming Pakistan and separating it from the international community. 119

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif tried to clear Pakistan’s position at international level

and arranged meetings with USA’s President to handle the situation. Nawaz Sharif

also wrote letters to the head of international peace maker institutions especially

heads of Government-8 countries to explain Pakistan’s position on that issue. COAS

General Pervaiz Musharraf alleged India for that worse situation. Nawaz Sharif tried
 320

to convince India to settle the issue by bilateral talks but India did not want to lose

that chance to defame Pakistan and she strictly refused to negotiate with Pakistan on

that issue. Pakistan contact with Bill Clinton who made an agreement in absence of

India and forced Pakistan for withdrew its forces from Kargil immediately without

any condition.120

The relations amongst the Premier Nawaz Sharif and the COAS General

Pervaiz Musharraf were anxious on Kargil issue. 121 Nawaz Sharif alleged that the

Kargil operation was held without taking him confidence and it was sole decision of

COAS while Musharraf asserted that Prime Minister knew everything about that

operation and he was on board.122 He explained that Kargil operation was victory for

Pakistan and that operation was conducted by “Kashmiri Mujahedeen” who occupied

the peaks and gave heavy loss to Indian army. COAS’s that explanation could not

satisfied Prime Minister and severe misunderstanding developed between two head

of institutions.

7.7.3 Imposition of Martial Law and End of Democratic Rule

Kargil issue created serious difference between Prime Minister and COAS.

These conflicts boosted when Nawaz Sharif took final step against COAS and issued

the order of retirement in his absence and appointed Lt. Gen. Zia ud Din as new

Commander-in-Chief of Armed Forces. On that time General Musharraf was in Sri

Lanka on an official visit and coming back to Pakistan. 123 He was in Airplane when

Nawaz Sharif issued the order of his termination from COAS and instructed civil

aviation authority to not allow the airplane carrying to land at Karachi airfield and
 321

turn away it elsewhere; nonetheless the airplane was hazardously low on fuel as the

pilot, due to the puzzling messages from Karachi control tower, was encircling the

city. Soon the military took over the control tower and the airplane landed at Karachi

airfield.124 That act of Prime Minister annoyed the senior Generals of army and they

took the charge of PTV and Nawaz Sharif was placed under house arrest. Army was

deployed on important buildings and PML (N) government was toppled under the

charges of interfering in the affairs of army, causing disagreement in their ranks and

politicizing and subverting the army. On October 14, 1999 General Pervaiz

Musharraf took the charge of Chief Executive under the PCO and imposed

emergency in the country. The Parliament and all four provincial assemblies were

adjourned; all four Governors, central and provincial Ministers and advisors were

terminated.125 General Pervaiz Musharraf declared that he imposed Military Rule in

the vast benefit of the masses and Military Rule was the only option to safe Pakistan

from internal and external threats. 126

Conclusion

The third so-called democratic regime of Nawaz Sharif ended with the

enforcement of third Military Rule in Pakistan. In that period the role of

establishment was minor while civil bureaucracy remained under the control of

political representatives. The heavy mandate in Parliament, weak opposition, total

control on all institutions including, Judiciary and Military and popularity in the

masses after nuclear explosion made Nawaz Sharif arrogant. He adopted dictatorial

style and overpowered his opponents one by one. He interfered in the matters of

every powerful institution and tried to manage it according to his own needs. Benazir
 322

Bhutto, CJ Sajjad Ali Shah, General Jahangir Kramat, Chief Executive Leghari and

many top-level personalities were either forced to obey his orders or had to vacate

their offices. Politically he required none of the support from other political parties to

run the government. Constitutionally he had the authority to modify the Constitution

with the help of coalition partners, according to his desires. He was in position to

take step for reinforcement of the political norms and democratic values but he

wasted his powers in confrontations with other institutions and in the end he lost his

government and forced to exile. Politically it was the most crucial era when people

of Pakistan voted for democracy and gave a chance to PML (N) to flourish and

strengthen democracy but Nawaz Sharif adopted such a confrontation policies which

led him to collapse and once again permitted democracy to be conquered by military.
 323

References and Notes

1
In the shape of fourteenth amendment which abolished the power of President to dissolve assembly.
2
In the bench of “seven Judges six judges endorsed the verdict while one judge wrote different note.”
3
Malik Meraj Khalid was born in.1916 in the outskirts of Lahore. He started his political career as a
member of Majlis-e-Ahrar. Later on he was quite active during Ayub era when he joined the
Convention Muslim League. Afterwards he joined Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and was among the founding
members of PPP. After his election to the National Assembly in 1970 he became Federal Minister for
Agriculture. For a brief period, he also served as Chief Minister of the Punjab. In 1988, when
democracy was restored he was elected Speaker of the National Assembly. Thereafter he could not
secure any niche in the Parliament as he kept loosing elections. His acceptance of a rector-ship of the
Islamic University Islamabad virtually marked the end of his political career. However he entered into
lime-light again after he was made care-taker Prime Minister following the dismissal of Benazir
Bhutto on 5 November 1996.”
4
http://pu.edu.pk/images/journal/HistoryPStudies/PDF-FILES/17-Zahid_V28_no2.pdfAccessed on
Feb. 11, 2016.
5
He was brother-in-law of President Farooq Leghari.
6
The renowned economist “Shahid Javed Burki, was given the portfolio of finance, who was
instrumental in introducing major economic and financial reforms. He undertook several measures to
stablise the foreign exchanges and bring down fiscal deficit to the 4 percent of GDP as demanded by
IMF.” Moreover, “broadening of the tax base to include agricultural incomes, changes in the
management of the state owned banks, and the establishment of a Resolution Trust Corporation to
deal with bad debts” were the important steps that had been taken by the care-taker government.
7
Ahmed Rashid., Breaking up the Party, The Herald, Karachi, November, 1996, 39.
8
The Pakistan Times, Islamabad, April 8, 1997.
9
Tahir Kamran., Democracy and Governance in Pakistan, (Lahore: South Asia Partnership-Pakistan,
2008), 28.
10
Ibid.
11
Dawn, Karachi, December 6, 1996.
12
Dawn, Karachi, November 15, 1996.
13
Dawn, Karachi, November 20, 1996.
14
Dawn, Karachi, January 5, 1998.
15
Tahir Kamran “Democracy and Governance in Pakistan.” 27.
16
Exclusionary model is seat adjustment among parties in which a party does not field a candidate in
exchange for the other party leaving another constituency opens for its candidate. For more detail see
Waseem, Political parties in Pakistan.
17
Dawn, January 12, 1997.
18
Nawa e Waqt, January 22, 1997.
19
Pakistan People’s Party, Mir Murtaza Bhuttoi group also see Jassart, January 22, 1997.
20
Jafri., Pakistan, 793.
21
Syed Talat Husain., PML (N) ‘s Manisfesto, News, January 5, 1997.
22
Syed Mushahid Husain, “Muslim League ki Siasat,” Nawa I Waqt January 3, 1997.
23
Faqir Khan, “Revival of Democracy in Pakistan 1988-1999: An Analysis,”(Pakistan Journal of
Social Sciences (PJSS) Vol. 35, No. 1, 2015), 201-212
 324

24
Dawn, Karachi, February 14, 1997.
25
Imran Khan, interview by Ashraf Mumtaz, Dawn, Karachi, January 18, 1997.
26
Daily Jasarat Karachi, January 12, 1997.
27
Daily Jasarat Karachi, February 5 1997.
28
Faqir Khan, Revival of Democracy in Pakistan 1988-1999: An Analysis, 219.
29
Tahir Kamran., Democracy and Governance in Pakistan, 29.
30
Faqir Khan., Revival of Democracy in Pakistan 1988-1999: An Analysis, 311.
31
Muhammad Waseem., Pakistan Election 1997; One Step Forward, in Pakistan 1997, (edited by
crage Baxter and Charles Kennedy, 12 Boulder: West View Press. 1998), 414.
32
Tahir Kamran., Democracy and Governance in Pakistan, 27.
33
The News, Lahore, February 5, 1997.
34
1997: General Elections Report, Vol.1, (Islamabad: Election Commission of Pakistan, n.d), 234.
35
Sartaj Aziz., Between Dreams and Realities: Some Milestones in Pakistan’s History, 162.
36
Jung, February 17, 1997.
37
Tahir Kamran., Democracy and Governance in Pakistan, 24.
38
Jafri., Pakistan, 794.
39
Jung, February 26, 1997.
40
Sartaj Aziz., Between Dreams and Realities: Some Milestones in Pakistan’s History, 162.
41
Dawn, Karachi, February 21, 1997.
42
Dawn, Karachi, February 23, 1997.
43
Hamid Khan., Constitutional and Political History of Pakistan, 817.
44
Dawn, Karachi, February 23, 1997.
45
Ibid.
46
Shaikh Rasheed Ahmad, Interview with Kamran khan, News, February 28, 1997.
47
Dawn, Karachi, May 6, 1999.
48
Dawn, Karachi, May 26, 1999.
49
Paul Ernest lenze, Jr., Civil Military Relation in Islmic Democracies: Military Intervention and
Withdrawal in Algeria, Pakistan and Turkey, (Phd. Thesis, Washington State University, Department
of Political Science, 2011), 86.
50
Safdar Mahmood., Political Roots and Development: 1947-99, 312.
51
Shuja Nawaz., Crossed swords Pakistan its army and the war within, 487.
52
Ibid.
53
Dawn,Karachi, May 8, 1997.
54
Ibid.
55
Dawn, Karachi, April 1, 1998.
56
Dawn, Karachi, June 29, 1998.
57
Dawn, Karachi, July 4, 1998.
58
Altaf Hussain, interview by Idrees Bakhtiar, The Herald, Karachi, November-December, 1998.
59
Dawn, Karachi, May 20, 1997.
60
Under the Act “the special courts were set up to try heinous offences. The Act extended great
authorities to the law enforcement agencies. The police was permitted to go into homes without
warrants and to shoot and kill anyone on a doubt that he was involved in the sectarian violence.”
61
Sections 5 (2) (i), 10, 14, 19 (10) (b), 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 35 and 37. The Supreme Court
explained that these provisions were in contrary to the articles of the Constitution and needed crucial
amendments.
62
Dawn, Karachi, March 19, 1998.
63
The composition of the “Khidmat Committees in provinces was as follows; 157 in the Punjab, 71 in
NWFP, 105 in Sindh and 94 in Balochistan. The range of every committee was from 9 to 11. The
minorities and women were included in the committees too. Dawn, Karachi, April 14, 1998.”
64
The functions of “these committees were to examine police performance, provide justice and relief
to people, eradicate corruption, to take action on people’s complaint regarding utility bills, to promote
the message of pollution free environment and cleanliness, enforcement of marriage Act and
promotion of positive activities such as, games and cultural shows. The committees were provided
with the power to instigate inquiry against any corrupt official from grade 1 to 16.
65
Dawn, Karachi, April 18, 1998.
66
Dawn, Karachi, March 12, 1999.
 325

67
Ibid.
68
Dawn, Karachi, May 3, 1999.
69
Dawn, Karachi, June 7, 1999.
70
Dawn, Karachi, March 7, 1999.
71
Dawn, Karachi, November 27, 1998.
72
Amer Ahmed Khan., Desperately Seeking Solutions, The Herald, Karachi, October 1999, 34.
73
The Pakistan Times, Islamabad, January 19, 1998.
74
Dawn, Karachi, February 26, 1998.
75
Dawn, Karachi, February 27, 1998.
76
Dawn, Karachi, June 12, 1998.
77
Sajjad Ali Shah., Law Courts in a Glass House: An Autobiograph,” (Karachi: Oxford University
Press, 2001), 568.
78
Dawn, Karachi, August 2, 1998.
79
Dawn, Karachi, August 3, 1998.
80
The issues of serious concern for the MQM were “no-go areas and large killings of its workers. The
MQM believed that opponents of the MQM were employed by the agencies in eastern part of the
Karachi district against its workers. The MQM (H) declined that the agencies had supported it against
the MQM.”
81
Dawn, Karachi, February 27, 1998.
82
Dawn, Karachi, May 1, 1998.
83
Hakim Muhammad Saeed was “a former Governor of Sindh, an eminent scholar and educationist
who had dedicated his life to the cause of education especially of small children.”
84
Dawn, Karachi, October 31, 1998.
85
Dawn, Karachi, November 16, 1998.
86
Dawn, Karachi, January 13, 1999.
87
An ordinance was promulgated by the Federal government on November 20, 1998, titled as
Pakistan Armed Forces (Acting in Aid of Civil Power) Ordinance, 1998, invoking Article 245 of the
Constitution. The ordinance was extended to all those areas of Karachi where armed forces were
working in aid of civil authority. The ordinance authorized the armed forces to arrest, interrogate and
do trials of terrorists and offenders without granting bails. The Section 3 of the ordinance had
delegated the COAS or any other official designated by him (not under the rank of Brigadier or
equivalent) to set up military courts. The military court had been authorized to try civil offenders. The
military courts were bound to decide the case in three days later it was decided that courts could take
some more days if it considered it necessary. The ordinance mentioned that appeal against the
decision of the military court could only be filed in any court. On November 26, 1998 the President
notified another ordinance to amend the aforementioned ordinance, authorizing the armed forces to
investigate terrorism cases.” The amended ordinance had amended the Section 5 of the “Pakistan
Armed Forces (Acting in Aid of Civil Power) Ordinance, 1998 which mentioned that the armed forces
might supervise investigation of any case but that too on the direction of the Federal government.
88
Dawn, Karachi, June 20, 1999.
89
Muhammad Munir., The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan: Being a Commentary on
the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, (Lahore: PLD Publishers, 1999), 502-503.
90
According to the amendment “the bill related to matters of Quran and Sunnah may be presented in
any house of the Parliament and if it passed by the majority then could be refer to the other house. If
the bill was passed by the majority of the members without any amendment then it would be
conveyed to the President. If the bill did not get passed in the house or passed with amendment then it
should considered in the joint sitting. Another provision of the proposed bill mentioned that the
Federal government would be responsible for the enforcement of zakat, salat and eradication of
corruption. It was also bound on the government to carry out amer bil ma’roof wa nahi anal munkar’
(Quran 3:110), and to provide social and economic justice in the light of Quran and Sunnah.”
91
Sajjad Ali Shah., Law Courts in a Glass House: An Autobiography, 572.
92
Ibid.
93
Dawn, Karachi, October 9, 1998.
94
Sartaj Aziz., Some Milestones in Pakistan’s History, 193.
95
Faqir Khan., Revival of Democracy in Pakistan 1988-1999: An Analysis, 322.
96
Shuja Nawaz., Crossed swords Pakistan its army and the war within, 437.
 326

97
Dawn, Karachi, July 29, 1998.
98
Sajjad Ali Shah., Law Courts in a Glass House, Dawn, Karachi, August 23, 1997.
99
The downsizing was made “without consulting the Chief Justice. Nawaz did not want to appoint
judges on recommendation of Justice Sajjad Ali Shah though under the Constitution the
recommendation of the Chief Justice was obligatory on executive for appointing the judges. The
judiciary had opposed the institution of special courts and took suo motu action on Karachi situation
which convinced the government that judiciary could cause difficulties for it; hence a move to restrict
judiciary.”
100
Dawn, Karachi, September 11, 1997.
101
Sajjad Ali Shah believed that “being the Chief Justice of Pakistan he had no obligation to consult
the senior judges in the matter of nomination of judges to the Supreme Court Bench.”
102
Hamid Khan., Constitutional and Political History of Pakistan, (Karachi: Journal of Public
Administration and Governance ISSN 2161-7104 2015, Vol. 5, No. 12001), 823.
103
Dawn, Karachi, October 26, 1997.
104
The Article 68 of the Constitution prevented the legislators from criticizing the conduct of any
judge of the superior courts.
105
Hamid Khan., Political History of Pakistan, 823.
106
On October 31, 1997 Nawaz had address the nation from the floor of National Assembly blaming
that “the executive-judiciary confrontation was a conspiracy which had ended and the government had
agreed to implement the recommendations of the Chief Justice in national interest.”
107
Hamid Khan., Political History of Pakistan, 825.
108
Shaikh Rasheed Ahmad, interview by Mazhar Abbas, ARY News, “Do Tok”, May 30, 2010.
109
Mian Ajmal took oath as the Chief Justice because 10- member bench decided unanimously that
previous appointment of Mian Ajmal was illegal and unconstitutional.”
110
The Pakistan Times, Islamabad, December 3, 1997.
111
Jung, January 1, 1998.
112
The Pakistan Times, Islamabad, January 1, 1998.
113
http://pu.edu.pk/images/journal/HistoryPStudies/PDF-FILES/17-Zahid_V28_no2.pdf Accessed on
02 June, 2017
114
He added “that through that council, decision making would be institutionalized and that issues
such as economy, internal security, sense of deprivation in smaller provinces and relations with
bordering countries namely Afghanistan, China, India and Iran, and United States of America (USA)
would be tackled immediately.”
115
Shuja Nawaz., Crossed swords Pakistan its army and the war within, 498.
116
Hassan Askari Rizvi., Military State and Society in Pakistan, 231.
117
Dawn, Karachi, October 8, 1998.
118
Shahid M. Amin, “Kargil: The Unanswerable Question”, Dawn, Karachi, July 25, 1999.
119
Hamid Khan., Political History of Pakistan, 932.
120
Faqir Khan., Revival of Democracy in Pakistan 1988-1999: An Analysis, 322.
121
Pervez Musharraf interview by Kamran Shahid, Express News, “Frontline Exclusive”, October 4,
2011.
122
Hassan Abbas., Pakistan drifts into extremism, Allah, Army and America’s war on terror, (New
Delhi: Pentagon Press, 2005), 211.
123
Saeed Mehdi interview by Mazhar Abbas, ARY News, “Do Tok”, May 30, 2010, part. 2,
124
The News, Karachi, October 15, 1999.
125
Pervaiz Musharraf., In the line of Fire, (Lahore: Jung Publishers, 2008), 231.
126
Khalid Mehmood Arif., The Role of Military in Politics, (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2001),
109.
 327

Conclusion

This study investigates party politics in Pakistan from 1985 to 1999 by

focusing on its origins and growth and how far it has created a democratic culture in

Pakistan. In modern democracies political parties form the nucleus of democracy and

both are part and parcel for developing the democratic culture, tolerance in society

and for bringing about socio-economic development in the country. The underlying

hypothesis of the study is that party politics in Pakistan has remained immature,

irresponsible and undemocratic therefore, democracy in Pakistan could not flourish

as it did in India and other democratic countries in the post-colonial period. The

study endeavors to find answer to the following queries: What is the concept of

major political parties and how they behave within the party and with other parties;

what is their behavior when they are in power or they are in opposition. The main

argument of the study is that political parties and their main leaders failed to develop

modus operandi to respect each other’s mandate and as a result anti-democratic

 328

forces used their conflict as an excuse to change government or imposed Martial

Laws.

Since the country’s birth in 1947 political party system in Pakistan has

remained weak. The organizing body of founding political party All India Muslim

League dissolved immediately after the creation of Pakistan and Quaid e Azam

altered the name of previous All India Muslim League in Pakistan Muslim League.

From beginning, Quaid Azam tried to separate the government administration from

political influence and after taking the oath as first Governor General of Pakistan; he

left the headship of Pakistan Muslim League and Ch. Khaleeq uz Zaman was

appointed as first president of Pakistan Muslim League. The newly formed PML

tried to lead the country but was prevented by strong feudal lords and powerful

bureaucratic elites from working independently. Later the military bureaucracy also

entered in politics and since then has been a regular fixture of the politics. Since

1947, twenty nine out of thirty eight elected Provincial Assemblies were prematurely

dissolved. During this period, forty four out of seventy seven Chief Ministers were

dismissed by federal government and another thirteen resigned; they failed to win

support in the Provincial Assemblies. Unfortunately, Pakistan took twenty three

years to hold her first National elections and this too, surprisingly, under a military

dictator, General Yehya Khan. Surprisingly, Z A Bhutto’s government completed its

first tenure but in the next election, allegations of rigging weakened his rule which

enabled than Chief of Army Staff General Zia ul Haq to impose military rule and ban

all political activities in the country. This history shows the weakness of political

structure of Pakistan.
 329

The period of 1985 to 1999 witnessed different shades of democracies in

Pakistan. After the first phase of Gen. Zia’s purely military rule (1977-1985), to

satisfy the political community’s demands, he experimented with “controlled

democracy” but under the full shadow of military control, with the premiership of

Mohammad Khan Junejo (1985-1988). After the death of Zia in 1988, General

Aslam Baig became the COAS and Ghulam Ishaq Khan was nominated as the Chief

Executive of Pakistan. He introduced a new term for the kind of the then functional

government, “Guided Democracy”, during the first premiership of Benazir Bhutto

(1988-1990) which was politically guided by the Military and President, both

remaining behind the scenes. After the dissolution of the PPP Assemblies in 1990

“Presidential form of democracy” was introduced by President Ghulam Ishaq Khan

along with help of the Army Chief. Nawaz Sharif (1990-1993) and Benazir Bhutto

(1993-1997) ran their governments under the supervision and guidance of strong

Chief Executives, G. I. Khan and Farooq Leghari; and when they tried to disobey

President both were forced to vacate the Premier House. In the end “authoritative

democracy” was introduced by Nawaz Sharif (1997-1999) under which a weak, and

symbolic President named Rafique Tarar was appointed as Chief Executive of

Pakistan and a moderate and democratic lover Military Chief, General Jahangir

Karamat was appointed as COAS under his premiership, who later resigned from his

office following a dispute with authoritative Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif instead of

reinstating to Martial Law.

Third Martial Law, imposed by General Zia, came to an end after the party-

less elections in 1985. In the result of this non-party based election; Muhammad
 330

Khan Junejo was appointed as Prime Minister of Pakistan who started party politics

in Parliament after the refurbishment of Pakistan Muslim League on official level.

The Election 1985 was a devised to deprive the political parties from coming into

power and control the political system and democracy by the Establishment. In 1985,

the elections were held after 8 years of the dictatorial period under the dictatorship of

Zia and some democratic lovers gave all the credit to MRD parties that their protest

and resistance movement forced Zia to conduct the election. It may be partially right

but the real picture was that Zia longed to show the international community a

democratic picture of Pakistan. He was longed to hide his Martial Law rule under a

democratic cover. He never affords to impose real democracy in Pakistan because

the real and original democratic system could become a threat for his own tyranny

rule; so he decided to conduct the election on the party-less basis and imposed such a

strict and severe restrictions on political activities which could not be bearable for

any political party; so according to his expectations, MRD went to boycott and her

action left the political arena of Pakistan open for second and third leadership of

political parties which was consisted on local, regional and ethnic type leaders.

Throughout the ruling period, Zia tried to remain to stay away from direct

involvement in political activities. He imposed restrictions on political parties and

allowed only those small groups of political parties for their political activities which

reinforced his rule. Pakistan Muslim League (Pagara) and jamaat-i-Islami along with

other minor religious-based political parties were allowed to take part in all political

activities. But in these elections these political groups could not succeed and lost

their seats. Besides these minor political groups, several members of Majlis e Shora
 331

and few cabinet members of Zia’s cabinet also lost their seats. That showed the

impartiality of government in elections. President Zia did not need to manipulate the

elections because after the boycott of MRD there was no chance that regional and

ethnic-based newly elected split groups could form a strong opposition.

As was expected and devised, Zia created a political class with a different

political approach which helped him justified his military coup and actions taken

thenceforth. After elections, the National Assembly filled with un-experienced, local

based and party less new entrants. These newly elected members have no previous

political experience even they have no any political vision or any political agenda.

Without any manifesto or plan how can they prepare National Policies or they can

pass the legislative bills. These untrained politicians were a blessing for the

dictatorial period of President Zia. He used their disabilities and presented the 8 th

amendment bill in the Parliament which was approved by the house without any

delay. No strong voice arose in the favor of any change, modification or alteration in

that amendment bill. It was such a democracy which Zia wanted and he succeeded in

his goals.

After the revival of PML by Prime Minister Muhammad Khan Junejo at the

official level, some representatives joined her while others remained aloof; so the

National Assembly split into two factions of representatives in which one ruling

group consisted of the PML members while the other group automatically

constituted the opposition. With this step the party politics started again in the

Parliament. However, the new political show ended soon as Junejo tried to take

political liberties and began to challenge Zia’s writ of Military rule. As a result Zia
 332

dismissed Junejo’s government along with all elected Assemblies. Through his

actions Zia showed that he still preferred strong Military supremacy. Following his

dismissal; Junejo started preparations for new elections. In the meanwhile President

Zia died in an airplane crash which altered the whole political scenario. G. I. Khan

became new Chief Executive of Pakistan with the backing of the Military. Army

supported him because he assured them his loyalty. The new COAS, General Aslam

Baig, was not inclined towards imposing another Martial Law for fear of a strong

public backlash after years of military rule so he turned GI Khan into his front man.

The resistant movement of MRD against Zia’s dictatorial rule had created awareness

among the masses and they had begun to demand political rights. Zia had wanted a

yes man but Junejo had his own ideas on how to run his government and eventually

got dismissed.

Zia held election for its own purposes and nominated Muhammad Khan

Junejo as Prime Minister; because he felt that this gentle and old politician will not

be able to differ with his policies; but Muhammad Khan Junejo stunned him with his

political tactics. He not only forced Zia to lift Martial Law but also compelled him to

obey the decisions of elected Parliament. Junejo started Parliamentary politics under

his dictatorial umbrella and tried to empower newly elected weak and scattered

Parliament. It was political diplomacy of Junejo that he successfully spent three

years with a strong dictator who was not only an authoritative President but have the

portfolio of COAS too. Junejo planted the seed of democracy which became a tree in

few years.
 333

After the demise of President Zia in an air crash, Ghulam Ishaq Khan was

nominated as President of Pakistan and he conducted fresh elections in 1988 on party

basis. Before election the political activities in the country reached at their peak. The

momentum of election activated all political parties especially Pakistan People’s

Party and its opponent Pakistan Muslim League who announced to contest election

under the banner of Islami Jamhori Ittehad. In Sindh Mutihada Qaumi Movement

was active while Jamaat e Isalmi, Awami National Party, and Jamiat Ulma e Islam

participated in that election through either an electoral alliance or on a seat-

adjustment basis. All political parties presented their election manifestos to attract

the voters. The elections of 1988 resulted in a split mandate and produced a weak

Parliament, in which the largest political party was PPP with 92 seats in a house of

237. It was forced into an alliance for forming a government. The President and

Military were both were happy with the diluted strength of the PPP and the split

electoral mandate of various parties as then they could perform their political

maneuverings better. PPP, a leftist-oriented party, formed a new government under a

shadow of compliance with the wishes of the Military.

The conflicts between PPP and IJI started soon after the elections. PPP

formed a coalition government in the National Assembly while IJI formed its

government in the province of the Punjab. The confrontation escalated amongst PPP

and IJI when the federal government launched its People’s Program which the Chief

Minister of Punjab, Muhammad Nawaz Sharif opposed strongly and refused to

implement it in his province. Soon after the conflict over the power politics started in

other provinces as well and all means, fair or foul, were used by the two major
 334

parties in their quest for forming governments in these provinces. Both Nawaz Sharif

and Benazir Bhutto were new-comers and inexperienced in party politics of Pakistan

so they became a part of that dirty power politics and without realizing that they

were playing in the hands of the Army Chief and the President; they enhanced

confrontation between Centre and Provinces. The aim of both political leaders was to

get full political power and to rule on Pakistan. Both political parties proclaimed

divergent ideologies so a bitter contest of all kinds ensued between them and neither

was willing to relent. The Nawaz Sharif the key leader of IJI; adopted the strategy to

weaken and destabilize the government of PPP in the Centre and in provinces too.

That confrontation increased even IJI formed an opposition alliance against PPP

government named Combined Opposition Parties (COP) in the National Assembly

consisting of fourteen political parties eventually forcing the PPP out of power.

Different parties of COP gathered on one common goal; threw the PPP out of power.

The different methods, political tactics and techniques used to bribing each other’s

members of Parliaments. Political harassing, threating and bribing were some of the

shameful means used to defeat and threat the members of each other party. This

shameful Changa Manga politics forced the President Ghulam Ishaq Khan to topple

the government of PPP and give a chance to new people after new elections. The

charges imposed by President on PPP government were horse trading, corruption,

non-cooperation between the center and the province relations, favoritism,

administrative failings, contempt towards the Senate and courts of law, political

hostility, violation of constitutional provisions, and failure to restore law and order in

Sindh.
 335

In fact, during that’s period of PPP government, Chairperson PPP Benazir

Bhutto tried her best to satisfy Army and President to get their political sympathy but

unfortunately; both having conservative thoughts affiliations, were not in the favor of

Socialist PPP. Both accepted her mandate due to its popularity in masses and success

in election but they were not ready to give her proper importance in the national

politics. The impacts of Zia’s Islamization policy were still in the mind of Military

and Army was not ready to give any chance to Socialist PPP to make a solid political

space in the politics of Pakistan. On the other hand, Chief Minister of the Punjab

Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif was also creating problems for PPP’s federal

government. In fact, PPP had forgotten that beside President and Army Chief, the

main political opponent Nawaz Sharif was also fighting with her in the field of

political battle. Mian Nawaz Sharif was more expert and experienced in political

maneuvering than Chairperson PPP Benazir Bhutto. He not only gains the

sympathies of President and Army Chief against PPP but also used every legal and

illegal resource to quit the PPP from the power. The new term “Changa Manga

Politics” was first time in political history of Pakistan introduced by him against PPP

government; which changed the whole political ethics and norms of Pakistani

politics. In that dirty politics, the new words like horse trading, Changa Manga

Politics and Lotay were introduced in Parliamentary politics which decreased not

only the honor of politicians but instable parliamentary system too.

After 1985, third elections were held in 1990 and once again leftist political

parties contested election against rightist political groupings; once again Islami

Jamhori Ittihad and People’s Democratic Alliance opposed each other in election.
 336

The 1990 election witnessed a vital change in political thinking and understanding in

Pakistan. In this election voters’ concern had moved from their ideological

attachment to local issues, mainly improvement of the lifestyle of an ordinary man

through welfare programs and development projects. It was apparent in most of the

cases that public elected those people whom they considered helpful in resolving

their daily life problems; And this had mostly been observed in the Punjab where IJI

government had encouraged economic development, and received strong backing

from the country’s emergent urban middle class which had steadily distanced itself

from the “traditional” politics of landlord, feudalist and aristocratic political families

such as the Mazari, Leghari, Bhuttos and Jatois. Meanwhile, the PDA depended

upon its people support as it did in the elections of 1988 but this approach failed.

The party politics in this era remain unchanged and after elections only the

ruling party changed while everything else remained the same. This era of

democracy is also labeled as the “era of guided democracy” for the modest purpose

that the Army remained behind the scenes and controlled policymaking procedures

especially in defense and foreign affairs departments. Reversal of roles meant that

Nawaz was now the prime minister and Benazir Bhutto was on the seat of the leader

of opposition. The party politics in this era was not different from the previous

regime of PPP and she adopted same methods and techniques against IJI which

Nawaz Sharif had previously used against her. IJI won a clear majority in

Parliament’s Lower House and Nawaz Sharif had no fear of a strong opposition so

he never tried to establish good relations with opposition parties or even with his

own electoral allies. Nawaz Sharif created an atmosphere of confrontation and even
 337

his own alliance partners began defecting from his alliance. Thus Jamaat-i-Islami,

Hazb e Jihad, Jamiat Ulma e Islam, National People’s Party and the MQM left and

seeing this Benazir’s PDA started a movement against the IJI’s government after

forming a large alliance of 23 different political parties and demanded the

resignation of Nawaz Sharif. In 1992, PPP started Long March and later Train March

against IJI government which pressurized the IJI government. A friction arose

between the Chief Executive and the Prime Minister about the selection of new

Army Chief and the President dismissed the IJI government reiterating the reasons

he had used in toppling the PPP government earlier as the history repeated itself.

But this time something new happened as on the plea of Nawaz Sharif, Supreme

Court restored his government but conflicts between the sitting premier and the

Chief Executive failed to reduce so to stabilize the situation and on the mediation of

the Army Chief both resigned from their portfolios and new elections were

announced on October 6, 1993.

After the election of 1990, Nawaz Sharif became Prime Minister of Pakistan.

It was his first entry in national politics so he could not manage the political matters

properly. He was the member of IJI alliance and it was his duty to satisfy all its

coalition members but he tried to control them with his authoritative behavior which

was not acceptable for his alliance partners. So they parted themselves from IJI

alliance one by one. The separation of alliance parties from IJI weakened the

government which gave a chance to his opponent political parties especially PPP to

get involved in political maneuvering against his government. Perhaps Nawaz Sharif

had forgotten that in previous government of PPP, he was in opposition and he had
 338

already launched a successful agitation movement for termination of PPP’s

government and presently, under his government PPP was in opposition; and it was

obvious that now PPP will try her best to destabilize IJI government so it was a

warning for Nawaz Sharif that he should be remain very careful about his opponent

political tactics. But unfortunately, after becoming Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif not

only deprived from his angry alliance companions but also lost the support of

President who was the most powerful character of that political system. PPP got

benefits of his political mistakes and used same political tactics against his

government which Nawaz Sharif adopted against PPP government. There was a

chance for Nawaz Sharif to learn a lesson from political mistakes of PPP but

surprisingly, he done those political mistakes intentionally which made his

government more instable and PPP toppled his government with the help of

President.

The next elections held in 1993 and that time a new trend emerged in

Pakistani politics. More than four dozens political parties took part in that election

but surprisingly except four political parties all became the part of one or other

alliance. This election was named “election of alliances” but unfortunately voters

rejected all these alliances and voted for the same rival leftist and rightest political

parties which had been ruling since 1985. Before election Pakistan Muslim League

(N) quit the IJI alliance and decided to contest elections on its own while PPP

contested this election after seat adjustments with the PDA. Religious political

parties made their own alliance named Muttihadda Deeni Muhaz (MDM) while

MQM boycotted this election. After elections PPP secured the highest number of
 339

seats, eighty-six in the Lower House of the Parliament while PML (N) bagged 72

seats. The close margin of seats between the two biggest political parties enhanced

the importance of independent candidates and coalition partners; so both major

political parties indulged in horse-trading to make their governments in Centre as

well as in Provinces. With the help of coalition partners, PPP succeeded in making

its administrations at both the federal and provincial levels. That time PPP also

nominated its candidate for Presidential election and PPP stalwart Farooq Ahmad

Leghari elected as President of Pakistan which was a great achievement of PPP.

The second term of BB differed from her first. Benazir Bhutto as chairperson

PPP adopted such policies which created harmony between other political parties.

She obliged her electoral partner and bestowed the Chief Minister-ship of the Punjab

to her allies. She also tried her best to please Military with her policies. In fact the

PPP Chairperson as opposition leader in 1993 had constantly adopted a single point

agenda for collapsing the administration of the IJI and for this purpose she had used

all kinds of tactics. In retaliation, Nawaz Sharif, as President of the PML (N),

provided a tough opposition to PPP government and was keen on toppling her

administration through politics of agitation and launching a strong movement

through print and electronic media. Nawaz Sharif now adopted the same tactics used

previously by the PPP against his government. Since the PPP government also

indulged in mega corruption scams in which Asif Zardari, her husband figured

prominently besides other politically nefarious activities. The assassination of

Murtaza Bhutto, brother of existing Prime Minister has affected badly the image of

Benazir Bhutto. That big incident also damaged the PPP’s public image. In the
 340

meanwhile, the confrontation between Prime Minister and President started on

different issues which affected the relation of Prime Minister with President.

Although Farooq Leghari was a senior worker of PPP and he was nominated by

Chairperson of PPP for that portfolio, even than he decided to terminate Benazir

Bhutto from Premiership and with all above mentioned allegations once again

Benazir Bhutto was removed from the premiership after only three years. In that

entire political situation it can be said that Nawaz Sharif played all his political cards

against BB’s government very cleverly and forced President Leghari, a former PPP

stalwart himself, to topple PPP government.

The next and last elections of this parliamentary period were held in February

1997. That time PPP and PML (N) both contested the elections in a solo fashion.

Public showed its annoyance with PPP’s policies and fully supported PML (N).

Nawaz Sharif secured 134 seats in the National Assembly. Nawaz Sharif’s historical

triumph made him arrogant and till the end of his regime he adopted policies which

facilitated the slide towards another Martial Law.

Nawaz Sharif started his second tenure with absolute authority and power. He

obtained heavy mandate from voters and absolute power from Parliament to

implement his policies. The major political parties comprising Jamaat-i-Islami,

Muthida Qoumi Movement, PPP, Awami National Party along with other minor

political parties failed to resist him and with solo decisions and dictatorial attitude he

amended the Constitution, forced the COAS to resign, appointed the country’s

President from his own party and chose the new Chief Justice of Pakistan. It was a

golden opportunity for politicians especially for Nawaz Sharif and PML (N) to
 341

establish vital political norms and values in the country for the development of

democratic system but PML (N) used its powers to amass sole political authority and

absolute power over all other institutions which generated resistance especially in the

Military. When Nawaz Sharif tried to terminate Pervaiz Musharrraf from the

headship of Army; Pervaiz launched a successful coup against Nawaz and enforced a

new Martial Law in the country. This was the end of the longest era of civilian rule.

In fact the period of 1993 to 1999 was very suitable for reinforcement of the

democracy in Pakistan. In this era Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif get a golden

chance to establish strong political system in the country and all major Pakistani

institutes supported him. Nawaz Sharif was the first politician who exercised his

authority on every pillar of the country and forced him to obey his orders. Every

institution including Military, Judiciary, Chief Executive, Parliament and even

opposition was under his command and control. The strongest institute especially

Military supported him; even he compelled Chief of Army Staff General Jahangir

Karamat to give resign from his post and he submitted it without imposing a new

Martial Law. It was a stunning action and submissive response from Army. Perhaps

it was happened first time in the history of Pakistan that military which ruled in

Pakistan nearly four decade in the shape of Martial Law; showed such sympathies

for democracy or civilian government. Nawaz Sharif amended constitution and

snatched all powers of President which had been bestowed him through eighth

amendment. Now Prime Minister was powerful and has full command on

government. After that amendment, newly symbolic President was not able to

terminate his elected government so that threat of dissolution of assemblies from

 342

President was also ended. Nawaz Sharif got heavy mandate in election so tiny

opposition of that period was not able to launch any agitation move against him so he

was free to make policies. Due to heavy mandate; Parliament was under his control

so his party can pass every legislative bill without the help of any other political

party. He changed Chief Justice of Supreme Court Justice Sajjad Ali Shah when he

differed with him; even the worker of PML-N attacked on Supreme Court and

nobody could stop them. He picked General Pervaiz Musharraf as new Chief of

Army Staff and trusted on him. It was the authoritative rule of Nawaz Sharif. In the

last he did a mistake and tried to appoint Zia ud Din Butt as new Chief of Army Staff

instead of General Pervaiz Musharraf. But General Musharraf was very different in

nature from General Jahangir Karamat. He refused to accept his orders and imposed

Martial Law in the country. It was end of Nawaz Sharif civil dictatorial rule as well

as the expiration of democratic system in Pakistan.

The era of this research period was very different from other democratic

periods. During the era of 1985 to 1999 five elections were held and five Prime

Ministers were terminated; it witnessed dissolution of six National Assemblies,

appointment of three Presidents and five Army Chiefs. In this short span neither any

President nor any Prime Minister could complete his constitutional tenure. In this

half and one decade, not a single Assembly in the Centre or in any Province could

reach or finish its constitutional tenure. Politicians lost a golden opportunity to

strengthen the democratic system. Military gave them several chances and avoided to

interfere in political matters but the politicians could not get benefits from those
 343

chances and again and again invited them as mediators to resolve intra-political

frictions.

The politicians’ bitter conflicts with each other, the rivalry of political parties,

the lust for absolute authority and power, absence of political tolerance and greed of

wealth ruined all political ethics and norms in politicians and they used all fair and

unfair means to remain in power. Every ruling political party tried to remain in

power at any cost and every opposition political party tried its best to oust ruling

party from power and for this it felt no hesitation in using any means and tactics even

to the extent of welcoming military rather than tolerating a political office. In

Pakistani political culture of that period no political party was willing to let the other

party complete its constitutional tenure and that was the reason for the termination of

five Prime Ministers in just fourteen years which is an endless dilemma of our

political history.

In our research period, Pakistan People’s Party, Pakistan Muslim League (N),

Mutihadda Quomi Movement, Jamaat e Islami, Awami National Party and Jamiat

Ulma e Islam were the main political parties and Muhammad Khan Junejo, Benazir

Bhutto, Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, Altaf Hussain, Ghulam Ishaq Khan, Sardar

Farooq Ahmad Leghari and Rafique Tarar were the prominent politicians whom

political character beside their political achievements and failures were discussed

thoroughly. Beside the national political parties and politicians some provincial level

political parties including Pakistan Muslim League (Junejo group), Baluchistan

National Alliance, Jamiat Ulma e Pakistan and Jamhori Watan Party played very

crucial role in government making on provincial level. The second leadership of

 344

main political parties including Mian Manzor Watto, Qaeem Ali Shah, Ghulam

Haider Wyne, Sardar Akbar Bughti, Shahbaz Sharif, Aftab Shabaan Mirani and

several others provincial level politicians were also discussed who supported all fair

and unfair policies of federal government and played key role in political

maneuvering of that period. Further, the role of Army high profile official including

General Mirza Aslam Baig, General Asif Nawaz Janjua, General Abdul Waheed

Kakar and General Jahangir Karamat was also analyzed who showed their affection

and support for promotion and continuation of democracy; and instead of the

political blunders of political leadership they remained aloof from politics and did

not try to impose Martial Law.

After critical observation and examination of this longest instable democratic

period; it can be said that the most bitter and irresponsible role was played by two

main political leaders named Nawaz Sharif (President PML-N and key leader of IJI)

and Benazir Bhutoo (Chairperson Pakistan People’s Party). Both were the leaders of

mainstream political parties of Pakistan and both were elected as Prime Minister of

Pakistan; even in this research period, both take two turns as Prime Minister of

Pakistan one by one. Public selected them for solvation of their problems but they

indulged in dirty politics and lust of power forced them for leg pulling of each other.

Both were terminated by Presidents and every time both were involved in

termination of each other governments. Both were new entrant in national politics of

Pakistan and both were politically un-experience and immature; so President and

Military establishment used them for their own benefits. According to research

analysis, both were the responsible for imposition of Martial Law in 1999 but if
 345

someone analyze the whole period impartially, he will reach on that conclusion that

Nawaz Sahrif was more liable for this political instability and for imposition of last

Army Rule than Benazir Bhutto. After the election of 1993, Nawaz Sharif was in

position that he could control and stable the democratic system in Pakistan and he

tried to done it too but perhaps, such in a different way that after defeating all his

political and non-political opponents he changed his mind and he wished to became

Amir ul Momneen (a sole Islamic portfolio, which has absolute power and control on

all institution in any Islamic state, including political, administrative and religious

powers). And gradually, he was achieving his destinations and one by one all heads

of national institutes were obeying his command accept General Pervaiz Musharraf

who refused to accept his order and not only imposed Martial Law in the country but

also forced him to left the country and as well as politics for ten years.

In short, study has observed on empirical evidences that political parties

neither could develop mature and refined democratic culture within the party nor

they developed inter party coordination/understanding for the national cause and

continuation of the democracy in Pakistan. They behaved irresponsibly when they

were in “Power or in Opposition”. Their personal jealousies, ideological clashes and

vested interests forced them to rely on the antidemocratic forces and antidemocratic

forces used them to sideline democracy. This vicious circle continued during the

period understudy and resultantly neither democracy nor party politics attained

maturity. Even though experiments with different variations of democracy, the real

democraacy and democractic culture which always play a key role in making a

society could not grow during the period under study.

 346

Bibliography

Primary Sources
 347

Government of Pakistan Documents

Cabinet Secretariat, Rules of Business, Karachi, 1952.

White Paper on the Conduct of the General Elections in March 1977, Islamabad:

1979

White Paper on the Performance of the Bhutto Regime, Islamabad: 1979.

Assembly Debates

Debates in Senate 1985-1990. ( www.Senate. Gov. Pk.)

National Assembly Debates 1985-88 (www.na.gov.pk)

Provincial Assemblies’ Debates 1988-1997, Lahore: Provincial Assembly of the

Punjab Civil Secretariat Lahore.

Punjab Provincial Assembly’s Proceedings (December 1988 to June 1990) Lahore:

Provincial Assembly of the Punjab Civil Secretariat Lahore, 1988-1990

Subā’i Assembly Punjab, Mubāhithāt, December 15, 1988, Lahore: Provincial

Assembly of the Punjab Secretariat Lahore, 330-31.

Subā’i Assembly Punjab, Mubāhithāt: Official Report, December 17, 1988. Lahore:

Provincial Assembly of the Punjab Civil Secretariat Lahore.

Subā’i Assembly Punjab, Mubāhithāt: Official Report, December 17, 1988. Lahore:

Provincial Assembly of the Punjab Civil Secretariat Lahore.

Subaee Assembly Punjab, Mubahsay, March 13, 1989, Lahore: Provincial Assembly

of the Punjab Civil Secretariat Lahore, 10-17

The Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, Debates, Official reports, 1955-56, Karachi.

 348

The National Assembly of Pakistan Debates: Official Report, vol. 1, no. 3, December

3, 1988

The Punjab Laws, volume vii, from 1976 to 1995, Lahore: Provincial Assembly of

the Punjab Secretariat Lahore, 2003.

The Punjab Parliamentarians 1897-2007. Lahore: Provincial Assembly of the Punjab

Secretariat, 2007.

Official Documents

Official/Private Papers

Fatima Jinnah’s unpublished papers/files from National Archives of Pakistan,

Islamabad. 1981.

Madar-i-Millat (Urdu Pamphlet), Lahore, Nazarya Pakistan foundation, 2003.

Unpublished Sources

Thesis and Dissertations

Ahmad, Sabir. “Islami Jamhuri Ittehad and its Struggle” (Unpublished M.A thesis,

University of Sargodha).

Akhtar, Nadeem, Role of Political Parties in the Democratic System of Pakistan

(unpublished thesis, School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg 2011).

Awan,Sajid Mahmood. Political Parties and Political Development in the Punjab

1988-1999, (Ph. D. Dissertation, Quaid-e-Azam University Islamabad.2008)

 349

Bader, Jehangir. Political Leadership: A Case Study of Benazir Bhutto, (unpublished

Ph.D. thesis. Pakistan study centre Punjab University Lahore, 2013).

Bashir, Qurat ul Ain. Parliamentary Democracy in Pakistan: 1988-1999,

(unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Quaid I Azam University Islamabad 2015).

Husain, Akhtar. “Politics of Alliances in Pakistan 1954-1999” (unpublished Ph.D.

thesis. Quaid e Azam University Islamabad).

Khan, Kamran Azia. “Religion and Politics in Pakistan: the Role of Jammat I

islami” (Ph.D. dissertations, University of the Punjab Lahore, 2011).

Mushtaq, Abdul Qadir. Political Alliances and Movements in Pakistan,(unpublished

Ph.D. thesis, Quaid e Azam University Islamabad).

Paul Ernest lenze, Jr. Civil Military Relation in Islmic Democracies: Military

Intervention and Withdrawal in Algeria, Pakistan and Turkey, (Ph.D. Thesis,

Washington State University, Department of Political Science, 2011).

Pobre, Ceser P. “History of Political Parties in Pakistan (1947-1958)” (Ph.D. thesis,

University of Karachi, 1970).

Published Sources

Party Documents

Membership Campaign of PPP and PML, The News, Karachi, 1993, 1996.

Muslim League News (Urdu), Muslim League House: Davis Road Lahore.

Official Documents
 350

Begum Nusrat Bhutoo v Chief of Army Staff and Federation of Pakistan PLD 1977

SC 657.

ECP Report on 1985 General Elections

ECP’s Compendium of Election Laws.

ECP’s Report on 1997 General Elections Report vol. II: Comparative Statistics of

Elections 1988, 1990, 1993, and 1997, Islamabad, 1997.

ECP’s Report on 1997 General Elections vol.1 Islamabad, 1997

ECP’s Report on the General Election 1990 vol. 1,Islamabad, 1991.

Electoral Politics in Pakistan: National Assembly Elections 1993, Report of SAARC-

NGO OBSERVERS (New Delhi: International Centre for Ethnic Studies, 1995).

Report on General Elections 1992. 2 vols. Islamabad: Election Commission of

Pakistan.

Report on the General Elections 1988, vol. 1 (Islamabad: Election Commission of

Pakistan, n.d). 162, 164.

Report on the General Elections 1988. 3 Vol. Islamabad: Election Commission of

Pakistan.

The MRD handout, ‘Analysis of the Constitutional Crisis by the MRD Rawalpindi –

Islamabad. 247

The Pakistan Election Compendium, Vol. 1, 2, 3, Karachi: Church World Service,

2012.

The Supreme Court of Pakistan, Order by the Chief Justice Mr. Justice S.

AnwarulHaq on Application by Zulfikhar Ali Bhutto, 20 May 1985.

 351

Written statement of Human Rights Advocates Inc. (a non-governmental

organization in consultative status: Category II), E/CN. 4/1986/NGO/30, 1986.

Interviews

Interview with Aziz ur Rehman Chan, Ex. President, MNA PPP Punjab. People’s

House Punjab Civil Secretariat Lahore. (13/03/2017)

Interview with Haji Nadir Khan, President PPP Lahore Division, Lahore. Chaman

Bagh Rajgarh Lahore. (12/11/2018)

Interview with Khawaja Hassan Ahmad, Coordinator PML (N) Lahore Division.

Chief Minister House, 90 Shahrah e Qauid e Azam Lahore, (11/08/2019)

Interview with Mehnaz Rafi, Leader of Tehreek-e-Istaklal Party. House No 34.

Chauburji Park Lahore. (22/01/2016)

Interview with Mian Muhammad Azhar, Ex Governor of the Punjab. Lahore Model

School, Sanat Nagar Lahore. (7/01/2017)

Interview with Sh. Rasheed Ahmed (Awami Muslim League), MNA from

Rawalpindi. Muslim League House Davis Road Lahore. (08/08/2017)

Interview with Waheed Alam (PML-N), the MNA from District Lahore. Hiran Road

Krishan Nagar Lahore. (12/06/2017)

Autobiographies and Memoirs

Ahmad, Sheikh Rasheed. Farzand e Pakistan (Urdu) Lahore: Jang Publishers, 1995.

Bhutto, Banazir, Daughter of the East, London: Hamish and Hamilton, 1988.

Clinton, Bill. My Life, London: Hutchinson, 2004.

 352

Gillani, Yosuf Raza. Chah-e-Yosuf Say Sada, Lahore: Nigarshat Publications, 2006.

Hashmi, Javed. Han! Main Baghi Hoon, (Urdu) Lahore: Sager Publishers, 2005.

Hussain, Syeda Abida, Power Failure: The Political Odyssey of a Pakistani Women,

Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2015.

Khan, M. Asghar. My Political Struggle, Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2008.

Khan, Muhammad Ayub. Friends Not Masters: A Political Autobiography, Karachi:

Oxford University Press, 1967.

Musharraf, Pervez. In the Line of Fire, A Memoir, London: Simon and Schuster UK

Ltd, 2006.

Sharif, M.Shahbaz, Azm o Himat ki Dastaan, (Urdu), Lahore: Sharif Publications,

2000.

Siddiqui, Sahar. Ghulam Ishaq Khan, Islamabad: Ali Publishing Bureau, 2008.

Watto, Manzoor Ahmad. Jurm e Siasat (Urdu) Lahore: Jang Publishers, 2003.

Secondary Sources

Abbas, Hassan. Pakistan drifts into extremism, Allah, Army and America’s war on

terror, New Delhi: Pentagon Press, 2005.

Afzal, M. Rafiq. Political Parties in Pakistan, Islamabad: National Institute of

Historical and Cultural Research, 1998.

 353

_______________Party Politics in Pakistan, Islamabad: National Institute of

Historical and Cultural Research, 1989.

_______________ Political Parties in Pakistan 1947-1958, Islamabad: National

Commission on Historical and Cultural Research, 1976.

Ahmad, Ghafoor, Aur Election Na Hoo sakay, Lahore: Jang Publishers, 1990.

_______________ Benazir Bhutto Hakomat ka arooj o zawal (Urdu), Lahore:

Alqamar Publishers Rehman Market Urdu Bazar, 2001.

_______________ Nawaz Sharif ka Pehla Dor e Hakomat, (Urdu), Lahore: Alqamar

Enterprises, 1997.

______________ Nawaz Sharif, Iqtdar say ataab tak (Urdu), Lahore: Alqamar

Publishers Rehman Market Urdu Bazar, 2004.

______________ Phir Marshal Law Aa Gaya, Lahore: Jang Publisher.1988.

______________ Wazir-i-Azam Benazir Bhutto: Namzadgi Say Bartarfi Tak,

Lahore, Iqra Enterprise, 1995.

______________ Zia kay Aakhri das saal (Urdu), Lahore: Alqamar Publishers

Rehman Market Urdu Bazar, 2001.

Ahmad, Israr. Tehreek-i-Jama'at-i-Islami, Lahore: Tanzeem-i-Islami Publishers,

1985.

Ahmad, Munir. Altaf Hussain, Lahore: Gora Publishers, 1996.

_____________Bhutto Khandan Ka Katal (Urdu), Lahore: Takhliqat Publishers,

1998.
 354

_____________ Pakistan ke siyasi ittihad, Lahore: Frontier Post Publication, 1993.

Ahmad, Mushtaq. Benazir: Politics of Power, Karachi: Royal Book Company, 2005.

_____________ Government and Politics in Pakistan, Karachi: Royal Book

company, 1970.

Ahmad, Nazeer. Political Parties in Pakistan: A Long Way Ahead, Pakistan:

Khursheed Printing Company, 2004.

Ajmal, Mian. A Judge Speaks Out, Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Akhtar Nadeem. Role of political parties in the democratic system of Pakistan,

Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Akhtar, Rai Shakil. Media, Religion and Politics in Pakistan, Karachi: Oxford

University Press, 2000.

Akhtar, Muhammad Javaid. Dilemma of Political Culture: Case Study of Pakistan

(1988-1997), Multan: Bahaud din Zakariya University. 2010.

Akhund, Iqbal. Trial and Error: The Advent and Eclipse of Benazir Bhutto, Karachi;

Oxford University Press, 2000.

Ali, Parveen Shaukat. Politics of Conviction: The Life and Times of Muhammad Zia-

ul-Haq Lahore: The London Centre for Pakistan Studies, 1997.

Andrew Politics, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.

Anjum, Murtaza. Siyasat,Aain Aur Adalat, Lahore: Fateh publishers, 2001.

Anjum, Zahid Hussain. Pakistan 1992-1993 Aik Nazar Main, Lahore: Book Talk

Mian Chambers, 1993.

 355

Arif, K.M. Working with Zia: Pakistan’s Power Politics, Karachi, Oxford University

Press. 1996.

Arshad, Maqbool. Journaail Beeti, Lahore: Sang e Meel publications. 2008.

Awan, Abdul Ghafoor. Tīn Muntakhib Wuzra’ei Ā‘zam kī Bartarfi, Lahore: Unique

Publishing Company, 1991.

Aziz, K. K. Party Politics in Pakistan 1947-1958, Islamabad: National Commission

on Historical and Cultural Research, 1976.

___________ Pakistan's political culture: essays in historical and social origins,

Lahore: Vanguard, 2001.

Aziz, Sartaj. Between Dreams and Realities: Some Milestones in Pakistan’s History,

Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Bahadur, Kaleem. The Jama'at-i-Islami of Pakistan, New Delhi: Chetana

Publications, 1977.

______________ Democracy in Pakistan: Crises and Conflicts, New Delhi: Har-

Anand Publications Pvt Ltd, 1998.

Barker, Ernest. The Party system, Bombay: Casement Publication, 1953.

Bashir, S.M. Muslim League 1906 se 1992 tak (Urdu), Lahore: Pakistan Printers and

Publications, 1993.

Bhardwaj, K. K. Pakistan’s March to Democracy and Liberalism, New Delhi:

Anmol Publications pvt. Ltd, 1996.

 356

Bhutto, Benazir. Daughter of the East, An Autobiography, London: A Mandarin

(Paperback) London UK, 1994.

Sayeed, Khalid Bin. Politics in Pakistan, New York: Praeger, 1980.

Blondel, Jean. An introduction to comparative government, London: Cambridge

University Press, 1995.

Bukhari, Makhdoom Sayed Ghayur Abbas. Benazir: Beti Say Qaid Tak (Urdu),

Lahore: Multi Media Affairs, 2004.

Burki, Shahid Javed. Pakistan Under Bhutto 1971-1977, London: Macmillan, 1988.

Callard, Keith B. Political Forces in Pakistan, New York: Institute of Pacific

Relations, 1959.

_______________ Pakistan: A Political Study, London: George Allen, 1958.

Chadda, Maya. Building Democracy in South Asia: India, Nepal, Pakistan, London:

Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2000.

Chand, Attar. Pakistan: Party-Politics Pressure Groups and Minorities, New Delhi:

Commonwealth Publishers, 1991.

Chaudhary, G. Democracy in Pakistan. Dacca: Green Book House. 1963.

Chirag, Muhanmmad Ali. Tareekh-e-Pakistan (Urdu) Lahore: Sang-e-Meel

Publications, 2001.

Choudhry, G.W. Constitutional Development in Pakistan, Lahore: The Ideal Book

House, 1969.

Cohen, Stephen Philip. The Idea of Pakistan, Lahore: Vanguard Books, 2005.
 357

Downs, Anthony. An Economic theory of Democracy, New York: Harper and

Brothers, 1957.

Duverger, Maurice. Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in Modern

State, translated by Barbara and Robert North, London: Methuen and Co, 1967.

Farooq, I. Realism and practicalism, Karachi: Logical Printer, 2003.

Friedrich, Carl J. Constitutional Government and Democracy, the Theory and

Practice, New Delhi: IBH Publishing, 1974.

Gauhar, Altaf. Ayub Khan: Pakistan’s First Military Ruler, Lahore: Sang-e-Meel,

1994.

Gillani, Yosuf Raza. Chah-e-Yosuf Say Sada, Lahore: Nigarshat Publications, 2006.

Gopinath, Menakashi. Pakistan in Transition: Political Development and Rise to

Power of Pakistan People‟s Party, New Delhi: Manohar Book Service, 1975.

Grabow Wilhelm Hofmeister and Karsten. ,Political parties, Functions and

organization in democratic societies, Singapore: National Library Board, 2011.

Gunther, Richard. and Larry Diamond, Species of Political Parties, A New

Typology, London: Sage Publication 2003.

Hamid, K. Constitutional and apolitical History of Pakistan, Karachi: Oxford

University Press. 2006.

Haqqani, Hussain. Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military, Lahore: Vanguard

books (Pvt) Ltd. 2005.

Hasan, Mubashar. Mirage of Power, Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2000.

 358

Hashmi, Javed. Han! Main Baghi Hoon, Lahore: Sager Publishers, 2005.

Hassan, Mehdi. Pakistan ki Siyasi jumaetain, Lahore: Sang e Meel publications,

1998.

Heywood, Andrew. Politics, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.

Heywood, Prakash, Sarangi. Political Parties and Party System: A conceptual

Analysis, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2011.

Humeira Iqtidar, Secularism Beyond the State in Filippo Osella; Caroline Osella,

Islamic Reform in South Asia, Cambridge University Press, 2013.

Hussain, Mushahid. Pakistan’s Politics: the Zia Years, Lahore: Progressive

Publishers, 1990.

Hussain, S. S. Lengthening Shadows: The Story of Pakistan's Politics and Politicians

from Advent of Pakistan to Fall of Ayub, Karachi: Mujahid Publications, 1970.

Inayatullah, Pakistan Politics: A Personal View, Lahore: Feroze Sons, 2003.

J. K. White, What is a Political Party?, London: Sage Publications, 2006.

Jafary, Maqsood. The Ideals of Bhutto, Rawalpindi: Maqsood Jafary, 2008.

Jafri, A. The Political Parties of Pakistan, Karachi: Royal Book Company, 2002.

Jalal, Ayesha. Democracy and Authoritarianism in South Asia, Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1995.

____________ Modern South Asia; History, Cultural, Political Economy,

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

 359

____________ The Sole Spokesman: Jinnah, the Muslim League and the Demand

for Pakistan, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.

Jan Mohammad Dawood, The Role of Superior Judiciary in the Politics of Pakistan,

Karachi: Royal Book Company, 1994.

Javaid, Syed Haider. Journali Hakomat, Karachi: Nazar Publishers. 1999.

Jenkins, J. Craig. Handbook of Politics: State and Society in Global Perspective,

books. google.com.pk, 2010.

Jones, P. E. The Pakistan People's Party: Rise to Power, London: Oxford University

Press,

Juan, Jose Richard Gunther, Ramon and. Political Parties Old concept and new

challenges, 2002.

Kalia, Ravi. (Ed.) Pakistan: From the Rhetoric of Democracy to the Rise of

Militancy, London: Rutledge, 2011.

Kamran, Tahir. Democracy and Governance in Pakistan, Lahore: South Asia

Partnership, 2008.

_____________Sovereignty in Pakistan and the basis reasons of Power, Lahore,

Fiction House. 2000.

Kazmi, M. R. A Concise History of Pakistan, Karachi: Oxford, 2009.

Khan, Abdul Hafeez. The Conspiracies Against Pakistan and the Women in the Lives

of Politicians, Karachi: Royal Book Company, 1991.

Khan, Ayub. Friends Not Master, Lahore: University Press Limited, 1967.
 360

Khan, Hamid. Eighth Amendment-Constitutional and Political Crisis in Pakistan,

Lahore: Wajidalis, 1994.

____________ Constitutional and Political History of Pakistan, Karachi: Oxford

University Press, 2001.

Khan, Jahan Dad. Paksitan Leadership Challenges, Karachi: Oxford University

Press, 1999.

Khan, M. A. We've Learnt Nothing from History, Pakistan: Politics and Military

Power, Karachi: Oxford University Press. 2005.

Khan, Roedad. Pakistan-A Dream Gone Sour, Karachi: Oxford University Press,

1997.

Khan, Zafarullah. Political Parties in Pakistan; Disabled by Design, Islamabad:

Freedom Publishers, 2004.

Kogan, Mary Hawkes Worth and Mauriee., Eds. Encyclopedia of Government and

Politics, vol. 1 London: Rutledge, 1992.

Kukerja, Veena. Contemporary Pakistan: political processes, conflicts, and crises,

New Delhi: AGE Publications, 2003.

Kukreja, M.P. Singh and Veena. Pakistan: Democracy, Development and Security

Issues, Karachi: Paramount Publishing Enterprise, 2005.

Kumar, Raj. Pakistan People’s Party Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to Benazir Bhutto, Delhi:

Sumit Enterprises, 2008.

 361

Kumar, Subrata. The Post-Colonial State in Asia: Dialectic’s of Politics and Culture,

Lahore: Sang e Meel Publication, 1988.

Lamb, Christina. Waiting for Allah, Pakistan’s Struggle for Democracy, New Delhi:

Viking Penguin Book, 1991.

Ziring, Lawrence. Pakistan: The Enigma of Political Development, Kent: Won. West

View Press, 1980.

_______________Pakistan in the twentieth century, A Political History, Karachi:

Oxford University Press. 2007.

Lijphart, Arend. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in

Thirty-six Countries, London: Yale University Press, 1999. Chapter 5.

Lodhi, Maleeha. Pakistan’s Encounter with Democracy, Lahore: Vanguard Books,

2004.

Maali, S. Abdul. The Twin Era of Pakistan, Democracy and Dictatorship, New

York: Vantagwe Press. 1992.

Mahmood, Safdar. Muslim League ka Daure Hukoomat 1947-54, Lahore: Jang

Publishers, 1993.

_______________ Pakistan: Rule of Muslim League and Inception of Democracy,

Lahore: Jang Publishers, 1997.

_______________Political Roots and Development: 1947-99, Karachi: Oxford

University Press, 2000.

 362

_______________ The Political Study of Pakistan, Lahore: Sang-e-Meel

Publications, 1987.

Mahmood, Sayed Qasim. ed., Encyclopedia Pakistanica (Urdu) Karachi: Shahkar

Book Foundation, 1998.

Malik, I. H. State and civil society in Pakistan, politics of authority, ideology and

ethnicity, London: Macmillan Press.1997.

McGrath, Allen. The destruction of Pakistan’s Democracy, Karachi: Oxford

university press, 1996.

Memon, Ali Nawaz. Pakistan: Islamic Nation in Crisis, Lahore: Vanguard Books

Pvt Ltd, 1997.

Mufti Mohammad Waseem and Mariam, Political Parties in Pakistan. Organization

and Structure, Lahore: Lahore University of Management Science, 2010.

Munir, Muhammad. The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan: Being a

Commentary on the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Lahore: PLD Publishers, 1999.

Musharraf, Pervez. In the Line of Fire, A Memoir, London: Simon and Schuster UK

Ltd, 2006.

Nasr, Sayyed Vali Reza. Vanguard of Islamic Revolution-Jamaat e Islami of

Pakistan, New York: I.B. Tauris Publishers London, 1994.

Nawaz, Shuja. Crossed Swords Pakistan Army and the Wars Within, Karachi:

Oxford University Press, 2008.

 363

Niaz, Ilhan. The culture of power and governance of Pakistan 1947-2008, Karachi:

Oxford University Press, 2010.

Nizami, Qayyom. Jo Dekha Jo Suna, (Urdu) Lahore: Jahangir Book Depot, 2004.

Noel, Hans. Political Ideologies and Political Parties, New York: Cambridge

University Press, 2014.

Oxford University Press, 2011).

Press,2003.

Pye, L. W. & S.Verba, Political culture and political development, Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 2015.

Quraishi, Ishitaq Hussain. Struggle for Pakistan, Karachi: University of Karachi

Press. 1969.

Qureshi, Muhammad Farooq. Nawaz Sharif: Aik Hukmaran-Aik Sayasatdan, Lahore:

Qaumi Publishers, 1994.

Rafi, Raza. ed., Pakistan in Perspective 1947-1997, Karachi: Oxford University

Press, 2001.

Rais, Rasul Bakhsh, ed. State, Societ and Democratic Change in Paksitan, Karachi:

Oxford University Press, 1997.

Raza, Ali. Election Manifesto of Pakistan People's Party. Lahore: Classic Publishers,

1970.

Riaz, Syed Hasan. Pakistan Naguzeer Tha, (Urdu). Karachi: University of Karachi

Press, nd.
 364

Rizvi, Hasan Askari. The Military and Politics in Pakistan: 1947-1997, Lahore:

Sange-e-Meel Publishers, 2000.

Rizvi, Yaseen. Elections 93: Pakistan Islamabad: privately printed, 1993.

Robertson, David. The Penguin Dictionary of Politics, Middlesex: Penguin Books

Limited, 1985.

Saeed, Shafqat. Civil Military Relations in Pakistan: from Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to

Benazir Bhutto, Colorado: Westview Press, 1997.

Saghir, Tariq Ismaeel. Election 88, Lahore: Maqbool Academy 1988.

__________________ Election 90, Lahore: Maqbool Academy 1990.

Salim, Ahmad. Tootati Banti Assemblian Aur Civil-Military Bureaucracy, Lahore:

Jang Publishers, 1990.

Sardar, Muhammad Chaudhry. Nawaz Sharif: Tehri Rahn ka Seedha Musafir,

Lahore: Qaumi Publishers, 2000.

Sartori, Giovanni. Parties and Party Systems, A Framework for Analysis,London:

Cambridge University Press, 1976.

Sayeed, Khalid B. Politics in Pakistan: The Nature and Direction of Change, New

York: Praeger, 1980.

_______________ The Political System of Pakistan, Karachi: Oxford University

Press, 1967.

Schumpeter, Joseph A. Capitalism and Democracy, London: Allen and Unwin,

1966.
 365

Sekine, Kimie. Benazir Bhutto: her political struggle in Pakistan, Amherst:

University of Massachusetts Amherst, 2014.

Shad, Asghar. Benazir Bhutto: Pakistan Aur Jamhooriat, (Urdu) Rawalpindi: Sana

Publishers, 2001.

Shafqat, Dr. Saeed. Civil-Military Relations in Pakistan: From Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to

Benazir Bhutto, Boulder: Westview Press, 1997.

Shah, A. The Army and Democracy. Harvard University Press, 2014.

Shah, Sajjad Ali. Law Courts in a Glass House: An Autobiography, Karachi: Oxford

University Press, 2001.

Shah, Sayed Wiqar Ali. Pakistan People‟s Party: The Twin Legacies of Socialism

and Dynastic Rule, London, Praeger Publishers, 2004.

Shahab, Qudratullah. Shahab Nama.

Shaikh, Muhammad Ali. Benazir Bhutto: A Political Biography, Karachi: Orient

Book Publishing House, 2000.

Siddiqui, Sahar. Ghulam Ishaq Khan, Islamabad: Ali Publishing Bureau, 2008.

Sufi, M. A. Pakistan ki Zarōrat: Kalabagh Dam, Lahore: Ilm-o Irfan Publishers,

1998.

Syed, A. H. Discourses of Politics, New Dehli: Deep & Deep Publication. 1996.

Tahir, A. Ethno National Movements of Pakistan Domestic and International

Factors, Islamabad: Institute of Policy Studies, 1993.

Talbot, Ian. Pakistan: A New History, Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2012.
 366

Waseem, Muhammad. Election 1993 (Urdu) Lahore: Maqbool sons. 1998.

__________________ Pakistan Under Martial Law 1977–1985, Lahore: Vanguard

Books. 1987.

___________________ Politics and State in Pakistan, Islamabad: National Institute

of Historical studies, 1994.

___________________ The 1993 Elections in Pakistan, Lahore: Vanguard

Publishers.1994.

Weber, Max. Political Writing, Cambridge University Press. 1994.

Weiner, Joseph La Palombara, and Myron. Political Parties and Political

development, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972.

Weiner, M. The Politics of scarcity: Public pressure and political response in India,

Chicago: Chicago University Press.1962.

Wilder, Andrew K. The Pakistani Voter Electoral Politics and Voting Behavior in

the Punjab, Karachi: Oxford University Press. 1999.

Wynbrandt, James . A Brief History of Pakistan. New York: Facts on Files, 2009.

Younas, Salim. Siyasi ittehad or Pakistan per un ke asraat.(Urdu) Lahore: Jang

Publishers, 1993.

Zafar and Ishtiaq Hussain, Navid. (comp.) Election 93: Facts Figures Feats,

Islamabad: Modern Book Depot, 1994.

Zafar, S. M. Meray Mashoor Muqadmay (revised ed.) Lahore: Bright Books, 2002.

Zahid Hussain Anjum, Election 1977 ,Lahore: Maktaba imtiaz urdu bazar, 2001.
 367

Journal Articles

A. A. Chandio, “An analysis of Jeeya Sindh Tahreek as an ethno-nationalist

movement of Pakistan.” Pakistan Perspectives, 14 (1), 2009.

_____________ “Non- Party based General election of 1985: Causes an effect,”

International Conference on Social Science and Humanity IPEDR vol.5, IACSIT

Press, Singapore, 2011.

_____________ “Politics of Sindh: An Analysis of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s

Government” Interdisciplinary journal of contemporary Research in Business: 2012;

vol 4.

F. Haq, “Rise of the MQM in Pakistan, Politics of Ethnic Mobilization,” Asian

Survey, 35 (11), 1995.

Faqir Khan, “Revival of Democracy in Pakistan 1988-1999: An Analysis.” Pakistan

Journal of Social Sciences (PJSS) Vol. 35, No.1. 2015).

Gharib Ullah Ghazi, “Pakistan Ki Khaliq Muslim League Ki Jummato Mein

Taqseem”, Peshawar: Sunday Magazine, The Daily Awsaf, 17 October, 2010.

Hasan Askari Rizvi, “Pakistan in 1998: A Polity Under Pressure,” Asian Survey,

Vol.1, 1999.

Ivan Doherty, “Democracy out of Balance: Civil Society Can’t Political Parties”

Policy Review”, April – May, 2010.

Jahanzaib K, “Feudlism is a Major Obstacle in the way of Social Mobility in

Pakistan, ” J.R.S.P., Vol. 50, No. 1, 2013.

Kessing’s Record of World Events, Volume 35 No. 12.

 368

M. Ahmed, “Legitimacy Crisis in Pakistan, A Comparative Study of Political

Behavior,” Journal of Political Studies, 12, 2007.

Movement for the Restoration of Democracy, (A pamphlet published by) Pakistan

Democratic Forum, May 1983).

Mushahid Hussain, “Important Gains for Pakistani Democracy”, The Times of

India,9 November, 1990.

N. Kiran, “Political Stability in Pakistan: Regionalism and Role of Cabinet” (1947-

1958). Pakistan Vision, 13(1) 2012.

Noor-ul-Haq, “Governance and Democracy in Pakistan: Weaknesses, Strengths and

Prospects”, Islamabad: IPRI Journal X, No.1, 2010.

Omar Farooq Zain, “Paradox of our Political Parties” South Asian Studies, Vol.25,

No.1, January-June 2010.

P. B. Soomro, “Nawab Mushtaq Ahmad Gurmani's Role in the Politics of Pakistan”.

Pakistan Journal of History & Culture, 27(2), 2006.

Pakistan People’s Party, Ma’arif Research Journal (Jan. – June 2015):65-80

Politics without Parties, (A Report on the 1985 Party less Election Pakistan). Lahore:

Society for the advancement of Education (SAHE).(n.d).

Rais, Rasul Bakhsh. “Pakistan Hope amidst Turmoil” Journal of Democracy 5, no.2

(April 1994): 132-143.

__________________“Pakistan in 1987: Transition to Democracy”, Asian Survey

28, no. 2, part. 2 (February 1988)

 369

Sayyed, K. B. “Collapse of Parliamentary Democracy in Pakistan.” Middle East

Journal, 13(4) 1959.

Seyyed Vali Reza Nasr, “Islamic oppositions to the Islamic state: the jamaat e islami,

1977-1988”. International journal of Middle East Studies, no. 25(2)

Shahid Javed Burki, “Pakistan under Zia, 1977-1988” Asian Survey 28, no. 10

,October 1988.

Syed Akmal Hussain Shah, Ideological Orientation of Pakistan People’s Party:

Evolution, Illusion and Reality, Journal of the Research Society of Pakistan, Volume

No. 55, Issue No. 2 (July - December, 2018)

Umbreen Javaid and Amir Latif, “Historical Analysis of Successive Governments in

Pakistan: A History of First Six Decades, 1947-2007,” Pakistan Vision Vol. 18 No.

1.

Veena Kukreja, “Politics in Pakistan: Nawaz Sharif at the Helm, Strategic Analysis”,

vol.xxx: No.6, September, 1991.

W. I. Richter. “Pakistan in 1984 – Digging In.” Asian Survey, 25 (2), (1985): 145-

149.

Journals

Asian Affairs, London

Asian Defense Journal, London

Asian Profile,London

Asian Survey, University of California Press, Barkley

Asian Thought and Society, New York

 370

Ehtisab, Islamabad

J.Stor, Online research journal,

Journal of History and Culture,Islamabad

Journal of Political Studies, Lahore

Journal of Regional Studies, Islamabad

Journal of Social Sciences, Faisalabad

Pakistan Horizon, Karachi

Pakistan Journal of History and Culture, Islamabad

Pakistan Perspective

Pakistan Vision, Pakistan Study Centre University of the Punjab, Lahore

Punjab Journal of Politics, London

Strategic Studies, Islamabad

Third World Quarterly, London

Magazines

Far Eastern Economic Review

Zafar Abbas, The Mian or The Benazir Bhutto?” Herald

Newspapers

Asia Week, New York, London

Daily Haider, Karachi

Daily Post, Lahore

Dawn, Karachi
 371

Express Tribune, Islamabad

Harold, New York

Herald, London

Newsline, London

New York Times, New York

Takbeer, (Jamaat-i-Islami) (Mansoora, Lahore)

The Frontier Post, Peshawar

The Muslim, Islamabad

The Nation, Lahore

The News, Islamabad

The Pakistan Times, Lahore

The Times, London

The View Point,London

The Washington Post, Washington DC

Websites

http://oly.com.pk/emotional-intelligence- a-deficit-in-pakistan/ retrieved on

22/may.2017

http://personal.lse.ac.uk/hopkin/apsa2004ivbjh.pdf. accessed 4rth February 2019.

http://www.jochenhippler.de/html/problems_of_democracy_and_nationbuilding_in_

pakistan.html accessed 14rth May 2019.

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/americangovernment/chapter/the-shape-of-

modern-political-parties/,accessed on 23rd April 2018.

https://historypak.com/the-eighth-amendment-1985/ accessed 23 rd February 2017.

 372

https://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses/2457 accessed 24rth March 2018.

https://thegreatthinkers.org/burke/ accessed 10th December 2018.

https://www.britannica.com/ accessed 28th December 2018.

https://www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/american-government/political-parties/the-

structure-of-political-parties accessed 26th June 2017.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/ accessed 28th December 2018.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-

d&q=playing+party+politics&sa=X&ved=

2ahUKEwjLw82CqarhhV65eAKHWm7CN4Q1QIoAnoECAoQAw&biw=1366&bi

h=65 accessed 18th April 2018.

https://www.ndi.org/files/Political_Party_Programming_Guide.pdf,

accessedon28thOct.2018.

https://www.wikipedia.org/ accessed 22th December 2018.

https://www.yourdictionary.com/party-politics. Accessed on August 2017.

Pakistan People’s Party www.ppp.org.pk. Retrieved, 15-12-2017