The subject of this message may be a mouthful, however it may deserve reflection.
It arose in the context of a message from the Gordon Brown the prime minster of UK that he wishes to codify the unwritten constitution of the country. UK is probably the only country in the democratic world that does not have a codified constitution.
It has functioned as the leading democracy whose parliament has been called as the mother of all parliaments, and which is emulated around the globe in written constitutions.
The supremacy of the British Parliament was established after the Magna Carta that curtailed the power of the kings and protected the rights of the subject.
Since then the citizens of the UK have governed themselves, under the Acts of Parliament, Treaties, Common Laws, and Conventions.
One would wonder as to how a citizenry can govern it without an unwritten constitution, and the answer may lie in the Social Contracts that a citizenry adopts in conscience and spirit to live together in a society. This agreement may only be in principle for honorable nations whose word may be worth its weight in gold.
Let's understand what social contracts are all about. "Social contract describes a broad class of theories that try to explain the ways in which people form states to maintain social order. The notion of the social contract implies that the people give up sovereignty to a government or other authority in order to receive or maintain social order through the rule of law. It can also be thought of as an agreement by the governed on a set of rules by which they are governed."
In order for a social contract to have any value, it needs to be internalized in conscience as I suggested earlier. That is what Socrates did. "Many have argued that Plato's dialog Crito expresses a Greek version of social contract theory. In this dialog, Socrates refuses to escape from jail to avoid being put to death. He argues that since he has willingly remained in Athens all of his life despite opportunities to go elsewhere, he has accepted the social contract i.e. the burden of the local laws, and he cannot violate these laws even when they are against his self-interest."
It can then be said that unless a people accept in their conscience the value of a social contract, that may even be a written constitution, it can only remain a figment of imagination, or a piece of useless paper that can be shredded and trampled upon at the will of the powerful or the fascists in a society.
Many a times, we strive to understand with sincerity as to why a constitutional rule or respect of laws has not been entrenched in Pakistani society. The answer to that may lie in Ibn e Khaldoun's theory of "Assabiyat” that can be translated as tribal, based on prejudice, or parochialism.
Ibn e Khaladoun proposed Assabiyat as the fundamental principle of governance in Arabic or Islamic societies. In such societies, the ascendant or dominant tribes rule by force, and are toppled and replaced by another tribe when the time comes.
This has continued in all Muslim societies since the death of Prophet Mohammed. It is this Assabiyat that drives and controls the psyche of the Muslim rulers as well as the citizens.
We the Pakistanis are an essential member of the Muslim society at large. We have never attempted to shift the paradigm, and agreed in conscience to a social contract that will bind us to become a society based on rule of law, on respect of each other's rights, and a willingness to live together with appropriate give and take.
That is the reason that we are perpetually at each other's throat despite a written constitution in Pakistan. And contrary to that the Britons have lived together for over 1200 years without a written constitution.
