Main Points from the Presentation by
Mr Shafqat Mahmood, Senate of Pakistan

• Colonization has left South Asia with a paradoxical legacy—a strong executive and a fascination with the Westminster model of parliamentary democracy. It is a paradox because the strong executive does not allow parliamentary model to function very well.

• Parliament has become one other institution along with the executive, the judiciary, the armed forces etc. competing for space and power. So, instead of being an apex representative institution having ascendency over other institutions it just another insitution in competition with others.

• Elected Prime Ministers who are a product of the parliament disregard this institution after their elevation. They immediately start to rely upon the old colonial executive to rule the country and give lesser importance to their own party or the parliament. In such a context, the opposition often feels it should go home and come back in 5 years! In Pakistan, and other countries there are laws that forbid floor crossing; this reinforces the Prime Minister’s power and allows him or her to ignore the parliament.

• Committees are important parliamentary instruments, but in my experience, they often end up being an element of an elaborate charade. They are a part of the facade which allows viceregal rule to masquerade as a parliamentary democracy.

• In some cases the committees start to play an effective role until they begin to touch on issues that would put the government in a bad light. The executive then intervenes to stop the committees from proceeding further.

• The Public Accounts Committee has the potential of having an important impact, but it is often over-stretched. My feeling is that auditing should not be confined to one committee. Rather, all standing committees should have an audit function as regards the ministry to which they are assigned.

• In Pakistan, the budget is never sufficiently scrutinized by the Parliament as it is considered to be a secret document until it is presented by the Minister. As this is done at the end of the fiscal year, there is very little time for scrutiny to take place before the budget comes into effect. Budget can be an important element of parliamentary accountability if the committees are allowed to scrutinize and approve it before it is presented to the parliament.

• Civil Society does not understand the reality of the MP, which contributes to a negative image of parliamentarians. The role of the MP becomes to respond to bureaucratic problems at the local level rather than to deal with issues of national concern. There is therefore a skewed view of the role of a ‘good’ MP.

• The governance map as adapted by African parliamentarians is also a good reflection of the South Asian situation (i.e. state/executive dominated system of governance).

• In this context, strengthening parliament sounds like an enormous task. There is no quick resolution. Reform can only come from within and the powerful will need to take interest. However, I believe that if Parliament stands on its feet, good governance will be possible.