Exploring Power Politics and Constitutional Subversions in Pakistan: A Political and Constitutional Assessment of Instability in Pakistan
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Pakistan’s recent history can be labeled as anything but stable. From its very inception, Pakistan has had trouble agreeing on the nations constitutional framework. Pakistan’s first constitution was not instituted until nine years after the country gained independence from Britain and partitioned itself from India. Even then, the debate as to what type of government Pakistan should have remained unsettled. In its short history, Pakistan has had three different constitutions (1956, 1962, and 1973) interspersed with periods of martial law. The Constitution of 1973, although a significant step towards democratization, has become a battleground for presidents and prime ministers, who have added amendments solely to solidify their positions in office. The struggle between the two heads of state is apparent: the Constitution of 1973 has undergone thirty-six amendments, many of which pertain to the same few articles that delegate power to the heads of state. The power struggle has made Pakistan an unstable nation. This instability is especially disconcerting since Pakistan has nuclear capabilities and is already engaged in a war within its boundaries to eradicate terrorism in accordance with the United States’ war on terror. The consequences of Pakistan’s instability could be disastrous not only for Pakistan but for the entire world. The initial focus of this paper is to analyze the constitutional amendments which have caused instability in Pakistan. This paper will first examine the Eighth Amendment passed by President Zia ul-Haq in 1985, which allowed a president to dissolve Parliament and dismiss the prime minister. This power has been invoked by multiple presidents to overthrow elected prime ministers based on largely unsubstantiated claims. Next, this paper will address Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments, which were ratified in 1993. These amendments not only reduced the president’s powers but also increased those of the prime minister. Finally, this paper will discuss former President Pervez Musharraf’s Seventeenth Amendment, which was ratified in 2003. This amendment once again restored the presidential powers created by the Eighth Amendment and reduced the prime minister’s powers. Pakistan’s structural instability demands analysis of the underlying political and constitutional problems which prevent it from becoming a stable nation. First, Pakistan’s presidents and prime ministers have adopted a form of “power politics” in which one office has exclusive decision-making power and does not share it with the other. Moreover, the presidents and prime ministers have not been willing to allow a checks-and-balances system on their authority. Second, the Pakistani Constitution is easily subverted and remains subject to the whims of Pakistan’s leaders. Current President Asif Ali Zardari recognizes the damaging effects of these amendments and has promised to ratify an Eighteenth Amendment by March 30, 2010, which would restore the balance of powers between the heads of state as originally envisioned in the Constitution of 1973. However, his proposal only addresses the first cause of instability (i.e., the political cause). Until the second cause (i.e., the constitutional cause) is also addressed, Pakistan cannot ensure stability. Accordingly, this paper will argue that President Zardari’s Eighteenth Amendment must address Article 239, the clause that governs how the Pakistani Constitution is amended. To this end, amendment formulas, as most recently adopted by the Canadian Constitution, are one possible route that Pakistan could take.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,011 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».