Pakistan’s President Pervez Musharraf has kept his word, and lifted the state of emergency proclaimed six weeks ago. But with this, Pakistan today is still very different from what it was on the morning of November 3. On that day, he invoked the spectre of armed extremism and loss of Pakistan’s territorial sovereignty to justify what was martial law by another name. That was really to justify his mildly stated, but actual, agenda: to purge the judiciary of men obstructing his re-election as Pakistan’s civilian president. That judicial obstacle was and is embodied in the person of the now deposed Supreme
The main political parties have already decided, wisely, to participate in the January 8 elections. Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto are actually considering seat adjustments to counter the advantages of incumbency with Musharraf’s political proteges. The two former PMs are withstanding immense pressure to boycott the elections, from sundry politicians but mainly from students and lawyers seeking more comprehensive restoration of civil rights. The crackling tension between these two anti-Musharraf groups — politicians and civil society — may be good for Pakistan’s democracy. It broadens the canvas for democratic activity by giving space to non-electoral players. And it promises to impose on Sharif and Bhutto accountability of a sort not seen before in Pakistan. They are aware that given the current public mood, they must tolerate constant interrogation over their decisions and agenda. By taking them away from their old comforts of an either-or choice in elections, this will strengthen the spirit of democracy.
President Musharraf, even after the lifting of emergency, remains extraordinarily powerful. The onus is, thus, on him to conduct a free and fair poll. And he must know that even if January 8 passes well, he will be called upon to do more for anybody to believe that democracy has indeed been restored.