RSS
 

Posts Tagged ‘Legislation’

Women of Pakistan Envy Indian Monkey

21 Mar

monkey

The basic principle of justice has to be, justice for all. We in Pakistan still facing myriad of issues relating to a flawless dispensation of justice to masses with out any discrimination, despite the fact that we fought for a free judiciary for over one year. It makes one feel absolutely dejected to see masses still crying for justice after all that uproar and excitement. When one sees long lines of pension seekers trying to get what is their right, as something given as bounty,  women beaten up, thrown acid on, raped, maimed and thrown naked to the streets, when one sees minority communities living under severest of distress, when one sees lower judicial set up as vultures ready to eat these poor people, one is inclined to disbelief all the rhetoric of free judiciary.

At the end of the day, dispensation of justice begins from acknowledging an act as crime. If domestic violence is not even considered a punishable crime, how can one expect to get redress from the system? When acid throwing is not listed in the penal code as a form of offence, how one can even hope for it to be punishable? And when even some of these crimes  against humanity are listed as crimes, our rotten system just refuses to acknowledge that it ever happened. In our part of the world, the basic step for getting justice is registering it as crime in a police station. The registration document is called, First Information report, commonly known as FIR. Would you believe that despite all what we have done to get free judiciary with an inspiration of making it possible for masses to access justice with equality, it is still not possible for an average middle class urban family to get a complaint registered with the police.

In one instance, the FIR could not be registered for the rape of a young girl in Bahawalpur till the time she gave birth to a baby girl. Her case still lingers in one of the courts, after ninth birthday of her child. I wonder what the child would be called by our elitist intelligentsia – a love child?

Amidst all this, it was pleasant to hear that Jhumuri got her FIR registered in first attempt and without going to the police station. She just sent her written complaint, and the custodians of law came into motion. It happened in a local police station at Astarang in Orissa’s Puri district of India. Jhumuri fears for the life of her son, by a jealous former husband of hers. She then, with the help of neighborhood responsible citizens, lodged a written complaint with the police station. ”We have registered a case under Section 363 (kidnapping), Section 366(abducting for slavery) and Section 307 (attempt to murder) of Indian Penal Code (IPC). We are trying to give protection to the baby. . .”  inspector-in-charge of Astarang police station, Mr Satindra Kumar Das, is quoted as saying according to The Telegraph, India.

The only thing that makes this news item unique is the fact the complainant was a female monkey! Yes, Jhumuri is a female monkey who registered a complaint against her former husband, through local residents. Jhumuri charged her “former husband”, a male monkey called Raja, with attempting to kill her three-month-old baby Kuna. She put the imprint of her tail end on the one-page complaint, written in Oriya by the local people, The Telegraph says.  Raja was found to have become jealous of the baby monkey and tried to kill it several times. But her mother was able to abort all such attempts, with the help of the local people. When the locals felt that the simian kid faced a real threat to its life from the band leader, they decided to seek help from the police to drive out the rogue monkey. According to Mr Das, about a dozen monkeys led by Raja have been camping in the Astarang market area for the last few days. They have been provided with food by local businessmen and animal lovers.

Jhumuri is happy that she got justice in first attempt. Women of Pakistan envy this Indian monkey and long for justice, with bills on domestic violence and sexual harassment still pending before the Parliament.

 
8 Comments

Posted in Readings

 

2nd Instalment of Truth – NRO Actually!

21 Mar

nro3This is in continuation of my earlier post on NRO, posted on November 7, 2009. We were trying to learn about this Ordinance clause by clause. So far we have examined Section II and saw that a major amendment in Criminal Procedures Code could well be used to control the damage (if any), if the federal and provincial governments want. We’ll now move on to next sections.

Section III of the Ordinance adds up a new subsection to section 39 of the Representation of People Act (RPA) of 1976. The RPA has been amended many times after its promulgation in 1976. The latest amendment came in 2008. The said Section 39 of the RPA deals with the consolidation of election results. It previously had six subsections. The seventh subsection thus added involved immediate providence of the election results by the returning officer, to the contesting candidates and their election agents who are present during the consolidation process. It is provided that the returning officer will provide them the copy of the result of the count sent to the Election Commission. It must be noted here that all political parties agree that this amendment to the RPA 1976 is beneficial for the electoral process and its free, fair and transparent holding.

Sections IV and V of NRO can be read clubbed together for better comprehension. Both of these sections provide that no member of the Parliament or of Provincial Assemblies could be arrested in a NAB related case unless recommended by Special Parliamentary Committee on Ethics. These sections also provide that such Committees on Ethics will be constituted in Senate and in National / Provincial Assemblies, having equal representation of opposition and ruling party members. The members of these Ethic Committees will be appointed by the Speaker(s) National / Provincial Assemblies / Chairman Senate as recommended by the Leader(s) of House(s) and Leader(s) of the Opposition. There will be 8 members in each of these committees and a chairperson.

Moreover, both of these sections actually make amendment to already existing National Accountability Ordinance of 1999. Under Section 31-C of the NAO, the officers of banks and financial institutions who might be charged for appropriation and right off/ waiver of loans etc, under NAB, were given protection. These two sections of NRO (Section 4 and 5) actually extend this protection to the elected representatives of people.

The protection given to the bank officers under NAO 1999 provides for the NAB to not arrest any such accused unless a formal approval is given by the Governor State Bank of Pakistan. Similarly, if some officers / other persons associated with NAB investigations are accused of hampering such proceedings, s/he will not be charged with out the sanction of a Committee headed by NAB Chairperson.

In the presence of such a protection for the bank / government officers that already existed in the form of NAO 1999, the temporary protection given to the elected representatives of people doesn’t seem a big deal. Further, this protection seems to be given to curtail political victimization of the opposition members by any sitting government. This provision, negotiated by PPP with the then military ruler, seems to be in accordance with Charter of Democracy agreed between PPP and PML-N according to which, no political victimization will be done against each other. It seems that CoD was being formally institutionalized when this very clause was being negotiated.

It must be mentioned here, that a special meeting of Parliamentary Committee on law and Justice was convened on October 31, 2009 under the Chairpersonship of Begum Nasim Akhtar Chaudhry who is member of National Assembly from ruling PPP. The said Committee comprises 16 members including the Chairperson, 4 members from PML-N, one from MQM, 3 from PML-Q. That makes one chairperson, 7 members from PPP while total 8 members from other parties. This Committee discussed the Ordinance clause be clause and approved with simple majority.

Strangely enough, all major parties i.e., PPP, PML-N and PML-Q unanimously agreed to scrap these two sections of NRO. Should we think that all the parties agree to carry on with political victimization of each other?

Section VI of NRO provides for a new sub-section in Section 31 (A) of National Accountability Ordinance 1999. This new section says that any judgement of the court passed in the absence of the accused, would be void and should not be complied with. This Section was specifically added for the benefit of Mian Nawaz Sharif and Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto – two main leaders of major political parties who were thrown out of the political arena in Pakistan. This clause also seems to be an outcome of Charter of Democracy. In the absence of PML-N from the entire discussions of NRO with the General, PPP and MQM negotiated this clause, to the clear benefit of Mian Nawaz Sharif and Mohtarma. This is the section which made it possible for Mian Nawaz Sharif to stage a comeback.

Section VII , the last of NRO, provides for the withdrawal of all the cases against the holders of public offices, which were initiated by the Federal Government prior to October 12, 1999. These cases will only include the pending cases, and not the cases in which decisions have been finalized, or plea bargain has been settled by NAB. This also does not include cases related to cooperative societies and financial & investment companies, no matter if they are initiated prior to October 12, 1999.

Under this Section, protection is also provided to the NAB members & functionaries, federal, provincial and local governments and their functionaries against persecutions, on account of withdrawal of such cases.

It is very clear that all parties including PML-Q (including its Patriot members e.g., its Parliamentary Leader Faisal Saleh Hayat among many others), MQM, some members of PML-N and PPP are the beneficiaries of this section. It is also ironic that PML-N who is the biggest critic of this Ordinance, took active part in the Law & Justice Committee deliberations on NRO until Section 6. As soon as discussion started on Section 7, they staged a walk out. It may probably be due to the reason that the said section benefits only the mid level leaders of PML-N, and not the main leadership.

We’ll continue our discussion on NRO in the next instalment of truth, let’s assimilate this much first!


 

Bookmark and Share

 

 

 
3 Comments

Posted in Writings

 
 
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes