Social Sciences, asked by asfiyaahmed7838, 1 year ago

what is legal frame work order

Answers

Answered by Stephenstrange
15
The Legal Framework Order refers to presidential decrees issued during military rule in Pakistan in 1970 and 2002 over the organisation of elections:

Legal Framework Order, 1970, issued by Gen. Yahya Khan to lay out the rules governing the Pakistani general election of 1970

Legal Framework Order, 2002, issued by Gen. Pervez Musharraf in regards to the Pakistani general election of 2002 and the revival of the Constitution of Pakistan because he wanted dictatorship in pakistan¡

According to this order, the President can dismiss the national and provincial assemblies


Hope it is helpful plz mark as brainliest

scrhsmokhra: Thanks
Answered by vexithreddy
0

Answer:

Explanation:

In Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf led a military coup in October 1999. He overthrew a democratically elected government and declared himself the ‘Chief Executive’ of the country. Later he changed his designation to President and in 2002 held a referendum in the country that granted him a five- year extension. Pakistani media, human rights organisations and democracy activists said that the

referendum

was based on malpractices and fraud. In August 2002 he issued a ‘Legal Framework Order’ that amended the Constitution of Pakistan. According to this Order, the President can dismiss the national and provincial assemblies. The work of the civilian cabinet is supervised by a National Security Council which is dominated by military officers. After passing this law, elections were held to the national and provincial assemblies. So Pakistan has had elections, elected representatives have some powers. But the final power rested with military officers and General Musharraf himself.

Clearly, there are many reasons why Pakistan under General Musharraf should not be called a democracy. But let us focus on one of these. Can we say that the rulers are elected by the people in Pakistan? Not quite. People may have elected their representatives to the national and provincial assemblies but those elected representatives were not really the rulers. They cannot take the final decisions. The power to take final decision rested with army officials and with General Musharraf, and none of them were elected by the people. This happens in many dictatorships and monarchies. They formally have an elected parliament and government but the real power is with those who are not elected. In a few countries, the real power was with some external powers and not with locally elected representatives. This cannot be called people’s rule.

This gives us the first feature. In a democracy the final decision- making power must rest with those elected by the people.

please mark me as brainliest

Similar questions