Real change will not come through amendments, speeches, or court decisions. It will come only when authority shifts from drawing rooms to streets, from palaces to villages, from feudal families to the hands of the people.
By Noor Muhammad Marri Advocate | Islamabad
We, as a nation, keep running after the stone but never question the hand that throws it. We react to every crisis—never act to prevent it. We raised slogans for democracy, then demanded restoration of the Constitution, then glorified the 18th Amendment, and today we oppose the 27th Amendment. But the most important question remains unchanged: did any of this bring real change to the life of a common citizen in Sindh?
For the last 18 years, Pakistan has been under uninterrupted democracy. No Martial Law, no constitutional breakdown. Yet, the condition of Sindh has not improved; in many ways, it has worsened. The farmer still waits for water, the laborer for justice, the student for a teacher in a ghost school, and the patient for a doctor in an empty hospital. If democracy means people’s rule, where are the people in this system?
We are told the Constitution was restored, institutions revived, and courts made independent. But what relief has the Constitution given to the poor? What justice has the Supreme Court delivered to the oppressed? Is this not the same Supreme Court that legalized every Martial Law under the Doctrine of Necessity? Did these judges not take oath under the PCO? Did they not create the idea that “necessity of law” is greater than the Constitution itself? If constitutional courts cannot protect the people from hunger, feudalism, or injustice—then what difference will more constitutional courts make to the common man?
The 18th Amendment was celebrated as the victory of provincial autonomy. But in Sindh, did it empower the people or only expand the powers of feudal lords, ministers, and bureaucrats? New ministries were created, funds were distributed among political families, and public institutions were turned into personal fiefdoms. The 18th Amendment gave authority to provinces, but it did not give authority to the people. Feudalism remained alive, local governments stayed powerless, and the ordinary citizen remained voiceless.
In Sindh, democracy and dictatorship may differ in speeches, but their results are painfully similar. Under both systems, lands were allotted to foreign companies, canals and rivers were privatized for the influential, fishermen were deprived of waters, and farmers were deprived of land. Whether the Army Chief is appointed by the Prime Minister or the President does not matter when real power never reaches the people.
The uproar against the 27th Amendment is not a cry for democracy—it is a cry for lost privileges. This amendment is seen as a financial cut to feudal elites and political dynasties; that is why their teams scream loudly in Parliament and on television. This is not a people’s movement. This is a preservation of power, wealth, and family rule.
So what has democracy delivered to Sindh? Poverty, hunger, corruption, injustice, and hopelessness continue to rule. If today more constitutional courts are established, will it change the fate of the poor man? When the Supreme Court itself has a history of legalizing Martial Laws, serving power over people, and inventing the necessity of law—what hope remains for justice?
The truth is simple and bitter: this is not the war of the people. This is a fight between the sons of Shah Jehan—an ongoing political drama, a battle of thrones, not a struggle for the masses.
Real change will not come through amendments, speeches, or court decisions. It will come only when authority shifts from drawing rooms to streets, from palaces to villages, from feudal families to the hands of the people.
______________________
Noor Muhammad Marri, Advocate and Mediator Islamabad.
