CONTENTS:
0 Announcements
0 If you were to seek my counsel, General
Dr Ijaz Shafi Gilani
0 ‘Don’t trash the Supreme Court’
By Khalid Anwer
0 Media Freedom
By Rizwan Ghani
0 Issues of the Month: Civil Society vs. the State; and,
Gagging the Media
0 From the National Press
0 Letters to FreePakistan
==================================================================
Quotes of the Month:
The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
[William Shakespeare, King Henry IV, Part 2, Act 4, Scene II]
This will be the best security for maintaining our liberties. A nation of well-informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God had given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the religion of ignorance that tyranny begins.
[Benjamin Franklin]
A censor is a man who knows more than he thinks you ought to.
[Laurence J. Peter, The Oxford Dictionary of Humorous Quotations]
==================================================================
Thank you for subscribing to FreePakistan Newsletter!
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
Article: FREE MEDIA: BREAKING THE CLICHÉS
The Post of November 27, 2007, published an article, Free Media: Breaking the Clichés. The article discusses various clichés regarding the freedom of media prevalent in Pakistan. People both in and outside the government hold that print and electronic media reporting should be objective and impartial. The article demonstrates that it's an impossibility. The article further argues that the freedom of media means that media should be all free to be a PTV or a Musawaat; to be all free to follow the dictates of their conscience, or market. It is the choice of media houses and outlets. They should be bound only by two things: self-responsibility and legal responsibility.
Here is the link to the original article:
http://asinstitute.org/page.php?instructions=page&page_id=710&nav_id=93
Here is the link to The Post article:
http://thepost.com.pk/Arc_OpinionNews.aspx?dtlid=130846&catid=11&date=11...
The Frontier Post of November 28, 2007, also carried the article:
http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=100
Media Release: GOVERNMENTS SHOULD REJECT CALLS FOR A POST-KYOTO
TREATY “KYOTO 2” - CIVIL SOCIETY REPORT
Governments should reject calls for a post-Kyoto treaty “Kyoto 2”
Civil Society Report says climate policy should focus on removing barriers to adaptation
Lahore November 27, 20007: A new Report produced by a coalition of over 40 prominent civil society organisations from 33 countries says that governments should reject calls for a post-Kyoto treaty (“Kyoto 2”) with binding limits on carbon emissions. The report says a better strategy would be to focus on removing barriers to adaptation, such as subsidies, taxes and regulations that hinder technological innovation and economic growth.
From 3-16 December, government officials will be in Bali, Indonesia, for climate talks. They are set to discuss the establishment of a new treaty, dubbed “Kyoto 2”, which would require all countries to limit emissions of greenhouse gases.
The Civil Society Report on Climate Change concludes that such emissions caps would be counterproductive: they would undermine economic development, harm the poor, and would be unlikely to address the problem of climate change in a meaningful way.
“Kyoto 2 is the wrong solution. Such a treaty would harm billions of poor people, making energy and energy-dependent technologies, such as clean water, more expensive, and would perpetuate poverty by retarding growth”, said Dr. Khalil Ahmad of Alternate Solutions Institute, one of the 41 organisations who published the report.
“Given that nations are having trouble complying with the relatively small emissions cuts required under Kyoto, the economic and social consequences of a Kyoto 2 Treaty could be devastating”, added Dr. Khalil.
The Civil Society Report argues that adaptation is the best way to enable people to deal with a changing climate. That means:
• enabling people to utilise technologies capable of reducing the incidence of disease, such as clean water, sanitation, and medicines;
• deploying technologies – e.g. flood defences, roads, sturdier houses, and early warning systems – that reduce the risk of death from weather-related disasters;
• removing barriers to the use of modern agricultural technologies, which would better enable people to adapt to changing conditions;
• eliminating subsidies, taxes, and regulations that undermine economic growth – thereby enabling people better to address current and future problems.
Other conclusions in the Civil Society Report on Climate Change include:
• Over the course of the past century, deaths and death rates from weather-related natural disasters have declined substantially. It appears that the main drivers of this reduction have been improvements in wealth and technology.
• Mortality from extreme weather events is far more strongly affected by the technologies deployed by humans – such as the construction of houses, roads, and dams – than by climate.
• Human ecology and human behaviour are the key determinants of the transmission of infectious disease. Obsessive emphasis on climate is unwarranted because, given suitable economic circumstances, straightforward strategies are available to ensure the public health.
• If adaptation is not unduly restricted, production of food and other agricultural products, as well as forestry products, will keep pace with growing human demands.
• Foreign aid is being used as a ‘carrot’ to induce poor countries to restrict their emissions. But aid has mostly been wasted or even counterproductive. While there is a case for refocusing aid on projects that have a stronger chance of providing net benefits, increasing aid would do more harm than good.
• Finally, the stick of trade sanctions have been threatened as a means of enforcing the global cap – yet such sanctions harm both parties; a clear lose - lose scenario.
Download the Report (PDF):
http://ipn.lexi.net/images/uploaded/7-474b35c3caa26--csccc-report-web.pdf
For more information, contact info@asinstitute.org
Article: OUTRAGEOUS TO THE DIGNITY OF FREE PEOPLE
The Frontier Post of November 16, 2007, published an article, Outrageous to the Dignity of Free People. The article argues that people are not made of flesh only; they do need economic progress, but they do need freedom. They needs freedom to think, imagine, experiment with ideas, to speak their mind, to write down their stream of thought, to express themselves, to publish themselves, to discuss and debate with other people, to be what they want want to be. These freedoms have been ensured to him in the Constitution of 1973.
It is the foremost duty of the state to secure these freedoms to every individual citizen, and in addition to this, it is the second most important duty of the state to make it unequivocally clear that no individual or group or community or party has any right or can be allowed to infringe theses freedoms of any individual irrespective of his status. This is what is meant by rule of law. But if the state fails in upholding the rule of law and works against the interests of the citizens, it is for the higher courts of the country to rein it in and provide relief to the citizens. But when both constitution and courts are wrapped up on any pretext, the people have no protection of their lives, their freedoms, and no access to information and no door to knock at for justice. This amounts to their complete enslaving and may force them to resort to the law of the people, i.e. a rebellion against the ruling elites.
Here is the original article:
http://asinstitute.org/page.php?instructions=page&page_id=707&nav_id=93
Here is the published version:
http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=91
On November 19, 2007, the same article was carried by The Post also.
Here is the link:
http://thepost.com.pk/Arc_OpinionNews.aspx?dtlid=129414&catid=11&date=11...
Article: THE BANE OF SOVEREIGNTY
The Frontier Post of November 06, 2007, published an article, The Bane of Sovereignty, by Dr. Khalil Ahmad. The article discusses the moral and political implications of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's two exiles. The article argues that sovereignty of a country is determined by its Constitution. If it is followed in letter and spirit, the sovereignty is intact; if not, sovereignty is harmed.
Here is the original article:
http://asinstitute.org/page.php?instructions=page&page_id=706&nav_id=
Here is the published version:
http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=72
Article: RESPONSIBLE CHOICES
The News International of October 28, 2007, in its Political Economy section, published an article, Responsible Choices. The article discusses continuous price hikes of essential items in Pakistan and suggests a non-governmental way out highlighting responsible consumer behavior.
The original title of the article, Price Hikes: A Non-Governmental Way Out, was changed to Responsible Choices.
Here is the original article:
http://asinstitute.org/page.php?instructions=page&page_id=703&nav_id=93
Here is the published version:
http://jang.com.pk/thenews/oct2007-weekly/nos-28-10-2007/pol1.htm#4
==================================================================
IF YOU WERE TO SEEK MY COUNSEL, GENERAL
By Dr. Ijaz Shafi Gilani
[This article first appeared in The News International on Tuesday, November 20, 2007. The writer holds a doctorate from MIT and specialises in public-opinion research.]
As a long-time student and researcher of public opinion, I am frequently asked the question these days: How has the public reacted to imposition of emergency, or martial law, in Pakistan? For many of my interlocutors it is a rhetorical question. They simply wish to reconfirm and reinforce their own perceptions and views of their friends and acquaintances. I am amused and a bit irritated. Yet, in this particular case it is true that their perceptions find an echo in public opinion polls. Public reaction to the emergency and suspension of the Constitution is overwhelmingly negative. When views are so skewed in one direction, the real question is not "what" is the opinion; instead it is more meaningful to ask the "why" question. Why are views so one-sided and can we identify the grounds for uniformity of views.
But first, the public opinion itself. In a survey (the sample size of which was 1,663 and which was conducted on November 5-6) carried out shortly after the announcement of emergency, only 19 per cent of the respondents across the four provinces supported it, 67 per cent opposed it and 14 per cent were unable to make up their mind. Barring a few exceptions, this overwhelmingly negative response cuts across political affiliations and social differences.
What explains this dramatic aversion to emergency or suspension of the Constitution? Similar polls on earlier occasions, notably in October 1999, showed widespread approval of the takeover. In his first suspension of the Constitution eight years ago, General Musharraf received around 70% approval in a Gallup Pakistan Poll. In fact, the latest appears to be the only one of the five martial laws (defined as suspension or abrogation of the Constitution by the chief of the Army) which has received popular disapproval. For right or wrong reasons, the martial law of the Fifties (Ayub Khan), Sixties (Yahya Khan), Seventies (Zia-ul-Haq) and Nineties (Musharraf 1) are known to have been received with approval and considerable support. What, then, explains the change in the case of the Musharraf 2 martial law?
One obvious, simple but outstanding, reason is that it is a repeat performance by the same person after eight years of rule. In previous cases the approval and welcome to martial law represented an amusing trait of the miserable across the world. All change is seen by them with a "bright eye," with an instinct, even if false, for hope. For years I have had difficulty in explaining why public opinion in some of the most miserable countries in the Gallup International's global surveys top the "Hope Ladder" at the start of the new year. These people innocently hope that moving from one calendar year to the next will mysteriously catapult them out of their misery. There is a deeply embedded instinct to long for and welcome the Messiah from another world. The instinct is stronger than the average among the miserable, or when one feels miserable. To his misfortune, with eight years of rule behind him, General Musharraf is no longer a mystery or an unknown Messiah. Thus, when asked: "According to one opinion the emergency is in the interest of Pakistan, while according to another opinion it is in Musharraf's own interest. What is your view?" A vast majority of 68 per cent favours the latter opinion. Only 18 per cent support the former view, while the remaining are undecided. Musharraf may sincerely believe that he is burning the midnight lamp and killing himself to promote a "Pakistan first" policy. But while it would hurt his feelings, one has to whisper to him honestly: "The majority of Pakistanis (68 per cent) look upon your recent actions as a "Musharraf first" syndrome. Only 18 per cent believe in your "Pakistan first" rationale to suspend the Constitution.
There is also a more profound basis to widespread the rejection of the Musharraf 2 martial law. This is particularly true of the intelligentsia, professionals and the politically active sections of the population. As a columnist recently put it: "These people are hungry for rule of law." And here is a change from the past which we must note. In the past the politically active class and the intelligentsia were more interested in partisan loyalties and the desire to win power for their favourite world views or ideologies. Today we observe a dramatic shift in a different direction. More and more of this segment of society in particular and the population in general are coming together to seek a common non-partisan goal: "the rule of law." Perhaps they are adjusting themselves to a change in the role of the state in society. The power of the state to affect public welfare and development, as provider of jobs and wealth, its role as custodian of collective values and as centrepiece of identity is on the decline. As a norm the state is returning to its traditional role as provider of law and order, at best a facilitator. Central to this role is the guarantee to "rule of law." Apparently the sponsors and managers of state publicity are not quite sensitive to this change of public mood. The role of state in promoting economic welfare, important as it might be, is not seen as superior to or substitute of rule of law. Thus, when a survey carried out last week asked the question on the appropriateness of (practically) dismissing Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, only 14 per cent were in favour, while a massive 70 per cent opposed it, and the remaining did not respond. The question was followed by a mock presidential poll between General Pervez Musharraf and Iftikhar Chaudhry. Among those who voted 70 per cent voted for the chief justice and only 30 per cent for the General. In my assessment it is not a choice between two persons, both of whom are respectable and accomplished in their own ways, and neither is without shortcomings. Instead, the results of this simulated contest show a massive preference for "Rule of Law" as opposed to "Martial Law." The chief justice represents the former, the General the latter. In its resolve to uphold the "rule of law," the civil society of Pakistan has never been so united before. This unity is beyond partisan concerns.
I disagree with the view which considers Pakistan a divided nation. In a curious way it has never been so united on something which is so central to civilised behaviour. If one were able to sustain it, it would be time to celebrate.
Now, to conclude. If General Musharraf were to seek my counsel, I would say: In all respect, the most honourable course for you is to quit. I say it with earnestness. If I were you, that is what I would do. Our Prophet (Peace be upon him) advised: "Wish unto your brother what you wish well for yourself." Of the five martial laws in our history, you have the undesirable distinction of being the only person who has done it twice. Be the first one to quit honourably. [Courtesy The News International]
==================================================================
‘DON’T TRASH THE SUPREME COURT’
By Khalid Anwer
[This article first appeared in Dawn on November 24, 2007. The writer is a renowned lawyer.]
The headline above has been borrowed from a direction issued by then Vice President Al Gore on the eve of one of the most notorious judgments delivered by the US Supreme Court. This was the case by means of which the conservative judges, by a bare majority of five to four, handed over the presidency of the US to fellow conservative George W. Bush.
In the election of 2000, Gore had a comfortable majority of the popular vote. But by a quirk of American electoral law the election was to be decided on the basis of electoral college votes and whoever won in Florida would be the next US president. The electoral results in Florida showed Bush as leading but there was a dispute on the under-votes (i.e. votes not recorded in the voting machines). When Gore demanded a recount, Bush went to court. His case was weak. He wanted that there should be no recounting at all.
Obviously the correct view would be that recounting should be allowed to go on and if either party was dissatisfied with the result that could have been challenged. The Florida State Supreme Court decided in Gore’s favour. One of Bush’s basic objections was that the under votes in only four counties were being checked and that there were different standards of voting in different counties — he contended that this denied him the equal protection of the laws.
The Florida State Supreme Court however decided that the under votes in all the counties in Florida should be recounted. Ironically it was this judgment which was then challenged successfully in the US Supreme Court by Bush. In fact the case was taken twice to the Supreme Court, with Bush winning both times.
The most extreme of the Supreme Court judges was Justice Scalia — a hard line judge who is a great favourite of neo-conservatives. His response to the Florida court judgment was scarcely believable. In its internal deliberations in the US Supreme Court, as soon as the decision came on Friday, he demanded that the US Supreme Court should pass an immediate order of stay, grant permission to Bush to appeal to the Supreme Court and then reverse the decision of the Florida Supreme Court — all by Saturday morning and without hearing any oral arguments at all.
The proposal was simply outrageous in its sweep. The conservative majority in the court eventually ordered that a stay would be granted immediately, the parties would file their written arguments on Sunday with arguments scheduled for Monday. Never before in the history of the Supreme Court was a case scheduled for such a swift disposal. When this order was announced on Saturday it was obvious what the final result would be; the court had advertised its intentions in clear language.
At that point of time Al Gore sent a message to his spokesman, “Please make sure that no one trashes the supreme court.” There could be no better display of grace in the face of adversity. His political career was on the verge of being destroyed by a biased court but he accepted the coming decision with dignity. For him, the institution of the supreme court was more important than his personal career.
When the majority decided in favour of Bush a powerful dissent was penned by Justice Stevens: “Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year’s presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the nation’s confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.”
Is there a lesson to be learnt here by military or civil politicians, past, present or future, in Pakistan? Let us now turn to events here. The Supreme Court was yet to render a verdict regarding General Musharraf’s eligibility on Nov 3 when the emergency, which had been looming on the horizon, was imposed. Ominous warnings were being given by government representatives that martial law, in pristine, hybrid or attenuated form, was in the offing.
How were the judges supposed to respond? Obviously they could only observe that they would not be cowed by these scarcely veiled threats. Were they supposed to say, “Yes, we’re scared!”?
An outsider to their counsels cannot say with certainty what they were planning to do. Certain it is that the government inferred the worst. That the judges were operating under the surveillance of the agencies is not open to doubt — the ISI’s right to spy is the only permanently operating fundamental right in the country.
The president has made his war on terror the frontispiece of his assault on the judicial system. It is worth pausing for a moment to explore who exactly is a ‘terrorist’. The word ‘terrorist’ is commonly used these days to refer to a person who uses methods of terrorism to dislodge, damage or destroy an established government — an art in which the CIA has specialised. The historical provenance of the word is, however, the exact opposite.
Its etymology is traced out in the Compact Oxford English Dictionary (Vol. II) which defines ‘terrorism’ as “government by intimidation as directed and carried out by the party in power in France during the reign of terror, the system of the terror.” (The word is derived from the French terroriste).
Who were the original terrorists? The Jacobins, the ruling faction during the French Revolution. In other words, the original connotation of the word ‘terrorist’ or ‘terrorism’ relates to a ruling party which controls the apparatus of the state and relies on methods of coercion i.e. terrorism in order to rule the country.
A little reflection will indicate why this meaning is not merely lexical but reflects an underlying reality. The worst type of coercive or terrorist activities are those which are employed by misusing the full power of a modern state apparatus against the people of that state.
It is emblematic of governments which seek to suspend basic human rights, ostensibly to combat what they term as terrorist activities, that they, in fact, employ those very methods which they condemn in individual terrorists.
The US government has refused to accept, in blatant violation of public international law, that the Geneva Conventions are binding on it and has also refused to allow terrorists imprisoned by it in Guantanamo the right to defend themselves in courts of law.
The good news is that the US has stopped torturing suspected terrorists; the bad news is that it has done so by redefining torture.
Pakistan’s armed forces are currently waging a war in the tribal areas and Swat. It is said that the declaration of an emergency was necessitated because of judicial impediments in fighting terrorism. But we have still to be informed as to what court order prevented the Pakistan army from carrying out military operations either in Swat or the tribal areas. We have not been informed about this for the simple reason that no such order was passed.
The phrase ‘war against terror’ even otherwise is a semantic monstrosity. The word ‘terror’ is an abstract noun. How can war be conducted against an abstract noun? Yet this meaningless phrase is repeated ad nauseam to justify repeated violations of basic human rights.
Any resident of a major city in Pakistan knows that violent crime is a lucrative and risk-free endeavour. Every day scores of mobile phones, wallets, etc. are snatched at gunpoint. The assailants are neither arrested nor prosecuted.
Why? Because the police have other priorities — such as arresting superior court judges and beating up lawyers and journalists. Judges are also citizens. If they, or any of them, have committed a crime they should be charged with it. If they have not, they should be released forthwith and paid substantial damages as compensation.
The fact is that in the past few years the Supreme Court has made an enormous contribution to enforcement of basic human rights. The change has been paradigmatic and not merely incremental. The rule of law is but a theory but praxis is something different. In a country where the unwritten assumption has always been that the most vulnerable members of society have no enforceable rights whatsoever this represents a huge step forward.
The judicial battle against police atrocities is something which will remain to the eternal credit of the former Chief Justice. A balanced assessment, no doubt, requires notice to be taken of the fact that there has also been a marked decline in the intellectual trajectory of judicial pronouncements. It seems that hermeneutical skills have been trumped by the emphasis on speed of disposal of cases.
For a court of ultimate jurisdiction to emphasise quantity over quality is not a wise choice; a plethora of hurried judgments, which are sometimes self-contradictory and often rooted in shifting theoretical postulates have not enhanced the court’s prestige.
But, in the final analysis, nothing is more important than the enforcement of the basic rights enshrined in all the great statements of human rights relating back to the Prophet’s (PBUH) last sermon. [Courtesy Dawn]
==================================================================
MEDIA FREEDOM
By Rizwan Ghani
[This article first appeared in Pakistan Observer on November 29, 2007.]
I have watched nation wide protests against media ban imposed since Nov. 3. I don’t approve of dialogue between information minister Nisar A. Memon and media representative including APNS, CPNE and PFUJ. I think neither Memon nor handful of professional organizations can engage in a dialogue to discuss critical issues including media code of conduct, press freedom, free speech, objective journalism etc., because of cardinal legal and constitutional stakes of individuals and pubic versus state. These rights are protected by the constitution and dialogue could well compromise them. Ideally, govt. should unilaterally withdraw all draconian laws and lifts ban or else the media organizations and representatives wait for the parliament to do the needful and at this stage only focus on contractual issues.
The handful of professional organizations however well meaning they may be aren’t legally entitled to represent public in lieu of the parliament. I am of the view that in the larger interest of restoring, strengthening and improving media freedom, the matter better be left to the new parliament. In the meanwhile, concerned organizations may well continue the struggle for restoration of their jobs and other professional and contractual rights.
Similarly, as fourth pillar of democracy there is little that independence of media can supplement at this stage in country because freedom of speech and media freedom are the constitutional guarantees protected by the courts. There is little that organizations will gain through dialogue in wake of alleged question marks on the independence of judiciary, the absence of parliament and an establishment seeking an end to standoff with media more for international ‘face saving’ than addressing real issues. Otherwise also, the priority is protection of minority stakes and at stake are democratic and constitutional rights of public including right to know and freedom of speech.
Interestingly, US media faced a challenge in 1973. Reportedly, the Nixon govt. issued a 735-page criminal code revision bill, known as S-1. It contained provisions that would have made reporters who attempted to uncover information about national defense liable to prosecution for espionage. However, due to the publishing of famous Watergate Espionage Scandal by the Washington Post, the executive failed in its attempt to gag the media and president Nixon had to resign. The development resulted in bringing more openness in American media and US Congress enacted “Sunshine Law” which became effective in 1977. The law provides that meetings of some 50 federal agencies and commissions will be open to the press and the public.
I am of the view that to secure national interest Pakistan needs its own ‘Sunshine Law’. And I am of the view that the any individual, project, policy or information that involves public money should be open to public scrutiny. The logic is simple if something or someone is using even a quid from state exchequer under public fund should be open to public scrutiny starting from president, prime minister, cabinet, lawmakers down to every public servants. The lawmakers and courts should extend their support and strengthen the media to act as public’s watchdog.
Today’s media standoff shows that Pakistan media has crossed the stage of US “Penny Press”(PP) plan of 1884 and has in fact been derailed on its route to Objective Journalism. In the Penny Press Plan, the newspapers were facilitated by local post and transport system. It helped improved their circulation and advertisement. That in turn helped newspapers become financially independent. What followed next in US media was papers breakaway from partisan politics and press introduced independent views. Republican, Horace Greeley, editor of The New York Tribune started criticizing Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War.
The PP changed face of American press by ending era of partisan press and introduced objective journalism. The end of partisan press meant end of one-sided expositions, the end of one-sided assaults and the conscientious journalists announced a Declaration of Independence, wrote Whitelaw Reid Editor of New York Tribune. The journalists of that day began to view their work as profession and established professional associations. The press autonomy enhanced the confidence of the press corps and they started feeling equal to politicians. This professionalism reinforced the notion that journalists should be independent.
They refused to act as conduits of official information. They started providing their own analysis and interpretations of events to balance government’s position. The others went so far as to advocate that journalists should side with those who are less powerful in society and unable to speak for themselves-a practice termed as advocacy journalism. It also introduced a fresh trend which was termed as adversarial journalism- a practice of challenging government and serving as opposition to public officials, particularly president. Notable examples include the reporting of Seymour Hersh of The New York Times who exposed secret documents which came to be known as the Pentagon Papers on how US became involved in Vietnam war. In present times the media criticism of Bush and Blair war on terrorism including Iraq are cases in point. The struggling, protesting and banned media persons in Pakistan proves that country’s media has come of age.
Pakistan’s media has matured and it should now be recognized as the new mediator in country’s politics instead of imposing bans on it. Our leaders should recognize the fact and unconditionally withdraw all media related ordinances and bans. Both government and the media representatives should help resolve issues related to contractual obligations at their earliest but they should stay away from issues like press freedom and freedom of opinion because of legal and constitutional issues including individual freedom. These are cardinal issues and they do not fall within the purview of both parties at this stage. The journalists should avoid the trap. They instead should wait for the new parliament and join public to seek ‘sunshine laws’ in Pakistan in national interest to help inculcate transparency, accountability and meritocracy. Lastly, it is about time our politicians looks beyond politics of protests as public display of power and recognize power of media in politicking.
Finally, if I were to make political parties and public for run for their money in coming elections I would have arranged face offs between leading political parties and their leaders on domestic issues including economic, education, health and foreign policy. It would have helped public hold the politicians accountable and allowed media to make a productive contribution by helping the country to unite. The free interaction between different political parties could have helped public form opinion. It would have made the elections rewarding for the public who as result of debates on issues would have simply come out and voted to protect its stake. Free media can help get rid of election rigging that in turn will lead country on road to advanced democracy. Pakistan can still do it. If only it is realized.
[Courtesy Pakistan Observer]
==================================================================
Issue of the Month: Civil Society vs. the State
TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT RE NOV 3 PCO
Setting aside the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO), a seven-member bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry on November 3 evening barred the President and the Prime Minister from taking any action contrary to the independence of the judiciary. The other members of the bench included Justice Rana Bhagwandas, Justice Javed Iqbal, Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed and Justice Ghulam Rabbani. Following is the text of the 2-page Supreme Court order:
“This application was filed in Court on 2nd November 2007 praying that respondent-Government may change composition of Bench by adopting extra Constitutional measures, which could mean either by placing Martial Law or bringing PCO or by imposing emergency.
2. Application could not be taken up as it was not numbered. However, now it has been marked to Bench. In the meantime, in electronic and print media news appeared that PCO has been promulgated to enable Government to administer fresh oath to the Chief Justice as well as Judges of the Supreme Court so that favourable Judges could be appointed. Be that as it may, we feel that Government has no ground/reason to take extra Constitutional steps, particularly for the reasons being published in the newspapers that high profile case is pending and is not likely to be decided in favour of the Government, although matter is still pending. Therefore, a special Bench has been constituted and on considering pressing situation and news which have published in newspapers, we direct as follows:-
1) Government of Pakistan e.i. President and Prime Minister of Pakistan are restraint from undertaking any such action, which is contrary to Independence of Judiciary.
2) No judge of the Supreme Court or the High Courts including Chief Justice(s) shall take oath under PCO or any other extra Constitutional step.
3) Chief of Army Staff, Corps. Commanders, Staff Officers and all concerned of the Civil and Military Authorities are hereby restrained from acting on PCO which has been issued or from administering fresh oath to Chief Justice of Pakistan or Judges of Supreme Court and Chief Justice or Judges of the Provincial High Courts. They are also restrained to undertake any such action, which is contrary to independence of Judiciary. Any further appointment of the Chief Justice of Pakistan and Judges of the Supreme Court and Chief Justices of High Courts or Judges of Provinces under new development shall be unlawful and without jurisdiction.
Put up before full court on 5th November 2007.”
OUR HEARTS BLEED AND OUR EYES ARE FULL OF SORROW
[Ashraf Liaquat Ali Khan, Son Of Liaquat Ali Khan]
[Akbar Liaquat Ali Khan, Son Of Liaquat Ali Khan]
[Yousuf Haroon, Son Of Haji Abdullah Haroon]
[Begum Laila Sarfaraz, Daughter Of Haji Abdullah Haroon]
[Zia Ispahani, Son Of Mah Ispahani]
[Qazi Azmat Isa, Son Of Qazi Mohammed Isa]
[Qazi Faez Isa, Son Of Qazi Mohammed Isa]
[Talat Shuaib Qureshi, Granddaughter Of Begum Maulana Mohammad Ali]
[Abdullah Hussain Haroon, Grandson Of Haji Abdullah Haroon]
[Rukhsana Abbasi, Granddaughter Of Saadullah Khan]
[Samiullahansari, Great-Grandson Of Nawab Samiullah]
We, the children and grandchildren of the Freedom Fighters of Pakistan are pained to observe what is happening to our beloved Pakistan, and how the following teachings of our Quaid-e-Azam are not followed:
* “Government of Pakistan is in the hands of the people...based on fundamental principles of democracy not bureaucracy or autocracy or dictatorship.” [Address to Civil Officers at Sibi, February 14, 1948]
* “Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. It has taught equality of men, justice and fair-play to everybody. We are inheritors of these glorious traditions.” [Address to the people of USA, February 1948]
* No man should lose his liberty without a judicial trial in accordance with accepted rules of evidence and procedure.” [Speech on Criminal Law Emergency Powers Bill, February 6, 1919]
* “Let us behave and regulate our affairs as free men; we are not suppressed and oppressed under the regime of foreign domination; we have broken those chains.” [Speech at public meeting at Dacca, March 21, 1948]
* “Make the people feel that you are their servants and friends, maintain the highest standard of honour, integrity, justice and fair play.” [Address to Gazetted Officers at Chittagong, March 25, 1948]
* “Study the Constitution and understand its true constitutional and legal implications and be faithful to the Constitution.” [Address to Officers of the staff College, Quetta, June 14, 1948]
The well being of Pakistan demands the immediate withdrawal of the PCO, the Proclamation of emergency, and all recently enacted laws that have curtailed freedom of speech and expression and all laws that permit arrest and detention without a judicial trial by an independent judiciary.
The nation expects that the government will realize the wisdom to restore the Constitution of Pakistan and to restore all the judges who had sworn to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”.
Let bygones be bygones. Let us make amends, we are after all brothers and sisters and have to live and die together. Let us not to betray the Quaid and the Freedom Fighters who worked with selfless, tireless devotion to attain this beautiful and wonderful country, achieved by “moral and intellectual force and with the power of the pen...for which there is no parallel in the history of the world” [Quaid’s address to the nation, August 31, 1947].
Pakistan first, last and always. [Daily Times]
A MESSAGE TO PAKISTAN FROM AMERICA'S LAWYERS
We, the lawyers of America, stand shoulder to shoulder with the brave lawyers and citizens of Pakistan as you strive to preserve the rule of law in your nation.
An independent legal system and a just constitution are cornerstones of all lawful societies. The arrests of Pakistan's Supreme Court justices, and of thousands of lawyers, judges and civil leaders, are a profound breach of the rule of law.
The American Bar Association calls on President Pervez Musharraf to:
Restore the constitution of Pakistan
Reinstate Pakistan's Supreme Court justices.
Free those lawyers and civil leaders who have been wrongly jailed
The courageous men and women of Pakistan, led by their legal community, remind citizens of all nations that justice and the rule of law are both precious and fragile.
The suspension of Pakistan's institutions of justice is a threat to the rule of law in all nations.
We, the lawyers of America, stand with you.
[ABA (American Bar Association) Defending Liberty - Pursuing Justice]
OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT
[Souhayr Belhassen, President, International Federation for Human Rights, Paris]
Dear Mr President, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) expresses its deepest concern about the developments in Pakistan and your decision to proclaim the state of emergency, since Nov 3. The objectives and the scope of such an action constitute a flagrant breach of the international standards and the constitutional rule of law in Pakistan.
FIDH draws your attention to the fact that the most basic rights such as the right to life, the interdiction of torture and slavery or servitude, the fair trial guarantees, the legal capacity of the person and the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion cannot be derogated under any circumstances, according to the international law which defines the conditions of proclamation of the rule of emergency and its conformity with international human rights standards. The above-mentioned rights, guaranteed by International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, constitute a body of principles widely accepted and are, therefore, part of international customary law in the field of fundamental freedoms.
We note that throughout your statement you repeatedly attacked the judiciary’s power and its alleged interference in actions and responsibilities of the executive. However, the Supreme Court and the judiciary in general have an essential role to play as guardians of the constitutional order and the separation of the power in order to ensure the strict respect of the constitution and of human rights and public liberties. FIDH has recently called upon you to respect the independence of the judiciary, including the lawyers’ freedom to act, under all circumstances, as the most central and indispensable feature of a democratically functioning state.
FIDH remains very worried about the fate of members of its affiliated league, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), following the storming, on Nov 4, by police officers of the HRCP head office in Lahore, where more than 55 activists were arrested and detained, including HRCP executive director I. A. Rehman and its secretary-general Iqbal Haider.
All 55 human rights activists were brought before the judicial magistrate on Nov 5 and were sent to Kot Lakhpat Jail, Lahore. According to information received, around 70 members, throughout the country, are currently either under arrest and detention in several police stations, or under house arrest.
FIDH draws your attention to the house arrest order, for a period of 90 days, issued against the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of thought, conscience and religion, Asma Jahangir, also president of Human Rights Commission of Pakistan.
In addition, we deplore the house arrest order issued against Hina Jilani, the UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Human Rights Defenders. We request you to immediately proceed to lift those measures and avoid any further action of repression and harassment against human rights defenders, lawyers, journalists, other activists and members of political parties.
Furthermore, FIDH remains worried about the arbitrary use of violence by police forces against demonstrators in more than three cities. The police have allegedly used teargas and batons to break up demonstrations by lawyers protesting against the rule of emergency and have proceeded to numerous arrests and arbitrary detentions.
Mr President, you justified your decision under the necessity to fight terrorism. Notwithstanding this motivation, we would like to remind you that any action that states undertake in the fight against terrorism must be respectful of the international legal framework and certainly not be used as an excuse to derogate constitutional and international guarantees for political motives.
FIDH urges you to return, as soon as possible, to civil rule and protect and promote human rights as enshrined in Pakistan’s Constitution and in international human rights instruments. We firmly believe that the strict respect of human rights by the state of Pakistan is a prerequisite to fight any kind of extremism and political or religious fundamentalism, as well as terrorism.
In addition, Pakistan, as member of the UN Human Rights Council, should uphold the respect of fundamental rights to the highest standards. We urge, once again, the Pakistani authorities to ensure respect for human rights in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in all circumstances. [Dawn]
MARTIAL LAW
[South Asian Network for Secularism and Democracy, Toronto, Canada]
We, at the South Asian Network for Secularism and Democracy (SANSAD), are shocked by General Pervez Musharraf's decision to impose the state of emergency and suspend the Constitution of Pakistan. We condemn the promulgation of the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO) in the strongest words. It is an assault on the already fragile democratic institutions of the country. Clause 2 (1) of the PCO issued by the chief of army staff gives powers to the president to "amend the Constitution, as is deemed expedient". This is nothing but a recipe for imposing personal, dictatorial rule over 160 million Pakistanis. The PCO further gives the president and the prime minister total indemnity as the courts cannot give any judgment that is against these individuals or anyone they give authority to. We believe that such sweeping powers to the president and the prime minister are not only detrimental for political and civil rights of the people of Pakistan, but would also further entrench the military in the state, economy and social life of the country. We condemn the suspension of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan and the large-scale arrests of politicians, lawyers, judges, and human rights activists. We seriously doubt General Musharraf's stated claim that the emergency has been imposed to fight extremists' militancy in the country. We believe that his policies of carrying out the US agenda and its "war on terror" are principally responsible for the rise of militancy in the country.
We demand that General Pervez Musharraf should be removed as the chief of army staff and the president without delay. We demand that a transition government of national consensus should be formed which should hold fair and free elections within 90 days so that political power is finally transferred to the duly elected representatives of Pakistani people and the role of the military in the governance of Pakistan is brought to an end. We also demand that the United States stop all military assistance to the Musharraf regime and stop all interferences in the internal affairs of the country. We express solidarity with all democratic forces of Pakistan who have bravely challenged authoritarian moves of General Pervez Musharraf. [The News]
IN SUPPORT OF JUDGES AND LAWYERS
[Student body, LUMS (Lahore University of Management Sciences), Lahore]
Our generation -- born and bred in the politically disappointing decade of 1990s that ushered in another military rule in Pakistan -- had always doubted the possibility of change. Our parents and peers told us that the only way to live in the country was to subject our ideals to the "system" and that the only code of conduct was that of bribery and bullying. They quoted history books and told us how pointless it was to struggle for justice and democracy in Pakistan. Newspapers and TV channels simply added facts that proved their arguments and our own little experiences with "practical life" verified them.
We didn't see people around us as good and bad, or right and wrong, but simply as the smart and the stupid in terms of their dealings with political reality. We weren't able to take any sides because we didn't see any. All we saw was a jumble of interests, each and every one of which could be compromised at a certain price. The theories and principles we learned at school and college seemed utterly devoid of any relevance to our real lives.
But then we saw some people fighting, not for their personal material interests, but for ideas and institutions. Ideas and institutions that form the basis of justice and democracy. We saw them fighting with a passion and selflessness that simply astounded our conventional understanding. We also saw them being oppressed and tortured with such heartlessness that offended the very notion of being human. For the first time in our lives, we saw a conflict where compromise was not an option. For the first times in our lives, we were in doubt about which side to take.
Many judges of superior courts have been put under house arrest. Hundreds of lawyers have been arrested, put under house arrest or forced to go underground. Despite all this, thousands of them are resolved to take the fight to its rightful end, and are bravely facing the inhumane violence being meted out to them on the orders of a power-hungry military dictator. But let us assure you, the lawyers are not alone in this struggle.
We, the students of LUMS and those of many other universities, have joined lawyers in many protests for the independence of judiciary and have witnessed the despicable yoke of dictatorship with our own naked eyes. We have also witnessed the purity of intentions with which lawyers have struggled to throw off this yoke. This purity of intentions and resolve has shown us a much-awaited glimmer of hope. It has shown us the possibility of change. For giving us this glimmer of hope, this tangible inspiration, this possibility of change, we thank you. For your courage and resolve, for your steadfastness, for your selflessness, we salute you. For carrying on the struggle and showing all of Pakistan what a principled stand really means, we congratulate you. And rest assured, we wouldn't let you down. [The News]
MARTIAL LAW
[Kamla Bhasin, Praful Bidwai, Amrita Chhachh, Sonia Jabbar and Ritu Menon, New Delhi]
We unequivocally condemn the imposition of emergency in Pakistan by General Musharraf, along with the promulgation of the Provisional Constitutional Order, suspension of fundamental rights, muzzling of the press, and violence against lawyers, human rights activists, journalists, feminists, artists, trade unionists and other civil society members. We condemn the arrest of the regime's critics and demand their unconditional release.
Musharraf claims to be saving Pakistan from 'suicide,' primarily through 'religious militancy'. Yet, armed militias are being allowed to overrun Swat. The Shariah has been imposed, Pakistani flags on government buildings replaced by religious ones, and the Frontier Constabulary in Daroshkhela town disarmed and disbanded by the militants. These are grim portents with roots in the U.S. backed military-mullah alliance of the 1980s.
Musharraf has chosen to wage war against Pakistan's liberals instead of combating fundamentalist militants. We express our support and solidarity with Pakistani civil society in its twin struggle against Musharraf's tyrannical rule and religious fundamentalism. We demand the immediate lifting of the emergency and hope the international community will support the people of Pakistan in their hour of need and help its transition to genuine democracy. [The News]
TOLERANCE LEVEL
[M T Mazari, Islamabad]
In his first press conference after the proclamation of emergency (read martial law) in the country, General Musharraf appeared with no tolerance for those who are opposed to him. The tirade against honourable justices of the Supreme Court, especially Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, did not come as a surprise as everyone knows how the mind of a military ruler works. It is quite understandable that with someone like Iftikhar Chaudhry as chief justice of the Supreme Court, General Pervez Musharraf wasn’t free to misuse his power.
How could General Musharraf bear someone who provided people with the hope of timely justice? How could he stand the judges who had reinvigorated the concept of supremacy of law and the constitution? This is the darkest period in the history of this country. If the crisis are overcome soon, it may result in, God forbid, disintegration of the country.
[Pakistan Observer]
“EMERGENCY PLUS”
[Taimur M Khan, Lahore]
General Musharraf’s proclamation of the so-called “Emergency Plus” is effectively a declaration of martial law, as Emergency powers enshrined in the constitution do not allow Supreme Court judges to be removed from office. A seven-member bench of the Supreme Court declared this act illegal and unconstitutional but instead of following the Court’s decision, the government imposed a new PCO and sidelined the judiciary. Instead of taking such extreme measures, General Musharraf should have worked towards a proper transfer of power to an elected civilian government. [Daily Times]
TRIBUTE TO JUDGES
[Ahmad R Shahid, York, UK]
I salute the judges of the superior courts who refused to take oath under the PCO. In its naivety the government thinks that by banishing the judges it has done itself a favour and served the interests of the military. The Romans suppressed, tortured and killed the Christians and yet ultimately Christianity became their official religion. The Chinese did the same with the followers of Confucius, but ultimately Confucianism became their national philosophy. I wonder if in a few years, or decades, the judiciary would re-emerge from its ashes to become the most powerful institution of the country. [The News]
SOLIDARITY WITH PEOPLE
[Javed Jabbar, Los Angeles, USA]
Although I am about 15,000 miles away from Pakistan at the moment, I express my solidarity with all fellow citizens who are victims of the ongoing attack on basic freedoms. I hence disapprove of the violation of the Constitution, the assault on all major institutions of political and civil society. I applaud the courage and the struggle of citizens and leaders who uphold the supremacy of law, respect for judicial norms and for fundamental rights. I abhor the ban on access to private TV channels and all other restrictions on freedom of expression.
While it is true that Pakistan is facing unprecedented violence from indoctrinated, irrational fanatics, the actions being taken in the name of a cure are worse than the disease. At this time all those who believe in the Quaid’s vision of a progressive Pakistan must together face and eventually overcome this attempt to derail our beloved country for the sake of individual and group interests. [Dawn]
MARTIAL LAW
[Omer Salim Khan, Basingstoke, UK]
After its dastardly imposition of martial law in Pakistan, the present regime is now out to ruin the Supreme Court forever by withdrawing its suo motu powers. This is another direct blow to the fundamental rights of all Pakistanis, since these powers guaranteed equal treatment for all classes and groups of people in civil society. As a Pakistani citizen, I strongly protest this draconian measure. This whole farce enacted by the Musharraf junta is largely an effort to cripple the judicial institutions of our country. [The News]
THE GENERAL STANDS NULLIFIED
[Mahmood Elahi, Canada]
Pervez Musharraf justifies his action of suspending the constitution as a necessary measure to fight terrorism. But by arresting the judges, he has, in fact, nullified his claims. With judges in jail, no one is left to protect the people from illegal confinement and torture. How is he any different from the extremists who want to rule through instilling fear in individuals?
Religious extremists will be the principal beneficiaries of Musharraf’s recent move. All they have to do is join forces with the army in destroying the moderates and secular political groups like lawyers, journalists and intellectuals. [Daily Times]
MARTIAL LAW
[Nadeem Ahmed Sheikh, Hyderabad]
I am shocked at what has happened to the constitution of my country. Am I a slave to someone ruling this country? Who is that someone to deprive me of my basic rights? Are we going ahead or are we taking this country back to the Dark Ages? Are we bound by law or by the rule that might is right? Should I be paying taxes for the luxuries of the corrupt classes of the country? Well, my answer to these questions to myself is that if those other sections of society are not following the social contract, I am not bound to do so either. [The News]
SOLIDARITY WITH PEOPLE
[Naeem Rashid, Lahore]
It is astonishing how the judges have been blamed for letting the terrorists go and cited as one of the reasons for imposition of martial law. But now the government itself has freed 25 terrorists in exchange for 200 soldiers. Why?
And how unfortunate it is that a government that gives in when confronted by the Taliban does not feel remorse while brutalising unarmed lawyers, media people and other personalities of civil society And by the way, there was also a mention of Lal Masjid’s re-opening as another example of SC letting go terrorists. But the two judges who gave the orders for Lal Masjid to be re-opened are among the four Supreme Court judges who have taken the oath on the PCO. Strange in a pathetic sort of way though. [Dawn]
ODE TO JUDICIARY
[Abdul Rauf, Fateh Jang]
The lawlessness shown by the government on November 3 by completely ignoring the decision of the seven-member bench against the PCO has once again exposed the reality of "enlightened moderation." I feel embarrassed to be a Pakistani.
I salute the judges who refused to take oath under the PCO. They have given us hope, they have given us a path to follow to the ultimate destination: the rule of law. I am particularly grateful to our honourable judge Rana Bhagwandas who, according to newspapers, was not allowed to celebrate Diwali. [The News]
ACTING ON CONSCIENCE
[Kausar S K, Karachi]
The judges who did not take oath under the new PCO; the lawyers who are persisting with their resolve to uphold the constitution and freedom of press; the journalists who refuse to be bludgeoned into submission: they all represent the critical consciousness of Pakistan.
It is a pity that the police are not acting on their conscience. Police brutality cannot be justified in the current situation, especially as most of the people who have suffered from violence were protesting in a peaceful manner. The police force must listen to their conscience. Also, while the police is busy rounding up peaceful activists from the cities, militants in Swat remain the major threat to the security of Pakistan. As I was writing this, news came in that another district had fallen to the militants after the security forces meekly surrendered to them. [Daily Times]
TORTURE
[Maha Shah, Lahore]
I was angry and disgusted when I read Asma Jehangir's report on the torture of arrested lawyers. The humiliating treatment, the stripping, the torture, and the injections given to the lawyers, who had giant rats for company in their over-crowded cells, was shocking. The beatings were so severe they caused medical complications.
I am in awe of General Pervez Musharraf--he can fall asleep at night, while I am unable to even lull myself to nightmares. [The News]
BEACON OF HOPE
[Rudy Shankar, USA]
In Pakistan’s sorry episode, there is a strong beacon of hope: it’s the lawyers who are putting their lives and principles on the line. I am sure the world will recognise this brave act and will not forget. What an irony that the self-proclaimed ‘secular’ president has managed to anger the secular forces within Pakistan. The extremists must be slapping themselves on their back on this unplanned fortune falling on their lap.
People of Pakistan, your middle class and secular forces are showing that in spite of 60 years of despotic rule — interspersed too infrequently by democracy — you have a strong backbone. Keep up the struggle. Zindabad. [Dawn]
MARTIAL LAW
[Javed Hussain, Attock]
On November 3 a seven-member bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry made a historic decision. The honourable judges declared that the emergency, the constitution being put in abeyance and the promulgation of the PCO were all illegal acts. The Supreme Court ruling was not accepted by the administration and judges were asked to take oath under the PCO.
However, it is heartening to note that about 60 judges have sacrificed their careers for rule of law and the supremacy of the constitution. They have refused to become a part of an unconstitutional judicial setup. The people need to unite behind the judges and fight for their restoration so that the supremacy of law could be ensured. [The News]
SEEKING ANSWERS
[Naeem Sadiq]
I would like to pay tribute to the seven honourable gentlemen, who, working late afternoon on November 3, wrote a one-pager that will become the finest judicial document ever written in Pakistan. For the first time in our history, they recorded a bold, immediate and unambiguous judgement that declared the abeyance of constitution, imposition of emergency and the PCO as unlawful and without jurisdiction. For responding to the call of their conscience and upholding the rule of law, these seven honourable judges deserve the highest gratitude of every law-abiding citizen of Pakistan.
What must an ordinary citizen of Pakistan, who has been drummed with endless sermons on the need to follow the law and uphold the constitution, do under such circumstances? Should he follow the interpretation of the Supreme Court or that of the army chief? This question is fundamental to our existence as a civilised nation, and we must seek and agree on an answer, once and for all. [Daily Times]
MARTIAL LAW
[Pir Shabbir Ahmad, Islamabad]
The front page of The News on Nov 15 carried a picture of a policeman in civilian clothes holding a boy of 14 or 15 by the throat, while another policeman is pulling the boy by the collar of his shirt in a most degrading manner. Agony was clearly visible on the victim's face. It was neither occupied Kashmir nor occupied Palestine, but Karachi.
The boy belonged to a group of protestors who were agitating against Benazir Bhutto's detention. It was abhorring to see a child being treated in such a manner by a government who until a few months ago announced that an official would be placed at every police station to ensure that human rights violations were not committed by the police. The scene also reminded the nation of the promise made by the General after he assumed power that he would bring true democracy to us, which would be different from the sham democracy we had had before.
The picture was a manifestation of a reign of terror let loose by a government which no longer enjoys a popular mandate and can only stay in power through draconian measures. It was also a warning of the kind of democracy we are likely to see from now onwards. Our country can now safely be listed in the roll of honour of the world's police states. [The News]
BEACON OF HOPE
[Shehryar Hussain]
What horrific scenes are we witnessing in the Pakistani and international newspapers of the Pakistan police mercilessly dragging, beating, thrashing lawyers and ordinary citizens! Is this Stone Age or what? No sane mind can comprehend what the law-enforcement agencies are doing to our society.
Is this good promotion of the soft image of Pakistan? The whole world is watching in awe and anger what policemen are doing to the educated and intellectual segment of society. Even the most barbaric regime in the recent history would not have resorted to such inhuman measures as adopted by the executive to make sure that he sticks to his position forever. The politicians should have come in the open to voice protest instead of being confined to their cocoons. The world watches as Pakistan continues to weep and be invaded by it own army. [Dawn]
MALTREATMENT OF WOMEN
[Dr Ghayur Ayub, London]
It was not difficult to judge from a picture in The News (Nov 16) whether the policeman who was pushing a female demonstrator into a van was arresting or molesting her. For sure the picture exposed the real face of enlightened moderation of the Musharraf regime. [The News]
STUDENT ACTIVISM
[Mohammed Hussain, Lahore]
Given the sad state of affairs in our country, it was refreshing to read about students in various educational institutions making their voices heard through various gatherings and demonstrations that were peaceful and restricted to their campuses. For a long time, student politics has had an extremely negative connotation thanks to the violent and destructive activities of various sectarian, religious, political and ethnic student unions in the major universities of our country. As a result, well-intentioned and sincere students who are aware and want to make a difference did not have a platform to voice their opinions and concerns. Student politics was banned in Pakistan and in several universities, those admitted had to sign undertakings that they would not participate in political activities.
The initiative of the students at LUMS (Lahore University of Management Sciences) in Lahore, followed by Quaid-e Azam University, BNU (Beaconhouse National University) and FAST (The Foundation for Advancement of Science and Technology) in Lahore is a welcome development. These students gathered peacefully and set an example for the rest of the country. There is no need for violence and destruction, and civilised disagreement on issues is a key feature of good democracies. Students are our future and must be allowed to participate in the political process in a civilised and constructive manner. Violence should not be allowed at all, and at the same time, they should not be restricted from such activities. [Daily Times]
BEHIND THE SCENES
[Omer Bin Enaam Irvine, California, USA]
President Gen Musharraf’s stance on current militancy and judicial activism holds no substance. The current regime is using militancy to its advantage and igniting this phenomenon as and when required. Whenever, the executive senses serious threats, suicide attacks and roadside bomb attacks on paramilitary forces become a regular feature.
The Lal Masjid operation, when lawyers’ movement was nearing success, and Swat operation, when the Supreme Court was about to rule Musharraf’s election as president unlawful, are clear examples of operations executed by the present regime.
The patriotic citizens, lawyers, judges, print and electronic media are showing zero tolerance to corruption and malpractices of current regime and their ‘behind the scene’ allies. There are two most significant reasons behind the action of imposing emergency in the country: (a) Musharraf’s eligibility as president, and (b) National Reconciliation Ordinance’s legality as law.
Rising militancy is used as an excuse. Why was Swat truce broken two days before emergency declaration? Why were more than 200 soldiers released almost immediately, who were detained more than two months ago, after the imposition of emergency? Why did Benazir Bhutto leave for Dubai one night before the emergency decree and come back one day later?
Why were workers of selected opposition parties arrested? It is need of the hour that we clearly know who is/are the mastermind(s) behind the gang-rape of the Constitution and remember before supporting and voting any political groups. God bless Pakistan. [Dawn]
THE JUDICIARY AND LAWYERS
[Gullzaman, Paris]
Pity the citizens of a country who in the 21st century have to witness the members of the superior judiciary locked, humiliated and abused; the constitution flouted at will and laws broken by those who are supposed to be its custodians. My head hangs in shame as I witness the edifice of my motherland shaken and once again in turmoil, not at the hands of enemies but at the hands of a self-declared Caesar.
I am ashamed to face my children who ask me questions for which I have no sane answer. What should I tell them when they witness gory scenes splashed on the TV screen showing the ghastly beating of lawyers, women, members of civil society, students and human rights activists? An elderly lady lawyer, who was a former judge of the Punjab High Court, was being pushed and beaten on the road by the police who have no fear, for Caesar desired it so.
Are these the extremists whom the generalissimo wanted to deal with in his address to the nation? What are we, if not a banana republic? Whither is the country, created by my Quaid, heading for? Are we going to be a country with kangaroo courts where people have no recourse to justice against excesses committed by the executive or drug barons? Whose doors will our daughters like Mukhtaran Mai knock at now that taking suo motu action is not a suitable option for the judiciary to exercise? Which court will now order an enquiry if innocent citizens are slaughtered as they were on the streets of Karachi on May 12? Is this country so weak that every Caesar or pharaoh thinks it will break if he were not at the helm? How will we face our forefathers who gave their lives so that we may live in a sovereign country free from fear or discrimination? [The News]
TURNING TO LINCOLN
[T Mallick, Lahore]
The present political crisis in Pakistan is a direct consequence of injustices, arbitrary resort to the use of force as a tool to intimidate dissenters, plunder of state assets and complete disregard of rule of law and basic fundamental human rights by the government. Unfortunately the establishment in Pakistan has become so used to a rubber stamp judiciary that when the judiciary started functioning in the manner that it should always have functioned, the regime was angered and termed it judicial activism. The survival of civil society and basic fundamental rights of the people can only be guaranteed by an independent judiciary. The people of Pakistan want restoration of an independent judiciary. This is a wrong that has to be righted, otherwise the very foundations of this nation and the objectives of our founding fathers stand eroded.
I would (also) like to quote Abraham Lincoln who on 18 May 1858, stated “To give victory to the right, not bloody bullets, but peaceful ballots only, are necessary”. On 4 March 1861, while delivering his Inaugural Address, Lincoln said: “This country with all its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it.” [Daily Times]
DETAINED LAWYERS
[Shaza Basheer, Karachi]
My uncle, who is a lawyer, was arrested on November 5th, from the LHC premises along with 40-50 other lawyers. His only crime was being present at the place where he works. Since then, he’s been moved from jail to jail, and been tried in the anti-terrorism court at Lakhpat Jail. My family had to run from pillar to post and use our contacts to find out where he was being held as the police are being extremely tight lipped about the whole situation. After much pleading, we managed to get him things like his medication, slippers and change of clothes. Yesterday we learnt that he’s now been shifted to Bahawalpur.
I demand from the authorities concerned as to why these civilians are being treated like terrorists and war prisoners? Being lawyers, these so-called “terrorists” have a very close working relationship with the police. The fact that the police is treating them this way shows that a much bigger hand is behind them. Has our army, instead of protecting its people, revolted against its own nation? It certainly seems so. My family is trying to put up a brave face but it’s proving more difficult with each passing day. We feel angered and helpless with this unjust situation. I urge the people to raise their voice against this oppression. [Dawn]
NOT ALLOWED TO MEET AITZAZ
[Dr Tariq Hassan, Attorney & Advocate, International Legal Services, Islamabad]
It's day five and I am still waiting to get the permission to see Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan who is incarcerated in Adiala Jail--despite my repeated visits to the DCs office and efforts to contact him on the phone on a daily basis. No luck in sight. I am now easing off the pressure to prevent A A from being moved to Mianwali Jail to avoid the incessant pressure.
Munir A Malik has been moved to Attock--the maximum security prison--and he is undoubtedly being tortured there. The whereabouts of Ali Ahmed Kurd are still not known and no one has been allowed to see Tariq Mahmood. Now there is talk of the non-compliant judges being moved to Quetta --in fact, Justice Javed Iqbal has, I am informed, been forcibly moved to Quetta already. The Chief Justice of Pakistan is next on the list. I have, therefore, been urging friends in various human rights organizations and bar associations abroad to send delegations to meet all the detained leaders and judges to ensure their safety and welfare, since no one here is being given access to them.
The international response at all levels has been tremendous as you know but the government has turned a blind eye to all the resolutions, editorials, articles and recommendations that continue to pour in on a daily basis. There is dire need for the words of the international community to be turned into action and we need the international legal community's and the media's support to galvanize visits by foreign delegations for the purpose. [The News]
INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY
[Khurshid Anwer, Lahore]
During the heaviest raids on Britain by the Luftwaffe’s bombers and rockets in World War II, Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill was questioned on the critical situation. Churchill asked if the courts were working. When told that they were, he said that there is nothing to worry about.
His comment highlights the importance of an independent and reliable judiciary. Britain had functioning courts even during one of its deadliest wars. Yet here in Pakistan, those in power simply cannot accept an independent and functioning judiciary. How can people have faith in the system when the very institution guarding the law is so vulnerable? Pakistan needs a competent and independent judiciary that will not be dismissed every time it disagrees with those in power, or else we will not make any serious progress. [Daily Times]
THE JUDICIARY AND LAWYERS
[Rashid Orakzai, Oslo, Norway]
The lawyers’ community of the subcontinent has always played a pivotal role as torchbearers of freedom. The founding father of Pakistan, Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah and other leaders of the All-India Muslim League were primarily lawyers.
The present struggle for the restoration of the constitution and independence of the judiciary started when Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry was removed and the lawyers led by Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, started a massive campaign. Today the Chief Justice of Pakistan and his peers who refused to take oath under the PCO, along with prominent lawyers like Barrister Ahsan, Munir Malik and Tariq Mahmud, have won the hearts and minds of the people of Pakistan, by their devotion and commitment to principles and constitutional rule. Their credibility is more than the combined goodwill of all other political parties, including Benazir Bhutto.
Justice Iftikhar gave relief to the oppressed sections of society, including victims of gang-rape. He prevented the plunder of state assets like the Steel Mills. There was no personal motive behind these judicial decisions on the part of the judges. Men like Justice Chaudhry are willing to put their careers at stake, while a general has put the future of Pakistan at stake to remain in power. The judges must be restored, and those who ordered the attacks on lawyers and members of civil society must be held accountable for their excesses. Sanity must be restored, because the vast majority of Pakistanis are moderate, peaceful and law-abiding citizens.
Pakistan is not the fiefdom of usurpers who can flout the constitution at will. The Quaid-e-Azam and our founding fathers did not create Pakistan, so that we may have kangaroo courts and be a banana republic. It is not within the powers of a president or general to sack a chief justice of Supreme Court of Pakistan. The position of chief justice of Pakistan, according to our constitution is beyond the jurisdiction of the chief of the army staff. There can be no hope for free and fair elections in Pakistan without restoration of the judiciary headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry. [The News]
SILVER LINING
[Aftab Ahmad, Canada]
Without an independent judiciary and a robust press, democracy is no more than a disguised autocracy. Pakistan has been a victim of more than that. The army generals, Ayub, Zia and now Musharraf have persistently corroded the basis of political process. No wonder, the elected regimes under their hegemony appeared ridiculously inept. And there are hardly any to inspire.
The latent anger of the legal community aroused by the moral fiber of our chief justice was not taken into account. Until it spread all over, the universal outcry was for the promised elections...not against the onslaught of the “overactive” judiciary. Hopefully, the process continues until the constitution is restored without the impeding clauses. Never had I felt so proud to have been a part of Pakistan’s legal community though I am away from my homeland for the past 28 years. [Dawn]
CAPPING THE REAL ISSUE
[Dr Irfan Zafar]
There seems to be an organised strategy by the government to cap the real issue of restoration of the judges who refused to take oath under the new PCO by concentrating more on the issue of upcoming elections (read selections). The citizens have been deceived too many times, and political propaganda and rhetoric has been employed repeatedly. The problem with luck, however, is that it runs out sooner or later, which is when one can hope that our ‘leaders’ will call it a day. [Daily Times]
AT A CROSSROADS
[S. Saxena, Dehradun, India]
My heart bleeds to see the images of Pakistanis being kicked, slapped, dragged and pushed mercilessly by security forces. What is their crime? They are demanding for restoration of people’s rule in their country which was given to them by the Founding Fathers of their country as their basic and fundamental right. However, Pakistanis must realise that they are at a historical cross-road.
The only similar incident in history that comes to my mind is The Battle of Plassey between Sirajudaullah and Robert Clive. The stakes of losing are too high. If Pakistanis win, they will emerge as a highly respected nation in the world. If they lose, it might be the end of their existence. [Dawn]
POLITICAL SCIENCE 101
[Dr M Aslam, Canada]
Perhaps, it’s time that we begin to realise that Rome was really not built in a day. Therefore, we first need to strengthen the essential pre-requisites of a democratic polity, education and economic prosperity in order to appreciate both our rights and responsibilities to the state, and thereby seek gradual socio-political development instead of outright confrontation that will surely bring the house down.
Recall that, historically, law is merely the expression of the will of the strongest for the time being, and is never static, but shifts from generation to generation. There is always a higher law than the Constitution (our Constitution recognises this up front), and good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly. I feel the suggestions and solutions springing up in civil debate are extreme in nature. It seems like everyone from the military and the bureaucracy to members of interest groups need a customised ‘Political Science 101’ crash course. [Daily Times]
EMERGENCY PROVISIONS
[Salman Kazmi, Karachi]
General Musharraf has declared, for the second time in his tenure, emergency rule and suspended the Constitution. The new PCO has been enforced. The emergency provision has not been proclaimed under the available provisions of Article 232 of the Constitution which are as follows: ‘If the president is satisfied that a grave emergency exists in which the security of Pakistan, or any part thereof, is threatened by war or external aggression, or by internal disturbance beyond the power of a provincial government to control, he may issue a proclamation of emergency.’ In spite of following the above-mentioned constitutional provisions, General Musharraf suspended the Constitution and enforced the Provisional Constitution Order 2007 in its place.
In his address to the nation, he said emergency provisions had been enforced because the judiciary was crossing its limits and passing decisions beyond its powers. The judicial decisions of certain judges were inconsistent with the decisions of the executive and the legislative body (parliament).
Another reason of invoking emergency provisions is the rising of militant attacks in the country. As a high court advocate, I think the president’s perception is based on wrong scrutiny of facts. If the Supreme Court pointed out the flaws of the executive and the legislative body, those judicial decisions cannot be considered ultra vires or beyond its limits.
To maintain the balance of power among these pillars of a state, the judiciary shall make a true interpretation of laws made by the legislative body and also consider the correct implementation by the executive. If the SC is not observing its responsibilities and behaves like a dummy, the country cannot progress. The SC never crossed its limit, rather it always pointed out the flaws either in the working of the executive or the legislature. The SC, which is terminated under emergency provisions, played a vital role in enforcing the state laws in a true sense. For example, the Pakistan Steel Mills case was decided against the government on the basis of fraudulent privatisation and declared null and void.
For the first time, the SC protected the rights of those politicians who were not in the government. i.e. release of PML-N leader Javaid Hashmi; permitted former prime minister Nawaz Sharif to come to Pakistan even though he was exiled in Saudi Arabia. Undoubtedly, the decision of the former SC maintained a strong trust in the eyes of the people, but they failed to change the norms of our military rulers. No government official wants a judiciary which is so independent in its decisions.
In view of the strong impact of independence of the Judiciary in the shape of the Supreme Court, the government felt that a pending case, regarding the eligibility of General Musharraf as the candidate in presidential election, may be decided against him and the government may suffer a severe loss and may not get the favourable result in the coming general election.
The matter of militants has been wrongly manipulated by the government itself, only to get support and sympathies from the US, EU and Commonwealth countries. President Musharraf took all action in the tribal areas against the so-called militants only to prolong his tenure. There is a strong concept of jirga where the dispute can be resolved in accordance with the local custom but the government is not showing any leniency in this regard to resolve the dispute. I assume that in any country or system, no single person has authority to suspend the constitution single-handedly. [Dawn]
DWARFING THE NATION
Sami Ullah Khan, Abbottabad]
Despite the brutalities that have unfolded in the past week, the spirit of our lawyers, journalists, students and all other civilians is not waning. And I salute them for that. By levelling baseless charges over some judges, the government has dwarfed them in the eyes of world, and this inescapably means dwarfing Pakistan internationally.
The government must reinstate the deposed judges, lift the state of emergency, free those detained recently to ‘maintain public order’. The current measures are not proving constructive domestically or internationally, and therefore a different approach is required. [Daily Times]
SELF-SERVING LEADERS
[Fahd Abbasy, Karachi]
President Musharraf’s exculpation by referring to the militancy and judicial activism as a threat to the integrity of this country is fragile to say the least. All this happened during his rule and is unprecedented. He cannot absolve himself of the responsibility by imposing emergency. The president has always castigated the religious extremists for imposing their views forcefully on others, hence calling them obscurantist and rigid. I wonder what has he to say about imposing himself on this nation forcefully and how is he different from the former?
And what about the investment rollback due to emergency which would cause a solid blow to the economy which is the lifeblood of this country. There is no difference in Pakistan of 1990s and Pakistan of the 21st century. [Dawn]
US LAWYERS SHOW SUPPORT
[Saad Gul, USA]
On November 14, the American Bar Association urged lawyers across the United States to show solidarity with Pakistan and its lawyers. In Raleigh, capital of North Carolina, the local bar association organised a symbolic walk, which ended at the North Carolina Supreme Court. Many attorneys wore black coats to identify with their Pakistani counterparts. The president of the local bar spoke about the importance of rule of law and expressed concern for Pakistan and its people.
This was a genuine and touching gesture by American lawyers. They conducted this walk with grace and dignity. All traffic laws were obeyed. No throughway was obstructed, and there was no threat to public property or innocent bystanders. Only a single policeman was visible, the same individual responsible for security at the Supreme Court complex. It is impossible not to appreciate the outpour of support for Pakistan. Also, the disciplined method of protest speaks volumes about the culture of dissent in the United States. I look forward to the day when we can do the same in Pakistan. [Daily Times]
ILLEGAL CJ
[Zahoor Ahmad Gorsi, Lahore]
The media organizations are referring to Mr Hameed Dogar as the Chief Justice of Pakistan, which should be strongly opposed considering that the Provisional constitution Order (PCO) had been declared as illegal by the Supreme Court before its judges were put under house arrest. [Dawn]
PEACEFUL DEFIANCE
[Amna Khan]
The gesture of peaceful defiance by protestors on Wednesday, November 21, was something unique in the recent political history of Pakistan as it showed that the sane and literate members of society are ready to stand for their values by acting on them. Such protests will improve our image in the world. [Daily Times]
DON’T KILL LAWYERS
[Mustafa Mahesar, London]
“BLACK coats face off brute force” (Dawn, Nov 6).
“The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”
The above quote comes from Shakespeare’s ( Henry VI, Act IV, Scene 2), The scene concerns the planning of an evil coup — a takeover of power in which there is a conspiracy to establish a total dictatorship. The plotters are boasting about how they will make everybody bow down to them. That is when one of the conspirators, Dick The Butcher, chimes in, “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.” His goal was to destroy the law, so that the citizens would have no legal protection.
Musharraf’s Dick the Butcher must be a clever man who has recognised lawyers as potential enemies who can save citizens from his dictatorship. [Dawn]
YOUTH SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH
[Student Activist, Lahore]
Why are people so surprised that the students at Pakistan’s premium institutions have decided to join the lawyers and courts against General Pervez Musharraf, and that they are ready to take to the streets for constitutional governance in Pakistan? I am a part of these student protests at a university in Lahore, and wish people had more faith in themselves, and their fellow Pakistanis. It is true that the re-emergence of students in politics is a complex phenomenon. But the bottom-line is simple: the restoration of the constitution and the judiciary to what they were before November 3; release of martial law prisoners; revocation of curbs on the media; and revival of representative government through free and fair elections are rights that we are entitled to as humans and citizens. We will not beg for a ruler’s mercy because we, the people, are above that. The time has come for the youth to inherit Pakistan. [Daily Times]
FIGHT FOR DEMOCRACY
[Khurram Mustikhan, Canada]
Gen Pervez Musharraf has suspended the Constitution, deposed and arrested the judges of the Supreme Court and high courts, and launched a crackdown on civil society. This has been done to silence the voices of those progressive forces that are fighting for a democratic Pakistan.
Among those arrested include my father, Yusuf Mustikhan, Senior Vice-President of the National Workers Party; Hasil Bizenjo, Secretary-General of the National Party; Ayub Qureshi and Liaquat Sahi. They have been charged with treason and held incommunicado in the Landhi Jail. Their crime: fighting for the cause of democracy and rule of law. They have decided to fight dictatorship from the prison.
The people of Pakistan have spoken up. They will not tolerate dictatorship anymore and will confront it. Judges, lawyers, trade unions, students unions, journalists and progressive political forces are united and fighting for the cause of freedom and justice in spite of a crackdown by the dictatorial regime. How many people will they arrest and imprison? How many people will they beat and torture? How many people will they charge with treason?
Have these rulers not learned anything from our chequered history? Have they not read or seen the fate of our former dictators? They can use brute force to chain, torture or imprison people, but they cannot imprison their minds. On behalf of my father and all those fighting for the cause of democracy, I say this to the general that the battle for democracy has begun. And we, the people, will win. [Dawn]
BREAK THE MYTH!
[Rukhsana Malik, Lahore]
Transparency International is one of the most well-known corruption rating agencies in the world. Overthrows of most civilian governments in the 1990s were justified by referring to this agency’s findings, which rated Pakistan the third most corrupt country in the world in 1996. The Musharraf regime made wide use of these ‘findings’ to project a negative image of all political parties and leadership in Pakistan. It is another matter that he included the most corrupt among the civilians in his own governments. It is for this reason, perhaps, that Transparency International has claimed in its 2006 report that the Musharraf government (2002-2006) is more corrupt (67%) than PPP’s second government (48%) and Nawaz Sharif phase II (34%). It is sad that mainstream political parties and civil society organisations do not use such data in the way the military regime had used it so often against civilian governments, to malign them and justify the continuation of military rule in Pakistan. It is high time civil society organisations expose both institutional and common corruption under military rulers and break the myth of clean government under military rule. [Daily Times]
FIGHT FOR DEMOCRACY
[Arslan Razmi, USA]
I and my spouse attended a spirited rally in the Boston Common the other day, where dozens of protestors expressed their solidarity with the lawyers, judges, and activists who are so courageously fighting for the revival of the Constitution and for some minimal respect for the law in Pakistan. While the government is predictably unable to appreciate the ludicrous outlandishness of its actions and the consequences thereof, we hope that hundreds of such struggles would link up globally in order to expand hope where at the moment there seems to be so little. [Dawn]
RESPECTING THE CONSTITUTION
[A Khan, USA]
Attorney General Qayyum’s statement that President Pervez Musharraf will take his oath as a civilian president under the 1973 Constitution is ludicrous. After suspending and maiming the document, is Musharraf taking oath under the document just to mock it? An official taking oath under a document is obliged to respect, obey and protect what is enshrined in it instead of going against it. It is not too difficult to determine if these conditions have been met in Musharraf’s case. [Daily Times]
STUDENT INACTIVITY
[Nabiha Chaudhry, Karachi]
This is in response to the report by Qasim A. Moini (Nov 11). I agree with him. I too am a student at NED University and I have been continuously trying to motivate my colleagues and make them realise the sensitivity and severity of this emergency issue in our country but in vain. Nobody seems to be interested in the prevailing conditions of our country. While some of us are too obsessed with what is hot in Bollywood, others are too engrossed with their plans to earn a distinction in examinations and daydream of a highly paid job offer at the very start of their careers. We must not neglect such severe issues as this.
I was shocked that the other day a colleague expressed amazement at being told that the news channels had been taken off air. I think it is not only our engineering university but the entire student community that is going through the same phase. An unknown teacher in the same report has mentioned that politics is negligible within the campus. I wonder how he/she justifies the administration’s control over a certain party in the university who has very confidently written (big and bold) anti-Imran Khan slogans on the walls of the university’s biggest canteen, while an ordinary student is issued a show-cause notice on even scribbling a funny remark on a wall.
We must, therefore, work together for a cause: the restoration of the judiciary, Constitution, democracy and the media. [Dawn]
FLOWERS FOR THEM
[Hasan Rana, Islamabad]
I request all those readers of your newspaper who are common Pakistanis like me and are frustrated over the current political and judicial crisis to present bouquets with a 'thank-you note' to deposed judges and lawyers who have shown integrity by not bowing to the dictates of a usurper. People can lay flowers in front of the residences of the judges, leave them in their driveways and send them through courier or deliver them to their guards. And if all this is not possible somehow, let's reserve a certain place in every city, town and locality to lay flowers there symbolically for those who have resisted the ultra-constitutional measure of the army chief. Let's say thanks to those who have restored our faith in the judiciary and stood in the face of tyranny. [Daily Times]
AN UNFORTUNATE STATE
[Engr S T Hussain, Lahore]
How unfortunate it is that Pakistan, sixty year after its independence, is in a state of emergency with people’s fundamental rights suspended and the judiciary dismantled just to justify the illegal acts of a general. In 1999 people welcomed Musharraf’s coup because many thought that he was a saviour of sorts but on March 9, the people’s hopes evaporated and worse still, now they are left with no choice but to accept Benazir Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif as potential leaders when both have been charged with corruption and have already disappointed the masses before. [Daily Times]
STAY IN JAIL
[Gangly Khan, Mandi Bahauddin]
On Nov 5 when I went to the district courts, I saw the police baton-charging lawyers near the bar room at the court premises. Then there was bursting of tear-gas bombs. About 200 policemen were cordoning the courts.
Due to frequent explosions of tear-gas bombs, lawyers withdrew into the bar room and closed it from inside to escape humiliation and arrest. The remaining lawyers ran towards their chambers. Police personnel chased them and after breaking the doors of the chambers got hold of about 20 advocates. They also arrested clients and lawyers’ clerks after belabouring them.
We were conveyed on a police van to the police station, Saddar Mandi Bahauddin, where we were put in the lock-up. The lock-up was a small room that was dirty and poorly maintained. It could hardly accommodate four to five detainees. At one corner, there was a latrine facility having about one-and-a-half-foot-high wall around. The latrine was stinking and the lock-up was full of stench. We were up all night. Next morning the police produced us in the court of the judicial magistrate and obtained a physical remand for a day.
We were told that a criminal case had been registered against us under sections 324, 188, 147, 148 of the PPC and MPO. The police then took us to the police station, Kuthala Sheikhan, for investigation where we spent the second night. The condition of the lock-up room of this PS was almost the same as that of the PS, Sadar Mandi Bahauddin. Next day the police produced us again in the court that sent us to the District Jail, Mandi Bahauddin, on judicial remand where we stayed for five days as under-trial prisoners.
Despite all types of humiliation and torture, lawyers’ morale remained high. There was no sign of sadness or repentance on their faces. When they came out of the jail on bail, I found them more determined than before. Their brave conduct showed that the lawyers’ movement for the restoration of independence of the judiciary would continue undeterred with more vigour and valour till Gen Musharraf’s rule was over. [Dawn]
A POLICE STATE
[Asma Jahangir, Chairperson, HRCP, Lahore]
The situation in the country is uncertain. There is a strong crackdown on the press and lawyers. Majority of the judges of the Supreme Court and four high courts have not taken oath. The chief justice is under house arrest (unofficially). The president of the Supreme Court bar (Aitzaz Ahsan) and two former presidents, Muneer Malik and Tariq Mahmood, have been imprisoned for one month under preventive detention laws. The president of the Lahore High Court bar, Ahsan Bhoon, and former bar leader Ali Ahmed Kurd have also been arrested. The police are looking for six other lawyers, including presidents of Peshawar and Karachi bars. The president of the Lahore bar is also in hiding.
There are scores of political leaders who have also been arrested. On Nov 3, I was placed under house arrest for 90 days. Ironically the president (who has lost his marbles) said that he had to clamp down on the press and the judiciary to curb terrorism. Those he has arrested are progressive, secular-minded people while the terrorists are offered negotiations and ceasefires. Lawyers and civil society will challenge the government and the scene is likely to get uglier. We want friends of Pakistan to urge the US administration to stop supporting the dictator, as his lust for power is bringing the country close to a worse form of civil strife. It is not time for the international community to insist on preventive measures, otherwise cleaning up the mess may take decades. There are already several hundred IDPs (internally displaced persons) and the space for civil society has hopelessly shrunk. We believe that the general has to go and a government of national reconciliation put in place. It must be backed by the military. Short of this there are no realistic solutions, although there are no guarantees that this may work. [The News]
SALUTE TO JUDGES
[Sheeba Ajmal, Peshawar]
The speech that the president gave on Nov. 3 to explain his imposition of emergency was not a very good speech. He seemed at a loss for words and could not justify at all what he has done. His action has plunged the country into a dark tunnel at the end of which one sees no light. There are no ministers but mere stooges acting on instructions given by the military government. And they are all liars. Mr President, is this your gift to the nation for trusting you and supporting your strategies for the past eight years? How embarrassing and hurtful was it to see the president of a country blaming Supreme Court judges for all that has happened. Instead of condemning the convicted SSPs and IGs he took out his anger on the judges. He should have called the police officials and asked them about their misconduct, instead of expressing appreciation for their insane behaviour on television. I could not have imagined that he would go to such an extent, none of us could.
He has insulted this nation before the whole world. He has made a joke of us. We are all with Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry. We salute the judges who did not take oath under the new PCO. We support the judiciary’s cause: an independent Pakistan free of dictatorship. [Pakistan Observer]
WHY A 'FAILED STATE'?
[Taimur M Khan, Lahore]
In a recent interview Gen Musharraf stated that Pakistan was about to be declared a "failed-state" and that he would choose Pakistan over "so-called democracy". When he took over power in a coup in 1999, one of his justifications was that the country was about to be declared a failed state. Today, he reminds us again of the possibility.
Is this what he has accomplished after having absolute power for eight years? Pakistan is not a failed state, but it may turn into one if Gen Musharraf continues to rule this country. Pakistan's salvation lies in the supremacy of the constitution and the presence of strong institutions such as the judiciary, parliament and the media. But the ruling junta has purged the judiciary of upright judges and has blacked out independent-media channels that negate the government's propaganda. With a partisan "caretaker" setup now in place, the stage is set for rigged elections.
The need of the hour is clear: removal of the martial law imposed on Nov 3 and an end to the army's role in politics, ensuring the supremacy of the constitution, reinstatement of all the Supreme Court and high court judges who refused to take oath under the PCO, repeal of the draconian PEMRA laws and transparent elections under the supervision of a reconstituted and impartial Election Commission. Gen Musharraf and a progressive Pakistan with strong institutions cannot co-exist. It is time all of us made a choice; I, for one, have chosen my country. [The News]
LAGAY RAHO...
[M. Rafique Zakaria, Karachi]
It was nice to see in Dawn’s issue of Nov 22 the picture of a female journalist offering a red rose to a police official outside Karachi Press Club despite the police’s brutal behaviour with the journalists a day before. This reminded me of Indian movie ‘Lage Raho Munna Bhai’ in which Munna Bhai (Sanjay Dutt) launches peaceful defiance through the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi, which he calls ‘Gandhigiri’.
He sends flower bouquets to the landlord of an old-age home who forces the occupants of the house to vacate. Following in the footsteps of Mahatma Gandhi by adopting a peaceful way of protest, he asks the general public to send flower bouquets to the landlord of the old-age home with a ‘Get Well Soon’ card, and ‘Gandhigiri’ does wonders for Munna Bhai.
I think it is time we Pakistanis started sending flower bouquets to the presidency for Gen Pervez Musharraf with ‘Get Well Soon’ cards. Let us put ‘Gandhigiri’ to test in Pakistan. [Dawn]
MARTIAL LAW
[B A Malik, Islamabad]
The emergency declared by General Musharraf is the fifth martial law, the second by Musharraf himself. Musharraf says that Pakistan is his life, his blood and his soul. Who can believe him, since he has destroyed all the institutions of the country? If Pakistan comes first, as he frequently claims, he will not prolong his rule through the use of the military establishment.
By declaring emergency he has moved years away from his commitment to transferring power to a civilian government. General Musharraf has admitted defeat by resorting to unconstitutional means to cling to power. It is time for him to quit gracefully. The nation has had enough of his so-called enlightened moderation. He has made a mess of everything and a laughingstock of himself, to the amusement of the whole world. [The News]
PAKISTAN CEASES TO EXIST?
[Raja M. Afzal Khan, Gujar Khan]
Gen Yahya Khan finished the Quaid’s Pakistan in December 1971. Now, suspension of the Constitution for an indefinite period by the Chief of Army Staff means the remaining Pakistan legally ceases to exist as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. As such, all laws, institutions, government office-holders, and citizens governed by various clauses of the Constitution cease to exist as legal entities. So, which is the legal authority in this part of the subcontinent and under which Islamic or internationally-accepted democratic concept? Will some legal expert be kind enough to make readers like me wiser on the subject? [Dawn]
PCO
[A J Mohammad, Jehlum]
The submission of Attorney General Malik Mohammad Qayyum that the order passed by a seven-member bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry declaring the PCO null and void was beyond its legal ambit is devoid of rationality. The learned judges had not been served with any written order to take fresh oath under the PCO and therefore they were within their right to declare the PCO null and void. [The News]
MARTIAL LAW
[Mohammad Arslan, Lahore]
One man has made this country of 160 million people his playground. We are hostages of a military junta running on our tax money. The general seems to be under the impression that the country is his personal property. He does whatever he wants, and whenever and however he can do it, because he has absolute power. There is no law, no right and no wrong.
What happened is shameful and embarrassing, but what can we possibly do? After all 160 million people are nothing more than bloody civilians. The general says that the media is partial in this situation. What about PTV? Just because PTV supports the government, it is honest and genuine? It is about time that the 1973 Constitution was put in a glass container in a museum for good, and the country converted into a defence housing authority and cantonment run by generals. [The News]
ADMIT YOUR MISTAKES
[Bilal Khan, United Kingdom]
I still can’t believe that so many people are still so content with the present situation, praising Gen Musharraf on his imposition of emergency and assuming that life will be peachy as it was before. It’s portrayed that the culprits and problem creators who are responsible for the present situation are either the media (particularly GEO) or the judges. Who can believe this? Gen Musharraf whose day job was army chief once … suddenly woke up one morning and took over Pakistan and became the president.
He solely, I repeat…, he solely commanded/ruled Pakistan for eight years. When he began to tumble, he blamed the media and an independent judiciary for the mess in the country. How can we accept this that it’s the media’s and judges’ fault? Gen Musharraf took credit for whatever he did in the past eight years …, now he should act like a man…, face the nation…and should say: “I was the sole ruler of this country for eight years and accept that I have failed in running this country.”
Can he admit his mistakes? It’s so easy in the end to pin the blame on someone. The army, like any other government institution, dwells on the hard-paid tax by the citizens of Pakistan. Who has given them the authority to rule us and decide our future? [Dawn]
MARTIAL LAW
[Saiqa Khan, Lahore]
I am appalled at the tide of brutalities unleashed against Pakistan's civil society and people by General Musharraf's government. But despite the heroic sacrifices and protests of a few noble souls, the majority of the people are too crushed and too cowed down to rise up in support of the protesters. Unless people awaken, nothing substantial will happen and the despotic leader will keep usurping our rights. The courageous judges, the lawyers, human rights activists, students and teachers, and all other members of society who are standing up at this historic juncture, deserve our collective tribute. [The News]
BACK WITH A VENGEANCE
[Akhtar Hussain, Karachi]
This is with reference to the recent verdict of the apex court validating the election of Gen Pervez Musharraf as president of Pakistan. Justice Munir gave birth to the ‘doctrine of necessity’, Justice Iftikhar and his brother judges buried it, or they thought they did it. But this doctrine has come back with a vengeance as ‘doctrine of power’. Accepting the power of ‘Power’ is the only sane thing to do under PCO and emergency rules. [Dawn]
DEPOSED JUDGES
[Ahmed Zaib advocate, Sargodha]
I request everyone, especially the press, not to refer to the honourable chief justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, and other honourable judges who have declined to take oath under the Provisional Constitutional Order as "former justices". Legally, all of the deposed judges are still members of the judiciary because neither the army chief nor the president has any right to remove a judge from his or her office by a single stroke of pen. Their forced removal by a dictator is a coup against the judiciary. These judges are the heroes of the entire nation. We are proud of them because they have preferred dignity to worldly gains and have uplifted the honour of the legal profession. [The News]
==================================================================
Issue of the Month: Gagging the Media
BEACON OF HOPE
[Quratulain Syed, New York]
My residence in the NY City gives me the privilege of still being able to watch Pakistan’s TV transmissions, despite the ban in Pakistan. Yesterday, I came across a news story where the Governor of Punjab said that the Pakistani public is relieved by the discontinuation of private channels as they do not have to listen to ‘sansani khaiz’ news. He probably thinks the public is a fool.
The government of Pakistan has no authority to deny the people of Pakistan (who are responsible for paying salaries of these leaders) their basic fundamental rights of freedom of speech and expression. The speech of Gen Musharraf after the imposition of emergency was such that no human being with any good sense can listen to. The government of Pakistan has played much with the lives of Pakistani public, and it’s time they realised that this is enough. [Dawn]
MEDIA BLACKOUT
[Gulraiz Shah, Karachi]
While General Pervez Musharraf may have valid reasons for imposing emergency, the government’s move to enforce a complete news media blackout in the country will prove counter-productive. The people of Pakistan are worried with the uncertainty surrounding the security and political situation in the country, and information void is not going to help unite the people in such dire times. The government should lift the ban on the media so that people can be made aware of the situation and understand the circumstances surrounding the current uncertainty in the country. [Daily Times]
'NATIONAL INTEREST'
[S T Hussain, Lahore]
It is in the national interest that all private news channels are blacked out, that the judiciary is made subservient to the executive and that its all judgments should be in favour of the government. Nawaz Sharif should not be allowed to return before three years. It is in the supreme national interest that General Musharraf become president-for-life as well as lifelong chief of the army staff. It is in the national interest that the 160 million people are deprived of their fundamental rights, liberty, freedom of speech and movement.
It is not in the national interest that people elect their own representatives and rule the country, because it is only the army generals who are capable of doing that. The only way to make Pakistan progress is that there should be no constitution, all courts should be replaced by military courts, all independent news TV channels should be banned, the present National Assembly, the prime minister and ministers become permanent and there should be no election commission. Long live 'Pakistan First' General Musharraf! The people do not want the rule of law, but rule by an individual. [The News]
FREE MEDIA CITY
[Somi Khan, Jeddah, KSA]
It was shocking that Dubai Media City has ordered two TV channels of Pakistan GEO TV and ARY to shut their transmission only on few hours notice. Dubai Media City claimed to be a free zone for world media to opening their broadcasting centers. Investments were attracted in the name of free media zone. But this blatant action has passed a wave of fear among the investors for losing their money and business any time with a simple order without giving any notice or abiding the terms of the license.
It means that the properties, business and investments of foreigners are not safe in UAE and any action can be taken on the behest of the hostile governments. The west will use it for making negative propaganda against a Muslim and Arab country. The government of UAE has not so far denied that it had ordered the Geo and ARY to shut their transmission. Does it mean that only the West is safe place for doing business and abiding of contracts and rules and regulations? [Pakistan Observer]
AN IRKED MOTHER-IN-LAW
[Ali Bokhari, Ireland]
Since the imposition of the emergency, I am surprised at the attitude of ruling class towards media, especially the electronic. They are behaving towards them like a “Roothi Saas” (irked mother-in-law). I think the media should completely boycott them. They want to take us back to stone age of Ayub, Yahya, Zia and other pueudo democratic governments.
The media should not compromise on any code of conduct because all of us know that media’s behaviour has been more or less fair. In all of the political talk shows, they always invited ruling partymen to prove their case. The media cannot be blamed to be partial because of the rulers’ dismal performance. I wonder where the moderates of government like S M Zafar and Mushahid Hussain are these days. [Dawn]
BAN ON TV CHANNELS
[Afnan Naeem, Wah Cantt]
After reading the message of Geo TV in the Nov 12 issue of this newspaper regarding the unethical ban on a number of private TV channels, I was at a loss for words because the government's action seems devoid of any rationality. Why is the government not allowing us to watch the TV channels of our choice? Why is our right to information being denied by the government? I feel sorry for all the blocked channels, especially those run by the Geo TV network, as they have been subjected to discrimination at the hands of PEMRA. I hope sanity will prevail and the government will soon restore the transmission of the blocked TV channels. [The News]
RIGHT TO KNOW
[Muhammad Yousuf, Karachi]
For nearly two weeks now, the people of Pakistan have been denied their right to know because of the government’s ban on private and international news channels. The ban has been reinforced through amendments to the PEMRA and Press Ordinances. The government has accused the banned TV channels of defaming government functionaries and having a negative impact on the situation in the country.
While it is true that the Pakistani media is in its ‘adolescent’ stages and there may be lapses of judgement, banning news channels and preventing coverage and transmission is hardly the solution to the problem. The people’s right to know, and the freedom of speech, should outweigh the potential hazards of a free media. The government should immediately lift the curbs on media freedom, and stop violating the people’s rights. This will not only help our media grow, but will also improve the government’s standing in the people’s eyes.
[Daily Times]
REVERT TO THE RADIO, PLEASE
[Khalid Idrees, Islamabad]
Dear readers, are you really worried that since Nov 3 all private news channels, local as well as foreign, have been blocked by the cable operators in compliance with government instructions?
My humble advice to the dear readers who feel deprived of news of what is happening in the country as a result of this measure is to take heart for this has been done to stop corrupting their innocent minds, a very laudable objective which for quite some time had remained unattended by the state’s apparatus.
Yet if the dear readers are very keen to have their minds corrupted and are not willing to go by the pure stuff being diligently purveyed by PTV, they have the option of reverting to good old radio, the contraption that has since long been sidelined by us. I, for one, have gone for this option for the last couple of days and I feel one can get all the information one wants about the happenings in the country.
One can tune on to the BBC, VOA, Voice of Germany and many other stations to get all the local news one needs as well as information on international reaction to the situation in Pakistan. Some people would say that recourse to radio in this age is a sign of retrogression. So what, I would say. Perhaps retrogressive steps taken by the government call for retrogressive responses from the people. So, dear readers, revert to the radio for satiating your curiosity. [Dawn]
MEDIA FREEDOM
[Muhammad Awais, Lahore]
The freedom of expression enjoyed by private TV channels made people more responsible and they started thinking analytically and rationally. These channels became popular because they presented different points of view in an unbiased manner. The channels never exceeded the limits of their freedom because they gave everybody an equal opportunity to express themselves.
But we were stunned on November 3 when this freedom was snatched through a single order by General Musharraf. People wonder why the president took the unpopular decision and deprived the people of their right to know. [The News]
TRUTH WITH RESPONSIBILITY
[Dr Irfan Zafar]
PTV is nowadays displaying and promoting a new caption: “Truth with responsibility”. Abraham Lincoln, the sixteenth President of the United States once said, “How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four; calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg”. The media channels showing the “real” truth with responsibility are already off the air. PTV need not float hollow and meaningless slogans. [Daily Times]
CURBING THE MEDIA
[Kamran Kiani, Rawalpindi]
Putting curbs on the media is one of the tools available for the dictators to silence the dissenting voices. The current regime has no precedent in this regard. Blackening off the TV screens, causing billions of rupees’ loss to the industry, threatening jobs of the people working with the TV channels and what more, denying people of their right to access information, are no doubt a worst form of dictatorship and suppression of dissenting voices.
The media, especially electronic, was working as a mirror. If you were making bad faces in front of the mirror, it was not the fault of the mirror. The media was doing a great job of educating the people. Ordinary souls were not as much informative as they are today, thanks to the independent electronic media. Gen Musharraf claims he has given freedom to the press, but I feel that the press has snatched their freedom and, of course, there is a long list of journalists who have paid a heavy price for this.
Today again the media is at war and those who are at the helm of the affairs have put freedom of the press at jeopardy, which is indeed bad news for the nation. If Gen Musharraf and his aides think that they have served their purpose by silencing the electronic media, they are badly mistaken. In fact, they have created much more hurdles in their way by locking horns with the media. It is a war between a pen and a long stick of the military. Rulers of this country have taken the extreme step by closing down the transmission of entertainment and sports channels.
Advertisers have also suffered a big blow because their commercials cannot be aired. This also has deprived the government of GST on the TV commercials, which may also be estimated in billions. Better clear the message instead of killing the messenger. [Dawn]
LOPSIDED
[Barkat Ali, Rawalpindi]
It is sickening to watch PTV for what it has been presenting, particularly since the imposition of martial law. The channel tries very hard through its mostly new and unknown presenters with their superficial views and comments, claiming that the emergency is the choice of the nation. But in doing so PTV has done further damage to its reputation, if it had any to start with, especially with regard to independent reporting.
PTV wants us to believe that the entire country is peaceful, there are no protests, the whole nation supports the imposition of emergency in the country and the decision to filter out the "confrontationist elements in the Supreme Court". So incredibly false are such comments that even a person of little intellect can see through them. I request the government to take PTV off air as well, as long as the other channels are blacked out. At least the government would be providing some relief to the viewers this way. [The News]
KILLING THE FREE MEDIA
[Asim, USA]
Since the imposition of Emergency rule in the country on November 3, the news seems to get more depressing by the day. However, the events of November 16 are particularly depressing. The country suffered a news and information blackout for almost two weeks as private news channels (as well as some international news broadcasters) were taken off the air. However, it came to light late Friday night, November 16, that two prominent news channels, both broadcasting from Dubai, were shutting down.
According to sources, the Pakistani government put pressure on the “host country’s” government to shut these channels down, and apparently, the “host country” has complied. This is yet another blow to freedom of speech in Pakistan.
First, it was Saudi Arabia that helped the government get rid of Nawaz Sharif on his return, despite a Supreme Court ruling allowing the former prime minister to return. And now, the UAE has also done its part for the Pakistani government. Isn’t it strange that while most Pakistanis criticise the United States and the West for interfering in Pakistani affairs negatively, our supposed ‘brethren’ are at the forefront of efforts to strengthen the current regime? This is a sad day for Pakistan. [Daily Times]
BANNED TV CHANNELS
[M. Nawaz Khan, Lahore Cantt.]
The government has banned all private TV news channels, including the BBC and CNN. It wants us to see only the official version of the news, commonly known as ‘spin’, on the PTV. The citizens began circumventing the ban by installing satellite dishes but the government did not like that and ordered the police to forcibly close the shops selling the dishes.
Now a ban has been imposed on import of decoders and recording and reception equipment. On the other hand, according press reports, not only judges of the Supreme Court but also the chief law officer of the government and the attorney general have installed satellite dishes on their residences. If such high functionaries of the state are allowed to circumvent the ban, why deny this facility to us common citizens? [Dawn]
POLICE BRUTALITY
[Shahzaib Khan, Lahore]
The images from Karachi on the front pages of most newspapers are shocking. Peaceful protestors opposing the current regime’s draconian restrictions on the media were brutally pushed back by police personnel in what was yet another reminder of how high-handed the government can be in stifling independent thought and analysis. It is now very clear that what the government means by a “responsible” media is a “compliant” media that sacrifices objectivity and ethical concerns to help paint a rosy picture of the government. If the government wants the people of Pakistan to take its claims of supporting a “free” media seriously, it should stop dealing with peaceful protests in such a violent manner.
[Daily Times]
MARCHING TO A DIFFERENT TUNE
[A Viewer, Lahore]
Flipping through the channels on Nov 12, I came across one that was blocked on Nov 3 but subsequently unblocked after an agreement to abide by Pemra’s code of conduct. Clearly, the anchor was marching to a different tune (pun intended). During the interview of a senior member of an opposition party, the anchor’s usual bellicose persona was more pronounced and his arguments more shallow and rhetorical than ever.
He crossed all lines of professional conduct and fair interviewing and appeared convinced that he needed to insult his guest to convince the powers-that-be that he is being a good little boy and playing by the rules. Clearly the real professionals and the real leaders of the press are on channels still blocked by the government and still fighting for the rights of the press.
All channels need to keep in mind that their primary audience is educated and informed and will simply tune out if they spew what appears to be government-prescribed propaganda under the guise of independent journalism. Anchors and channels with a short-term vision will win the ratings war and the advertising proceeds over the next few weeks. After that, they will be reduced to their rightful place in the second and third tier categories. [Dawn]
WHAT HAS CHANGED?
[Sami]
While I completely respect the stance adopted by Geo network of not bowing down to government pressure, I want to bring your attention to the channels that have signed the code of conduct and are on air presently. Dawn News, Aaj TV and all other channels on air are reporting (even against the government) with the same vigour that they displayed prior to November 3. Perhaps the code of conduct is not as oppressive as it is being made to look? The contents of the channels certainly make one think so.
Either way, hats off to those who are on air, and are trying to do an honest job, and hats off to those who are off air, trying to uphold their principles! [Daily Times]
ROLE OF MEDIA
[Dr Misbah Azam, USA]
The role of the media, and more specifically of outspoken and often controversial anchors, in Pakistan, is being debated everywhere. The media is an important source of information and can influence the way masses think. It has also been proven in the past that media can be used to create sentiments of nationalism. It is considered the eyes, ears and mouths of the people because it has the ability to scrutinise those who have the power to change the futures of millions.
During the Vietnam War, when the US media became vocal and active, the government had to change their policies and eventually withdraw troops from the unnecessary war. However, when the same media became the cheerleader of the Iraq war, the whole country got stuck in the ill-planned war, which it can neither continue nor pull back from.
If our regime was expecting that the media would constantly praise the government for its policies then it might as well have declared that there is no need for the media, because its main job is scrutiny for the benefit of the people. As far as media objectivity is concerned, in every talk show in Pakistani private channels, government representatives have always been invited to defend the government or present its points of view. Musharraf’s government must realise that if they weaken the media right now, the enervated and drained media will fail to keep a watch on the next government as well, leading to the same corruption and mess that Musharraf claimed he wanted to eliminate once and for all. [Daily Times]
==================================================================
From the National Press
PAKISTAN’S REAL PROBLEM
[Zill-E-Rehman Khan Niazi, Islamabad]
According to the World Economic Forum’s recent competitive ranking on the Best Countries for Business, Pakistan stands nowhere amoung those 50 countries listed, getting beaten by countries like Chile, Estonia, Thailand, Tunisia, Puerto Rico, Slovenia, India and Slovak Republic. And then our political leaders have the nerve to determine that Pakistan’s economy is pacing forward and the country has been attracting business from global players.
The Global Competitiveness Report tallies 113 factors that contribute to an economy’s competitiveness. It boils down to how well a country is positioned to squeeze efficiency out of its business and attract companies and investment from abroad. Components of the resulting Global Competitiveness Index range from the quality of a nation’s road to the independence of its judiciary to the incidence of tuberculosis to how easy it is to hire an engineer.
Looking at the current political situation in the country, and even the time before the current state of emergency, it does not take a rocket scientist to conclude why Pakistan may never make it to those 50 countries best for business. Perhaps, it is about time that instead of bragging about its laurels, the government should seriously focus on being led by people who could put the country on the road to success. It is also the obligation of the citizens of this country to determine the direction of leadership. They should also avoid the thieves, the thugs and the robbers who already have stuffed their coffers with public money and are again gaining strength to do the same. [Dawn]
PERKS AND PRIVILEGES FOR VVIPS
[M. G. H. Dadabhoy, Karachi]
Your columnist Hafizur Rahman in his well-researched article on the subject (Nov 7), with facts and figures on import of most expensive limousines by VVIPS without payment of duty, with one past prime minister topping the list, and causing losses of millions to the government exchequer, is quite revealing. Fortunately, the illegal practice was stopped by the successor government. Unfortunately the lifestyle of our executive and legislative pillars of the country is beyond comprehension and control of the people on whose shoulders the heavy burden of bearing the cost falls. The lavish presidency with a platoon of servants, befitting an Arab king, is unbecoming of the head of state of our poor country.
Likewise, the unlimited perks provided to the members of parliament doing insignificant legislative work during a year is not equivalent to their drawing large sums of money from the exchequer for little service rendered to the nation. Similarly, the overstaffed bureaucracy is costing a big chunk of the federal budget. All these leave a very meagre portion of only about 2.10 per cent of the budgetary provision for education and healthcare together, besides other sectors.
No wonder that the literacy in our country is hardly 30 per cent, from which emanates all ills and problems like overpopulation, unemployment, lawlessness, water and power shortages, housing and multifarious problems for the populace. Such a low literacy and uncontrolled population growth are integrated with each other and is the root cause of lawlessness, suicide bombings and terrorism in Pakistan.
In his article, ‘Back to square one’, Kamran Shafi (Nov 6) has described the methodology of Maulana Sufi Muhammad, the rebel leader of Malakand Agency, as to how he would take truckload of young boys with tender mind, brain-wash with ‘jihad’ and drop them into Afghanistan as ‘mujahideen’ to sacrifice in the war with American troops. This is perhaps because he wants to get rid of extra burden on him of large numbers of such innocent boys, whom the parents with seven or eight children send three to four boys to be brought up in madressah and lessen their burden of upbringing due to abject poverty.
This goes to prove that due to the lack of education in rural areas the maulvi inculcates the urge in the mind of illiterates to enlarge their families, cumulating in admission of their children into madressahs for free-of-cost board and lodging perforce. This vicious circle goes on unabated. To enlighten the people on the unscrupulous use of public money and squandering the meagre wealth of our nation, eminent economists like Shahid Javed Burki, Sultan Ahmed, Kasier Bangali and others should critically analyse the government expenditure under different heads of accounts with justification or otherwise. This will reveal as to why the political parties vie to contest election and are keen to ‘serve the people’ of Pakistan with tall and false promises to grab the chair for self-aggrandisement. [Dawn]
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE
[PILDAT (Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency)]
The 12th National Assembly completed its fifth year on November 15. One of its last few actions was the endorsement of the extra-constitutional act of the chief of army staff of proclaiming a “state of emergency” and suspending the constitution on November 3. Its five-year term has ended without fulfilling two of its vital constitutional requirements.
These include the presidential address to the joint sittings of parliament at the beginning of every parliamentary calendar year, and the mandatory 130 days’ sittings in the fifth parliamentary calendar year. Its legislative performance over the past five years remained unsatisfactory. It passed 50 bills. In comparison, the number of presidential ordinances issued during this period is 121 (on average 24 ordinances per year). This means almost 2.5 ordinances were issued against every act passed by the assembly. The National Assembly passed only two bills in the first year, 17 bills in the second year, 18 and five bills in the third and fourth parliamentary years, respectively, while it passed eight bills in its fifth year. All except one in the 50 bills were government-sponsored bills.
The National Assembly met for an average of a little over three hours per day during these five years. A total of around 47,000 questions were asked in the assembly during the five years out of which only about 10,000 (or 21 per cent) were answered. During the first year, most of its 43 committees were not constituted and during the combined five-year period, these committees and their subcommittees on average held 200 meetings per year. The completion of its five-year period is marred by a lack of respect and dignity among the general public owing mainly to the support of the present ruling alliance to the military-led government and the role played in the current judicial turmoil in the country—not a record any legislature can be proud of. [Pakistan Observer]
BRIDGE COLLAPSE: WHAT BECAME OF THE INQUIRY?
[Farhatullah Babar, Ex-Senator, Islamabad]
What happened to the inquiry ordered into the collapse of the bridge on the Northern Bypass in Karachi a few weeks ago? The inquiry was to be completed by the end of October and its findings made public. Questions refuse to die down.
1. Why this deafening silence about the bridge collapse, the inquiry and the follow-up action?
2. What were the terms of reference of the inquiry commission, if at all an inquiry was held?
3. What were the names of the members of the inquiry commission?
4. What were the reasons for not making the inquiry open to public?
5. Did NAB take notice of the loss of human lives and colossal loss to the national exchequer due to sheer negligence or corruption, or perhaps both, on the part of the contractors, consultants and the client, and if not, why?
6. Was it within the mandate of the contractor to undertake building of roads and bridges?
7. If the contractor was not mandated to build roads and bridges why was it awarded the contract in the first place and who is responsible for it?
8. Was the contract awarded without inviting bids as revealed during the question hour in parliament? Why was the contractor favoured with a cushy contract and that too without bids?
9. What are the other projects the same contractor has been awarded which are beyond his/her stated mandate?
10. Is it correct that a speed-breaker built in the middle of the curved part of the bridge contributed to the collapse due to unbalanced forces unleashed by the application of brakes by heavy vehicles? If so, was this speed-breaker based on some technical study and duly approved by the client or consultant? [The News]
DEALING WITH PIRACY
[Bilal Mustafa, Lahore]
Protection of intellectual property from theft and piracy is a key global issue being discussed on world, regional and national levels. Intellectual property involves patents (including patents on “biological material” such as seeds) and copyrights on books, music, films and software. There are hundreds of global piracy syndicates that violate these copyrights and are costing the respective industries billions of dollars as consumers flock to pirated material as compared to purchasing legitimate copies.
Pakistan, too, has a problem with piracy. However, we must not look at the problem inside-out. It affects Pakistanis just as much as it affects artists, engineers and businesses abroad. Because there is a culture of piracy in our music industry — most audio CDs and DVD films sold in the market are pirated — local artists and film houses have very little incentive to invest time and money in producing high quality content. There is no institution that effectively monitors and enforces copyrights and as a result, several of our musicians have gone to foreign markets such as India and Europe to produce and market their music, simply because those markets are protected and guarantee returns greater than what they would expect in Pakistan.
There is an immediate need to address the situation and enforce copyrights in Pakistan. This is the only way we will encourage greater and better local efforts not just in the entertainment industry, but also in publishing and research. [Daily Times]
==================================================================
Letters to FreePakistan
News of what is happening in Pakistan has captivated people here, who otherwise would never have heard of the Swat Valley other than hearing me mention the place. I do hope that you are alright. How I wish I were there to be able to know more from your perspective. For now, I remain neutral. It is not for me to pass judgment upon the decisions of government. The situation is complicated and made more touchy by Western interference. It is such a farce for the USA to push for 'democracy' and 'fair elections' after the Palestine elections that voted Hammas into power, then huffing and puffing that the 'wrong' party had been elected. Such hypocrisy makes the USA ridiculous. I am unfortunately not well studied in the field of politics, so it is difficult for me to articulate anything such that it holds any substance.
What I do appreciate is the Swiss form of government. There we have a direct democracy. Perhaps Pakistan scholars would benefit from studying the Swiss system. Naturally nothing is perfect, but it seems to me that it is a more fair form of government than most, including the USA system. One brilliant thing about Switzerland is that there is plenty of law and order. I often described the country as a police state in which there is freedom... the right type of freedom that provides a safe environment in which a person live and travel without fear. Imagine a Pakistan where people would get along in spite of differences, each person living a decent life with self-discipline to live within the law. It is so easily said... one can strive for a change for the better.
Be well, be safe... my thoughts are there with you all in Pakistan... wishing for a better tomorrow.
peace,
[Katherine, USA]
[The following letter refers to the article Outrageous to the Dignity of Free People by Dr. Khalil Ahmad]
"These freedoms have been ensured to him in the Constitution of 1973. It is the foremost duty of the state to secure these freedoms to every individual citizen, and in addition to this, it is the second most important duty of the state to make it unequivocally clear that no individual or group or community or party has any right or can be allowed to infringe theses freedoms of any individual irrespective of his status."
Nice, thought provoking and interesting view, though men of consciousness is always limited by his level of awareness nevertheless it is viewed such a person holds a belief in moral rights to be sacred except for those rights he feels infringes upon his self interest :) thus the need for codification of human rights, legal rights, one can see the problems in an established culture where the leaders of the State see themselves as more important than the people themselves and constantly argue the very survival of the state depends on them and potentially acquiesce themselves to think themselves as morally superior they see human rights and justice in terms of moral relativism, they need not be reminded of human rights, if they could see beyond their own self interest, and if they could imagine the dreadful world without human rights. I can not but feel that the country has time after time failed the people, both the power that be the Govt (rights by the people) and the Judiciary (Justice for the people) How well have we protected the rights of the women, rights of the minority, etc, the basic rights. Securing human being's essential interests is the principal ground upon which human rights is justified and a fundamental part of good governance. Is there a political culture that prepares one to be ethical with a sense of civic duty today to make sure it is not just a matter of rule of Law but also right kind of Laws. Perhaps your following comments answers that ""But when both constitution and courts are wrapped up on any pretext, the people have no protection of their lives, their freedoms, and no access to information and no door to knock at for justice.""
[Aziz]
I have just been released from Central Jail Gujranwala. The first ever experience to be behind the bars for a very noble cause will always be a source of proud and satisfaction for me. The majority of the nation is still sleeping in the darkness. Traders, businessmen, industrialist, investors, and even common poormen are doing their usual daily business. They have no concern whatever happens in their country. Our national poet Dr. Allama Muhammad Iqbal having prophetic imagination, tried so hard to awaken us but we are not inclined.
I want to thank you for sending me the booklet "Charter of Liberty" which I have received. A great work of my interest.
I am an Advocate and practicing in District Bar Gujranwala. I hereby request you to please send me the under mentioned booklet also.
New booklet argues Pakistanis desperately need rule of law
Please consider the compilation of your precious published Articles in shape of a book.
[Muhammad Waseem Elahi, Advocate, Gujranwala]
People here are talking a lot of Pakistan... sometimes I prefer not to say much... what can one say... I certainly agree with you about the rule of law... that is a just law. Corruption is the worst cancer for any nation. Sadly it is found in abundance in every region of the world. I have just finished reading "The Kite Runner", a very interesting story that could depict any society's human nature. It makes me think of George Orwell's "Animal Farm" and William Golding's "Lord of the Flies". Most interesting and most depressingly true. Oh well, I continue to wish for improvement to come.
wishing you well.
peace,
[Katherine, USA]
==================================================================
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.”
