PTI

Tehreek-e-Insaf and democracy in parties


The uncertainty about the announcement of the schedule of the elections, which was doubtful even before its holding, has been removed. According to the announcement of the Election Commission, the election schedule will probably be announced around December 14, 56 days before the date of holding the elections on February 8. On Saturday, Tehreek-e-Insaf's party elections were held in haste and barrister Gohar was elected unopposed in view of the disqualification of party stalwart Imran, while the rest of the office bearers were retained.


However, just as PTI's previous elections were declared illegal, it would be premature to say whether the "absentee party elections" held yesterday by Tehreek-e-Insaaf, which disappeared from the field, will have legal justification or not. When the aim is to expel a party from the electoral field, then it is not a big task to make the mark of the bat disappear from the ballot paper like a sword. The major advantage of this sin will be that it will be possible to avoid the enormous sins of widespread rigging in the entire election process. The question has already been raised on the transparency of the elections, so it is another sin. Of course, the Election Commission will find it difficult to seal these emergency party elections, which were a kind of absentee funeral prayer, that PTI's last year's elections were much more "democratic and legal".


By the way, which party's elections are democratic in which transparent election rules are taken into account.There is no evidence anywhere of the elections of 176 registered parties, except for one half exception, and the parties who have informed the Election Commission of their election results and who have also been given honorable confirmation, how democratic and representative their elections were. All parties are indebted to their  founders, founders, families, personalities and groups dependent, And they are not remotely related to the democratic process. Now the identification of blind ears (PTI) is not ridiculous. 


When the political parties are undemocratic and dictatorial in nature, or they are dependent on a family or a personal talisman, what is the meaning of public participation in the democratic process? A small group around a leader, above party workers and members, will not only decide their candidates in elections, so-called manifestos and government formation and legislations, then democracy will have a public basis and approval, neither parties will be able to become an organic body that can cultivate democracy and shape the will of the people. Of course, historically, institutional and state interventions created an environment for the development of democratic processes and parties, but who prevented the democratic and organic formation of political parties? If anyone had broken the shackles of the dictatorial structure, it was the parties of public politics and that too with the force of public power. And the expression of people's power is creating a good spirit for Khmer in the post-colonial authoritarian state.


The demonstration of which we have seen in the tragic chapter of 1970. In a state in which there is no active participation of the people, then there is no geography, and if these two components are not present, then there is no moral status of the alleged ruler, then where does the state remain? We read in political science that the state is an oppressive force above society that maintains its neutrality. But when a powerful entity claims to be a state and loses its alienation and neutrality, such a state loses its "justification". Meanwhile, the censorship-ridden media confirmed their intellectual dishonesty by adopting the term "state" as an alternative to "army". However, the state is, in the final analysis, a class-based violent institution which, through a social contract, the people try to maintain their right to rule by binding them to constitutional protection and the rule of law. Where the people are successful, republic becomes their destiny and where they fail, dictatorship, monarchy and caliphate, monarchy and totalitarianism dominate. Unfortunately, this is the fate of Pakistan and it is not ready to change.


Now after the party elections whether Tehreek-e-Insaf will be able to participate in the elections as a political party despite being a legal and constitutional party, it will become clear in the coming days. The biggest obstacle in its way is public acceptance which prevents it from being accepted. According to political science, there are many types of political parties, but all of them claim the interests of some class or classes advocacy of interests. Ideologically, they are manifestations of left and right wing and their various secondary tendencies. Depending on their structure, these parties are either cadre parties or public ones.


Right-wing and left-wing ideological parties are parties of cadres. We have broad popular support parties that impose group or personal or family power on the support of public constituencies and elections like PPP, PML-N, Tehreek-e-Insaf, A. NP etc. Family monarchy in parties is antithetical to democracy, while personality or cult worship may be populist, not democratic. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto organized a large Awami Party, but no alternative leadership emerged and the party became shrouded in dynastic or royal legacy. The PML-N was born from the bowels of dictatorship and grew out of the right-wing reaction against Bhutto's social liberalism and became a family limited company. Tehreek-e-Insaf gathered around Imran's cult, which remained silent, and despite the total dependence on this cult, Minus Imran agreed that the sign of the bat should remain intact.


In view of the party analysis we have presented above, it can only be said that all these parties are deprived of the basic quality of fulfilling public goals and democratic values. What is happening now with Tehreek-e-Insaaf, and it has agreed to Minus Imran formally if not really, has happened before. When there was an attempt to minus Bhutto, the PPP became a parliamentarian. In the 2018 elections, minus Nawaz Sharif, Brother Khurd took over the leadership and sent his elder brother's politics on vacation, whether he becomes the Prime Minister for the fourth time or not.


Now Imran has also been forced to retreat, so it is not yet known whether the newly arrived barrister Gohar will be able to save the mark of the bat or not. If this happens to the parties, then what will happen if the beauty of BB democracy is not disregarded? However, the institutional preparations for making the hybrid system permanent have been completed. Now who will be his ladle or ladles, his musical game has started, what is the purpose of the democrats and what has to do with the people reeling in inflation.