Lawless justice

It is the lawmakers that need to be taken to task. It is the system’s architects that need to be faulted. It is the planners and resource providers that need to be shaken up

Asif Ali Zardarihas been honourably absolved of all charges.The court quotes lack of evidence as a basis for dismissing the case.The accountability court goes by the law and dispenses justice.Déjà vu of over four decades sets forth the feeling of glee in law twisters and feeling of despondency in law seekers.Justice has prevailed but the truth may have been derailed. This just about summarises the quality of justice that is being meted out to the big and powerful, and this just about summarises the quality of progress in the country. On paper it was all correct and appropriate. The case was filed, it was fought and it was dismissed due to lack of evidence. But the question that law and justice dispensers fail to answer is how do you protect evidence, how do you ensure witness protection, how do you tighten the ability of clever exploiters of taking refuge in rusty laws, discriminatory interpretations of law and, most of all, hapless and helpless justicesystems? The best example of this is the 18-year-old case of Asif Ali Zardari and the hardly eight-month-old case of Ayyan Ali. This stagnant legal journey shows the state of justice or rather injustice that has entrenched itself in this country.

Who is to be blamed for this foolproof system of protecting the accused who matter and others who matter to those who matter? Both Asif Ali Zardari’s case and Ayyan Ali’s case were fought by the PPP legal stalwart,FarooqNaek, and he managed to protect his clients and his client’s clients with the same ease he has practised in decades. The SGS-Cotecna case is the most famous case that brought the tag of Mr 10 Percent to Asif Ali Zardari. However, the famous National Reconciliation Ordinance(NRO) of Musharraf overtook dozens of such cases against politicians. The rest,the toothless National Accountability Bureau (NAB) did. The NAB head is chosen by the consent of the ruling and opposition parties. NAB has been recently shaken up as part of the National Action Plan (NAP) and 13-year-old references have been reactivated. But the NAB head has been as controversial as the previous appointees.

Take this particular case:the former deputy chairman NAB,HasanWasimAfzal, while recording his testimony, said that he himself brought the original documents that contained agreements with the offshore companies, details of bank accounts and their beneficiaries, some judicial decisions and other documents. He said he no longercarriedthe record with him since he is now retired and keeping the record with him would be a crime, adding that the record should be either with the Lahore High Court (LHC) or accountability court. During the proceedings, WasimAfzal maintained that he was a witness in 20 corruption references. The prosecution, however, did not record his statements in 19 cases while only in the SGS case his statement before investigation officer Gulshan Khan was recorded under section 161. Now that the original documents were being asked for by the court the same passing-the-buck game started. NAB said itdid not have them and maybe the LHC had them. The court says it does not have them and so, in this wild goose chase, the gander escapes.

Similarly, after umpteen attempts to file charges againstAyyan Ali, finally she has been granted her passport back with the warning that if she tries to leave the country a two million rupees fine will be imposed. This is a mockery of a penalty to somebody who is caught red handed with half a million dollars. Can we blame the judges? Not really, as the court goes on evidence and the evidence in Asif Ali Zardari’s case is nowhere to be found. Can we blame the lawyers? Not really, as the law is being followed. Then whom do we blame?

It is the lawmakers that need to be taken to task. It is the system’s architects that need to be faulted. It is the planners and resource providers that need to be shaken up. But why shake up laws, systems and plans that ensure more power to the powerful? That is perhaps an explanation for the perpetuation of a system that long has been criticised but reinforced. Lawmaking is the job of parliament and its record has been dismal. How do you expect the lawmakers to pass a law on tax defaulters when 70 percent of them donot pay taxes? How do you expect lawmakers to pass the accountability bill when nearly all prominent ministers and members of parliament have cases lying with NAB? How do you expect parliament to make asset declaration more transparent when nearly all of them are hiding 90 percent of their assets? Thus, when we are asking defaulters and wrongdoers to bring reforms, we are really just fooling ourselves.

And that is basically what feeds the rotting system of the country. Take any sector, from energy to the economy, and we see more of the same. The energy sector is bleeding as thewindow dressing of new projects diverts public attention from the main finding of every report that the same inefficiency and corruption continues to eat away at any improvement. The economy, for decades, has been fed on expensive borrowed money; this government has broken all records of borrowing internally and externally. There are no tax reforms, there are no health reforms, there are no judicial reforms, there are no educational reforms, there are no industrial reforms and there are no economic reforms. That is because reforms would mean upsetting a system that these lawmakers have perfected and customised for decades to ensure a political mafia that makes people like Asif Ali Zardari and Ayyan Ali become the most rich, the most powerful, the most famous and, unfortunately, the most attractive role models for the many who look at how to exceed laws and how to stampede justice.

Read more...

War for war

Whatever policies, strategies and actions the world has taken to suppress terrorism, it has in fact fuelled it to become bigger and stronger

Last winter it was Peshawar, this winter it is Paris. Last winter it was innocent school children, this winter it was the innocent public out for entertainment. Last winter it was intelligence failure in a country that is blamed for not doing enough against terrorism, this winter it was political failure for a country whose president happened to be part of the public watching that fatal football match. The response in Pakistan? Attack the hideouts of terrorists in Waziristan. The response in Paris? Attack hideouts in Syria. Hundreds of innocent lives lost and thousands of family members almost dying with grief is something that makes most eyes moist and many hearts heavy for a long time to come. The desire to kill and exterminate anybody and anything remotely connected with these incidents is duly justified. However, the question is: is that really effective in achieving the goal of eliminating terrorism?

The tragedy of Paris is a reminder of how terror has expanded and multiplied despite the war on terrorism that we have witnessed post-9/11. No subject has been debated more, researched more and focused on more in the last one-and-a-half decade than terrorism. World powers along with their allies have put together their best sources and resources to counter this menace yet it has increased in scale, depth and frequency.

France itself has a history of attacks that have multiplied over a period of time. The Algerian independence driven bomb attack in 1961 on a train was the most recent in memory. In the 1990s, Algerian insurgents called the Armed Islamic Group were responsible for an Air France hijacking and two bombings on Paris trains. A series of gun attacks in March 2012 targeting French soldiers and Jewish civilians came to be known as the Toulouse and Montauban shootings. Three soldiers, a rabbi and three Jewish schoolchildren were killed. In January this year, at least 12 people were killed by gunmen who opened fire in the offices of the French satirical weekly newspaper Charlie Hebdo. This alone is an indication that whatever the world and Paris have done to combat terrorism has been ineffective and needs a review and redo.

Compare the last attack on the World Trade Centre by al Qaeda on 9/11 and the war on Iraq and Afghanistan thereafter. The Taliban became the most popular brand of terror and Osama bin Laden the man who turned into a monster after the US/Russia conflict in Afghanistan. After 15 years, the three countries affected by this conflict — Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan — are still facing terror bombings, have ruined economies and are hotbeds of resentment against the west. The US has withdrawn troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, and is now desperate to bring the Taliban to the negotiation table in Afghanistan with the help of Pakistan. The effectiveness of operations in Iraq is evidenced by the fact that the UK and US now admit that there were no weapons of mass destruction and the war was the result of “some ill-informed and ill-advised policy making”.

Is this admission to such destruction enough for those millions who were killed in this war? Is this confession enough to absolve the west of its perception of Islamophobia? Is this realisation that a whole country was blown to bits and generations wiped off not going to have its repercussions? Well, it has had serious repercussions and these are in the shape of the birth of originally Islamic State in Iraq (ISI). ISI was formed in reaction to the US backed Shia government of Al Maliki and the alienation of Sunnis in the country in 2004. As the war in Iraq raged so did the jihadi narrative of IS. In 2012, as the Syrian conflict started, the organisation expanded to establish itself in Syria and was rebranded as Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). With the Charlie Hebdo killings it relabelled itself as Islamic State (IS), with a global mission.

It is not hard to assess from this analysis that whatever policies, strategies and actions the world has taken to suppress terrorism, it has in fact fuelled it to become bigger and stronger. The names may change and there may be temporary spurts of peace but they keep on coming back with ever more effective ways of defeating whatever intelligence or war skills that the world possesses. Does that mean that world powers should not hound and beat down terrorism? Does that mean criminals of this brutal nature should not be hounded and punished? No, it only means that focusing on the effect and not focusing on the cause will always result in making the cause so powerful that it will out power the terrorism annihilating the power resources of the world.

After 9/11 there have been so many studies that have proposed a multipronged approach. While you punish the terrorist, you focus on causes of terrorism and uprooting them. The main reasons for terrorism to rise are deprivation, alienation, occupation and imposition. Wherever there is perceived inequity and injustice, rebellion will be inevitable. All studies have revealed that without strategies of inclusion, engagement, education, participation and development, no rebellion in the world has been suppressed. The question thus is how much time, resources and effort have been spent on engagement strategies compared to destruction strategies? The answer is pretty simple: compared to spending on war it may be at best 90/10. The next question is: has this ratio borne fruits in making this world more secure and safe? The answer is no. World insecurity has increased exponentially.

The Paris bombing has Algerian, Moroccan and Belgian origin French involved but President Hollande’s first reaction is 20 bombs on Syria. This is almost déjà vu. The names have changed from Afghanistan to Syria and from al Qaeda to IS but the game of power versus power and war versus war remains the same. A question to ponder: while a terrorist kills people on brainwashed misinformation and ignorance, what do you call Tony Blair after confessing that it was misinformation and ignorance of the right facts that caused millions to die and decay in Iraq? If this is not a war crime and not punishable then what is? It is this perceived discrimination that spirals and fuels the unbeatable rise in rebels with a cause.

Read more...

Politics of balance

Except for Tunisia, from where it started, the Arab Spring has become the Arab autumn where governments like Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Syria have all seen civil unrest and foreign interventions

The Arab Spring was a movement towards open economy and capitalistic reforms. The Western spring was a movement towards less capitalistic and more socialistic government. These are not conclusions but debates that have been fiercely fought out between various schools of thought. People across the world are more global in their knowledge and awareness. The availability of social networking tools make instant messaging possible to billions with a click and form pressure groups that can change global policies. It started with the Greek refusal to bow to the dictates of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Ban,k and has now spread to Canada where Justin Trudeau has become the symbol of a new type of politics of change. What school of thought will prevail, only time will tell. However, indisputably, this is a time for historians, economists, sociologists and literary figures to sharpen their intellectual tools and come up with new research and theories that may have a profound effect in shaping the world order in this century.

It all started with a country, Tunisia, in 2010. A vegetable vendor and the breadwinner for his family of eight, Bouazizi hoped to save enough money to buy a pickup truck that would simplify his work. On December 17, 2010, a police officer seized Bouazizi’s unlicensed cart, rejected his fines and abused him. Frustrated, Bouazizi complained to the local municipality officials but his request was denied. Hopeless and forlorn, he set himself on fire, which subsequently triggered widespread protests in Tunisia that led to the Arab Spring.

Initially, the Arab Spring was an optimistic transformation of the Middle East, much like the revolutions of 1989 that toppled communism. Authoritarianism and political corruption were enhancing social inequality and hindering economic growth. Democracy seemed to promote socioeconomic advancement and defuse global tensions. The 2011-2012 phase of the Arab Spring appeared successful. The authoritarian governments in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen were overthrown in protests ranging from peaceful to violent. Governmental changes were observed in Jordan, Iraq and Bahrain, while autocrats in Saudi Arabia and Algeria assured social reforms. However, except for Tunisia, from where it started, the Arab Spring has become the Arab autumn where governments like Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Syria have all seen civil unrest and foreign interventions to take advantage of the socio-economic turmoil.

In the west, capitalism and open economies have come under fire due to the prolonged recession that has made many giant companies and countries go bankrupt. The excessive spend and spend consumerism philosophy made the US and Europe economies fall into recession like ninepins. Europe was particularly hit as country after country applied for bailout packages to save themselves. This gave rise to a demand for more controlled economies that were not fed on credit instruments but on austerity measures. Spain, Portugal and Italy all went through harrowing times and had people on the streets condemning government policies. But no other country has been as badly hit as Greece. These aftershocks of the recession earthquake have their epicentre in profligate spending, easy money and intoxicated capitalism. Alexis Tsipras became a brand of defiance against this form of government where the masses suffer due to deep addiction of the governments to run deficits, borrow from money sharks like the IMF and World Bank, and then punish their ordinary people for the excessive indulgence of the rich and powerful. He represents the new breed of political leaders: young, angry, defiant and daring. However, on taking control of the government he found out that negotiations with the EU, European Central Bank (ECB) and IMF were more difficult than negotiating with a dissatisfied Greek voter to vote for him. But give him credit for his guts as he called for a re-election to get backing for his proposals and won it again. The Syriza-led government re-elected in last month’s snap poll has committed to enacting almost 50 “prior actions” by end of this year, covering detailed fiscal and structural reforms. How he copes with parliament response and public response is yet to be seen.

Similar to this firebrand, politics in Canada experienced a change of heart. Justin Trudeau, young and unassuming, beat the experienced Stephen Harper in a fairy story victory. At just 43, the charismatic Trudeau spent a gruelling campaign — Canada’s longest since 1872 — beating back the Conservatives’ ad narrative that he was not mature. Trudeau is not totally centre left as they claim he is and is in favour of the “invest and spend” economy. He immediately announced the withdrawal of support for wars in Syria and Iraq though they do want to combat Islamic State (IS) and extremism. Fifty percent of his cabinet will be women. His policy of accepting a larger number of refugees also scored heavily with the voters.

While the Arab and western world are juggling with their political stances, Asia is also witnessing some historic reversals. Narendra Modi, who swept the Indian elections on his anti-Pakistan, pro-hinduvta and pro-economy chant, has faced two stumping defeats, one earlier in Delhi where the upstart Aam Admi Party took 67 of the 70 seats and now in Bihar by the veterans Lalu Parsad Yadava and Nitish Kumar, who romped home with 178 of 273 seats to let the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) know that politics based on caste and religion will dwindle away. On the other side of Asia, in Myanamar, history is being made. The National League for Democracy (NLD), led by Aun Suu Kyi, has won 53 lower house seats in the national parliament out of 62 announced so far. The military government that rules Myanamar handed power to a semi-civilian government in 2011 but the army still dominates politics after decades in power. Twenty-five percent of seats in parliament are reserved for the army. But the very fact that the voter turnout was 80 percent shows how strongly people voted against the dictator rule.

Political ideologies are in the process of a makeover. From authoritarianism to democracy, from capitalism to socialism, every form of political structure is being tested and sent for remedial treatment. The only common denominator in all these changes is that with this viral world where one picture of a small child lying desolate on a seashore can move people across the globe so much that government policies and election results are being affected by it, means the balancing act in politics will continue. For countries to hide behind their geographical walls and their digital firewalls is almost impossible. What is needed is not to reinvent new theories but to ensure that these philosophies do not become power play games subjugated to human desire for unbridled control.

Read more...

Elite capture

You can influence jobs, contracts, postings and transfers. You can get innocent people convicted and criminal people acquitted. You can be a thief but nobody can catch you. You can be a murderer but nobody can convict you

In the end, the Chief Justice (CJ) had to protest against the injustice. CJ Anwar Zaheer Jamali has taken suo motu on Mustafa Kanju’s smooth exit from the confessed murder of 15-year-old Zain. The Anti-Terrorist Court (ATC) acquitted a murderer who had admitted to the crime on the grounds of lack of evidence. This murder took place in a public place, the firing was witnessed by hundreds, the accused was proven drunk and trigger happy, he confessed to the crime, nine witnesses were supposed to confirm the evidence and the Chief Minister (CM) promised justice regardless of connections yet Mustafa Kanju has been set free. This for the only reason that he is the son of Siddique Kanju, a former MNA and minister, and if you are the son of the rich and powerful the media is hushed or diverted, courts are put on the defensive, policemen become your personal bodyguards and witnesses disappear into thin air.

It was not just murder but the way this murder was conducted that speaks of the arrogant extremism in the power brokers of this country. Mustafa, the son of the former minister for foreign affairs, Siddique Kanju, and brother of PML-N MNA Abdul Rehman Kanju, was drunk and became infuriated after his luxury car accidentally hit the vehicle of a woman in Cavalry Ground. His fury was directed at how any other car could dare to be on the roads when the Kanjus were driving around madly. How could his speeding car be impeded by these low-lying ordinary people who needed to be fixed for getting in his way? The car he hit belonged to a woman and when he came out to tell her off, she dashed off sensing he may do more damage. This escape from his fury drove him insane and he started yelling. Hearing the noise people came out of their houses. He opened indiscriminate fire and hit Zain, the only son of his mother, a motorcyclist and Husnain, 18, who came out of the house after hearing the noise. Zain, a class nine student, died on the spot and Husnain was critically injured.

Memories of Shahzeb’s killer, Shahrukh Jatoi, coming out of the van flashing victory signs come rushing back. This victory sign is for winning over justice, law, ethics and morality. This is the sickness prevailing in the social and moral fabric of this society, which has destroyed the power of institutions to prevail over individuals. This power comes from money that buys position that buys influence. This power of influence is so potent that it makes laws and justice impotent. That is why there is an insane race in this country to hold a government, public or political office. If we see the financial compensation associated with these offices, it is pathetic yet they are highly sought after, especially political positions. The reasons are very obvious. These offices give you clout over many institutions, projects and public resources. These offices become a big symbol of status, fear, opulence and manipulation. If you are an MNA or MPA you are the don of your constituency. Your influence pervades the District Commissioner’s (DC’s) office, the police station, courts and public sector project offices. You can influence jobs, contracts, postings and transfers. You can get innocent people convicted and criminal people acquitted. You can be a thief but nobody can catch you. You can be a murderer but nobody can convict you. Even the private sector’s rich and powerful industrialists align themselves to various parties and fund them in return for favours for their industries and their businesses.

To retain this game of influence the system has been designed to perfection by the power brokers. Spend money, buy institutions, script surveys and reports, and suppress evidence and witnesses to become too powerful to be nabbed or caught. The electoral process is instrumental in perpetuating this power hoarding by the elite of the country. Our present electoral system is an example and vehicle to seats of power. Nearly all feudal families, rich industrialists and top bureaucrats compete in this game of buying and influencing votes. The geo-demographic study of voter patterns also shows that the educated class, which is the minority, hardly bothers to vote while the poor and illiterate vote more either because the landlord orders them to or their own family compulsions based on loyalty make them blind to any concept of national interest. Thus, we see this absolutely amazing system of having the most incompetent and corrupt people pass through all election scrutiny, through all codes of conduct and, many times, even when they are not even present in campaigns and have been jailed for crimes, they get miraculously elected. Consider this: Naveed Tahir, who is currently in jail, was elected as councilor from Lahore’s Union Council 124’s Ward number six without even running a campaign. According to details, Tahir fled after snatching Rs 16 lakh from an excise team two months ago, was is in jail and did not even run a campaign. He managed to secure the PML-N ticket and was even elected as councilor after securing 328 votes.

These small time crooks are inspired to adopt this path to success by their mentors who are on even higher positions of power and influence despite committing bigger crimes. A glaring example of this was seen in the recent elections when the law minister, Rana Sanaullah, was alleged a number of times by his own colleagues to be a target killer who has committed 20 killings. A list was also presented to the public in the media. To add ridicule to this bizarre irony, the Inspector General (IG) of police in Punjab instead of investigating defended the minster by saying such statements were immaterial - that maybe due to the fact that his own brother has been blessed with an unopposed seat in these elections. Thus, it is a neat and compact game of power hoarding where top politicians, with the help of top industrialists, top bureaucrats and top institutions create this impenetrable fortress of nourishing each other by ensuring that the lesser masses remain too miserable to ever challenge, contest or break through this elite mafia.

Read more...

Completely foreign affairs

The psychology of exclusivity and the power attached to being the only one carrying that status is what makes the rich and famous stand out

Imagine that a country’s foreign policy depends on allowing the hunting of the houbara bustard. Most people would say it is a typo error or slip of tongue. Most people would say it is a parody show of the sitcom variety. Most people would say it is just somebody who has become tipsy after a few pegs. But it is none of the above. Rather, it is a legal case being presented by the highest legal body in the country to the highest legal court in Pakistan i.e. the Supreme Court (SC). The case is that the illegality of royal princes hunting the endangered specie of houbara bustard should be made legal otherwise our foreign policy will become an endangered species. Thus, it is a case of endangered houbara bustard versus endangered foreign policy. That itself speaks volumes about how bereft of substance and strategy not only our foreign policy is but how bereft of any legal or ethical sensitivity our government is. This is a crass case of admitting that we are beggars and that beggars cannot be choosers. This is the crude admission of the people at the top that in a country where people die a dime a dozen daily, who cares about a few thousand birds? This is a callous confession of money talking and overriding silly concerns about the ‘God forsaken’ environment.

The psychology of exclusivity and the power attached to being the only one carrying that status is what makes the rich and famous stand out. Whether it is rare editions of Rolex watches or limited editions of gold plated Rolls Royce’s, the Arabs and the rich of the world spend billions to keep these brands alive. Thus, the royal families of the Middle East are feted and bowed down to by lesser countries because, for appropriate ‘service’, appropriate rewards are bestowed on the serving countries. Pakistan has played the role of the obedient butler for a long time to princely visitors. Every government has striven to outdo previous ones in pleasing their desire to hunt rare and ‘no shoot’ birds to get this satisfaction of exclusivity. Houbara bustard hunting has been decried around the world and in Pakistan as well by conservationists and social activists but the practice has continued unabated. The law permits the bird’s hunting but in numbers not exceeding 100 birds. However, once you let ‘his highness’ be, he is not going to let the houbara bustard be when he is in this adrenaline kick drive to hunt irrepressibly.

The record speaks for itself. Gulf Arab royalty taking over huge territory in Pakistan to hunt the vulnerable houbara bustard is an old story. Recently, a Saudi prince hunted around 2,100 birds along with members of his entourage in Balochistan. The prince hunted 1,977 birds while those accompanying him hunted 123 birds during a 21-day expedition in January. The ‘special permits’ issued by the federal government only allow the holder (and not those accompanying him) to hunt up to 100 houbara bustards in 10 days. But what is permitted to the ordinary is not really applicable to the extraordinary. However, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government actually fined and penalised a Qatari prince for hunting this bird while all other provinces have been partners in crime. This serious violation has been supported by governments over a long period of time but this is the first time a government has actually called it a “pillar of its foreign policy”. This brings us back to our discussion of where our foreign policy is, what our foreign policy is, who makes it, who heads it and who implements it. Foreign policies are based on the larger vision of what relations a country envisages with different regions in the world and with what purpose in mind.

If we look at regional relations we see a complete absence of vision, stance, response, strategy and action. The perfect example of this vacuum is our relationship with India. Never before has there been a better chance of developing a policy of putting India on the defensive. Modi has been doing everything to destroy India’s secular image. Most minorities in India are being victimised. The need of the hour was to have a strategy session and develop a very detailed action plan stemming from the vision of creating Pakistan’s positive perception internationally and highlighting India’s aggression on various forums. After missing this opportunity at Ufa, one had hoped that the UN General Assembly (UNGA) session last month was the ideal opportunity for taking the Indian government to task. However, the trip turned out to be more of a family and friends’ vacation for the Prime Minister (PM) than anything beneficial as far as image building for the country is concerned.

When there is no policy, there is no plan of action. With no foreign minister and policy our relationship with India is ‘whatever you take it as’. A typical example of this was the humiliating visit of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) chairman, Shahryar Khan, and Najam Sethi. Why is Pakistan dying for a series with India? Why did they have to go to India at a time when Shiv Sena is not even sparing the South African team? Why is the International Cricket Council (ICC) president, who happens to be Zaheer Abbas, not being utilised to lobby our cause? What is the foreign office’s stance on this visit and what is its response to the unprecedented mistreatment given to our officials? Guess what the answers are. None. When you do not know where you are going, all roads will lead you nowhere.

That is why the PM’s visit to the US was more of the same. There was the usual talk about strengthening democracy, fighting more against terrorism, especially the Haqqani network, and solving all issues with India, including Kashmir. There was no mention of Indian sponsorship of terrorism in Pakistan and no mention of trade opportunities. There was no mention of helping with the energy crisis and of course the cue sheet was also in the hands of the PM with the usual quick glances to remember what to say. This just about summarises the abject surrender of foreign policy in foreign hands. But if the main pillar of a country’s foreign policy is based on “to hunt or not hunt a bird” all one can hope and pray for is that the next time our PM goes to meet another head of state, his foreign policy cue sheet does not become an endangered species.

Read more...