CONTENTS:
0 Announcements
0 The Shah of Pakistan?
By Malou Innocent
0 Myth of International Community
By Dr. Rubina Saigol
0 The Man Everybody Seems to Have Forgotten About
By Aitzaz Ahsan
0 Issues of the Month: Ditching the People’s Mandate US
Style; The Verdict; and, Civil Society vs. the State
0 From the National Press
0 Letters to FreePakistan
==================================================================
Quotes of the Month:
Our foreign policy in the Middle East has traveled a long consistent trajectory, and it is suicidal, and it will lead us to a national suicide preceded by a total loss of honor and dignity. Instead of pride, greed and envy driving us to actions against the innocent that we will regret, let us, as George W. Bush once promised to do, pursue a humble foreign policy.
[Karen Kwiatkowski [(February 22, 2008)]
Without Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as publick Liberty, without Freedom of Speech: Which is the Right of every Man, as far as by it he does not hurt and controul the Right of another; and this is the only Check which it ought to suffer, the only Bounds which it ought to know.
[Cato’s Letters No. 15 (February 4, 1720)]
Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you!
[Pericles, 430 B.C.]
==================================================================
Free Pakistan, a monthly newsletter, exists for the promotion of limited government, rule of law, protection of property rights, market economy, individual freedom, and private initiative. Its vision is a free and prosperous Pakistan; for only such a Pakistan can contribute positively to the creation of a free and prosperous world.
The Newsletter is an affiliate of Alternate Solutions Institute, Lahore, Pakistan, http://asinstitute.org, the first free market think tank of Pakistan.
The Alternate Solutions Institute is a registered, non-profit, non-political, non-governmental, educational and research organization. Its mission is to promote a limited responsible government in Pakistan under the rule of law protecting life, liberty, and property of all of its individual citizens without any discrimination.
For more information, comments and contributions, contact the institute at info@asinstitute.org
Website: http://asinstitute.org
Free Pakistan URL: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FreePakistan
Subscribe: FreePakistan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: FreePakistan-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
==================================================================
DISCOVER YOUR POLITICAL LEANINGS! World's Smallest Political Quiz
Take the Quiz now and find out where you fit on the political map!
http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html
==================================================================
PHILOSOPHY OF LIBERTY
What is Philosophy of Liberty? A screensaver by Lux Lucre and Ken Schoolland explains it.
Download and install it. http://www.free-market.net/rd/321907219.html ; http://www.jonathangullible.com
==================================================================
Announcements
Media Release:
POOR NEED PROPERTY LAWS TO CREATE WEALTH – PROPERTY RIGHTS INDEX 2008
Pakistan lags behind 92 countries; ranked at 93 with weakest property rights
Far behind neighboring India’s position at 36
In IPR even Bangladesh is ahead of Pakistan
In Gender Equality, Pakistan is ranked at 86th out of 90 countries
Lahore February 26, 2008: People in countries that protect their physical and intellectual property enjoy a GDP per capita up to nine times greater than those without legal protection, the 2008 edition of the International Property Rights Index (IPRI), reveals. Countries that protect property rights provide an essential foundation for peace, stability and prosperity, the Index shows: its calculations cover 115 countries, representing 96 per cent of the world’s GDP. Alternate Solutions Institute, Lahore, and 40 organizations from six continents joined the Property Rights Alliance in Washington, DC and its Hernando de Soto Fellowship program to disseminate the report that is released today.
“Property is an extension of one’s self and life. Without its protection, we are just in a state of social and existential nothingness,” said Dr. Khalil Ahmad, Executive Director of the Institute. “What happened in the wake of Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, and how both public and private property was plundered is sufficient to prove the state’s criminal negligence in protecting its own property and the property of its citizens,” he added.
That is why for Pakistan not only protection of property rights but protection of property itself continues to be a great challenge. The 2008 IPRI Report shows that Pakistan lags behind 92 countries with weakest property rights and is ranked at 93rd position (score: 3.9 out of 10) along with Nepal and Ecuador. It is far behind India’s position at 36.
This year the top country is Finland with 8.6 score whereas the bottom country is Bangladesh with 2.9. It is important to note that Pakistan falls in the bottom quintile that includes countries like Bangladesh and Ethiopia. It is no better than its last year’s performance when it was ranked at 59th position out of 70 countries with a score of 3.3. As regards Intellectual Property Rights, Pakistan is ranked at 103rd with 2.8 score whereas Bangladesh fares better at 101st with 2.9. In Gender Equality regarding property rights, Pakistan is ranked at 86th out of 90 countries with a score of 2.4. In other components of the Index, Pakistan’s performance is as follows:
Legal and Political Environment: score 3.0; rank 106th; Last year’s score 1.9
Physical Property Rights: score 5.8; rank 56th; Last year’s score 5.1
Intellectual Property Rights: score 2.8; rank 103rd; Last year’s score 2.8
Gender Equality: score 2.4; rank: 86th out of 90 countries; Last year’s score 2.0 and rank 63rd out of 65 countries
Hernando De Soto, whose seminal work on property rights led to the conception of the IPRI, said this year’s results “provide further proof of the relationship between the robustness of a country’s property rights system and its economic development, revealing that much still needs to be done to extend property rights to more people, especially the poor.”
In order to incorporate and grasp the important aspects related to property rights protection, the 2008 IPRI focuses on three areas: Legal and Political Environment (LP), Physical Property Rights (PPR), and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). The 115 countries represent 96% of world GDP: the study demonstrates that countries in the top quartile of the Index have an average GDP per capita more than nine times higher than those in the bottom quartile.
The International Property Rights Index provides the public, researchers and policymakers, from across the globe, with a tool for comparative analysis and research on global property rights. The Index seeks to assist underperforming countries to develop robust economies through an emphasis on sound property law.
Download the Report (PDF):
http://ipn.lexi.net/images/uploaded/7-47c43f5642f54--022508ot-report.pdf
For more information, such as a country-by-country analysis, list of global partner organizations, visit: http://asinstitue.org http://www.internationalpropertyrightsindex.org/
Article: PROTECTIONISM HARMS ENVIRONMENT
The article, Protectionism Harms Environment, by Caroline Boin and Kendra Okonsky, syndicated in Pakistan by the Alternate Solutions Institute was published in The Post on February 11, 2008. Here is the link:
http://thepost.com.pk/Arc_OpinionNews.aspx?dtlid=143914&catid=11&date=02...
Article: MEDICINES THAT KILL
The article, Medicines that Kill, by Roger Bate, syndicated in Pakistan by the Alternate Solutions Institute was published in The Post on February 04, 2008. Here is the link:
http://thepost.com.pk/Arc_OpinionNews.aspx?dtlid=142636&catid=11&date=02...
On February 09, 2008, it was carried by Business Recorder. Here is the link:
http://www.brecorder.com/index.php?id=692201&currPageNo=1&query=&search=...
==================================================================
THE SHAH OF PAKISTAN?
By Malou Innocent
[This article first appeared in The Washington Post (Online) on January 23, 2008.]
America's most vulnerable ally in the war on terror is Pakistan. But our alliance with the nuclear-armed Islamic state may be exacerbating that country's instability.
For eight years, Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf has delayed, deferred and ultimately denied his citizens the right to freely choose their next leader. U.S. policymakers and analysts concede that Musharraf's autocratic rule is a problem but fear that whoever replaces him may be worse.
Once before in that part of the world, Washington backed a high-profile ruler without regard to his constituents' wishes: Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi of Iran. The result was a fiasco for American foreign policy. The Shah's legacy should caution U.S. policymakers that allying too openly with an unpopular leader could have dangerous repercussions.
From 1953 to 1979, Iranian life under the Shah was dreadfully brutal. Through SAVAK, the Shah's secret police and intelligence service, political opponents were routinely tortured. Methods included electric shock, nail extraction, insertion of broken glass into the rectum, and "cooking," which entailed strapping a victim to a bed of wiring that was then heated, cooking the victim alive. The Shah's repression was systematic and unyielding, but he was also America's principal strategic ally in the region.
President Dwight Eisenhower gave the Shah millions of dollars in emergency aid for his complicity in Operation Ajax, the U.S.-British coup that overthrew the democratically elected Iranian prime minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953, a decisive turning point in Iran's history. President Lyndon Johnson, who mistakenly praised the Shah for "winning progress without violence and without any bloodshed," signed-off on a six-year, $600 million military sales credit package for the Shah. And President Richard Nixon offered the autocrat the right to buy any non-nuclear U.S. weapons system without congressional or Pentagon review, a deal later described by Time magazine as "carte blanche" for the Shah.
For Pakistan, unwavering support and an open aid spigot are rewards for Musharraf's assistance in apprehending terrorists. After the fall of Afghanistan's Taliban government in late 2001, the United States authorized over $10 billion in aid to Pakistan, allotted in $100 million monthly payments plus an additional $200 million in annual payments. The aid is meant to help the Pakistani military retard insurgent gains in the Pashtun-dominated North-West Frontier Province as well as combat the spread of Taliban fighters in the lawless tribal border regions of Waziristan.
Like America's overt support for the Shah, assisting Musharraf is risky for several reasons:
First, America's assistance to a dictator increases the power of that country's extremists. In Iran, the Shah's brutality and corruption fed deep-seated resentment among the Iranian citizenry, a resentment that led to the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini, the emergence of an Islamist regime and the seizure of the U.S. embassy in 1979. Iranians wanted to end the Shah's despotism, a despotism they perceived was largely underwritten by American aid. For Pakistanis, a similar anger resonates today.
A poll released this month by the United States Institute for Peace and the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes found that a majority of Pakistanis favor a more democratic political system. While Pakistani voters are largely unsympathetic to al Qaeda and the Taliban, Islamists in that country exploited anti-American sentiment at the ballot box in 2002. An alliance of six fundamentalist parties called Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, or MMA, won 52 of the 342 seats in the National Assembly, becoming the third largest bloc in Pakistan's parliament.
A second danger in allying overtly with a dictator is that U.S. policies now stand at odds with the wishes of the Pakistani people. Musharraf's dismissal last March of Pakistani Supreme Court justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry spawned waves of pro-democracy protests throughout the country. Despite the Pakistani public's pervasive feeling of disenfranchisement, U.S. aid continued to flow, further cementing anti-American attitudes and feeding a unifying fervor of greater political self-determination. The more overtly we aid Musharraf, the more Pakistanis will feel that their political independence is being denied by political pressures from Washington.
The third danger of supporting an unpopular autocrat is that U.S. interests would be jeopardized should Musharraf fall. If the United States continues to work for Musharraf and against his opponents, those opponents likely would give little attention to U.S. interests if they come to power.
One alternative to backing Musharraf is to push Pakistan toward democracy; an option that many believe would address Pakistan's political problems. But this solution presumes that the United States can micro-manage Pakistan's internal politics. We cannot. Pakistan's problems are complicated, deep and systemic in nature. There is also a legitimate fear that pushing democracy onto Pakistan may bring to power a civilian leader who - unlike Musharraf - may not have the loyalty of the Pakistani army, chief of army staff, and the military-run Inter-Services Intelligence. That loyalty troika is critical for any Pakistani leader to succeed. Even the late Benazir Bhutto was sacked twice as prime minister, in part because she did not have the loyalty of the Pakistani military. Many generals even made it a point not to salute her.
So what is left for U.S. policy toward Pakistan? History provides us with a practical alternative to either supporting Musharraf or trying to identify and back a democratic successor: the British colonial policy of masterly inactivity. Throughout the mid- and late-19th century, the British government in India assumed the role of non-interference in the internal affairs of the Pashtun tribes in what is today the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of modern-day Pakistan. The British assumed this policy because interference only exacerbated conflict and increased anti-British sentiment. American policymakers should assume a similar role by becoming more modest in their ambitions for Pakistan.
Rather than push, prod and encourage Pakistan to do what the United States wants, U.S. policymakers should not interfere in that country's political affairs. Given that country's proximity to the war in Afghanistan, the cauldron of conflict in its border region, and the fear that Pakistan's nuclear weapons could fall into the wrong hands, some continued cooperation with whatever government holds power in Islamabad is important. But that does not mandate that Washington become embroiled in Pakistan's political dynamics.
The United States once earned the title of the "Great Satan" by propping up the Shah of Iran. We should not go down that same path by propping up the "Shah" of Pakistan.
==================================================================
MYTH OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
By Dr. Rubina Saigol
[This article first appeared in Dawn http://www.dawn.com on February 18, 2008.]
One has suspected for a long time that the so-called ‘international community’ is a major global myth that serves to cover up a lot that needs to be revealed.
Generally it is believed that the ‘international community’ consists of the different countries of the world with the UN as their embodiment and a reflection of their aspirations.
It is also commonly assumed that the ‘international community’ is a moral space – a space that represents international human rights norms, standards and values to which the individual countries are expected to conform. There is also an unspoken assumption of the equality of nations and of shared values, principles and beliefs.Upon closer examination, however, one finds that the so-called ‘international community’ does not seem to conform to any of the standards and values associated with it. More often than not, the term ‘international community’ is a euphemism for the United States and its allies. The assumption of equality falls apart as soon as one realises that this ‘community’ follows mostly US dictates and chastises and affirms nations, countries and governments according to the extent to which they toe the US line.
In fact, it is neither international as many countries that are not in favour are excluded from this deadly brotherhood nor is it truly a community as the values, norms and standards are far from shared. If anything characterises this so-called community it is double standards and hypocrisy. For example there is one standard for Israel, another for Iran, one standard for India and another for Iraq.
There is hardly any moral consistency with which nations are rebuked, reviled or rewarded within the power oriented and unequal system underlined by the UN and its totally unequal membership in which some are permanent members and others temporary. In a morally twisted sort of way if you have a massive stockpile of nuclear weapons, considered morally unacceptable for Iran, Iraq or Syria, then you are permanent and a ‘good’ member.
If, on the other hand, you have no weapons of mass destruction and are not at war with anyone as for example Iran or Iraq, you are a pariah state that must be punished and bombed out of existence. The possession of nuclear weapons qualifies you to be a moral and good state in a position to redraw world maps and design the moral order. Barring that you are a ‘failed state’ or a ‘terrorist state’. However, a state that has actually used nuclear weapons against civilian populations is never defined as a terrorist state and the same is true of states that occupy the lands of others and kill them on a regular basis.
However, nowhere is the hypocrisy of the ‘international community’ more obvious, glaring and absurd as in the case of Pakistan. A country in which a dictator popular with the ‘international community’ has violated every norm of constitutional and democratic rule, and where law, morality and legality have been destroyed like never before is constantly described as ‘on the path to democracy’, ‘in the right direction’, and so on.
One wonders how the US and Britain would react if the entire Supreme Court were to be sent packing by the defendant for fear that the verdict may go against him. Most defendants in the world change their lawyers if they are not satisfied with their work. Pakistan has the unique distinction where the entire bench was dismissed by the defendant. This is equivalent to dissolving the people and electing a new one if a dictator does not like the electorate and its choices.
One wonders how this famed ‘international community’ would react if its army chiefs took over by overthrowing Gordon Brown or George Bush; how would they like their civilians being court martialled; how would they like their Superior Court judges manhandled by the police, lawyers beaten up and judges incarcerated for crimes never committed or proven in any competent court of law. I wonder how BBC, CNN, Fox News, NBC, CBS or Channel 4 might react if they were ordered by the UK and US army chiefs to go off the air for 77 days.
How would Americans like their constitution to be first suspended and then amended by one single man? One wonders how the American Civil Liberties Union and other human rights groups would react if hundreds of citizens just disappeared into thin air and their relatives never knew their whereabouts.
Yet, Pakistan’s government has been consistently praised as it goes through all these actions. The so-called neutral caretaker government has proved exactly how ‘neutral’ it is by its clumsy handling of SCBA President Aitzaz Ahsan’s release, then re-arrest and then release again. They have made a joke out of arresting and releasing lawyers and judges. The fact is that the terrifying undertakers are fast taking the country down under. Along with flour, electricity, oil and gas, Shaukat Aziz, the imported miracle economist, is also gone. So who is accountable? No one.
But the ‘international community’ no longer seems to believe in the universality of human rights. It has bought the argument of cultural relativism and cultural specificity put forward by the creator of Pakistan’s miracle of disappearances – people, flour, power all made to magically disappear without a trace.
The general has argued that Pakistanis are not ready for the kind of rights enjoyed in western countries, that we are different. Human rights were supposed to be universal and available to all human beings. Now however, our general seems to have convinced the West and the elusive ‘international community’ that Pakistanis are different and the standards used for others should not be used for them.
While arguments for universality were based on the essential sameness of all human beings, arguments for cultural specificity are based on difference in culture and religion. The latter forms of argument, based on cultural and moral relativism, are almost always used to deny rights and express reservations against human rights instruments.
So Pakistanis can have their will expressed through elections cancelled by one man’s desire to seize all power for himself. Elected governments can be dismissed at will. The Constitution can be suspended at the slightest whim and then amended to suit one and only one man. Pakistan’s judiciary can be dismissed by a defendant!
What can be more appalling? Every citizen is presumed guilty until proven innocent – human rights standards are made to stand on their head. Yet, terrorists run amok in the country, killing at will. No one is there to stop them because the government is too busy jailing and beating judges and lawyers.
And the ‘international community’ bereft of all morality, stripped of all norms and standards of decency, ethically bankrupt and emasculated stands by watching in silence as a progressive and law-abiding Pakistan is steadily deconstructed and all vestiges of civilisations destroyed. [Courtesy Dawn]
==================================================================
THE MAN EVERYBODY SEEMS TO HAVE FORGOTTEN ABOUT
By Aitzaz Ahsan
[This article appeared in The Frontier Post on February 13, 2008.]
In the past months, as the crisis in Pakistan has worsened, key figures in the Bush administration, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, have spoken out about the need for free and fair elections and have condemned extremism. Yet they have continued through-out to support the man who poll after poll show to be the least popular public figure in Pakistan, less so even than Osama bin Laden: President Pervez Musharraf.
Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte went so far as to call Musharraf an "indispensable ally" just days after the general declared de facto martial law and suspended Pakistan's Constitution. All the while, US officials have ignored a man who lives a mere stone's throw from Musharraf. This man's exclusion might seem understandable: barbed wire surrounds his home, the phone lines are cut and the gate is padlocked from the outside. Yet he is no dangerous criminal. Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry is the chief justice of Pakistan.
He's also one of the most popular figures in the country, according to recent polls, and its best hope for returning to a democratic path. Chaudhry was an unlikely figure to become public enemy No. 1. He was appointed chief justice in June 2005 by Musharraf himself. Once on the bench, though Chaudhry proved independent, he was no iconoclast. Yet he acted in ways that made Pakistan's powerful elites nervous. He expanded the jurisdiction of his court in the domain of human rights, refusing to tolerate police abuses. He reached out to victims of forced marriages and Pakistan's unjust rape laws. He blocked a number of land developments that would have harmed the environment. And in the process, he made some powerful enemies: many of the developers he stymied were Musharraf cronies or army officers.
The chief justice made himself even more unpopular in 2006 when he began to probe into a growing scandal over missing persons. In the years since September 11, Pakistan had suffered a disturbing number of forced disappearances, as individuals were yanked off the streets, allegedly by security personnel. As the number of victims grew, mothers, wives and daughters of the disappeared began to picket the supreme court. Finally the justices took notice and in 2006, after several hearings and much prodding by the court, some 200 missing people were released from custody. Musharraf was reportedly angry with the move and told the Americans that Chaudhry had ordered the release of 60 terrorists arrested during the Red Mosque crackdown. In fact, it was three other justices, none of whom were fired, who had released those captives; Chaudhry wasn't even involved in that decision.
It was probably the matter of Musharraf's own future that sealed Chaudhry's fate. Late last year Musharraf began to worry that if the chief justice insisted on following the letter of the law, Musharraf would be barred from running for another term as president (since the Constitution disqualifies anyone in uniform from standing for the office, and Musharraf was still head of the Army). To prevent any objections, on Nov 3 Musharraf fired the supreme court judges, had them arrested and also detained the attorney pleading the case against him: me.
This was not the first time Musharraf had moved against the chief justice. He had first ordered him to resign in March 2007, and when Chaudhry refused, had removed and detained him, though the justice was unanimously reinstated by 13 members of his own bench in July. It was Chaudhry's campaign to get back onto the court that turned him into a national hero. After he was sacked, bar associations across the country invited him to speak. As he travelled the country, millions came out to receive him. Wherever he went, men, women and children poured out to cheer him on for having defied the increasingly unpopular general. Showing solidarity became a way to denounce the president. Ordinary citizens cheered Chaudhry with defiance in their eyes. I know for I was his driver during this tour.
Chaudhry's brave stance soon won him accolades around the world: Harvard Law School gave him its highest award, the Medal of Freedom, and the New York City Bar Association made him a rare honorary member. Yet US officials remain unmoved, despite a letter Chaudhry sent to Western leaders last week protesting his treatment. Blind to the overwhelming support Chaudhry enjoys at home and abroad, Washington continues to pay lip service to the need for an independent judiciary in Pakistan while doing nothing to support one. This strategy is dangerously shortsighted. The United States has every reason to worry about terrorism and instability in Pakistan. But allowing Musharraf to continue arresting judges and peaceful protesters will only strengthen the terrorists' hand. If we lock up our judges and subvert the legal process, then those who believe in a more brutal kind of justice will triumph. It's therefore high time to take a stand. From now on no dignitary should visit the president on his hill without making it a point to inquire about the prisoner on the hill nearby. Due process and democratic principles demand nothing less.
[Courtesy The Frontier Post]
==================================================================
Issue of the Month: Ditching the People’s Mandate US Style
AMERICAN FOLLY
[I. Siddique, Karachi]
A senior US State Department official, Richard Boucher, faced scores of grilling questions from a congressional panel on the US refusal to endorse the demand of restoration of the previous Supreme Court in Pakistan (Jan 30).
He said that the country could deal with the dispute involving the judiciary after the election, as it is important to hold the polls first. Also, that he wasn’t in a position to judge if the previous Supreme Court overstepped its jurisdiction while hearing a case against President Musharraf, but agreed that it was wrong to sack the judges over this dispute.
Didn’t Mr Musharraf overstep his jurisdiction as COAS when he imposed emergency and suspended the Constitution? Mr Boucher would know very well that the Supreme Court had not yet delivered its verdict, so there was no question of exceeding its authority.
It is most unfortunate that instead of learning a lesson from the violence following Benazir’ Bhutto’s assassination and in Kenya after allegations of rigging, the US administration is stubbornly and foolishly persisting in supporting Mr Musharraf and refusing to ask for the reinstatement of the sacked judiciary.
What good will the election does if there isn’t a judiciary the nation’s majority trusts for rectifying any wrongdoing in the election? The harebrained proposal of Mr Boucher amounts to giving the medicine first and then seeing what ailment it can cure. Those sensible American legislators who are demanding the restoration of the pre. Nov 3 judiciary are urged to pressure their government not to alienate 160 million Pakistanis for the sake of one man. [Dawn]
BAD US
[Omar Ali, Karachi]
This is in reference to the recent statement of Richard Boucher. The US official stated that if the sacked judges were restored after the Feb 18 general elections, President Musharraf could dissolve the incoming parliament. Nothing can be more shameful than this. It is a blatant attack on our national sovereignty. The government must condemn Boucher's statement. It also indicates that the Bush administration played a supportive role in the imposition of emergency and the removal of the judges in Pakistan to validate President Musharraf's re-election. [The News]
A REMINDER!
[Fida Khan, Rawalpindi]
After the general elections, the envoys of the United States and the United Kingdom seem to be pretending like they are the ones who have brought PPP and PMLN into power; the way they are issuing pressuring advice certainly makes one think so. I think that a reminder reiterating that the election result is the people’s verdict is needed. The people’s will and the country’s sovereignty must be respected and not manipulated, under any circumstances, in favour of one or a few individuals. [Daily Times]
MISGUIDING US LAWMAKERS
[A. Aleem, Karachi]
US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher deposed before a US congressional hearing that if the new parliament takes an action to restore the judiciary, President Pervez Musharraf has the power to dissolve the legislature and negate that action (Feb 3).
His explanation led to a debate between him and the lawmakers who argued that Washington’s position on this dispute was not based on sound logic and it may enhance the anti-American feelings in Pakistan. The Democratic Party Congressman, John F. Tierney, who was presiding over the hearing, observed that “despite the essential need of a legitimate and impartial judiciary in the electoral process, the Bush administration appears willing to concede a dismantled judiciary to President Musharraf.”
He further said: “Despite signs that the vaunted Pakistani military establishment is distancing from President Musharraf, this administration appears willing to continue, and expressing steadfast support for President Musharraf. Despite evidence that President Musharraf’s clinging to power represents a distraction to our counterterrorism efforts, we continue to pursue policies described by Pakistanis as Busharraf.”
The foregoing shows that while the concerned congressmen appear to have gauged the Pakistani situation precisely and that the US must stop supporting Mr Musharraf, the American official is trying to scare them into believing that the Pakistani president’s power is unshakable and it would be futile for Washington to try to get the judiciary restored.
Mr Boucher would certainly be aware of the fact that the new assembly of Pakistan would have the right to impeach the president and some opposition politicians have already given indication of doing that. Also, that Mr Musharraf had stated recently that if there were such a move by the incoming parliament, he would rather quit his job than face the impeachment proceedings.
Thus, the diplomat has been less than honest by not informing the congressmen accordingly. These lawmakers must take note of the correct situation and demand of Mr Bush to intervene in the matter, otherwise there can be no hope of curing the anti-Americanism over here, which will only worsen. [Dawn]
IGNORANT WESTERN MEDIA
[Aamer Najmi, Lahore Cantt.]
There are many perceptions against Pakistan in European countries. The Western media has played an important role in creating misgivings about Pakistan and its peace loving, tolerant and moderate people in the minds of people of these countries. They have been putting the whole blame on Pakistan for the emergence and rise of terrorism, militancy and extremism without bothering the least about ground realities. It is a matter of record that Pakistan itself has been a major target of terrorism, militancy and extremism after 9/11. Pakistan has been fighting war on terror as a member of US led international coalition and suffering a lot. It is unfortunate that so far our role has gone unrecognised and unappreciated due mainly to the ignorant Western media which is projecting only one side of the picture.
President Pervez Musharraf did very well to clarify the misgivings and misunderstandings against Pakistan during his recent tour of some European countries by putting forth his country’s point of view on all available platforms. Addressing one of his last engagements in London, Britain, prior to returning home, President Musharraf strongly dispelled the wrong notion that Pakistan is spreading terrorism in the world. He said Pakistan is itself a victim of terrorism and fighting a war to eliminate this menace. [The Nation]
AMERICA'S PAKISTAN POLICY
[Fazl-e-Rabbi, Rawalpindi]
The Americans should understand that by backing military rulers in Pakistan, they are creating hatred among the people of the country against the US. Instead of supporting tinpot dictators, they should reshape their Pakistan policy and make concerted efforts to restore true democracy by encouraging the democratic forces in Pakistan. [The News]
LEAVE US ALONE
[A Pakistani, Karachi]
Do we Pakistanis as civilians, journalists, human rights organisations, NGOs or our ambassadors and government ever go to the US to tell the Americans what to do in their country? The answer is ‘no’. Then why should American consulates and ambassador in our country intervene in or interfere with our national affairs advising our newly-elected party chiefs to do this or that? This naturally creates great suspicion about their offering, ie money, for favours such as continuity of their proteges.
A democratic wave has finally taken a turn, provoked by American policies working in this country till Feb 18. We Pakistani masses wish this new democracy to be nurtured rather than be nipped in the bud by American influence.
America claims to be a great supporter of democracy, then why not give us a chance to implement the will of our masses as it is they who have brought this change in our country by their vote and from here we wish to make this country rather than break it, as has been happening almost every day in the form of bomb blasts against American policy working in this country.
It is my anticipation that if our leaders now do away with American influence, the destruction of our country through bomb blasts will reduce.
As far as terrorism is concerned, it is Pakistan’s own priority and whether America asks for it or not, pays for it or not, we have to do it at our own cost of money and men to save this country from chaos. But saving the US in their country is not our problem. Asif Ali Zardari and Nawaz Sharif both have the great responsibility on their shoulders to join hands and and steer clear this nation through all the temptations on offer, all threats to their lives, and all other conspirational moots organised inside or outside the country to trap them into following a wrong direction.
A local channel is commendably playing these days the line of a song, Jo waada kiya woh nibhana padega. Let them add one more line to it: Rokay zamana kitna bhi tumko, karke dikhana padega.
The masses admire this reminding message to our national leaders at this critical time. If they failed to deliver now, then some new parties and new faces will emerge out of our national need to plant democratic norms for ever in the country and will snatch the next election from them.
It is Pakistan which has to live long (Long Live Pakistan) and not the individuals unless they sacrifice themselves for the country. If we did not stand firmly now against all odds, it will be most unfortunate as never again in future elections such clean sweeps may occur. So the two parties’ leaders must employ all their wisdom and very sincerely unite their political strengths together to run this country according to wishes of the masses who have voted for them in great hope. [Dawn]
THE LIBERAL WEST
[Qamar Nasim, Karachi]
Human Rights Watch has criticised the United State and the European Union and other western countries for their unfailing support to military dictators in Pakistan, the Middle East and elsewhere in the world. We Pakistani have always paid a heavy price for the immoral policies of foreign powers, especially in the cold war era. The west helped military dictator Zia, and it is their military assistance which crushed the MRD movement for the restoration of democracy. Once again, the west blindly supported another military ruler who, in his more than eight years in power, did great damage to Pakistan’s mainstream political parties. He succeeded only because he had the blessings of the so-called liberal United States. If they have any sympathy with the people of Pakistan, the US and the western countries should stop their support to individuals and extend support to the whole nation. [The News]
STUNG BY THE US
[A Pakistani, Karachi]
How little President Bush cares for the will and welfare of the Pakistanis, who have disproved President Musharraf’s argument that they aren’t fit for democracy, is apparent from his refusal to discuss Mr Musharraf’s political fate and by offering no comments on reports that opposition parties have stepped up calls for his resignation ( Feb 21).
The US administration’s stance was also apparent from the previous day’s statement by a State Department spokesman that his country would continue to work with Mr Musharraf. The majority of the seats have been won by the PPPP and PML (N) and both the parties have asked the incumbent to step down. Therefore, Mr Bush’s refusal to accept this reality and to continue supporting his ally in Islamabad reveals his insincerity towards us.
It may be noted that as soon as it had become clear that the Islamists in Algeria were on the verge of coming into power after winning the elections, the ‘champions’ of democracy, America, along with the former colonial masters of Algeria, France, conspired to keep them from doing so by instigating the Algerian army to crush them. As a result, the former took to militancy as the only option left for obtaining their rightful due, which pushed the north African country into a civil war-like situation, just as the army has been pitted against the civilians over here. Tens of thousands of Muslims have been killed in Algeria in the intervening years. Following that, the US has been invading one Muslim country after another and punished Hamas for its election victory.
The other thing is, if Washington had shown wisdom rather than arrogance and imprudence in dealing with the Taliban regime while asking for Osama bin Laden to be handed over during the Clinton and first Bush presidency, the situation could have been very different. At the time when Mulla Omar had agreed to let OBL be tried in Afghanistan or a mutually acceptable Islamic country if the Americans gave him evidence of the Al Qaeda leader’s involvement, the US refused to accept either option.
In view of the foregoing, it is imperative that leaders of the newly victorious parties must keep America’s real intentions in mind and put Pakistan first, instead of yielding to the machinations of American leaders and diplomats. They must remember that if Bush had not been supporting Musharraf so strongly, the latter would not have been able to plunge the nation into one crisis after another, just to ensure his re-election, which has brought so much misery and trauma to the judges (and even their children), lawyers, journalists, civil society, political activists and the ordinary people.
We must try to have good relations with all countries, including the US, but our leaders must not let the Pakistanis down by cosying up with the US officials. The symbol of our federation, Benazir, may not have lost her life but for that. [Dawn]
US SUPPORT TO MUSHARRAF
[Aqil Ahmed, Rawalpindi]
The United States and the European governments are creating mess in other countries of the world, especially in Pakistan. They will not approve of dislodging their chief justice the way he has been sacked in Pakistan. Still they continue to support the man who is responsible for doing this in our country. Though the US has admitted that the chief justice's sacking was unlawful, it is not pressuring the Pakistan ruler to reinstate Justice Chaudhry. The west wants "free, fair and transparent" elections in Pakistan but completely ignores the fact that the judiciary in Pakistan is being coerced. The general elections in such circumstances will only increase chaos in the country which is already at war with itself. It is time the US distanced itself from President Musharraf. [The News]
==================================================================
Issue of the Month: The Verdict
VERDICT FOR A BETTER FUTURE
[Col (R) Ram Gulrajani, Chennai]
As results of the election poured in, the writing on the wall was very clear. Pervez Musharraf’s inning is over and a new chapter in the history of Pakistan is about to be written.
At this juncture it will be wise for the two major opposition parties (PPP and PML (N)) to sink their differences, join hands to oust the military legacy, restore judiciary to its pristine position, throw out unilateral or manipulated constitutional amendments, check the rise of Islamic and fundamentalist hydra, secure against internal and external terrorism, mend fences with neighbours and stop being a puppet in the hands of western manipulators.
Nawaz Sharif and Asif Zardari are two mature persons who can usher in a new dawn in the country provided they do not stand on egos or false prestige or hanker for top position.
Pakistan has all the potential to be a leading country in the comity of nations. Its people are as good as any in the world. Its present image of the world’s terrorism breeding ground can be altered by joint efforts of the leading parties.
All that is required is a proper direction from selfless leaders, putting down internal strife, ushering in a new social order with education, helping industry and agriculture to be the backbone of progress, establishing more NGOs to take over social responsibilities and taking care of the youth’s aspirations.
The combined efforts of the PPP and the PML (N) can now do a miracle in Pakistan provided they leave behind their past baggage and chalk out a minimum common programme for the future and work in tandem. The world is now focused on the future of Pakistan and only these two leaders, Nawaz Sharif and Asif Zardari, can write the new golden history for the country.
This is also an opportunity for both of them to clean up their past images and show themselves in the new light. History may not give them such an opportunity again. [Dawn]
WELL DONE, PAKISTAN!
[Fatima Mansoor, Islamabad]
As I see it, the people of Pakistan have spoken loud and clear: they have rejected the message and policies of the PMLQ, and implicitly also rejected President Musharraf’s policies. However, the positives of the elections are too important to ignore.
First, the people of Pakistan have shown to the world that they can show political maturity. The election was largely transparent and there were no significant incidents of violence. The right to vote was exercised by millions and one hopes that the same will happen five years from now as the electoral process and democracy become entrenched in Pakistan.
Second, the message of the extremists, given a political face by several Islamist political parties, has been rejected. The MMA, from a significant number of seats in 2002, has only won three. At the same time, the ANP, a progressive secular party has won the majority in the NWFP.
Finally, despite claims to the contrary, this election was a referendum on Musharraf, and the leading parties are all opposed to his presence on the political scene. He should exit gracefully and allow democratic forces to govern Pakistan without his shadow lurking in the background. [Daily Times]
LOUD AND CLEAR
[Mahmood Latif Malik, Rawalpindi]
The people have spoken against President Musharraf and their message is loud and clear. They have rejected the policies of President Musharraf. The people are fed up with the corrupt leadership of the PML-Q. They do not want to see their representatives making false promises; they want peace and justice in society. They want to see the pre-November 3 judiciary restored, they want the release of the imprisoned lawyers and an end to the ongoing military operation in the tribal areas. [The News]
NEW RESOLVE
[Shahzad S. Iqbal, Lahore]
After 60 years of experiments, Pakistanis deserve better. They need a good, efficient, effective, representative and accountable government. They need a bureaucracy and army staffed by people who do not push their weight and ranks around.
They need a judiciary that knows how to ensure equity and fairness for all. They need a judiciary that can hold dishonest and corrupt elements accountable irrespective of their institutional affiliation, rank or social standing. They need a media that does not follow sensationalism but is investigative, factual, bold and critical.
Collectively, we all need to talk less and do more. We all need to understand that nobody irrespective of caste, creed, age, rank or experience has exclusivity on wisdom. Let’s tolerate dissent as this is a virtue of all democratic and progressive societies. Enough of talk, let’s work for a new Pakistan. [Dawn]
A REFERENDUM AGAINST THE PRESIDENT
[Farooq Zaman, Lahore]
The president has said he is ready to work with anyone who forms the government. After the defeat of the PML-Q and the success of the PPP and the PML-N in the February 18 elections, the question is whether the next government will hold out an olive branch to the president or not. It will be wise for President Pervez Musharraf to resign gracefully now. Better to do this than to be impeached by the incoming parliament. [The News]
PEOPLE’S VERDICT
[Engr St Hussain, Lahore]
The people of Pakistan have spoken loud and clear that they want democracy, peace and rule of law. They have rejected extremism in the country, they have rejected those politicians who were supportive of autocratic rule and failed to deliver. The mandate of the people is against General Musharraf’s policies and his illegal actions against the judiciary. Now it is up to the politicians to implement their election manifestos to win the hearts and minds of the people.
The mainstream parties PMLN and PPP bear a massive responsibility to establish political stability, facilitate cooperation between the provinces and the centre, provide security to citizens, tackle inflation and rampant corruption and maintain economic growth. By ensuring the independence of the judiciary, they can help entrench democracy in the society. PPP and PMLN have a golden opportunity to clean up their tainted past by respecting the verdict of the people and serving them selflessly. [Daily Times]
THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN
[Tooba Alam, Karachi]
I extend my heartiest felicitations to PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif for the sweeping victory of his party in the February 18 general elections. I urge him to form a national government along with the PPP if the latter agrees to make Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan prime minister. The eight-year autocratic rule of the general is finally over. The incoming parliament should restore the pre-November 3 judiciary through passing a simple order in its first session and leave the validation of Pervez Musharraf's re-election as president up to the Supreme Court.
By casting their votes against the political heavyweights, people have expressed their discontentment at the policies of the past government. The president claimed in a number of recent interviews that he would call it quits the day he believed he was 'unpopular' among the masses. After the Monday polls, it is evident that the anti-Musharraf sentiment prevails in the country. The embarrassing defeat of the PML-Q and the MMA shows that votes were cast against those parties which sided with Musharraf in the past either overtly or covertly. The MQM would also have been routed from urban Sindh had its hooligans not stormed the polling stations and harassed its opponents in broad daylight to change the election results in its favour. [The News]
PEOPLE’S VERDICT
[A. Hakim, Karachi]
President Musharraf has been trying to dodge the reality confirmed through many independent and reliable surveys by experienced organisations that he has become extremely unpopular amongst the Pakistanis, most of whom want him to resign.
The outcome of the recent polls should have convinced any reasonable person of the veracity of this finding, which is also the opinion being expressed even by the US media after the polls. But Mr Musharraf apparently has switched off his faculty of reasoning and is in no mood to abide even by his own commitment that if the people want him to go, he wouldn’t delay it by a day.
On the contrary, the situation in Pakistan reflects Voltaire’s words: “Many are destined to reason wrongly; others, not to reason at all; and others to persecute those who do reason”.
There’s an Arab saying: “Clothes when new make you swagger, when old make you ashamed”. Mr Musharraf’s uniform is not just old, it’s gone, so he must show some humility instead of exhibiting arrogance.
One wonders what else remains that could convince the president to accept the facts? Perhaps the only way remaining is that 51 per cent of the eligible voters, i.e. some 45 million Pakistanis, would have to visit the president’s house to tell him they don’t want him. [Dawn]
A REFERENDUM AGAINST THE PRESIDENT
[Najeebullah, Swat]
The election was in fact a referendum on President Musharraf's policies. The nation gave a clear-cut message to the establishment that it's subservient to the elected representatives of the people. The forces which have supported dictatorship in the past were badly defeated in the polls. If the incoming government wants to stay for the next five years it will have to reinstate the honourable judges of the superior judiciary who were illegally sacked on November 3. It will also have to hold Mr Musharraf accountable for suspending the constitution twice. If the new government succeeds in doing these two things, it will win over the people of Pakistan, especially the lawyers' community. [The News]
A MATTER OF TRUST
[Abdul Rauf, Fateh Jang]
The brave people of Pakistan have given their verdict: the pro-Musharraf government has been voted out. They have also refuted claims of certain people that Pakistanis are too immature and not ready for democracy. The parties that have emerged as leaders in the elections are currently busy discussing possible government formations. They should bear in mind that the people of Pakistan have put their trust in them to bring positive change to the country. If they don’t come good on their promises, and betray the people’s trust, Pakistan could face a grave crisis reminiscent of the one that we faced in 1970. [Daily Times]
OPEN LETTER TO NEW LEADERS
[Ijaz Mir, Malaysia]
What the Pakistani public wants is to live a decent and peaceful life, where life and property are safe. We need to declare an emergency in the education and health sector and war on corruption. We need to do away with the corrupt feudal system. We need to have respect for the law. And all our processes must be strongly anchored in integrity. Nepotism, favouritism and cronyism should be meted out with the heaviest punishment as should corruption in any form, shape or size. We have no time to lose.
Our problem is a serious crisis of governance and corruption which has been institutionalised. Those who brought this country to this state should be punished. Do not give him free passage. Allah has given this opportunity to you, Asif Ali Zardari, Nawaz Sharif and Asfandyar Wali, to put affairs of Pakistan in order. Please do not let it go fruitless. Learn from your mistakes and make this time a landmark in history that will remember you. [Dawn]
A WIN FOR PEACEFUL POLITICS
[Gul Zaman, Peshawar]
Due to increased terrorist activity and attacks within Pakistan’s borders, over the course of the last 12 months, our beloved country has become known across the world as the hub of Al Qaeda and the Taliban. I believe there are two components to fighting the war on terror. While the Pakistan Army is fighting the terrorists on the military front with bravery and zeal, there is a political and social element to the fight as well, which relates to the hearts and minds of the local population and is impossible to neglect. It was therefore extremely heartening to see the Awami National Party sweep the polls in the NWFP and defeat the Islamist parties. The PPP also did well.
Both these parties are secular and progressive and opposed to the violent tactics of the extremists. In addition, the ANP is also a strong supporter of the politics of non-violence. It is a great sign for Pakistan and a great boost in the war on terror that the people of NWFP have spoken against the terrorists and sided with the progressives. One hopes that the ANP and the PPP will build on this victory and ensure that the province, and indeed the country, moves out of this crisis. The people of the province have also shown that they are not backward or immature, but in fact stand for democracy and progress. [Daily Times]
ELECTION 2008
[Capt (r) Babur Zahiruddin, Islamabad]
In the Feb 18 election, the people of Pakistan have given their mandate vehemently in favour of anti-Musharraf forces. As per the demand of the ex-servicemen association, General (r) Pervez Musharraf should resign as president and join his former colleagues' association after handing over power to the next government. The nation has rejected his pro-American policies and his false theory of enlightened moderation.
This will also salvage the pride of the Pakistan army, which has been dragged into the mire because of his anti-democratic and draconian policies. [The News]
A NEW BEGINNING
[Jamal Khan, Peshawar]
Peshawar has been, over the years, the cultural hub of the Frontier province and has been home to many superb musicians, artists and performers. It was extremely unfortunate that the 2002 elections threw up a hard-line Islamist government led by the MMA. The MMA government shut down all cultural and entertainment activities and for five years, Peshawar ceased to be a vibrant and bustling city. Theatres were shut down, musicians were barred from performing and artists fled the city for more tolerant climes. However, many of the city’s artists and performers have breathed a sigh of relief after the resounding victory of the secular and progressive Awami National Party in the province. The jubilation of Peshawar residents at the victory of the ANP was obvious as they celebrated and distributed sweets. It is hoped that the draconian and absolutist laws put in place by the MMA government will be removed and Peshawar will once again become a glorious hub of cultural and artistic activity. [Daily Times]
==================================================================
Issue of the Month: Civil Society vs. the State
OFFICIALS’ SPIN
[Iqbal, Karachi]
When a BBC correspondent asked the interim information minister Nisar Memon why former chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and his family were under house arrest, the minister replied that Justice Chaudhry is free, otherwise how could he have issued a letter rebutting President Musharraf’s allegation levelled during his European tour (Jan. 30)
I am amazed at Mr Memon’s defacing of truth. It is like saying that when Z. A. Bhutto had got his book, If I am assassinated, smuggled out of prison, he was not under arrest! In addition, the same gentleman has been quoted by a section of the electronic media (Jan 30) as saying that in his meeting with President Musharraf, the Israeli defence minister has recognised Pakistan for the first time and it has also raised Pakistan’s stature internationally.
This is really ludicrous. He is making it sound as if it wasn’t Israel, which was created illegally (even according to Mr Jinnah) and through terrorism, but our own dear country that was established in a most democratic manner, which is in need of being recognised. Please don’t degrade Pakistan.
Yet another report (Dawn, Jan 28) cites Mr Memon as saying that the office of the president should not be made controversial because it is the symbol of the federation. Did he ever tell Mr Musharraf not to address the PML (Q) ‘jalsas’ because, as a symbol of federation, he was not supposed to engage in favouritism?
How far can some people stoop in their sycophancy. Until Mr Memon assumed this ministry, I had been admiring him, based on what he purported to do through his organisation called ‘The Reformers’. Unfortunately, he has turned out to be as much of a spin-master as some of the ministers in the previous cabinet. The train of events following the March 9 incident has exposed many leaders, politicians, officials, parties and governments inside and outside the country, for which we Pakistanis can be truly thankful.
Besides him, the president’s spokesman Maj-Gen ( r ) Rashid Qureshi, while commenting to the BBC (Jan 26) on the statement released by many ex-servicemen criticising Mr Musharraf, tried to make it sound insignificant by saying that not a single soldier or officer presently in service had said anything against the president. What would be the test for that: should half-a-million troops have gone on strike or resigned? As a former solider he, more than the civilians, knows that it would be against the army discipline for any serving personnel to do that, making them liable to severe punishment.
The very next day there was a statement by Lt-Gen (r) Kidwai, head of the Strategic Plans Division, that a scientist in one of our nuclear facilities had made a speech against Mr Musharraf in a mosque, for which he was fired the following day (Dawn, Jan. 27). This shows public servants simply aren’t allowed to oppose the president.
Some leaders and officials seem to think that they can fool all the people all the time, but they are badly mistaken. They are simply loathed, for, in the words of Homer, “Who dares think one thing, and another tell/My heart detests him as the gates of Hell”. [Dawn]
REINSTATEMENT OF JUDGES
[Tariq Khursheed, Lahore]
On November 3, around 60 men of character lost their jobs and a few of them were even put under house arrest. These honourable judges, along with their families, were humiliated just because they were about to give a verdict on Pervez Musharraf‘s re-election as president. The question is what they could have gained by not allowing Musharraf to become president for another five years. Was it for their personal interest? Certainly not, because they couldn’t have got anything personal from his ouster. On the contrary, they knew that the consequences of the verdict would be dire for them. Still they upheld the constitution and were made to suffer the aftermath. Here, I would like to mention two humorous ‘allegations’ levelled by the president against the sacked judges:
One, the judges were ‘illegally’ stopping him from becoming president. Isn’t it ironic that the man who took over the country by removing an elected prime minister illegally is now accusing the respected judges of an unlawful thing?
Two, the Supreme Court judges humiliated the senior officers of the executive, especially those of the law-enforcing departments, by summoning them in the court and holding them guilty for their wrongdoings. I ask the president what job is a court supposed to do anyway, if these actions were ‘unbecoming’ of the Supreme Court?
No one is above the law and that is what our religion teaches us. These 60 men of character lost their careers for the 160 million Pakistanis. History will never forgive us if we don’t bring them back into the courts. It’s either now or never. We will have to get them reinstituted and put the country back onto the track of justice and merit. [The News]
NO WAY OUT
[Humaira Jehanzeb, Islamabad]
President Pervez Musharraf has tried everything by now to somehow get rid of the issue of higher courts judges. He first tried to suspend, unsuccessfully, the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Chaudhry. In doing so, he sparked a nationwide movement for the independence of judiciary and the ouster of the president. Later, realising the that Supreme Court was about to rule against his candidature for presidential elections, Musharraf suspended the Constitution and promulgated a second Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO). Many top judges were fired, and put under house arrest. Prominent lawyers like Aitzaz Ahsan were also detained. Full use was made of state machinery to ensure the suppression of the issue of the deposed judges.
However, the two mainstream parties that have emerged as leaders in the February 18 elections have vowed to take up the issue in the next parliament. It seems that President Musharraf, despite the numerous acts of high-handedness, cannot dodge the issue any more. At some point or the other, something will have to give, and the majority of Pakistanis will continue to demand a settlement of this issue. [Daily Times]
FOUL LANGUAGE
[Fawad Ali Shah, Rawalpindi]
In one of his recent interviews with foreign journalists, President Musharraf once again used foul language against deposed chief justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry. Mr Musharraf should know that according to all the unbiased surveys conducted by reputed international organizations, the deposed chief justice is much more popular and acceptable than Musharraf among the masses. Mr Musharraf has not so far substantiated his allegations against Justice Chaudhry in any court of law.
It is ironical that he talks about the legal provision in the constitution to proceed against a chief justice because being an army chief he dismissed no less than 60 judges of the superior judiciary unconstitutionally and even put many of them under illegal house arrest.
[The News]
WHAT HYPOCRISY!
[Kamal Hasan, Lahore]
A lot of headlines are being made by the Ex-Servicemen Society of Pakistan. The members are urging General (Retd) Pervez Musharraf to resign, reinstate deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and appoint Justice Bhagwandas as Chief Election Commissioner. However, it was stunning to read that many of the high-ranking former generals sitting on stage at their recent meeting refused to apologise for their own dirty deeds of the past. Many of them had been instrumental in sabotaging democracy and putting military regimes in place. Many had also followed poor policies that endangered Pakistan. If these ex-generals are so unrepentant about their crimes of the past, what moral ground do they have to demand the resignation of President Musharraf?
The hypocrisy of these ex-generals is unbelievable, and I’m sure most ex-servicemen present in the last meeting of the group were even more disappointed than me. No one will take this group seriously unless its more notable members apologise for their crimes against democracy and the federation. [Daily Times]
WHERE IS THE JUSTICE?
[Khurshid Anwer, Lahore]
Over 50 men were murdered and scores of women and children were widowed and orphaned on May 12 last year, but the Sindh High Court deemed it appropriate to dismiss the petitions regarding the mayhem, saying the matter was out of its jurisdiction.
It is strange that tens of people were murdered and their families traumatised on May 12, 2007, and when the victims turned to the Sindh High Court for justice, it termed their petitions inadmissible on the jurisdiction basis. Strange logic. [The News]
EX-SERVICEMEN’S STATEMENT
[Salahuddin, Karachi]
I was disappointed to read K. Murad Bay’s letter of Jan 29 criticising the ex-servicemen for their recent statement against the president. Some of Mr Bey’s arguments will be considered here.
- Those who matter in our society, like the ex-servicemen, should act when they have the power; responding to one’s conscience when powerless serves no purpose.
To this I would only remind how the ousted chief justice of Pakistan and his family are suffering because Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry decided to act while in power by taking suo motu notices and trying to set things right.
He was the first judge to resist pressure. It is a pity Mr Bey ignored his unique contributions and suffering.
- He says the right of condoning or impeaching/removing the president rests first with the voters and then the future parliament.
We have seen how the parliament had been turned into a rubber-stamp, electorate into non-entities and how the president manipulated things, including the removal of 60 judges and imposition of emergency, to get re-elected. The emergency was lifted as soon as his election was assured. It is strange the writer has failed to acknowledge these facts.
- He argues had Mr Musharraf not joined the US war against terrorism after 9/11, Pakistan would have been in a worse condition than Iraq and Afghanistan. He is reminded of Turkey, which had taken a bold stand against American demands to allow operation in Iraq from its territory and was even offered billions of dollars. Yet Turkey refused but wasn’t ‘bombed back into Stone Age’.
In any case, we aren’t in much better shape than Afghanistan. The accounts of the suffering of the displaced men, women and children up north often make me cry.
- Mr Bey says the president has done nothing for himself and has given maximum freedom. I can only say he must be joking or trying to pull wool over the readers’ eyes. It is clear Mr Musharraf has been exerting himself to remain president, what more could he do for himself? Regarding freedom, we have all seen the bloody images resulting from the ‘freedom’ the Pakistanis have. I am disappointed at Mr Bey’s distortion of truth.
- In the end, I would say not only the ex-servicemen but the ex-CJPs and senior diplomats are absolutely right in asking for the president to quit. [Dawn]
MILITARY IN CIVIL DEPTS
[Farhatullah Babar, Ex-senator, Islamabad]
This is in reference to the news report "Army men to go from civil departments" published on January 18. Quoting defence sources, it said the decision had been taken to withdraw the in-service army officers from the civil departments, and a comprehensive policy was in the pipeline for making such inductions in the future.
Many people were quick to shower praises on the military leadership without asking that if a decision had indeed been taken to withdraw the in-service officers why a policy was on the anvil to make such inductions in the future.
On February 3, the press reported: "A serving major-general, Anwar Khan, has assumed the charge of managing director of the Pakistan Agricultural Storage and Services Corporation (PASSCO).
His predecessor, Major-General Ahmad Nawaz Saleem Maila, retired due to his retirement from the Pakistan Army on January 5. Maj-Gen Maila was appointed on June 13 last."
Is it part of the new policy that on the retirement of an army officer working in a civil department, the post must immediately be filled by another serving military officer of the same rank? It also reminds me how about two years ago the then defence secretary while responding to criticism regarding the allotment of lands to the army had assured a Senate committee, saying: "A new policy on military lands is on the anvil".
In Allama Iqbal's words, "Khudaya tere sada dil banday kidher jaain, Ke darveshi bhi ayyari hai sultani bhi ayyari." (O' God, what should the simple folk do, as both the king and the dervish are cunning?) [The News]
PRINCIPLES IN LIEU OF PERSONS
[Waheed Mazhar, Lahore]
After the general elections on February 18, 2008 and the trend that emerged in their results, there is hope that the lawyers’ movement shall also bear fruit. The resilience and perseverance of this movement has not only won the support of the country but has also received kudos from the international community. This movement is commendable for its objectives such as, ‘prevalence of rule of law’ and ‘independence of judiciary’, which are essential for any civilised and democratic government. And there is absolutely no need to explain to the enlightened legal fraternity, that rule of law and independence of judiciary depends upon and can only be ensured by strengthening the ‘institution of judiciary’ and not by the mere reinstatement of a few individuals.
It is hoped that in its decisive phase, the lawyers’ movement shall not become hostage to the dynamics of a personality cult and instead adhere to its principal stand i.e. prevalence of rule of law and the independence of the judiciary. The legal fraternity and their leaders should press the new parliament for strengthening the institution of judiciary instead of creating a stalemate by pegging their hopes on a few individuals. It is beyond any doubt that there are individuals who have given remarkable sacrifices for this movement and they shall always be remembered. Their names shall be written in golden words in the books of history. [Daily Times]
PRESIDENT AND THE JUDICIARY
[Mohammad Riaz Khattak, Peshawar]
It is unfortunate that President Musharraf chose to wash dirty linen in public by maligning the judiciary during his visit to the five European countries. On the one hand he says the foreign media interferes in Pakistan's internal affairs and on the other he maligns the country himself on foreign lands. He castigated deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry and other sacked judges of the superior judiciary for their corruption which is unproven in any court of law.
Why is it that the president generally feels more comfortable with the westerners than the people at home? He should be asked as to how a judge, who has earned public sympathy by taking up the cases of human rights, can be a risk to his own countrymen. In actuality, President Musharraf himself is a security risk. He is a failure as the ruler of this country because he couldn't fulfil a single pledge he made in his seven-point agenda upon coming into power nine years back. His handpicked governor of the State Bank, Shamshad Akhtar, has recently termed the claim of 'high growth' a gigantic hoax. The results of his prolonged rule can be seen in the form of the crises which have gripped the country one after another. [The News]
AN OPPORTUNE MOMENT
[I. H. Mahmood, UK]
A hundred senior retired military officers signed a petition asking President Musharaf to resign. The army has increased its activity against terrorism. These two steps have reduced the army’s embarrassment highlighted by Mr Musharraf’s clinging to power at all costs.
The upcoming Feb 18 election needs to be fair and should also be perceived as fair, which is not possible with Mr Musharraf remaining at the helm of affairs. A window of opportunity has arisen for the army to further improve its image and gain popular support by asking Mr Musharraf to resign and and reinstating the deposed chief justice. The election will then be perceived to be transparent. [Dawn]
REAL HEROES
[Ali Iqbal Bajwa]
At a moment when the entire nation is in a political turmoil, the lawyers' community is bravely opposing the unconstitutional removal of the members of the superior judiciary. These protesting lawyers truly deserve our respect. I request all the Pakistanis to give them the regard they deserve, because they are the real heroes of the nation. [The News]
UNDUE DETENTION
[Subramanyam Sridharan, India]
Whatever the reason was for the arrest of Mr Aitzaz Ahsan just after the declaration of Emergency on November 3, it is indefensible to continue to detain him under house arrest. Surely, after the lifting of the Emergency and after the successful conclusion of the polls, all those erstwhile reasons should not hold anymore? It clearly appears to be vindictive in nature. Very soon, political parties that were in the opposition so far, will be assuming power and the very first thing they would do would be to release him. How could this continued detention be justified then? It is therefore baffling as to why the caretaker government should be so intransigent in this matter. [Daily Times]
DETENTION ALL THE WAY
[Zubair Torwali, Bahrain]
After completing their 90 days’ illegal detention, Aitzaz Ahsan, Tariq Mahmoud and Ali Ahmad Kurd were again detained by the government. Munir Malik is out because of his ailing health. The real chief justice of Pakistan with a number of colleagues has been perpetually under house-arrest since Nov 3, 2007. Dr A. Q. Khan has completed four years of house-arrest. Benazir Bhutto has been ‘detained’ for ever. What a mess!
Those who are all for rule of law and democracy are in the lurch whereas those who are all for corruption are free to ‘detain’ atta, ghee, sugar and oil. Hawks are free while doves are under arrest. This regime has only one ‘credit’ to its history: detention of opponents. [Dawn]
KEEPING THE POLITICIANS AWAY
[Saima Ali, Lahore]
It has been reported that differences have emerged in the lawyers’ community on how to go about the restoration of deposed judges now that elections have been held and a new political dispensation is about to emerge. It was also reported that Supreme Court Bar Association President Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan’s decision to hold joint press conferences with APDM leaders like Imran Khan has caused concern in the lawyer’s community. I agree with the concerns raised, i.e. the presence of politicians on the lawyers’ platform will unnecessarily politicise the issue and dilute the main objective of the lawyers’ struggle. We have seen what happens when the legal community is infected with political sentiment: several top leaders of the lawyers’ movement vowed to burn the Supreme Court building down should the Court give a decision against them. The lawyers’ should continue their noble struggle for rule of law and independence of judiciary, however, they should not allow politicians to hijack their movement as that will only harm their case. [Daily Times]
LAWLESSNESS
[Raja M. Afzal Khan, Gujar Khan]
Lawlessness prevails when lawmakers and custodians of law openly violate laws of the land with impunity. If it is correct, we should identify those responsible instead of blaming those who are forced to react. [Dawn]
EMBARRASSING
[Muhammed Umer, Saudi Arabia]
During his recent tour of Europe, General (Retd) Pervez Musharraf distributed a pamphlet among European leaders containing allegations against the illegally deposed and detained Chief Justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Chaudhry. The allegations contained in the pamphlet are the same ones that were thrown out of the Supreme Court when it re-instated Iftikhar Chaudhry. Such petty behaviour from the President of Pakistan, that too on the international stage, is embarrassing. [Daily Times]
==================================================================
From the National Press
AN EYE ON FOOD INFLATION
[Muhammad Zaeem Iqbal Lahore]
Inflation always creates problems for nations, but when inflation is mainly due to the food items, and then the problems become worst, Pakistan is facing this problem of food inflation now-a-days. If we analyse the month of December 2007, we shall see the rapid increase of prices nearly in all the food items. According to the statistical data provided by the State Bank of Pakistan, Consumer Price Inflation (CPI) in December 2007 overall rose by 8.8%. However, if we analyse, there is a decline of 0.1% from December 2006 on year on year basis but still it is 0.1% higher than the CPI in November 2007.
Food inflation still remained high and witnessed a double digit rise for four consecutive months (from Sep -07 to Dec 07). Distribution of price changes of CPI food basket exhibits that out of 110 commodities reported in food group, 60 commodities including eggs, some fruits, cooking oil, pulse masoor, wheat, different types of rice and vegetable ghee exhibited double digit year on year inflation in the range of 10% to 61.9% in December 2007. The most prominent upward movement was observed in all major four varieties of rice showing increasing inflation ranging between 47.5% to 61.9% in December 2007. On the other hand, year on year inflation of 23 commodities including key staples such as onions, potatoes, tomatoes, sugar, basen, pulse, gram etc either declined or remained unchanged.
The contribution of individual food items in the overall year on year CPI inflation has been signified as 7 out of top 10 items contributing in overall inflation during December 2007 were from the food group. These items which have a cumulative weight of 20.6% include wheat flour, vegetable ghee, fresh milk, fresh fruits, wheat, meat and rice. The combined contribution of these food items was more than 61% in the overall inflation during December 2007. If we analyse overall inflation in different cities of Pakistan, highest level of overall inflation was recorded in Nawabshah (14%) and lowest in Sialkot (6.7%) during December 2007. In case of non-food items, highest level of inflation was recorded in Nawabshah (10.6%) and lowest in Faisalabad (3.7%).
If we see the food items, highest level of inflation was recorded in Nawabshah (19.0%) and lowest in Rawalpindi (7.9%). Further if we see the food inflation rates in other major cities of Pakistan, the rates are as in Karachi 12.4% in Lahore 11.5%, in Islamabad 8.1%, in Faisalabad 14.9%, in Peshawar 13.9% , in Hyderabad 14.9% and in Quetta 9% which show the worst condition of Pakistan's economy. If we analyse the inflation rates of food items during the last three years, in December 2005 the food inflation is 8.1%, in December 2006, it becomes 12.7% and in December 2007 it becomes 12.2% according to the State Bank of Pakistan, still if we see the 5 years average of food inflation, it increases 10% which is very dangerous and horrible for the Pakistan's economy.
But when we see the prices of different food items especially rice, wheat and vegetable ghee during December 2007 and January 2008, the food inflation rate boosts up in such a manner which we have not seen before. There is an increase of 50-60% in the prices of rice and vegetable ghee which has created huge problems for the people of Pakistan. The Government of Pakistan should must took some steps for the decrease in prices of food items, so the economy could be stabilized. [The Frontier Post]
PERSISTENT INFLATION
[Aftab Ahmed Khan, Karachi]
It cannot be denied that one of the worrying aspects of the current economic scene is the persistence of inflation at an uncomfortably high level. According to Federal Bureau of Statistics, Consumer Price Index for January showed an increase of 11.86 per cent over the corresponding month of last year.
The increase in food prices, with a weightage of 40.34 per cent in the index, was recorded at 18.25 per cent during the above two periods. The Sensitive Price Index recorded an increase of 12.04 per cent in the week ending Feb 7, 2008 over the corresponding week of 2007.
It is now crystal clear that the government’s hope of bringing down the annual rate of CPI inflation to 6.5 per cent in the current fiscal year is not going to be realised. The importance of containing and reversing the disconcerting inflationary trends in the economy cannot be overemphasised.
Inflation as an aspect of development will never be condoned by anyone who has observed its consequences over a large number of countries across the globe. These include accentuation of inequalities in society, disorganisation of public services, the misallocation of resources, the distortion of incentives and stagnation when ultimately stabilisation is attempted.
The most nearly unrelieved victims of inflation in Pakistan are those who work for the government and its pensioners. Our public administration has consequently been deeply demoralised and eroded. This is reflected in its inability to enforce laws, including those which relate to taxation and other public revenues, as well as in its failure to maintain and improve basic social services like education, health, transport, electricity, water and drainage.
It is generally insufficiently appreciated that many of our social, political and administrative problems have their roots in the persistence of uncomfortable inflationary pressures. History tells us that countries in a state of inflationary ecstasy are generally prey to administrative breakdown, class conflict and disorder — the precursors of totalitarian government. Without stable money, neither orderly economic progress nor justice can be assured. [Dawn]
MUSHARRAF'S LEGACY
[Engr S T Hussain, Lahore]
The legacy of the self-appointed saviour of the country, General (r) Pervez Musharraf, will include the following things: suicide bombings, mass killing of innocent citizens at the hands of the state security forces, centre-province confrontation, bad law and order, house arrests of judges and lawyers, extra-constitutional acts to secure personal interests, over 80 overseas visits at the taxpayers' expense, worst power and gas shortages, non-availability of flour, sky-racketing prices of daily-use items, curbs on the judiciary and media, rampant corruption and a total collapse of the civil bureaucracy. [The News]
RS 2 MILLION PER NIGHT
[Humayun Jan, London, UK]
Musharraf’s stay at a luxurious hotel opposite Hyde Park has cost Rs 2 million or roughly £17,000 per night to the Pakistani taxpayers. A fortnight’s stay would roughly amount to Rs 8 million and this does not include the cost of rooms for the entire team that accompanied Musharraf during his unofficial European trip. Senior British journalists have been reported to be smiling all the time while Musharraf disgracefully distributed the charge sheet against the Chief Justice of his own country to foreigners.
The charge sheet was related to fuel/medical expenses and irregularity in his son’s admission to a medical college that probably happened a decade ago. While Musharraf recently added a $60 million (Rs 3.6 billions) Learjet to his fleet of 14 VVIP aircrafts, the Chief Justice, who is senior in rank to the Army Chief, was accused of using a Mercedes car. [The Nation]
UNFAIR SUBSIDIES
[A Qayum Mangi, Sukkur]
The World Bank, in a recent report, revealed that agricultural subsidies in rich countries amount to nearly $300 billion a year, roughly six times the total amount spent on development aid to poor countries. The study found that full elimination of agricultural protection and production subsidies in rich countries would increase global trade in agriculture by 17 percent. This increase would enable agricultural and food exports from low- and middle-income countries to rise by 24 percent. As a result, total annual rural income in these countries would rise by about $60 billion, or roughly six percent.
There is a real need to persuade rich countries to abolish these detrimental subsidies in the interest of larger humankind. These policies that foster economic and social inequalities on the international and national levels are one of the causes of rising militancy and terrorism, especially in the Muslim world. Also, it is not that the poor countries will be demanding something extraordinarily unfair: current global trading regimes, led by the US and the EU, are pushing poorer countries to eliminate agricultural subsidies while fiercely protecting subsidies to their own farmers. If anything, elimination of subsidies in the rich countries would make the global agricultural trade fairer by applying the same standards to all countries. [Daily Times]
'PAKISTAN PACKAGE' SCAM
[Abu Abdul Muez, Islamabad]
I concur with the views of Mehran Leghari who in a letter published on Jan 28 condemned PTCL – and rightly so – for levying a new charge without first seeking permission from subscribers. It is in fact amazing that so many complaints have been published in newspapers all over the country but the PTA has so far failed to make PTCL deactivate these packages. This is nothing but downright fleecing and I can only wonder who is going to come to the assistance of the hapless PTCL subscribers. [The News]
FEMALES ONLY!
[Saba Sartaj, Lahore]
A girls’ college has recently banned the use of mobile phones on campus because of alleged misuse of the phones. The college administration states that the girls tend to bunk classes and use the time to talk on the phone. More absurd is the reported statement of Punjab Education Secretary Qazi Afaq Ahmed who has appreciated the move and lauded the college for taking such action against the use of mobile phones on the ‘campus of any institution for females’, since it is ‘against the law’! The college staff has confiscated around a hundred cell phones already.
I am appalled at the sexist nature of the law; no such rule is implemented in other colleges, and I can’t seem to understand why the law would prohibit the use of mobile phones in girl’s institutions only. Do students in other colleges, boys especially, not ‘misuse’ mobile phones? And does the administration think that banning mobile phones will ensure a hundred percent attendance in all lectures? More importantly, at this level of education, students are adults, and entitled to their privacy and individuality. How can a college be so authoritarian in its administration and still expect the healthy intellectual growth of its students? [Daily Times]
YOUTUBE BANNED!
[A Very Annoyed Citizen, Lahore]
The famous website, www.youtube.com, is a video-sharing website where users can upload, view and share video clips. In August 2006, The Wall Street Journal published an article revealing that YouTube was hosting about 6.1 million videos (requiring about 45 terabytes of storage space), and had about 500,000 user accounts. There a large host of videos one can view on it, including movie clips, documentaries, speeches, political debates and music videos. However, apparently, the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority has issued a notice banning YouTube because of blasphemous material available on the site. The IP addresses it wants blocked has made the whole resource unreachable.
It is completely absurd and without reason. PTA needs to realise that everyone was not using the site for negative purposes; in fact, it is an extremely useful database of some very important and informative videos. And it is purely incorrect of PTA to assume that now no blasphemous material will reach the eyes of Pakistanis. Why sacrifice such a useful facility for a reason that is hardly compelling? I am extremely appalled and enraged at such a notice, as are many other people. Technology will always be used for both good and bad purposes; barring technology altogether is not the solution! [Daily Times]
PLANNING COMMISSION’S WEBSITE
[Asad Amin, Quetta]
Researchers, academics and planners do depend on social and economic development information and data available on the official websites of respective countries. But Pakistan’s Planing Commission website itself is a big headache, not a single web link or page is accessible.
It’s hard to get data on military and security issues but collecting and accessing data on socio-economic and regional development trends is more complicated due to the multiple reasons. I sent several emails to the secretary and officials concerned but could not get a single reply. [Dawn]
READING HABITS
[Nadeemul Ghani, Karachi]
The government and NGOs have been doing their best to increase the literacy rate in the country but on the national level there is a decrease in our reading habits, which is quite alarming for a nation as a whole. Even schoolteachers do not take interest in cultivating a reading habit. Their knowledge is restricted to the knowledge gained in the college or university and to the subject they are involved in. The reading habit does not mean that your reading should be restricted to your profession.
You should read various issues, articles and studies like a daily intake of carbohydrate, vitamins and minerals to maintain a balanced diet. Reading is an excellent food for the brain, it allows you to think apart from your professional life and have your own perspective on issues. There should be a comprehensive nationwide programme on this issue with the involvement of the ministry of education, educationists and schools. They should encourage organisations to develop a reading habit. [Dawn]
==================================================================
Letters to FreePakistan
[The following letter published in the Frontier Post of February 04, 2008, and talks of the FreePakistan Newsletter also.]
OBSERVATIONS OPENLY SHARED
George Singleton USA
As I continue to receive numerous private e-mails, and have been put onto e-mail websites and mailing listings related solely to Pakistan both from within and outside the your good nation, I thought some of your readers might like a summary overview of some of these e-mails: . . . 9. A Free Pakistan Newsletter is regularly sent to me now, I think from Texas. It is a very high minded, liberal, and academic work by young overseas Pakistani students. . . [GSingle556@aol.com]
Thanks, most comprehensive (newsletter).
[Rajiva Vijaysinha, Sri Lanka]
Thank you for sending.
It is appreciated.
[Yasmeen Aftab Ali]
very well written, that if Pakistan is the most dangerous country, then let USA Keep its hands off. Regards and best wishes
[joginder singh, India]
Thanks for all specially for the letter of CJP Choudhry which destroys the whole myth of President Musharraf
[Tahir Ali]
Thanks a lot for the newsletter.
Its a very informative issue. There are many things to read, many lession to learn and many facts to understand. Let me read for comments.
May God help us , protect us and save us from harms.
Thanks again,
With Regards,
[Fazal Maula]
==================================================================
Edited and prepared by
Khalil Ahmad
Email: khalilkf@yahoo.com khalil@asinstitute.org
[FreePakistan Newsletter, among other things, is a compilation of views and news taken from the national newspapers’ print and online editions. It is not possible to mention the source of every piece of news or view made use of herein; but as a matter of policy, where possible the source is mentioned with due thanks. However, no opinion expressed here should necessarily be taken as reflecting the view of Free Pakistan Newsletter.]
==================================================================
Disclaimer:
“You are subscribed to the monthly Free Pakistan Newsletter, an affiliate of the Alternate Solutions Institute Lahore, Pakistan. . If you have received this message by mistake or wish to be removed from the mailing list, please send an email to subscribe@asinstitute.org with the subject “unsubscribe.”
