A
Critical Constitutional and Governance Analysis of Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif’s
Political Career
Abstract
This research paper critically
examines the political career of Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif and evaluates the structural,
constitutional, economic, and institutional damage inflicted upon Pakistan
during his multiple tenures as Prime Minister. Using primary constitutional
texts, Supreme Court judgments, parliamentary debates, and authoritative
secondary literature, the paper argues that Nawaz Sharif’s governance weakened
democratic institutions, undermined judicial independence, entrenched dynastic
politics, promoted elite-centric economic policies, and damaged accountability
mechanisms. The study adopts a critical constitutional lens and situates Nawaz
Sharif’s leadership within Pakistan’s broader struggle for democratic
consolidation and rule of law.
Keywords
Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif,
constitutional damage, judicial independence, dynastic politics, parliamentary
democracy, accountability, civil-military relations
1.
Introduction
Pakistan’s constitutional and
political history has been shaped by repeated disruptions, institutional
conflict, and leadership failures. Among civilian rulers, Mian Muhammad Nawaz
Sharif occupies a central position due to his three non-consecutive terms as
Prime Minister. While often portrayed as a symbol of civilian supremacy and
development, a closer constitutional and governance-based analysis reveals that
his political conduct caused lasting harm to Pakistan’s democratic and
institutional framework.
This paper argues that Nawaz
Sharif’s leadership was characterized by excessive concentration of power,
disregard for institutional autonomy, and prioritization of personal and
familial interests over constitutional governance.
2.
Methodology and Sources
This study employs a qualitative
doctrinal methodology, relying on:
- Constitutional texts of Pakistan
- Supreme Court judgments
- National Assembly debates (Hansards)
- Authoritative political histories and legal scholarship
3.
Concentration of Power and Institutional Weakening
3.1
Marginalization of Parliament
Although Nawaz Sharif enjoyed
overwhelming parliamentary majorities, Parliament functioned largely as a
formality. Major policy decisions were taken outside parliamentary
deliberation, undermining representative democracy.
National Assembly debates from 1997
reflect opposition complaints that legislation was rushed without meaningful
discussion, particularly constitutional amendments expanding executive power.¹
3.2
Erosion of Cabinet Governance
Cabinet decision-making was replaced
by personalized rule, weakening collective responsibility and institutional
governance.² This practice violated the spirit of parliamentary democracy
envisioned in the Constitution of 1973.³
4.
Assault on Judicial Independence
4.1
The 1997 Supreme Court Crisis
The most severe institutional damage
occurred during the confrontation with the judiciary in 1997, when ruling-party
activists attacked the Supreme Court while it was hearing contempt proceedings
against the Prime Minister.⁴
This incident marked an
unprecedented breakdown of respect for judicial authority.
4.2
Constitutional Consequences
Judicial independence is a
cornerstone of constitutionalism. By pressuring judges and manipulating
judicial appointments, Nawaz Sharif weakened the rule of law and normalized
executive interference in the judiciary.⁵
5.
Dynastic Politics and Democratic Decay
5.1
Family Control of Political Party
Nawaz Sharif transformed the
Pakistan Muslim League (N) into a family-dominated organization. Parliamentary
debates during the 2017 political crisis highlight concerns regarding
hereditary leadership and the lack of internal party democracy.⁶
5.2
Impact on Political Culture
Dynastic politics discourages merit,
entrenches elite dominance, and prevents political renewal. Pakistan’s
continued democratic stagnation is closely linked to this model of leadership.⁷
6.
Economic Governance and Elite Capture
6.1
Debt-Driven Development
While infrastructure projects were
showcased as progress, they were largely financed through external borrowing,
contributing to long-term fiscal instability.⁸
6.2
Unequal Taxation and Crony Capitalism
Economic policies favored industrial
elites and politically connected business groups. National Assembly budget
debates repeatedly noted the failure to broaden the tax base and protect the
poor.⁹
7.
Corruption, Panama Papers, and Loss of Legitimacy
7.1
Offshore Assets and Judicial Findings
The Panama Papers disclosures
exposed offshore companies linked to the Sharif family. The Supreme Court held
that Nawaz Sharif failed to establish transparency regarding his assets.¹⁰
7.2
Constitutional Disqualification
His disqualification under Article
62(1)(f) reflected not merely a personal failing but a constitutional crisis
rooted in a lack of accountability at the highest level of government.¹¹
8.
Undermining Accountability Institutions
Rather than strengthening
accountability mechanisms, Nawaz Sharif politicized them. Opposition speeches
in Parliament consistently accused the government of selective accountability
and victimization.¹²
This practice weakened institutional
credibility and entrenched impunity.
9.
Civil–Military Relations and Political Instability
Nawaz Sharif’s confrontational approach
toward civil-military relations lacked institutional maturity. His failure to
build consensus resulted in repeated breakdowns of civilian rule, reinforcing
instability rather than strengthening democracy.¹³
10.
Administrative Failure and Governance Deficits
Public administration under Nawaz
Sharif suffered from over-centralization, a lack of merit-based appointments, and neglect of social sectors, including education and healthcare.¹⁴ Parliamentary
questions repeatedly highlighted governance failures at the federal level.¹⁵
11.
Long-Term Constitutional and Political Consequences
The cumulative effect of Nawaz
Sharif’s governance includes:
- Weakened judicial authority
- Normalization of dynastic politics
- Institutional distrust
- Increased public cynicism toward democracy
These consequences continue to
hinder Pakistan’s constitutional development.¹⁶
12.
Conclusion
This research paper concludes that
Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif’s political career inflicted multidimensional damage
on Pakistan’s constitutional order and governance structures. Despite multiple
opportunities to reform democratic institutions, his leadership prioritized retaining power, fostering personal loyalty, and promoting elite interests.
For Pakistan to progress
constitutionally and democratically, future leadership must learn from these
failures and commit to institutional supremacy, transparency, and genuine
parliamentary governance.
Footnotes
1.
National Assembly of Pakistan, Debates,
Vol 34, No 7 (1997) 112–114.
2.
Hasan Askari Rizvi, Military,
State and Society in Pakistan (Palgrave Macmillan 2000) 215.
3.
Constitution of the Islamic Republic
of Pakistan 1973, arts 90–91.
4.
Al-Jehad
Trust v Federation of Pakistan
PLD 1996 SC 324, 351–352.
5.
Martin Lau, The Role of Islam in
the Legal System of Pakistan (Martinus Nijhoff 2006) 198–200.
6.
National Assembly Debates, Vol 47,
No 3 (2017) 67–69.
7.
Ayesha Jalal, Democracy and
Authoritarianism in South Asia (CUP 1995) 143–145.
8.
State Bank of Pakistan, Annual
Report 2017–18 (SBP 2018) 89–92.
9.
National Assembly Budget Debates
2016–17, Vol 45, 210–213.
10.
Imran Ahmad
Khan Niazi v Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif
PLD 2017 SC 265, 345–347.
11.
Constitution of Pakistan 1973, art
62(1)(f).
12.
National Assembly Debates, Vol 46,
No 9 (2016) 154–156.
13.
Lawrence Ziring, Pakistan: At the
Crosscurrent of History (Oneworld 2003) 274–276.
14.
Ishrat Husain, Governing the
Ungovernable (OUP 2018) 122–125.
15.
National Assembly Questions, Starred
Questions List No 48 (2015) 34–36.
16.
Mohammad Waseem, Political
Conflict in Pakistan (OUP 2010) 301–304.