04-07-2009, 12:25 AM
Nakaiun,
If some political leader is criticized, it does not by any means, give any support or right to any general to come into government. There is no other statement on this issue.
However, political set-ups have the basic concept of getting critciism and opposition in everything they do. They have to bear it with open mind. There is also no question on it. The democratic set up which wants 5 open years without any objection, criticism, hurdle and problem is not democratic at all. If this is true then what is the concept of opposition at all?
A deemed democratic setup without bearing criticism or the setup which bans any agitation, expression and opposition is nothing but a civil martial law or disguised martial law. Mind it, where we had been opposing army rule we had also not been wishing a civil martial law in our country. One of its example is governer rule attempt in Punjab. The other is the continuous army operation in northern areas without any attempt of settling down the issues. This is the dirtiest picture of a democratic set-up. I am not here to praise or support any body. I am just pointing out something odd that is against the basic concept of democracy.
Just let me know in which democratic set up USA use to apply drone attacks without any objection from the government, which in fact is a government by the people, and for the people? There are a number of fronts where people were expecting better from democratic setup in comparison to Martial Law but nothing has been improved in almost one year. There is no point for asking more and more time or asking for raising no question for complete 5 years. I mean what it actually means that give them 5 years? What it means? They are our peoples' elected persons and are answerable for whatever they do. They have there all the 5 years, no body is expected to snatch their seats, but they have to be acountable. This is the only beauty of the democracy.
If we have to give every one 5 years (this time one party, next time other, then other, then army etc) without raising questions and asking for corrective measures then how this would be called democracy at all? How the peoples issues will be resolved.
Therefore, the purpose of mentioning pitfall of current rulers is very clear and focussed. We all know what the anamolies they have. If someone don't want to say something its his right. But the people who like raising voice should not be criticised. We need democracy and not a disguised civil martial law. This is the thing which these rulers have been made to feel by the masses on the issue of CJ. This is democracy. All the obstacles and negative efforts were nothing but a symptom of martial law. I again mention we need democracy. It does not mean we need a particular party or a particular person.
Since we elect these persons by our votes, whenever they will do wrong, it means our selection had been wrong. So, eventualy we did wrong and only we have to make it good one day. That was the purpose of my post. I feel we unfortunately don't learn any thing from previous experiences. We will be doing same in upcoming days.
Regards,
KAMRAN.
