Chapter # 2 –  Political Developments Under Different Regimes

2.1 General Ayub Khan’s Era (1958-1969)

2.1.1 Discuss the Reasons for the Promulgation of Martial Law and General Ayub Khan Coming to Power

Introduction

The period between 1947 and 1958 was one of the most turbulent phases in Pakistan’s political history. Although Pakistan achieved independence in 1947, it faced immense challenges in establishing stable democratic institutions. The deaths of key national leaders, constitutional delays, political rivalries, frequent changes of government, and administrative weaknesses created an atmosphere of uncertainty and instability. During this period, Pakistan experienced a constant struggle between politicians, bureaucrats, and military leaders for control of the state.

By 1958, many people believed that the parliamentary system had failed to provide effective governance. Political instability, economic difficulties, law and order problems, and tensions between East and West Pakistan weakened public confidence in democratic institutions. These circumstances eventually led President Iskander Mirza to impose Martial Law on 7 October 1958, abrogate the Constitution of 1956, and appoint General Muhammad Ayub Khan as Chief Martial Law Administrator. Within a few weeks, Ayub Khan removed Iskander Mirza and became Pakistan’s first military ruler, beginning a new era in the country’s political history.

Political Instability and Frequent Changes of Government

One of the most important reasons for the imposition of Martial Law was the continuous political instability that characterized Pakistan’s first decade. After the death of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah in 1948 and the assassination of Liaquat Ali Khan in 1951, Pakistan lost its most respected national leaders. Their absence created a leadership vacuum that weakened political institutions.

Between 1951 and 1958, Pakistan witnessed the appointment and dismissal of several prime ministers. Within only seven years, the country had six prime ministers:

• Khawaja Nazimuddin
• Muhammad Ali Bogra
• Chaudhry Muhammad Ali
• Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy
• Ibrahim Ismail Chundrigar
• Feroz Khan Noon

Most governments survived only for a short period before being dismissed or forced to resign. This frequent change of leadership prevented continuity in policymaking and weakened public confidence in the democratic process.

The inability of political leaders to provide stable government convinced many people that parliamentary democracy was ineffective and incapable of solving national problems.

Failure of Parliamentary Democracy

Pakistan adopted a parliamentary system under the Constitution of 1956, hoping to establish democratic governance. However, the system failed to function effectively because political parties were weak and lacked strong organizational structures.

Most political parties revolved around personalities rather than clear political programmes. Politicians frequently switched loyalties, formed unstable coalitions, and focused on personal interests rather than national development. Governments often depended on fragile alliances that collapsed whenever political disagreements emerged.

As political instability increased, many bureaucrats, military officers, and ordinary citizens began to believe that democracy had failed. This perception created support for stronger centralized leadership and contributed to the acceptance of military intervention.

Constitutional Crises and Political Deadlock

The constitutional history of Pakistan before 1958 was marked by repeated crises and uncertainty. Although Pakistan became independent in 1947, it took nearly nine years to frame its first constitution.

The Constitution of 1956 declared Pakistan an Islamic Republic and introduced a parliamentary system. However, it failed to resolve fundamental political issues. Disputes continued regarding:

• Representation of East and West Pakistan
• Provincial autonomy
• Distribution of political power
• Relations between the central and provincial governments

Political leaders were unable to develop consensus on these matters. Instead of strengthening democracy, constitutional disagreements increased political instability. Many people feared that the political system was becoming incapable of governing the country effectively.

Weakness of Political Parties

Another important factor was the weakness of political parties. After independence, Pakistan lacked strong and organized political institutions capable of supporting democratic governance.

Many parties were divided by personal rivalries and factionalism. Political leaders often prioritized their own interests over national concerns. Party discipline was weak, and elected representatives frequently changed political affiliations for personal advantage.

This instability made it difficult to establish effective governments and further damaged the reputation of democratic politics in the eyes of the public.

Dominance of Bureaucracy

During the 1950s, senior civil servants became increasingly influential in political affairs. Because politicians were often viewed as inexperienced and divided, bureaucrats assumed greater responsibility in decision-making.

Powerful bureaucratic figures such as Ghulam Muhammad and Iskander Mirza played major roles in shaping national politics. Governors-General and Presidents repeatedly dismissed elected governments and interfered in parliamentary affairs.

The growing influence of bureaucracy weakened democratic institutions and created an environment in which military intervention appeared acceptable to many officials.

Economic Problems and Public Dissatisfaction

Economic difficulties also contributed to political instability. Pakistan faced several economic challenges during the 1950s, including:

• Slow industrial growth
• High unemployment
• Inflation
• Limited development resources
• Regional economic disparities

Although some progress was made in agriculture and industry, many citizens felt that economic conditions were not improving sufficiently. Frequent political crises disrupted development planning and discouraged investment.

As public dissatisfaction increased, support grew for a government that could provide stability and economic progress.

Law and Order Problems

Political instability also affected the law and order situation throughout the country. Demonstrations, strikes, protests, and political conflicts became common in several cities.

Government authority appeared weak, and politicians often blamed one another for the deteriorating situation. Many citizens feared that continued disorder might threaten national unity and security.

Military leaders argued that stronger administrative control was necessary to restore discipline and maintain stability. This argument later became one of the justifications for Martial Law.

East-West Pakistan Differences

Relations between East Pakistan and West Pakistan became increasingly strained during the 1950s. East Pakistan contained approximately 55 percent of Pakistan’s population, yet many people believed that political and economic power remained concentrated in West Pakistan.

Several issues contributed to these tensions:

• The language controversy between Urdu and Bengali
• Unequal political representation
• Economic disparities
• Concentration of government institutions in West Pakistan

The growing dissatisfaction of East Pakistan weakened national unity and created concerns about the future stability of the country.

The One Unit Scheme and Political Opposition

In 1955, the government introduced the One Unit Scheme, which merged the provinces of West Pakistan into a single administrative unit. The purpose was to create parity between East and West Pakistan.

However, many people opposed the scheme because they believed it reduced provincial identities and concentrated power in the central government. The policy increased political tensions and generated further criticism of the existing political system.

The Role of President Iskander Mirza

President Iskander Mirza played a direct role in the imposition of Martial Law. Frustrated by political instability and the failure of parliamentary governments, he decided to take drastic action.

On 7 October 1958, Iskander Mirza:

• Abrogated the Constitution of 1956.
• Dissolved the National Assembly and Provincial Assemblies.
• Banned all political parties.
• Declared Martial Law throughout Pakistan.
• Appointed General Ayub Khan as Chief Martial Law Administrator.

Mirza justified these actions by claiming that politicians had failed to govern effectively and that extraordinary measures were necessary to save the country from chaos.

General Ayub Khan Comes to Power

Although Iskander Mirza imposed Martial Law, he soon lost power to the military. General Ayub Khan controlled the armed forces and enjoyed strong support within the military establishment.

On 27 October 1958, only twenty days after the declaration of Martial Law, Ayub Khan removed Iskander Mirza from office and forced him into exile in Britain. Ayub Khan then assumed full control of the government and became Pakistan’s first military ruler.

Ayub Khan argued that democracy had failed because politicians were corrupt, selfish, and incapable of governing effectively. He claimed that military rule was necessary to restore stability, discipline, and national progress.

Immediate Impact of Martial Law

The declaration of Martial Law fundamentally changed Pakistan’s political system.

The immediate consequences included:

• Suspension of democratic institutions.
• Abrogation of the Constitution of 1956.
• Ban on political parties.
• Concentration of power in the military government.
• Expansion of bureaucratic and military influence in politics.

Ayub Khan later introduced several reforms, including the Basic Democracies System (1959) and the Constitution of 1962, which reshaped Pakistan’s political structure.

While many people initially welcomed the restoration of stability, critics argued that Martial Law undermined democratic development and established a precedent for future military interventions.

Historical Assessment

Historians continue to debate whether Martial Law was necessary. Supporters argue that political instability, constitutional crises, and administrative failures had made effective governance impossible. They believe Ayub Khan restored stability and created conditions for economic growth.

Critics, however, argue that the imposition of Martial Law weakened democratic institutions and encouraged military involvement in politics. They contend that Pakistan’s democratic system needed reform rather than suspension.

Most historians agree that the events of 1958 marked a turning point in Pakistan’s political history because they introduced direct military rule and significantly altered the relationship between civilian and military institutions.

Conclusion

The promulgation of Martial Law in 1958 was the result of multiple interconnected factors, including political instability, weak democratic institutions, constitutional crises, economic difficulties, bureaucratic dominance, law and order problems, and tensions between East and West Pakistan. President Iskander Mirza’s decision to abrogate the Constitution and impose Martial Law created the opportunity for General Ayub Khan to assume power. Ayub Khan’s rise marked the beginning of Pakistan’s first military regime and had a profound impact on the country’s political development. While Martial Law brought administrative stability and stronger central control, it also weakened democratic traditions and established a precedent for future military intervention in Pakistan’s politics.