RSS
 

Posts Tagged ‘Nawaz Sharif’

From the Forgotten Archives: Question Mark for Judiciary, Army & Media

11 Apr


This article was posted on the website of The South Asia Tribune (Issue No 54, August 10-16, 2003). SAT was a web news portal run and edited by Mr Shaheen Sehbai, now Group Editor of the Jang Group, who was at daggers drawn with Musharraf led army at that point in time. So fierce were his writings that he had to flee the country and take refuge in USA. Many suspect, that he did it to get green card for him and family. Once he got the much wanted green cards, threat to his life suddenly ended and he came back during same Musharraf regime and joined ARY TV. 

This strange turn of events aside, Mr. Sehbai ran this web portal for quite some time and shut it down just before returning to Pakistan. South Asia Tribune gave space to many right wing journalists who have been traditionally pro-establishment, pro-army and anti India. The news character SAT displayed on web coincided with first and third variable, i.e., pro-establishment and anti-India, but strangely enough, like all other traditional proponents of army, (e.g., Shirin Mazari, Naseem Zehra, Roedad Khan, Hameed Gul, etc) Mr Sehbai also followed the same course. 

On SAT's masthead, it was claimed that its a web Newspaper for investigative reporting. Probably that was the reason why an extreme right wing reporter Ansar Abbasi was groomed by it and used to be given quite a handsome space. Many former army officers including Mr A. H. Amin, the author of the following post, were also among those who came up with many "investigative" reports in those days, religiously being posted on SAT. The interesting thing was, majority of these "investigative" reports did not mention verifiable source or authentic references / citations. 

Although following story does not tell us anything about basic information like who filed the petition, who're the judges, it carries host of un-verified information about strongest most institution of Pakistan – the Army. Please be reminded, this was 2003 and Musharraf was all there without any potential and overt challenge from civil society, establishment, political sphere, judiciary and army itself. 

My question from Mr Nawaz Sharif and an independence judiciary is, will they call for an inquiry into this? Will the petition (if there's any) be taken up afresh? And if the charges are false, will Mr Sehbai and / or the author be tried for spreading false propaganda against the armed forces? 

People want to know sires, will you please answer?

 

 

 

By A.H. Amin

ISLAMABAD: The Lahore High Court in Pakistan is facing a legal and a practical dilemma: What to do with the petition which charge sheets the Pakistan Armed forces and lists details of massive kickbacks and corruption done by Generals, Air Marshals and Admirals.

The petition has been filed by a lawyer in public interest but its contents are so explosive, the High Court Judges cannot touch it. The LHC, under tremendous pressure of the Army regime, is almost helpless in even admitting or hearing the petition, let alone give a verdict against the Army.

The main charges mentioned in the petition include:

- Air Chief Marshal Abbas Khattak (retired) had received Rs180 million as kickbacks in the purchase of 40 old Mirage fighters

- Air Chief Marshal, Farooq Feroz Khan was suspected of receiving a five per cent commission on the purchase of 40 F-7 planes worth $271 million

- In 1996, the Army bought 1,047 GS-90s jeeps, at a cost of $20,889 per unit. The market value of a jeep then was only $13,000. According to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Pakistan’s main accountability organization, some senior Army officers made Rs. 510 million in the deal.

- One hundred and eleven Army men got 400 plots in Bahawalpur and Rahimyar Khan districts at throwaway prices, paying Rs. 47.50 per kanal (1/8th of a acre) as against the actual price of Rs15,000 to Rs20,000 (1US$=Rs. 56). Another 35,000 kanals were distributed among them.

- Six respondents got 400 kanals in the Punjab while former NAB chairman Lt. Gen Mohammad Amjad was allotted a two-kanal plot on the Sarwar Road in Lahore for just Rs. 800,000 – payable in installments over 20 years. The market value of this plot was Rs. 20 million.

- General Pervez Musharraf acquired a commercial plot worth Rs 20 million at DHA in Lahore for just Rs. 100,000, payable in 20 years. "As mentioned in the report of defense services director-general, a loss of Rs 5 billion was incurred due to such allotments."

- The Army awarded a contract for the purchase of 1,000 Hino trucks at $40,000 per unit while the local Gandhara Industries had offered trucks of the same specification for $25,000 a piece. In the purchase of 3,000 Land Rover jeeps in 1995, Army officials allegedly received around Rs. 2 billion as kickbacks.

- The Army management at WAPDA raised the power tariff 13 times during the last three years besides purchasing electric meters at Rs. 1,050 a piece against the open market price of Rs. 456, causing a loss of Rs 1.65 billion to the national exchequer.

- A former military regime sold the Pak-Saudi Fertilizers for Rs. 7 billion and earned a Rs 2 billion commission on the deal.

- In 1996, the Pakistan Navy spent Rs. 13 million on installing air-conditioners at the Islamabad Golf Club without any justification.

Apart from this petition some other major scams involving serving or ex members of the military junta are as follows:

- Ex Army chief General Jahangir Karamat took kickbacks of more than US$ 20 Million from Ukrainian tank company for purchase of 300 Ukrainian tanks for Pakistan Army through a middleman named as Colonel Mahmood , a brother tank corps officer of Karamat . Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif sent the present chief of the WAPDA Major General Zulfiqar, then serving in ISI, to Ukraine and Azerbaijan to investigate the scam.

- General Zulfiqar compiled a complete report of the transaction and the bribes given. But the Army tried to buy him out by rewarding him with the post of WAPDA Chairman and promoting him to the rank of a three star General. The then Army Chief, General Jahangir Karamat was forced to resign, based on the threat that if he did not, he would be charged for corruption.

- Many road contracts were given to a firm Hasnain Construction company without any public tenders by the recently removed Railways and Communication minister General Qazi. The company, owned by a relative of General Pervez Musharraf’s son, was also awarded the lease of a lucrative real estate in Lahore for construction of a Golf Course under frontmanship of Palm Country Golf Club, Singapore. The relative of General Musharraf admitted publicly that he was working for a commission to use his contacts and influence for the company.

- Prime commercial land developed in Defence Housing Authority Karachi was leased at dirt heap rates to McDonalds operated by Amin Lakhani by the then Corps Commander, Karachi Lt. General Afzal Janjua.

- The Army’s coercive organ NAB struck various under the table deals with various individuals accused of high profile economic crimes in addition to arm twisting NAB defaulters, into joining the present government. These include the present Prime Minister Zafarullah Jamali and at least one fourth of all elected legislators.

Where does the military virtue of a defense outfit stand in these circumstances? Is 2003 not a year fit to publish its obituary? Our military virtue died, trampled below the treacherous wheels of overpriced military trucks and overpriced Chinese aircraft and defective Atlantique planes that crash in our waters because of dubious maintenance.

Yes all this has served one important development purpose. Sons of ex-subedars, ex-clerks and ex-assistant political agents have done well, climbing from relatively simple life styles to grand luxuries propelled by phenomenal assets. All came to clean the Augean stables and all departed richer. The only exception was General Yahya Khan who whatever his drawbacks at least did not have the mind of a petty shop keeper.

Clausewitz, the great philosopher of war described “Military Virtue” of an Army as the corporate spirit which forms the bond between bravery, enthusiasm and espirit de corps. Clausewitz further defined military virtue as a quality which drives an Army in a similar way as genius makes a military commander illustrious.

Military virtue in words of Clausewitz could be generated in two ways, i.e. by a succession of military campaigns and victories or by military training activity carried to the highest pitch. The more a general demanded of his troops in terms of dedicated military activity in peace, the surer he would be that his demands in war would be properly answered. In short military virtue is the fuel that is supposed to drive an Army in war.

With the above premise in mind and keeping in view our present history it can be safely concluded that military virtue of thePakistan Army as an institution witnessed erosion from 1958 once the party started that made sons of Risaldar majors and Assistant Political Agents progress into industrial tycoons. It was a joy ride. Men who had one green suit to wear, in the words of General Tajammul, became the tycoons of Pakistan. It was the beginning of prosperity for few and the beginning of the end of military virtue of a previously Spartan and clean military machine.

The second military junta of Pakistan was led by the only Army chief not from humble background and this ensured that the Pakistan Army was kept away from cheap consumerism and avaricious lust for real estate.

The second great dinner party started in 1979 when thanks to Soviet invasion of Afghanistan a heaven-sent opportunity arrived in shape of US military aid for the third military junta of Pakistan. Stingers were flown in by the big daddy for the obedient son and these were sold in the open market by silent soldiers. Thus new business empires were created. The Zia junta as a whole did roaring business and the result is that at least four major tycoons of Pakistan today including present commerce minister have direct links with the Zia junta.

Where does building 90 acres of a welfare colony known as Creek City with the cheapest shack for Rs. 6 million fit in? Did the military junta begin the occupation for such sublime purposes in 1958 or 1999? Where does developing 62 acres of land in prime commercial real estate in Islamabad fit in? Is this the business of a Navy that was miserably shut up in a mouse hole in Karachi Port in 1971 War? True that kickback may have been taken, but at least Admiral Mansur bought a good submarine for the Navy. But for whose welfare is the Navy undertaking a project 1500 kilometers from the nearest sea?

What began as an idealistic journey ends with the shady deals around creeks in Karachi which the Navy failed to defend in 1971 and a military junta which wants to rule this country for eternity.

And in this messy situation, the subservient Lahore High Court has been asked to sit on judgment with the sprawling mountains of charges, some even admitted publicly by the Army. God help the poor Mr. Justices of the superior court.

The writer is a retired Pakistan Army Officer and a Defence Analyst who has written a number of books on defence and security matters.

 

 
No Comments

Posted in Looking Back

 

Eleven Years Ago in the Courts

11 Apr


In Court With Nawaz Sharif

This account was published in Time Asia on November 22, 1999. Posted on Baaghi for the sake of revisiting immediate history that seems to somehow dissolve in the air and put the people in amnesia so often. Read, think and decide!


 By GHULAM HASNAIN Karachi

Muhammed Nawaz Sharif was clearly disoriented and depressed as he stepped into the courtroom on Friday afternoon. For a moment, he seemed on the verge of breaking down in tears — his eyes were moist. "Where should I sit?" he asked one of his lawyers. He was shown a chair in the back.

When the formal proceedings began, Judge Rehman Husain Jafri asked Sharif if he had been tortured by the police. Sharif replied: "I was in solitary confinement for the last 38 days. In these days I never encountered any policemen." However, he said he had been interrogated by officials from other government agencies.

Jafri: The scope [of this trial] is quite limited. Police say you were arrested at 12:05 a.m. on Nov. 19.

Sharif: No, I was in solitary confinement for the last 38 days.

Jafri: That is a different subject. You can tell this when the actual trial will begin. This is not linked.

Sharif: Sir, I think it is linked.

Jafri: Were you tortured in custody?

Sharif: They did not beat me. But there are other things. If asked, I will tell you. Except torture they did everything.

Jafri: Do you know the charges?

Sharif: I have no idea what the charges are.

The judge read the charges–of treason, hijacking a commercial airliner and endangering the lives of 200 passengers.

Sharif: This is the first time I am hearing this.

After this exchange, the judge heard from lawyers for the defense and the prosecution. During this period, I managed to ask Sharif a few questions. Seeing me take notes, security in the courtroom signaled me to get out, but they didn't approach me for fear of interrupting the trial.

TIME: Did you order the hijacking?
Sharif: You hijack a plane with a gun. It is the democratically elected government which has been hijacked. It is the democracy which has been hijacked. Parliament has been hijacked. It is the 140 million people who have been hijacked. Who says plane was hijacked? There was no hijacking.

TIME: So what happened on Oct. 12? Did you sack army chief Pervez Musharraf?
Sharif: The coming moments will unfold everything. You will know soon what actually happened on that day. The thing which has to be found out is whether it was the coup which came first or the orders to the aircraft.

TIME: Do you expect justice and a fair trial?
Sharif: It will soon be clear. Everything will be in front of you.

TIME: Do you fear the military regime will hang you, as they did in the case of Zulfikar Bhutto?
Sharif: Let's see. I have left everything in the hands of God.

TIME: Where have you been since the coup?
Sharif: They kept shifting me to different places. I was kept in small rooms. Dingy rooms. I can't explain it to you in words. Seeing is believing. There was no mineral water. Each time I had to request them to fetch me mineral water. The supply of running water in the room was erratic. I was kept away from TV and newspapers. I had telephonic conversation with my family only twice. I don't know what is happening to them. I was totally in the dark.

TIME: What was the attitude of your captors toward you?
Sharif: It varied place to place. Each time you face different people. And they treat you in a different manner.

TIME: How long do you think this will continue?
Sharif: Let's see.

After hearing from lawyers on both sides, Judge Jafri handed Sharif over to police custody for interrogation till Nov. 22. He was taken away in an armored personnel carrier to an unknown destination. Sharif had been in court about 40 minutes.

Postscript: On Saturday, security officials didn't allow newsmen anywhere near the court–we were even barred from standing on the main road outside.


 
1 Comment

Posted in Looking Back

 

NRO Verdict: A Dangereous Path

23 Mar

ZardariNawazAPP-608

Finally the Supreme Court of Pakistan gave a much awaited judgment on National Reconciliation Ordinance 2007 after hearing the case for 7 days. The judgment has, at one hand, made urban citizens smile, it has greatly perturbed rural population – the bulk of PPP vote bank. The urban population has been the main recipient of propaganda campaign sponsored by the establishment in connivance with media, who has shown unprecedented support to the establishment in recent months. In the past, most of the media had to stand with army-dominated secret agencies sponsoring this propaganda, under duress and for fear. But this time around, the media dynamics have changed to a great extent. Corporate interest of the media owners and individual interests of major columnists / reporters and TV talk show anchors have taken a new turn. 

As soon as President Asif Ali Zardari took oath, some media sections also took oscillating positions on a rapidly moving political pendulum. Those who were eying on lucrative positions owing to their close relationship with the President, were greatly disappointed when they were not even contacted by the presidency. Others had a more "jihadi" stance against a slightly left to the center PPP. There were yet others who were very successfully lured by PML-N leadership, who is not only fond of doing it but is also very well trained in such measures since the days when they received huge amount of cash from secret agencies for establishing notorious IJI in opposition to PPP. All of them got together to defeat a president who was trying to play smart and outwit army by getting financial support for people, right in the hands of civilian government unlike past fundings by the donor countries (mainly USA) that used to go directly to the armed forces. The sin was unpardonable. So, Mr. Zardari had to face it!

Newly unleashed judiciary – the Azad Adliyah – got a nod from establishment to break the DEAL Mr. Chaudhry had entered in, brokered by army, for getting reinstated in March 2009. It is interesting to note here, that NRO came under attack in Nov – Dec 2009, despite the fact that it was in force since Oct 2007, precisely the point when PML-N stalwarts were too anxious to join hands with same Zardari lead PPP. He still was a "NRO laundered" president when Mr. Nawaz Sharif was trying to make up with him and meeting him under carefully created media hype. But it was not about time yet, I think. Mr. Sharif was still trying his luck with Zardari to get his share. All he was interested in was, laying off of 58-2(b) and 17th amendment (that would allow him to be a third time prime minister, without a president carrying a sword on his head). He did not intend to "derail the democratic system", since it involves money and resources to fight an unncessary mid-term election. The short cut seemed, getting it done through chopping off the third time PM bar and 58-2(b). So, if necessary, he could always make a move towards contesting an election and getting on the band wagon, with an unpredictably pro-establishment MQM and the comrades in waiting under the flag of PML-Q. 

But Zardari, it appears, proved to be a hard nut to crack. The man was able to foresee the plan. He did not loosen his grip on necessary constitutional clauses. In this case, it became necessary for Nawaz, to get rid of the president, and become one. In this way, there won't be any need to abolish 58-2(b), or 17th Amendment, because what fun would it be becoming a 58-2(b)-less president? The traditionally anti-PPP media sections, the sections of media that could not get benefits it had been eying on, MQM – the great political pendulum, PML-Q comrades and a greatly misguided urban citizenry all flocked together to buck up an activist and obliged judiciary to "correct" the "corrupt politicians". The Corrupt politicians in this case obviously meant PPP leadership, especially Zardari. And to "correct" meant, it was obvious too, deposing Zardari from presidency. The easiest way was to use a highly manipulatable media and civil society and gather them under the morally high grounded flag of "Anti-Corruption". 

Everything is, so far going according to the plan. But our worthy intellectuals (mainly coming from urbanized upper middle class / elite of Punjab) probably forgot that creating a public euphoria about such a verdict and thus influencing the court, would result in many controversies and power imbalance that would not only derail democratic system, but would also affect a concerted action against terrorism dangerously prevalent in the country. Surprising, also, was the fact that the worthy court did not take any notice of every B'Grade reporter turned TV anchor talk endlessly about the NRO, which had to be treated as sub judice. 

Supreme Court gave the judgment despite the fact that it had given an opportunity to the Parliament few weeks ago, to get the Ordinance validated by it. Giving the judgment against the validity of NRO, it seems that the worthy court has said loud and clear that the Ordinance had been acceptable, had it been validated by the Parliament. But since it has come to the court, it is not going to allow a "notorious" ordinance in the statutory book. Strange it may sound, but still our media pundits are happy about a "historic" judgment. 

It may also be noted that the judgment recognizes the highly controversial clauses of the constitution 62(f) whereby the prerequisite for acquiring public office has been attached to being undefined "sagacious, righteous and non-profligate and Ameen". The said clause was added to the constitution by the then dictator Zia ul Haq through a Provisional Order (14) in 1985. Those who are rejoicing must also remember that they are not only validating but legitimizing Zia ul Haq's notorious tailoring of the constitution in favour of marrying religion with the business of state. 

Whereas Nawaz Sharif, powered by media jihadis and civil society muftis, remains worried about 17th amendment, he surely is not concerned about the unjust and unfair amendments made by Zia ul Haq through P.Os and notorious 8th Amendment. It may be reminded here, that Nawaz Sharif during his HEAVY MANDATE days did not repeal 8th amendment, he only trimmed it by giving off 58-2(b) that suited him. He was, also, not worried about NRO till he had hopes from Zardari. 

The present judgment, among many other things, builds upon Mr. Salman Akram Raja's contention that the "Legislative judgment cannot be enacted by the Parliament. [ Smt. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (AIR 1975 SC 2299)]" and states in section 14 of the judgment that ". . . no change in the basic features of the Constitution, is possible through amendment as it would be against the national reconciliation . . ". This would be against the spirit of section 239 (6) of the constitution whereby legislature (Majlis-e-Shoora) is fully empowered to amend any part of the constitution. 

Strangely enough, the worthy court, whereas, speaks about those who benefited from the Ordinance, it is absolutely silent about the author of the Ordinance, General (R) Pervez Musharraf. The court also, did not consider that if it has started opening cases  in retrospect, probably no one including superior judiciary itself, is going to be above it. In some cases, the honourable judges have to open cases against their own children, and some of very important cases pending before the court since very long. few among them are, notorious Sabza Zar case, Mehran Bank case and IJI formation and doling out money case filed by Asghar Khan.

Media is watching its own corporate interest. Civil Society is confused. Citizens' minds are manipulated. Political parties are trying to build on the opportunity provided by you, you have treaded on a dangerous path my lord!


 

 

 
1 Comment

Posted in Writings

 

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

 

Let reason Prevail

16 Feb



Marvi SirmedThis column was published in Daily Times on Feb 16, 2010


A section of the media is putting the credibility of the entire media at risk by siding blindly with the political interests of one political party. Chasing small-term superficial benefits and satisfying the fragile egos of a few anchorpersons is going to curtail the freedom of the media at the hands of the media itself

There is a judicial crisis, the media says. This claim seems to be correct if one realises the level of urgency the Supreme Court showed in responding to a presidential notification. This notification was nothing bigger than the elevation of the senior-most judge of the Lahore High Court (LHC) to the Supreme Court and the subsequent appointment of the second senior judge as the Acting Chief Justice of the LHC. Those having objections to the president’s notification say it violated Article 177 of the Constitution. The said Article provides for a consultation with the Chief Justice (CJ) of the Supreme Court prior to making such appointments, but it does not give a definition of the “consultation”. It is also true that the CJ Supreme Court sent a summary to the president who subsequently rejected it and sent it back. The allegation of “not consulting the CJ” thus becomes irrelevant. Article 177 does not make the CJ’s recommendation binding on the president.


Interestingly, elevating a judge of a lower court to the apex court and appointing the next senior judge as acting chief justice of the lower court does not seem to either derail democracy or attack on the independence of the judiciary. It rather seems to be quite in accordance with the principle of seniority set by the Supreme Court in 1996 (Al-Jihad Trust Case). However, it is noteworthy that a five-member bench of the Supreme Court headed by the then Chief Justice Sheikh Riaz Ahmad and including the controversial Justice Hameed Dogar, set aside the seniority principle in the Appointment of Judges Case in 2002. Insisting on following this judgement made under the dictatorial regime is going to raise questions on the independent judiciary.


The technical side of the whole issue aside, there is an ugly political side to it as well, which amply puts everything in perspective. Justice Khwaja Sharif, whose elevation is in question, is a former member of a city council from Muslim League (now PML — N) and a family friend of the Sharifs, which makes it easier for the Sharif brothers to rule Punjab comfortably compared to a situation where a non-partisan judge becomes the Chief Justice of LHC. In order to secure their undisturbed political future, the Sharif brothers are understandably leaving no stone unturned to keep Justice Khwaja Sharif in as the CJ of the LHC.


What irks an objective mind is why the Supreme Court is making the presidential decision a point of friction? Sections of the media, in connivance with the PML-N, are doing no good to democracy by insisting on something as visibly partisan as his demand to keep Justice Khwaja Sharif in the LHC. In a well-attended press conference in Islamabad, Mian Nawaz Sharif termed the presidential notification an attack on the judiciary, and the president himself as the biggest threat to democracy. Both these statements make him appear a political pygmy, as he could not answer one simple question: how will keeping Justice Khwaja Sharif in the LHC ensure democracy and the independence of the judiciary? Not that this question was put to him in the press conference, which appeared like an internal meeting of the PML-N.


In all this tumult, we are forgetting what is at stake. A section of the media is putting the credibility of the entire media at risk by siding blindly with the political interests of one political party. Chasing small-term superficial benefits and satisfying the fragile egos of a few anchorpersons is going to curtail the freedom of the media at the hands of the media itself. Freedom is not necessarily attacked only through curbs by the government. Rather, the media itself has to ensure that one actor of the political arena does not exploit the media for its own selfish political interests. Freedom of the media does not rest in freedom to use strong abusive words against someone. It rather rests in the freedom to report the facts. If the media restrains itself from reporting the facts and continues with an opinionated and partisan media trial of anybody who fails to offer a competitive benefits package, it surely is going to erode not only the media’s credibility in the eyes of the people, but will rob it of its own freedom.


The second casualty of this unrealistic and false hype about a concocted ‘judicial crisis’ would be the judiciary. It is quite sad to see the judiciary endangering its own independence by insisting on something that could best be described as its tilt towards those who marched for Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s restoration. Also, putting aside the principle of seniority following the judgement under a dictator’s regime would set a tradition not very different from the infamous doctrine of necessity, which everyone thought has been buried forever. Lamentable, also, is the fact that the judiciary has already invoked the controversial clauses of the Constitution introduced by another dictator in a recent case against the NRO. It is sheer disappointment for the progressive sections of society who sided with the CJ for his restoration all through the months of struggle.


This is the point to ponder for Mian Nawaz Sharif too, who has announced in his press conference on Sunday that his party will take to the streets if Justice Khwaja is elevated to the Supreme Court. Despite frequently violating the Charter of Democracy (CoD) on many counts, he keeps trumpeting about the continuation of democracy and upholding the independence of the judiciary. Advocating the appointment of a Supreme Court judge on one person’s choice rather than following the constitutional procedure of appointment by the president, Mian Nawaz Sharif is once again making himself hostage to the 1990s’ frictional politics.


Last but not least, the people of Pakistan, who have been the ultimate casualty in every crisis induced by the interests of a few, have to think objectively. For once, we all need to refuse to play in the hands of those who are pursuing nothing but their own vested interests. Many of us might have an opinion against the policies or persons of either Mr Zardari or Mr Sharif, but we have to keep our sanity intact and let reason prevail. Justice Khwaja or no Justice Khwaja, the Constitution and the spirit of democracy should be considered supreme.


 
1 Comment

Posted in Writings

 

Folly, not clash of institutions

30 Jan

By Ayaz Amir for The News, appeared on Friday Jan 29, 2010

Clash of institutions has a grand ring to it, suggestive of Cromwell's Roundheads battling the monarchy; or the children of the French Revolution slaughtering the French nobility; or Lenin's Bolsheviks storming the Winter Palace. 

 

Would that this were the state of affairs in Pakistan. We could then expect something creative, a higher synthesis, to emerge from all this disorder. But we are not that lucky. This is less clash of institutions than elephants on parade: large egos on the march, the vanity of mediocrity on display — dressed up, as Pakistani mediocrity mostly is, in the colours of national salvation. 

 

If Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani is refusing to put a pistol to his head, if he is refusing to become another Farooq Leghari, and if the National Assembly (including the PML-N) is with him on the matter of not committing collective suicide, media samurais — of whom there are not a few and who deserve the title of Ustad-e-Fidayeen better than any Taliban — are dismayed, and almost on the verge of hysteria, because the triumph of prudence is the last thing they wish to celebrate. 

 

For six months and more these laptop warriors have been spreading confusion and alarm, conning a public which they take to be gullible into thinking that political change is around the corner. But their deadlines having not been met, not once but repeatedly, it is not surprising if there is an air of increasing desperation about their battle-cries, which they expect the public to take as serious analysis. If their frantic outpourings are serious analysis, comic relief acquires a different meaning. 

 

Two slogans have proved the most enduring in our history: Islam and corruption. Every humbug in authority, especially when besieged and short of real answers to our many problems, has raised the banner of Islam, none more loudly than Gen Ziaul Haq, who would be prince if ever there was a kingdom dedicated wholesale to the worship of hypocrisy. The more of a mess we have made of our Constitution the greater the reliance on Islamic references — not for acting upon them, perish the thought, as for the sacred rites of lip-service and window-dressing. 

 

To much the same use has been put the slogan of corruption. In every military coup, from Ayub to Musharraf, in every civilian coup, whether carried out by Ghulam Ishaq Khan or Farooq Leghari, the eradication of corruption has figured as the foremost priority. Ironic, then, is it not, that after every forced transition, every turn of the screw, the one thing to explode was corruption? So much for the good intentions, and so much for the heaven they led to. 

 

At present too the idea of change — that change is necessary if Pakistan is to survive — has been hyped up relentlessly around the theme of corruption. Foremost in this campaign, although keeping themselves well hidden in the shadows, have been the self-appointed guardians of our ideological frontiers. They may have been less than adept at guarding our geographical frontiers — the ones visible on a map — but the ramparts of ideology, in their own definition of this term, they continue to guard jealously.

 

. . . .  it is salutary to remember that the judges did not restore democracy. It was democracy which restored them. 

 

The laptop warriors may be doing their own thing, for in their ranks are to be found the odd knight of good faith genuinely taken in by all the talk about corruption, but the wrecking game they are embarked upon fits in neatly with the agenda of the ideological warriors who are just not comfortable with a civilian dispensation. 

 

Angels from heaven can descend tomorrow and minister to the needs of the Islamic Republic, but the ideological warriors and the definers of strategic depth — one and the same thing — won't be satisfied. Why do they suffer the Constitution? Why do they endure civilian trappings? If they are so impatient with democracy they should make Myanmar their model and once and for all have done with the charade of democracy. 

 

It is a measure of the success of the forces out to alter the political landscape that in just two years since the revival of democracy, they have managed to instil into the minds of the middle class — which for all its presumed sophistication is the first to fall for such gambits — that Pakistan's number one problem is corruption. If this bull is caught by the horns salvation is at hand. If not, the Republic faces ruin and destruction. 

 

The lawyers' movement did much good in that it helped weaken the foundations of dictatorship, although I must hasten to add that by itself it wasn't strong enough to defeat that dictatorship. That outcome had to await the fruition of the political process as signified by the holding of elections and the assumption of office by a political government. Even so, the lawyers' movement was an inspiring sight while it lasted. To a nation caught in the throes of depression it gave a glimpse of what resolve and sustained commitment could achieve. 

 

But there have been some negative effects too. One is the outbreak of a species of arrogance amongst lawyers finding vent in violent and yahoo behaviour. The frequency of such outbursts is serving to dim the shine of the lawyers' movement, the heroes of yesterday allowing themselves to be seen in a poor light. The second is the rise of a strange kind of innocence which seems to be divorced from any understanding of Pakistan's tempestuous past. 

 

This innocence finds expression in the belief that the movement and the subsequent restoration of the judges were turning points in our history. In this somewhat exalted view of things, the restored judges have been cast in heroic colours, indeed likened to prophets of a new dawn in which justice and the rule of law will always prevail. It was no doubt in a like spirit of exaltation that Justice Jawwad Khawaja in his added note to the detailed judgement of My Lord the Chief Justice in the NRO case stated that the last three years in their momentousness "… can be accorded the same historical significance as the events of 1947… and those of 1971…" 

 

Jinnah was the hero of 1947 and Yahya the anti-hero of 1971. While Musharraf can be made to run a close parallel to Yahya, whom should we take as the Jinnah of the last three years? In any event, this rendering of history can be faulted on another count. On our side of the divide, Jinnah was the sole architect of 1947. Lawyers and judges have not been the sole shapers of the outcome of the last three years. They played a part and often a heroic part in those events but not the sole part. 

 

And it is salutary to remember that the judges did not restore democracy. It was democracy which restored them. As we go on about a new dawn this sequence of events should not be forgotten. 

 

Furthermore, as laptop warriors foam at the mouth and serve up their beliefs and desires as news and analysis, faith that a new dawn is really at hand will be immeasurably strengthened if the guardians of justice take up two pressing challenges: (1) apologise in the clearest of terms, with a due sense of contrition, for the oath taken by them at the altar of Musharraf's PCO in 2000, and if some amongst their present lordships validated Musharraf's coup in the Zafar Ali Shah judgment, an apology for that too; and (2) take up instantly Air Marshal Asghar Khan's petition about the Mehran Bank scandal and the money distributed by the ISI in the 1990 elections. 

 

If there is any hesitation on both or either of these counts — and there can be very understandable reasons for exercising caution — would it be too much to ask that discretion be the better part of valour in other things as well? 

 

The inadequacy of the political class may be great and may be enough to drive one to despair. But if there is one lesson of our history it is that there is no alternative to democracy. It is within its fold and bosom that we must seek its reform and correction, and the salvation of the Pakistani nation. 

 
1 Comment

Posted in Readings

 

Pakistan Armed Forces ‘Tried to Oust President’

23 Jan


Military still 'calling the shots' in political and judicial process, report reveals

By Andrew Buncombe, Asia Correspondent – The Independent (Jan 22, 2010)

Pakistan's powerful military has actively worked to undermine efforts by the elected government to improve human rights in the country, according to a new report. It also tried to destabilise the elected government, and force out President Asif Ali Zardari.

In a damning critique of the military establishment, Human Rights Watch (HRW) said the armed forces had opposed efforts to end its intervention in the political and judicial process. It had also resisted attempts to locate some of the scores of people who were "disappeared" in the restive province of Baluchistan during the years of General Pervez Musharraf's rule. "The Pakistani military continues to subvert the political and judicial systems in Pakistan," said Ali Dayan Hasan of HRW.

"After eight years of disastrous military rule and in spite of the election of a civilian government, the army appears determined to continue calling the shots in order to ensure that it can continue to perpetrate abuses with impunity," he said.

The travails of Baluchistan represent one of Pakistan's darker but seldom-told narratives. General Musharraf's regime responded to a long-active independence movement with swift brutality. A veteran leader, Nawab Akbar Bugti, was assassinated and untold numbers of suspected activists were either jailed without process or else disappeared. Considered an ally in America's "war on terror", General Musharraf's actions were overlooked or even helped by the West.

Following the election of a civilian government in the spring of 2008 headed by Mr Zardari's Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), the authorities vowed to end the violence, withdraw troops and release political prisoners. Yet that has not happened. Worse, last April three Baluch leaders were murdered, allegedly by the military-controlled security forces, delivering a damaging blow to the relationship between Mr Zardari's government and the local community.

Mr Hasan said the military continued to hold sway over the province, muzzling local media and undermining reconciliation. "The military needs to recognise that it no longer runs the show," he added.

The report also highlighted how the military worked against Mr Zardari last autumn over a US aid bill, "in an apparent attempt to… force the resignation" of President Zardari. The Kerry-Lugar bill offered $7.5bn, but was opposed by the Pakistani military because of conditions the US attached, in particular that it was satisfied that the armed forces were fighting terrorism and not "subverting the political or judicial processes of Pakistan". Mr Zardari said no one who supported democracy could oppose the objectives of the conditions attached to the aid.

Rasul Bakhsh Rais, a Lahore-based analyst, said Pakistan's military – which has directly ruled the country for half its existence – had become more subtle in the way it intervened. For instance, it had been building a relationship with the Prime Minister Yousaf Gilani as a way of trying to isolate the President. "I think now they are working to counter Mr Zardari, to create checks and balances," he said.

The publication of the report came as the US Defence Secretary Robert Gates made his first visit to Pakistan since 2007, amid pressure from Washington for Pakistan to attack militants based in North Waziristan and blamed for cross-border raids on Western targets inside Afghanistan. Yesterday, a military spokesman said there would be no new offensives for at least six months. Some of the Taliban leaders operating in the territory are alleged to have close ties to ISI, Pakistan's powerful military intelligence agency.

 
1 Comment

Posted in Readings

 

We Never Learn from History

16 Jan

 This article appeared three years ago in Dawn, as a 7th part of a long article. Three years down the road, it still reflects realities of most concerning nature that we need to revisit. As part of our Pakistan Diaries series, Baaghi is publishing it once again with thanks to Ardeshir Cowasjee for this brilliant and daring piece.

By Ardeshir Cowasjee

?IT is not for us to attempt to fathom the inscrutable workings of Providence , as it works in ways which are often strange. As of now, the future of this country can only be left to divine Providence which has its methods of bringing to retribution those who seek to acquire power in order to amass pelf, and those who tread the wicked ways. And, strangest of all, its stick makes no sound. ??Let us think. Had the 'agencies' (we cannot dignify them by the appellation of 'intelligence') and their cohorts not masterminded the suspension of the Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, the rendering of him as non-functional, or the sending of him on forced leave as they did to the irretrievable detriment of their master, would we today have a united bench of the Supreme Court judges exercising independent minds empowered by the people? ??To follow on from last week on the matter of the Inter Services Intelligence and its meddling in the political affairs of Pakistan , and in particular in the country's 'free and fair' elections, the indefatigable retired air force air marshal, Asghar Khan, has once again approached the Chief Justice of Pakistan. On August 8, he addressed him : ??"Human Rights Petition 19/1996. Sir, I seek your indulgence. My petition No.19 filed in 1996 is pending in the Supreme Court. I should be greatly obliged if you would kindly order that it be urgently heard and adjudged. I may mention that I am now 86 years of age. Thanking you in anticipation and with kind regards…"

??The court is now hearing a petition filed by Benazir Bhutto accusing the government of 'institutional fraud' by the deletion from the electoral rolls of over 22 million voters. This is an important matter, yes. But if we are on the subject of elections, then equally important is the matter of how the deleted 22 million and the other millions on the rolls are to cast their votes. Can they be allowed to do so fairly and freely without the ISI indulging in its 'fixing' tactics which will bring in once again the purchased, corrupt and discredited who have been thrown up in the sporadic elections of the past two decades as 'representatives' of the people?Asghar Khan's petition was filed over one decade ago, it has been partly heard and then shelved, overtaken by the events of October 1999 and the subsequent matter of the judges of our courts and the oath under the Provisional Constitutional Order. Rightly, it should have been taken up before the 2002 elections. It was not, though Asghar twice, in 2000 and again in 2002, approached the then chief justices requesting them to act. For whatever reasons, he was ignored.

Let us hope now that Chief Justice Chaudhry will heed his plea and before the elections are upon us decide this vital issue. ??How much of the people's money was been misappropriated to be used by the ISI and its sister agencies to buy candidates during the elections of 1993, 1997, and 2002? We haven't a clue. But we do know that in 1990 at least Rs.140 million was the sum. Taking into consideration the inflation and the value of the rupee, the total sum employed in the subsequent elections must run into billions.??Let us now look at some of the familiar players involved in the 1990 game. ??Firstly, filed in the court is a photocopy of a letter dated June 7 1994, addressed by Lt- General Asad Durrani, formerly head of the ISI, to the then Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, who during her second term in office, appointed him as an ambassador to Germany, which reads : ??"My dear Prime Minister, A few points I could not include in my 'confessional statement' handed over to the director FIA. These could be embarrassing or sensitive.

(a) The recipients included Khar two million, Hafeez Pirzada three million, Sarwar Cheema 0.5 million and Mairaj Khalid 0.2 million. The last . . . [illegible] someone's soft corner that benefited them.

??(b) The remaining 80 million [was] either deposited in the ISI's 'K' fund (60 m) or given to director external intelligence, for special operations (perhaps the saving grace of this disgraceful exercise – but it is delicate information.) [Noted in the margin of this paragraph, by the writer in his own hand: "This is false. The amount was pocketed by Beg (Friends)"] ??"The operation not only had the 'blessings' of the President [Ghulam Ishaq Khan] and the wholehearted participation of the caretaker PM [Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi], but was also in the knowledge of the Army High Command.

The last mentioned will be the defence of many of us including Gen Beg (who took his colleagues into 'confidence' but that is the name that we have to protect). . . . ??"I keep praying that all these natural and man-made calamities are only to strengthen us in our resolve and not in any way reflective of our collective sins. With best regards and respects, Asad."??Filed also in court is a note attached to Durrani's letter written in his hand, reading: "YH ??[Younus Habib ] TT Peshawar A/C Sherpao For Election 5,00,000 ; Anwar Saifullah for MBL deposit 15,00,000 ; Farooq Leghari PO Issued 1,50,00,000. Another 1,50,00,000 paid through bank. There are a host of other political figures who received funds like Liaquat Jatoi, Imtiaz Sheikh." ??Retired Lt General Naseerullah Babar also filed in court a copy of a bank account sheet headed "G/L Account. Activity Report. Account 12110101 G. Baig (sic.)" The column heads read "Transaction, Date, Particulars, Debit, Credit." The numbered transactions took place between October 23 1991 and December 12 1993.

The first transaction listed was "Cash- P.O. Karachi Bar Association A/C Gen. Baig (sic.), debit, 5,05,680" (advocate Mirza Adil Beg, Aslam Beg's nephew, the then president of the KBA, confirms that the KBA received the money). . .". This list is too long to be reproduced here. ??The "host of other political figures who received funds" from an ISI account were revealed in the Supreme Court when Air Marshal Asghar Khan's petition was heard. Among others, Nawaz Sharif received (in rupees) 3.5 million, Lt General Rafaqat [GIK's election cell] 5.6 million, Mir Afzal 10 million, Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi five million, Jam Sadiq Ali five million, Mohammed Khan Junejo 2.5 million, Pir Pagaro two million, Abdul Hafeez Pirzada Rs.three million, Muzaffar Hussain Shah 0.3 million, Abida Hussain one million, Humayun Marri 5.4 million. During the hearing of the case, Aslam Beg, under oath, revealed the existence of a political cell within the ISI which had been formed in 1975 under Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, while clarifying that though he was aware of the distribution of funds, he was never personally involved. ??Details of other payments : During the Mehrangate investigations of 1993 which led up to a Supreme Court case, Younas Habib of Habib and Mehran Banks, as per his statement filed in court, disclosed that the following political and other pay-offs were made between 1991 and 1994 : "General Mirza Aslam Beg Rs.140 million ; Jam Sadiq Ali (the then chief minister of Sindh), Rs.70 million ; Altaf Hussain (MQM) Rs.20 million, Advocate Yousaf Memon ( for disbursement to Javed Hashmi, MNA and others) Rs.50 million ; 1992 – Jam Sadiq Ali, Rs.150 million ; 1993 – Liaquat Jatoi Rs .01 million ; 1993 – chief minister of Sindh, through Imtiaz Sheikh Rs.12 million; Afaq of the MQM Rs.0.5 million ; 1993 chief minister of Sindh, through Imtiaz Sheikh, Rs. 01. million ; 1993 – Ajmal Khan, a former federal minister, Rs.1.4 million ; 1993 – Nawaz Sharif, former prime minister, Rs.3.5 million ; 27/9/93 Nawaz Sharif, former prime minister, Rs.2.5 million ; 26/9/93 Jam Mashooq Rs. five million ; 26/9/93 Dost Mohammad Faizi Rs. one million ; Jam Haider Rs. two million ; Jam Mashooq Rs. three million ; Adnan, son of Sartaz Aziz, Rs. one million ; Nawaz Sharif and Ittefaq Group of Companies Rs.200 million (photocopies of cheques and deposit slips etc already attached with affidavit at page nos. 42 to 73) ; Sardar Farooq Leghari 12/12/93 (payment set/off) Rs.30 million – 6/1/94 Rs.2.0856 million – 19/3/94 Rs.1.92 million."

??Do we wish such shenanigans to continue at our expense, and at the country's expense? Can we not learn at least one lesson from history – that if the ISI and the others are given a free hand there can be no such thing as an election that is vaguely free or fair? Is Chief Justice Chaudhry listening? Will he hear the petition and decide? ??The encouraging news is that Senior Advocate Iqbal Haider has volunteered to represent Asghar Khan. Barristers Hasan Aurangzeb of Islamabad and Rafay Alam of Lahore will assist him. Let justice prevail.


 
No Comments

Posted in Readings

 

Why Punjab needs democracy?

14 Jan

 

Sometimes it is important to look back and see where we had been a while ago, where we wanted to go a while ago and where we were wrong? Baaghi starts this series of "Pakistan Diaries" in an attempt to do the same. Following is an Op-Ed column from the Dawn archives of 2007. Have a look on how were the apprehensions despite the hang over of a "successful movement by the people". 
 
(Dawn encounter, Oct 20, 2007)
By Abdul Khalique Junejo
 
PAKISTAN is undergoing a change, without any doubt, unprecedented in its 60 year existence. A change that is substantial, visible and irreversible. This change is affecting, and will continue to affect, the patterns of politics, the working and behaviour of the state and the overall development and conduct of Pakistani society. Symptoms of the change can be seen in the hard-earned freedom of press, new-found independence of judiciary and above all rejuvenated masses and their rekindled passion for politics and their enhanced awareness of and interest in state affairs.
 
Many would look for the causes of this change in the role of some individuals and credit different persons for this –– Nawaz Sharif, Pervez Musharaf or Iftikhar Muhammad Choudhry. Without denying the importance of the role of personalities in impacting the shape of things, the forces behind this profound change have also undergone a change in the recent past.
 
The past political movements didn’t bring about any significant change in the state apparatus or society as a whole because they were neither aimed at doing so, nor were they able to do so due to the composition and character of the people at the helm. All the earlier movements, barring one, were initiated and led by feudals and/or mullahs who are both intrinsically anti-progress and anti-change.
 
The anti-Ayub movement was an exception. The most important party in the lead of this movement was the Awami League, a well-organised political party, having its power base in East Bengal and dominated by middle class. Owing to its class character, it was bound to succeed in securing; dissolution of One Unit, one man-one vote and, above all, Pakistan’s only free and fair elections of 1970. Though the results of these elections, giving clear majority to Awami League, were not accepted by the rulers belonging to West Pakistan in the guise of military-mullah-feudal troika, but the resulting effects this ‘mass movement’ was bound to leave were beyond their control. If the people’s mandate had been allowed to prevail, the character of Pakistani state would have changed for ever in favour of democratic forces and for the overall good of society of the whole Pakistan. The troika’s refusal to accept the vote result resulted, however, in the independence of the people of East Bengal. The remaining ‘New Pakistan’ was handed over to the second major party (the PPP) which was heavily dominated by feudals and the opposition mainly comprised religious parties. Both felt quite satisfied with the status-quo.The PNA movement of 1977 against Z.A. Bhutto was dominated by one component of the troika; the mullah, while the MRD struggle of 1980s was led by another; the feudals. With due respect to the people who sacrificed or lost their lives, both these efforts were aimed at not changing the system but becoming active partners/collaborators. And the movements (rather their leaders) achieved what was desired; the moulvis became ministers in Zia-led martial law government and PPP of Benazir Bhutto cut a deal with the army to become junior partner. It may be said that there was only a change of face at the front. The system remained unchallenged and the organs of state representing this system remained unaffected and rather became stronger.

 
This time the situation is different. In the last quarter of the past century some changes of basic nature took place in the international arena as well as within Pakistani society which includes the information revolution and an emerging and asserting middle class. Changes in the socio-economic conditions gave birth to new forces that have, in turn, taken ahead the progress of society. That is what we are witnessing in Pakistan.
 
During the last eight years, most of the political parties—particularly those calling themselves ‘federal parties’—having vested interest in the prevalent dispensation cooperate with, even desire to be co-opted by, the incumbent regime. Amongst them, the PML-N has been less eager, reasons of which we shall examine later. The vacuum thus created was filled by the lawyer community.
 
The issue of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhri was a symptom rather than the cause of the change brewing in society and immediately became the rallying point. Civil society groups like teachers, doctors, trade unions, NGOs and journalists joined the movement which met an exemplary success. The political parties who ought to be agents of change failed, before and during this movement, to mobilize the masses. The reason is simple: people have started realising that these political parties dominated mostly by feudals and clerics only serve the status-quo.
 
Another factor distinguishing the earlier movements from the current one is the role of Punjab and its capital Lahore. Punjab is considered as the ‘power base’ of Pakistani state and the city of Lahore as its heart. During the last 60 years, it was always the establishment (Civil and Military bureaucracy) vs. the ‘others’ –– Bengalis, Balochs, Sindhis or Pakhtuns. Punjab stood firmly with the backing of the establishment, so much so that Punjab and establishment became synonymous. The nationalists always alleged that the government of Pakistan was there to serve the interests of Punjab in the name of ‘national interest’.
 
This time it is different. The movement of 2007 marks the beginning of a change in the roles of different actors, corresponding to the change in ground realities. Punjab, by virtue of its domination of the state, has acquired abundance of wealth and has reached a certain stage of development where it needs democracy.
 
Democracy can grow with the growth of capitalism. In 17th and 18th centuries, Europe, by virtue of its domination of the rest of the world, was able to collect, by any means, a huge amount of resources and wealth which paved the way for the development of capitalism and emergence of bourgeoisie /middle class. And the democracy was a natural corollary.
 
There is no gainsaying the fact that during 60 years of Pakistan’s life, it is Punjab alone that has progressed at a rate much faster than other provinces. In the last 30 years, it has taken big leaps to create new ground realities which gave birth to a sizable bourgeoisie/middle class. This class now desires more rapid progress and dreams to rub shoulders with its counterparts in the developing countries. To achieve this, it needs an open society, free trade with healthy competition, even licensing and other government facilities and a free media not only within the country but in neighbouring countries also.

To have all this, it needs democracy, though limited in some senses. On the other hand, the military has, over the time, developed its own vested interest in trade, industry and financial institutions so aptly described as ‘Mil-Bus’ by Aisha Siddiqua. To maintain its monopolist status, the military needs to sustain its domination of the state and prolong its sway over society. Hence, the current clash between the ruling military and the emerging bourgeoisie/middle class of Punjab. Since the PML-N is primarily a Punjab-based party and mainly represents this rising class, therefore its role in the current movement is a little bit different from the parties of feudals and clerics (as mentioned earlier) and since Lahore is the ‘heart’ of Punjab, so this time it is the ‘epicentre’.

 
One must keep two things in mind. First, the ongoing struggle and the class leading it are in the early stage of their existence. It will take some before they mature and, in the meantime, may suffer set-backs as was evidenced during Nawaz Sharif’s high-profile return. Second, since Pakistan is a multi-national country with different nationalities having different history, culture and development stage of their societies.
 
So, here the struggle for democracy would be long and complex. Even, there is a view that national question is the biggest and foremost question of democracy.

 
No Comments

Posted in Readings

 

Pakistan: Zardari Falls, Kayani Rises

27 Dec

 

This article is written by C. Raja Mohan and was originally published in  Indian Express on December 18, 2009. Raja Mohan is Henry A Kissinger Chair in Foreign Policy and International Relations at the Library of Congress, Washington DC

Whether he quits or not, President Asif Ali Zardari has been so severely weakened that he no longer poses a threat to Pakistan's permanent establishment. In fact the Army Chief Ashfaq Kayani might prefer holding a de-fanged Zardari prisoner in Islamabad's presidential palace and run the country with the pliable Yousuf Raza Gilani as the Prime Minister.

Barely two years ago a discredited Army leadership under Gen. Pervez Musharraf was forced to compromise with the civilian political leaders. Now the Army is back as the arbiter of the nation's domestic politics amidst a civilian disarray.

Kayani may in fact be better placed than his predecessor Musharraf, who had all the disadvantages of being legally responsible for running the country. Kayani, in contrast, has all the effective power in without being accountable to any one.

In many ways Pakistan's story of the last three years has been about the rise and rise of Gen. Kayani. Three years ago, Musharraf seemed so firmly in control of Pakistan. But as the judicial crisis in Pakistan unfolded from March 2007, Musharraf was forced to shed his uniform and hand over the baton to Kayani.

Although he stayed on as President, the real power had passed from Musharraf to Kayani, who was the new chief of army staff. Within a few months, Kayani nudged Musharraf to quit as President and move on.

If Zardari, who was unanimously elected President of Pakistan, thought he was all powerful, Kayani showed who owns the remote in Pakistan. Last March, it was Kayani who forced Zardari to restore Ifthikar Chaudhry, who was ousted by Musharraf as Chief Justice.

Chaudhry and his Supreme Court have now declared null and void the political deal under which the Musharraf allowed the return of Benazir Bhutto and her husband Zardari to Pakistan and contest the elections which were to return the nation to civilian rule.

Benazir, it may be recalled was assassinated upon her return to Pakistan, and Zardari took charge of the People's Party and won the elections. It did not take long for the political wheel in Pakistan to turn the full circle.

Lahore's lawyers have surely won the point on the illegality of the Musharraf-Bhutto deal, which gave special protection to Benazir and her husband from the many previous charges of corruption. But they might be losing the larger struggle for establishing the civilian primacy over the military in Pakistan, as the nation's latest experiment with democracy begins to unravel.

 
No Comments

Posted in Readings

 
« Older Entries
 
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes