Spreading a rumor is as easy as flying a paper airplane, so false rumors keep circulating every day. One such rumor, spread to create fear, is that soon the political and constitutional system will be wrapped up and martial law will be imposed in Pakistan. The army chief will become the President of Pakistan; he will be a uniformed president, and the country’s affairs will only improve when the formalities of democracy and its associated flaws are eliminated. In this regard, examples of China, Singapore, and Egypt are given, where rapid development has taken place and transparent systems exist, yet they do not have a democracy like Pakistan’s. In Islamabad’s circles, this rumor often circulates that what is the need for an artificial hybrid system? The real power of this country is the army; it should come forward openly and run the country itself. Instead of indirect rule, there should be direct rule. This was the very argument on the basis of which Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, General Zia-ul-Haq, and General Pervez Musharraf imposed martial law and made serious, long-term attempts to change the political system and the state structure of the country. All these past attempts failed badly. None of the objectives set at the time of imposing martial law were achieved, and all four martial laws eventually resulted in the restoration of democracy. Before every martial law, it was said that mistakes had been made in the past martial laws, but now those mistakes had been corrected; this time martial law would truly set the country on the right path—but the result remained the same. Certainly, even this time, discussions must have taken place in the high corridors of power, and various priorities must have been considered. It is not known what was discussed or who said what, but it can be said with certainty that due to the bitter experiences of the past, strong and serious support for imposing martial law is not visible, and the general consensus is that the country must be run within the constitution. This is indeed a welcome development.

The constitution is the veil of the state. If the veil is lifted, the state becomes naked; then everyone comes to know the real centers of its power, and it becomes an opportunity for outsiders to target the state at its weak points. Apparently, the current system has agreed not to remove the democratic and constitutional covering, and reason also demands that a nuclear state should remain clothed in a democratic cover and constitutional veil so that its nuclear assets remain safely hidden and protected.

The veil may have originated in Turkey, but it has proven to be a highly effective method of concealment. Not only Muslims, but even non-believers can use a veil if they need to hide something. When beauty is unveiled, it becomes difficult to bear. Under martial law, the army becomes both the face and the body of the government and the state. In today’s world, it is relatively easy to criticize and target a state and government under martial law. For example, the Commonwealth and the European Union have clearly set the principle that relations will be severed with any country where martial law is imposed, and its membership in these institutions will be suspended. The global difficulties of transitioning from democratic to non-democratic systems are now known to everyone, but legal and constitutional challenges have existed from the beginning as well. When General Ayub Khan imposed the first martial law in 1958, he must have necessarily consulted Supreme Court judges; that is why Justice Munir declared the martial law valid. General Zia-ul-Haq’s martial law is like yesterday’s event, and the events of General Musharraf’s martial law are also before us. General Zia-ul-Haq was aware of the legal, constitutional, and international difficulties; therefore, A.K. Brohi, Sharifuddin Pirzada, and Aziz Munshi were brought into play. A solution was found: the democratic Constitution of 1973 would not be abolished but suspended. Sharifuddin Pirzada, known as the magician of Jeddah, used to weld parts into the constitution to create a hybrid of democratic and non-democratic systems so that the system could continue. President Zia-ul-Haq remained president in uniform, and General Musharraf followed the same tradition, remaining president in uniform on a civilian post. Outwardly, the impression was of a semi-democratic system, but history has termed both periods as authoritarian. Now, whether some “magician of Hafizabad” or some other non-democratic wise man is at work, whoever it is has advised the government not to weld the constitution like Pirzada did, because that removes the veil. This adviser has convinced them that the democratic covering is extremely necessary. This clever strategist’s formula is that it is not necessary to remove the democratic covering in order to seize power and authority; whatever can be done can be done within this democratic attire so that the system remains stable. If, like in the past, martial law similar to that of General Zia or General Musharraf is imposed, the global environment currently in Pakistan’s favor may turn against it.

In short, the current situation is that nothing should be done that would spoil the democratic makeup. What may happen tomorrow cannot be said with certainty, because a new event or incident could completely change thinking and planning. It should be remembered that General Musharraf was also made Chief Executive. Whatever name is given, if the political and civilian government is completely dismissed, then decisions begin to be made unilaterally rather than collectively. Indian Prime Minister Inder Kumar Gujral once told this humble writer in an interview a unique historical fact: that two democratic countries have never fought a war, and even if conflict arises, democratic institutions do not allow it to prolong. Even if heaps of arguments are presented against democracy in the Third World and the Second World, countries that have enjoyed the fruits of democracy for a hundred years will rely more on their experiences than on arguments. Instead of making excuses to wind up democracy by creating narratives of special circumstances like non-democratic countries, it would be better to keep our establishment and defense strength hidden under the veil while keeping the constitution and democracy in front. Even if political and constitutional governments are weak or incompetent, they are far better than non-democratic governments. This humble person can only submit: do not remove the veil…!!