In electing new president, Pakistan takes another key democratic step

Mamnoon Hussain, a leader of the ruling party, will succeed President Zardari. The vote follows May's historic transfer of power from one civilian government to the next.

Arshad Butt/AP
A Pakistani female lawmaker casts her vote for the presidential election at the provincial assembly in Quetta, Pakistan, Tuesday, July 30. Pakistani lawmakers elected a Karachi-based businessman, who has earlier served as the governor of the Sindh Province, as the country's next president Tuesday, the election commission chief said.
Anjum Naveed/AP
Mamnoon Hussain, a candidate from ruling party Pakistan Muslim League-N arrives to submit his nomination papers for upcoming presidential election in Islamabad, Pakistan, July 24. Pakistani lawmakers elected Hussain, a Karachi-based businessman, who has earlier served as the governor of the Sindh Province, as the country's next president Tuesday, the election commission chief said.

Pakistani legislators elected a new president on Tuesday, in what is being seen as a key development in the country’s democratic process.

Mamnoon Hussain, a leader of the ruling Pakistan Muslim League party of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, was elected president with a comfortable majority.

The outgoing president, Asif Ali Zardari, will end his term on Sept. 8, marking the first time in Pakistan’s history that a democratically elected president has officially completed five years in power. In May, Prime Minister Sharif’s party swept the parliamentary elections in a historic transfer of power from one civilian government to the next.

“Pakistan’s democratic consolidation continues as a new civilian president has been elected by the electoral college,” says political commentator Raza Rumi. “Having said that, the inherent fissures within the political elite have also come to light during this process as the major opposition party – the Pakistan People's Party – did not participate in the elections. That raises a question on the legitimacy of the process.”

The run-up to the election was marred with controversy. The influential Pakistan People's Party as well as the Awami National Party both boycotted the vote. The parties’ bone of contention was that the election – earlier set by the Election Commission for Aug. 6 – was moved to July 30, after the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz petitioned the Supreme Court to have the schedule changed. The Pakistan People's Party has said it was not consulted in the process. And the head of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan, said earlier this week that his party was only participating “under protest.”

In any case, Hussain was projected to win the election given that his party had the majority of votes needed in the national and provincial assemblies.

Hussain, a Karachi-based businessman, has earlier served as the governor of the Sindh Province. An seemingly earnest, affable man and a party loyalist, Hussain’s nomination aimed to provide some representation to smaller provinces at the highest levels of government.

“It’s a very deliberate choice to nominate a Karachiite as a presidential candidate, because the Sharif government had been severely criticized for giving the most important posts to legislators from the largest province, Punjab. A balance had to be effected,” says Mr. Rumi. “The other significance of Mamnoon Hussain’s nomination is the inclusion of Karachi’s citizens in the governance process, given Karachi’s economic importance and that the fact that the business lobbies support the Sharif government.”

Hussain will take oath in September. He is unlikely to play a leading role, as the president is largely a figurehead in Pakistan. Constitutional amendments made during President Zardari’s tenure transferred most powers from the president to the prime minister.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.