Since Afghan Taliban Were Honest By Jawed Naqvi: New Age Islam's Selection, 01 August 2017
New Age Islam Edit Bureau
01 August 2017
• Since Afghan Taliban Were Honest
By Jawed Naqvi
• Topi Drama Re-Enacted?
By Hasan Mujtaba
• Maryam Mirzakhani Belonged To Humanity
By Muhammad Hamid Zaman
• Pakistan At 80: The Next 10 Years
By Shahid Javed Burki
• A Troubling Verdict
By Mohammad Sohaib Saleem
• Indeed, a Proud Moment
By Raoof Hasan
• A Harsh Verdict
By Dr Niaz Murtaza
• Justice in Times Of Civil-Military Conflict
By Munir Ahmed
Compiled By New Age Islam Edit Bureau
------
Since Afghan Taliban Were Honest
By Jawed Naqvi
August 01, 2017
SUPPOSE Lalu Yadav is really corrupt, which he may not be, and suppose Narendra Modi is clean as he claims to be. Does that lessen the threat India faces from fascism? Now that Pakistan’s Supreme Court has disqualified Nawaz Sharif for not coming clean on his assets, will everyone sleep peacefully?
The Afghan Taliban ran an honest government in Kabul during their short spell. Is that the trade-off we are looking at — a clean government at any cost, never mind the frightened women, the minorities?
The voice from the Orwellian pulpit holds sway. The Philippines president is hooked to its mesmeric wavelength. He has slaughtered at least 7,000 in their homes and on the pavements, mayors and opposition politicians, policemen and judges — a man possessed in his messianic drive to re-arrange society. Far worse is in store for others. Nations are razed to the ground to comply with the Orwellian decree. Lalu’s India and Sharif’s Pakistan stand at such a crossroads.
I was never enamoured of Sharif, not the least because of his grooming as Ziaul Haq’s blue-eyed boy. He deepened the fear by wanting to become the Amirul Momineen, a title borrowed from the Taliban. Democracy has coerced Sharif to curtail his religious atavism, to engage more with the existential challenges facing the country. No one should accuse him of not trying to mend fences with India. No one should doubt his new resolve to include Pakistan’s minorities in the ambit of secular governance.
Nations are razed to the ground to comply with the Orwellian decree. Lalu’s India and Sharif’s Pakistan stand at such a crossroads.
In a way, Sharif became nearly as important to Pakistan as Lalu Yadav is to India. This simple equation eludes a few self-regarding intellectuals on both sides. Not unlike their Pakistani cousins, even as the Bharatiya Janata Party crowbarred Lalu’s party out of office in Bihar, many Indian intellectuals were engrossed in an unrelated debate. The BJP struck up an alliance with a former foe, leaving the opposition in tatters. The collaborators explained their power grab as a requirement to fight corruption. If Lalu and his family are in serious trouble, it could not be for a more compelling reason than the fact that he had single-handedly stopped L.K. Advani’s march to Ayodhya. If he is finished off by the BJP, will Indian democracy be safe?
Hold your verdict, since some intellectuals are wallowing in a parallel timeline, one that seems characteristically bereft of a sense of timing. It so happened that the Economic and Political Weekly (EPW) investigated the Adani business conglomerate’s alleged crony links with Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
There is nothing hidden here. Modi had arrived in Delhi for his swearing in on Adani’s private plane. The investigations sought to establish that Modi had helped the Adani group in securing undeserved tax refunds. The Adanis threatened EPW with legal notice. The editor in his wisdom consulted his lawyers without apparently informing the trustees, including historian Romila Thapar, lodestar in India’s fight for its secular soul. The editor was asked to remove the story among the steps the trustees thought fit, but he preferred to resign. Liberal pontiffs have had a field day blaming the editor and the trustees, as if India’s democracy depends on their verdict. (Which rarely happens to come in one voice!)
In any case, the main issue in the exposé — that there could be verifiable evidence of complicity between business captains and politicians at the highest levels — was lost in the liberal din. If corruption is ever going to be Modi’s Achilles’ heel India should applaud the liberal gladiators for the hard work of bringing the exposé to the people’s notice. Is an exposé going to lay him low though? Moreover, should corruption count as an issue in a world where people are drowning in the Mediterranean Sea to escape slaughter and hunger? What became of the revelations of mass murder in Gujarat, or for that matter in Delhi?
We never needed a ruse to evict elected governments, corruption or no corruption. What was the excuse after all to remove Allende or Mossadegh? Bankrolled street power could do the trick, as was the case in Iran in the 1950s. Or someone could bribe the generals, as was the case in Chile and in some ways also in Bangladesh and perhaps in Pakistan too in the 1970s.
Prime Minister Modi accuses everyone, even the super-clean Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, of corruption. It is a useful ploy that helps keep opponents off balance. Above all, Modi’s strategy has the chief minister of West Bengal in its crosshairs. If he can get the communists in Kerala, it would be bonus. The prime minister possibly sees everyone other than himself as corrupt. If he doesn’t quite put it that way, his loyal press is always around to do the makeover. Is that going to be the strategy for the liberal opposition in India or Pakistan — corruption?
We don’t really know what awaits post-Sharif Pakistan, but BJP’s campaign to undermine Lalu Yadav by hook or by crook is part of a core strategy to disrupt the opposition ahead of 2019. Yadav became a national hero — and a lightning rod for secularism — when he briefly jailed L.K. Advani as the BJP stalwart headed to Ayodhya through Bihar in an early attempt at raiding the Babri Masjid. If we compare him with any major opposition leader, Lalu stands out head and shoulders above for never having compromised with Hindutva.
Mamata Banerjee and Kejriwal are the other two secular opponents of Modi who could be sorted out. As outspoken critics of Modi, they could face a Bihar-like assault before the next general elections. The BJP has never forgiven Lalu for being staunchly secular, nor is it likely to lower its guard against Banerjee or Kejriwal. Corruption is, however, the least of Modi’s concerns, nor was it ever close to being the real issue in Pakistan.
Source: dawn.com/news/1348869/since-afghan-taliban-were-honest
-----
Topi Drama Re-Enacted?
By Hasan Mujtaba
01-Aug-17
The nation’s apex court has sent the elected Prime Minister packing when the country was hardly three weeks away completion of 70 years of independence. And, ironically it’s less than a year away from the general elections in 2018.
Many years ago, I had co-authored a play along with my erstwhile colleague and friend Muna Khan in our days in Newsline magazine.
The story was set in background of a psychiatry asylum centre. The characters in group of mentally challenged people of different ideologies, backgrounds, and identities ended up under the same roof in prison like barrack of asylum. The main protagonist was a character named Malika, playing as epic eunuch, always clad in cross dress (a drags queen). According to the script, she was falsely arrested by the police and framed up on the charges of kidnapping of a child from the streets. ‘Eunuchs abduct babies’ is one of the many stereotypes and prejudices they face in Pakistan.
She was sent by a self righteous magistrate to the prison. Being poor and vulnerable in the prison, she was unable to pay bribe to the corrupt jail authorities to spare herself from being tortured. So animosity of the corrupt prison and police system with a self righteous magistrate, Malika wrongly landed in the mental asylum.
Malika, by her charms and being over smart, earned the sympathies of the asylum staff and the fellow inmates who chose her as their ‘leader’, as the story goes further. Among the other characters were: one comrade Ahmed Nazeer, a graduate of London School of Economics and card holder member of the under grouped Communist Party.
He lost his mind first in failed love affair, suffered a deep culture shock later when he saw collapse of the then USSR and other countries of the Communist bloc. Irshad Ahmed, who was a school teacher, and a Bhutto die hard found himself in asylum after the execution of the then deposed Prime Minister. In his cell of the asylum, he would adorn pictures of Maummar Gaddafi alike leaders (as these leaders alike were thought to be friends of Bhutto) besides Bhuttos’ pictures printed in colourful editions of old but censored newspapers.
Another character in the asylum was Kabeer Pardesi who wanted to become former BBC’s legendary correspondent Mark Tully or novelist Salman Rushdie. But he had failed and instead ended up in the asylum.
One day, they somehow managed to escape. The whole country was on high alert as ‘mentally challenged with dangerous thinking’ were at large.
The search for the mental asylum runaways including Malika was intensified in nook and corner of the country. And one evening, the people of Pakistan, saw in the nightly national news bulletin at 9:00 PM, the new caretaker prime minister swearing in, following the news of the ouster of the elected Prime Minister.
This time the caretaker prime minister, we were told, ‘was neither man nor woman’ but the eunuch none other than Malika. The Queen, Malika of whom the ‘Aziz hamwatano’ (dear fellow countrymen and women) were told that the new caretaker PM was the one who had never committed big or small sin. The honourable madam PM was an immaculate Hijra.
Extending the hand of friendship to India is one of the ‘crimes’ Nawaz Sharif committed and one for which he has seemingly been punished
The other members of new caretaker cabinet were comrade Ahmed Nazeer, inducted as senior minister with additional portfolio of political affairs, Irshad Ahmed was minister of education, and Mr Failed writer Kabeer as the minister for information and culture. Malika was also supposed to appear on national Television to address the nation after the news bulletin.
This play was titled ‘Topi Drama 96’ and could never make it to the stage. What was staged in Pakistan’s political theatre was toppling of the then prime minister Benazir Bhutto through a déjà vu presidential decree.
Surprisingly, the deposed Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, termed allegations against her as ‘Topi Drama’ levelled by Farooq Ahmed Laghari in his decree of her dismissal. This was merely a coincidence that the response of the deposed PM Benazir Bhutto to her dismissal coincided with the title of our play ‘Topi Drama 96’.
And now Nawaz Sharif was sent packing, through what this scribe wrote in its editorial, a ‘judicial coup’. The ‘topi drama’ is re-enacted on country’s political scenario time and again.
The people of Pakistan should be the better judge of the integrity of the politicians as their representatives. Extending the hand of friendship to India is one of the ‘crimes’ Nawaz Sharif committed and seems to have been punished for.
So the judges cannot steer the people and countries out of economic or political crisis. The state or establishment should give up their longstanding anthropological habits to send the elected prime ministers either to homes, jails, exile, or to the gallows. Period.
Source: dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/01-Aug-17/topi-drama-re-enacted
----
Maryam Mirzakhani Belonged To Humanity
By Muhammad Hamid Zaman
Published: August 1, 2017
As I boarded my flight from Boston to Islamabad on July 14th, my heart was heavy. I had just lost someone who was my inspiration and someone who I considered to be a personal hero. Cancer had taken away someone who embodied the spirit of a scientist, who pursued it for its original beauty. While I had never met Maryam Mirzakhani, she somehow felt my own. On news and on social media, there were eulogies and obituaries of a life ending too soon, of a beautiful mind no longer amongst us and tales of how much she inspired those around her, men and women.
As I was landing in Pakistan, I had expected part of our 24 hour news cycle to note with sadness the loss of someone who came from our neighbouring country, went through the system and never forgot her roots. I had expected at least some people to talk about science, the pursuit of perfection, and to take pride in the first woman Fields Medallist, who came from the region. It was not to be. While the news about politics was not unexpected, there was plenty of inane international news ranging from celebrity birthdays to new dance numbers, but no mention of Maryam Mirzakhani. I switched channels, looked online at the channels’ websites. But found nothing. Beyond Iran, the discussion in the US, Europe and even the Far East was about pursuit of excellence, the importance of immigration, and a celebration of the work of those who are endowed with exceptional intellectual gifts. We remained deathly silent on any of those topics. It is unclear to me whether this was due to our Saudi benefactors, a sectarian snub, or a rigorous pursuit of a science-free society. Perhaps, all of the above.
My issue with lack of interest in the life or achievements of Maryam is more than about a person. While the person herself was remarkable, and offers so much for us to think about, there is a bigger question of learning from our south-western neighbour. Despite an international embargo for a quarter century, revolutions and an authoritarian regime, their institutions continue to produce scholars of outstanding quality. Similar challenges would have crippled most other nations. Maryam was exceptional, but there are thousands of scholars, in all disciplines, who go through the Iranian system and shine at the highest of global standards. Beyond public education, there are other areas where Iran has a lot to offer to us. Their public health system, which is a blend of public and private components, and has been successful in integrating medical education with health provision, has plenty of lessons for a country like Pakistan that struggles with a broken and unstructured system and a high burden of disease.
The argument to engage with our south-western neighbour is not just based on their success and their systems, but also on a shared culture and history that are certainly a lot stronger than the neighbour in the north. The structural basis of our language, the script, poetry and art, are a common heritage. Perhaps in a world where the discussion starts and ends with CPEC, which is considered to be a cure for all our ills, a stronger scientific and education engagement with anyone but China is implausible.
It is not to say that Iran is perfect or that there aren’t challenges in restarting the relationship with Iran. Our extreme dependence on Saudi Arabia, pressure from the US administration, and Iranian relations with India all have contributed to our inability to benefit from those who have so much to offer. Yet, a blind eye to a neighbour, that shares its history, culture and language, in pursuit of pastures that may be green but toxic, is neither prudent nor patriotic.
A new government is in town. One hopes that it continues the good policies of the last few years and revisits the ones that are problematic. A slight left turn, in policy and engagement, in education and in health, may actually be a shorter and a more robust path to societal improvement.
Source: tribune.com.pk/story/1470952/maryam-mirzakhani-belonged-humanity/
----
Pakistan at 80: The Next 10 Years
By Shahid Javed Burki
July 31, 2017
As we head towards the country’s 70th birthday, it would not be inappropriate to speculate about the country’s future. For instance, we may ask: Where will Pakistan be when it celebrates its 80th independence day in 2027? This is a particularly difficult question to answer for a country such as Pakistan where so much remains unsettled even after 70 years of the country’s existence as an independent entity.
Pessimism is an indulged preoccupation of many thinking Pakistanis. The Panamagate episode spotlighted at least two features of the Pakistani landscape that worry all those who are concerned. The first was the important role the military has continued to play in the country’s life. Two of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) members were from the military intelligence services. The second concerns the steady deterioration of the institutional infrastructure needed in a maturing political and social entity. The JIT report highlights some of the institutional failings being witnessed by the country.
Pakistan has become an institutional graveyard, burying many institutions that have critical roles to play in developing the country and modernising society. The judicial system is weak, a characteristic the country shares with other South Asian nations. The planning commission at the federal level and provincial planning and development departments were once deeply involved in formulating policies and carrying out project appraisal. That is no longer the case. Prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (1971-77) methodically dismantled the institutional structure constructed by president Ayub Khan (1958-69). He also dissolved the powerful Civil Service of Pakistan that had inherited the mantle of the Indian Civil Service once called the ‘steel frame’ of the British raj. An independent and merit-based system of bureaucracy had served Pakistan well in the first post-independence quarter century. It is also the reason of India’s success in building a modern political entity.
By nationalising large segments of the modern parts of the economy, Bhutto also did away with the dynamism of the private sector that had powered the economy for a number of years. The elaborate systems established in recent decades for ensuring the accountability of the people in public service have not delivered what they were supposed to provide — a fact pointed out at some length by the JIT report. There are, in other words, many reasons for agreeing with those who are pessimistic about the country’s future.
Pessimism is a self-fulfilling premise. As economists have discovered, the level of confidence about the future is a major contributor to the pace and scope of economic progress. This is true at the micro and macro level. Stock markets value individual stocks on the basis of how they rate their future. Confidence also dictates the level and direction of investment by the private sector. Prevailing sentiment about the country affects the amount of investment by private players. Changing the narrative about Pakistan — focusing on some of the positives rather than by a total preoccupation with the negatives — would invite more capital to flow into the economy by both local and foreign entrepreneurs. If there is truth in the findings presented in the JIT report, even those who occupy senior positions in the government are inclined to invest their wealth outside the country’s borders. Given all this, are there reasons to be optimistic about the future?
A number of positives should begin to figure in the way the economy’s future is assessed. The most important of these is demography. The census held earlier this year will provide estimates of the size of the population, its rate of growth and its age distribution. The population, with the median age of 24 years, is very young. I expect that some 75 per cent of the population of large cities — those with more than 5 million people — is below the age of 25 years. The city youth is better educated; women among them have done surprisingly well in acquiring the skills needed by the modern sectors of the economy. Economists correctly believe that the next global growth thrust will come from South Asia but the countries of this region will not follow the pattern of East Asia’s ‘miracle economies’. Instead, they will provide modern services to the world’s aging population. Pakistan could be one of the suppliers of the needed services.
Pakistan’s location is also an asset. Sitting on top of India, and in between the resource-hungry China and resource-rich Middle East and Central Asia, Pakistan could become the area through which land-based commerce would flow. This is the reason why China is investing large amounts of its resources in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.
There is no doubt that the Pakistani economy has turned the corner, moving from sluggish to reasonably fast rate of economic growth. It has been successful in dealing with stresses it had come under in the immediate post-military era. The economy is now moving forward at a sustainable rate of growth of 5.5 per cent a year, two percentage points higher than the rate at which it was growing in the 2007-14 period. In the next 10 years — from now until the county celebrates its 80th birthday in 2027 — the rate of growth could average 6.5 per cent a year. If that were to happen, the size of the economy could be 90 per cent larger than the level reached in 2017, and the income per capita 63 per cent higher. The year 2027 may see Pakistan in much happier economic situation.
Source: tribune.com.pk/story/1470348/pakistan-80-next-10-years/
----
A Troubling Verdict
By Mohammad Sohaib Saleem
July 31, 2017
All the efforts to find the money trail, unearth the hidden wealth and the forgery gone to waste. The only thing taken out of the 250-odd page Joint Investigation Team (JIT) report was the accrued salary of Nawaz Sharif from the company Capital FZE which was construed as an undisclosed asset. Ironically, the said Capital FZE was not something unearthed by the JIT, the Supreme Court already knew about it (as mentioned on page 538 of the April order) and it is something, as claimed by the PML-N, disclosed in the nomination papers of Mr Sharif.
In hindsight forming a JIT was a futile exercise. Why did the majority justices (Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, Justice Azmat Saeed and Justice Ijazul Ahsan) got into matters of intricate facts and ordered a JIT, when they had no intention to make full use of its report in their final order? Here the approach of the minority justice is commendable. They got it right in the first instance. No JIT was required.
The reason why Justice Asif Khosa and Justice Gulzar Ahmed didn’t propose a JIT unlike the majority judges was because they didn’t venture into the questions of facts raised around the money trail. Justice Khosa on pages 64 and 65 of the judgments writes as follows:
“It ought not to be lost sight of that it is not the property in London which is in issue before this Court but what is at issue is respondent No.1’s honesty for the purposes of a disqualification under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution. Therefore, in order to attend to the said core issue I have decided to keep aside the material produced by the petitioners regarding the four properties in London and to take into consideration primarily the explanations offered and the material supplied by respondent No.1 and his children in order to see whether their explanations vis-à-vis acquisition of the said properties are on the face of it honest or not. This approach adopted by me leaves me with no disputed or intricate questions of fact on the issue and focuses solely on the issue of honesty of respondent No.1 with reference to the explanations advanced by him and his family only. Respondent No.1 and his family cannot claim that their explanations offered on the issue are themselves disputed or intricate and this Court cannot even look at them!”
In Justice Khosa’s opinion, it will be a ‘disaster’ if the court stops short of attending to the issue because it involves some disputed and intricate questions of fact. On page 64 of the judgment, Justice Khosa writes:
“…if this Court stops short of attending to the issue merely because it involves some disputed or intricate questions of fact then the message being sent would be that if a powerful and experienced prime minister of the country/chief executive of the federation appoints his loyalists as heads of all the relevant institutions in the country which can inquire into or investigate the allegations of corruption, etc, against such prime minister/chief executive of the federation then a brazen blocking of such inquiry or investigation by such loyalists would practically render the prime minister/chief executive of the federation immune from touchability or accountability and that surely would be nothing short of a disaster.”
The order announced on July 28th was really disappointing. The Supreme Court could have done much better, could have used the JIT report to form a strong ground for the disqualification of Nawaz Sharif. The precedent set will lead to floodgates being opened, which will burden our judiciary more than ever. Testing times for the Supreme Court ahead, we have not seen the last of the Panama Papers.
Source: tribune.com.pk/story/1470339/a-troubling-verdict/
-----
Indeed, A Proud Moment
By Raoof Hasan
01-Aug-17
“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorises it and a moral code that glorifies it” — Frederic Bastiat
The unanimous Supreme Court decision to disqualify Nawaz Sharif could potentially unravel divergent and powerful currents in the country to rebuild democracy along inclusive, egalitarian and sustainable lines. While such a need had been felt for a long time, it is only now that one can see the prospect of good tidings.
With his exit and that of his close cohorts within the family paradigm, the country is effectively rid of a mindset fed, bred and nurtured in despotic parlance. This was gruesomely witnessed in multiple dimensions through a good thirty years of his stints in power in the provincial and federal capitals.
A quintessential product of the military ala General Jilani and General Ziaul Haq, he remained hopelessly immersed in their narrative, projecting himself forcefully as its principal advocate till the fateful exit of the latter. During this stint, he conceived and perpetrated a number of petty conspiracies targeting his close associates and benefactors.
Enjoying enormously the power bequeathed upon him by his uniformed masters, he appeared restless trying to break free of the chains tying him down. That happened during the first stint in power of Benazir Bhutto when, as chief minister of Punjab, he joined hands with the devil himself to bring her down. This started a phase of testing the sustainability of a fledgling system pockmarked by article 58-2-B which gave carte blanche powers to the president to dismiss a sitting government. The phase of shenanigans ended with the toppling of his government by General Musharraf in 1999.
But Nawaz Sharif’s espousal of corruption remained an integral part of his power politics during and after the Zia era. He was always a tainted ruler, more of an emperor than a democratic head of government. He borrowed heavily from the banks with no intention of ever settling the liabilities. His business empire expanded at an exponential pace within the time span when he held various public offices. In the absence of independent media, this would only sporadically catch the headlines. When confronted with journalists of the obdurate variety, he didn’t hesitate to even have them kidnapped and mistreated in confinement. The despotic germs were assimilated and essayed rather frequently. In the process, these germs grew to become hydras which catapulted out of control and what may have started as a dream became a gruesome monster getting the better of his democratic pretensions.
Corruption was also used as an antidote for stark limitations of ability and capacity. It was a tunnel-vision intelligence that kept getting bloated with the intake of mounting illicit funds. This was crudely manipulated as an instrument for sustaining Nawaz’s power base with political associates receiving frequent injections of varied kind and quantum of gratifications
In fact, corruption became the singular most relevant instrument of governance with its tentacles deepening and expanding with the passage of time. Its influence on the commonly-perceived fourth pillar of the state has been particularly disheartening with some media houses becoming veritable extensions of the culture of corruption and the prime-time anchors and a growing band of the so-called investigative journalists pontificating endlessly in the virtues of the ruling mafias.
The principal mechanism which the defenders of corruption adopted was projecting the drive as a conspiracy of the military-judiciary combine. In the process, it was made to believe that espousal of corruption would strengthen democracy and keep the military at bay. This speaks volumes of the deeply degenerative narrative that has been systematically promoted by the beneficiaries of an odiously corrupt system for prolonging and strengthening their gainful base.
But, Nawaz Sharif is not the only criminal. There are others belonging to virtually every walk of life. Now that there is hope that accountability will be promoted and a legal-moral basis for governance established, it must be ensured that it does not remain confined to one person, one family or one party alone and that his phase is not the end but the beginning of a process that should become integral to all echelons within the ruling paradigm. It should also be expanded to all channels and vehicles of corruption, be they individuals or institutions.
In fact, the reason why this matter had to be petitioned in the apex court emerged as a consequence of the failure of all state institutions in their basic responsibility in addressing the scourge. Squeezed tightly in the tentacles of a corrupt executive authority, these institutions are not given the space to breathe freely, and a change at the top alone will not address the issue. In actual effect, these institutions have become effective conduits of the corruption of the rulers. This nexus between the executive authority and the institutions must be broken and the latter given their due independence to operate effectively in fulfilling the charter of their tasks and responsibilities as enshrined in the constitution. Their working should be transparent, accountable and efficiently conducted in an environment of empowerment.
But most important is the vigilance of the people in ensuring that this new-found drive against corruption moves on in an indiscriminate manner and does not spare anyone on the basis of his or her caste, colour, creed or power base. All are equal before law and all should be equally treated. As Atifete Jahiaga once said:
“Democracy should be built through open societies that share information. When there is information, there is enlightenment. When there is debate, there are solutions. When there is no sharing of power, no rule of law, no accountability, there is abuse, corruption, subjugation and indignation.”
It is a moment of deliverance. Let’s grasp this proud moment and ensure that we are able to bury the monster of corruption and put the country on course to fulfilling the dream of its creation as enunciated in the August 11 speech of the Quaid. Let everyone be free and let everyone lay claim only to what is measurable through the dint of hard work and devotion alone.
Source: dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/01-Aug-17/indeed-a-proud-moment
-----
A Harsh Verdict
By Dr Niaz Murtaza
August 01, 2017
ELECTED rulers are not above the law if they commit crimes. Democracy is bolstered if they get barred via due process. The Supreme Court launched an unprecedented inquiry via its 184(3) discretionary powers into Sharif finances based only on suspicion.
Since the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) rarely investigates its bosses, the court’s step was right. But its novelty and focus on one clan made it critical that the inquiry follow clear law and precedent with no further judicial discretion to avoid bias charges.
I had many concerns pre-verdict, two of which would have doomed the verdict for me. The first was Sharif being barred due to his adult children’s crimes. The second was the use of a vague and moralistic view of Article 62 rather than a legal one as always before. The verdict avoided both concerns.
There are other issues. This is the first time an MP has been barred without trial and that too by the Supreme Court directly, which means no appeal. Article 10-A mandates a fair trial for people facing criminal charges. Was Sharif given one? The long hearings in court were an inquiry and not a trial. Some say the Supreme Court can give verdicts without trial if guilt is self-evident. I see Article 10-A but not these powers given anywhere. Did the court, the Constitution’s protector, give itself the power to override it unilaterally?
Nawaz Sharif should ask the court for a review
Even when guilt is self-evident, why not send the case for a quick trial to meet constitutional edicts, document things and decide a fair punishment? Nor is guilt self-evident here. The verdict unseats Sharif for not declaring a salary he never took, terming it a receivable asset.
In cash accounting, which individuals and small firms use, assets only include those in hand. Accrual accounting, which large firms use, also includes receivables. The latter is more accurate but both are legal.
As an individual using cash accounting, Sharif was right in not disclosing receivables. But the court says he should have used the strict accrual accounting view of assets even if individuals don’t use it and the Election Commission of Pakistan gives no guidance. It is right if one takes the strictest view but this strict view has never been used before to bar MPs.
Many may ask if the bench took this strict view as it was upset at the more serious charges the joint investigation team levelled (which the court had to send to NAB legally) and was looking for anything small to bar Sharif. To avoid such charges it was best to send the case for a quick trial to other judges. They may have barred Sharif too, but not for life, which seems harsh for this minor and iffy issue. MNA Iftikhar Cheema hid not iffy receivables but physical assets and was barred in 2016 but not for life. Sharif should ask the court for a review given the lack of a fair trial and the legality of cash accounting. But any reprieve may be brief since he may get convicted in NAB cases soon.
So, I find the process flawed. The verdict is not outright wrong but unprecedented, borderline and given hastily by the apex court when it should have been left to the trial court. But borderline verdicts can expand the borders of accountability. Should we celebrate the new strict approach? We could if it is applied to others too, especially Zardari, Altaf Husain and Jehangir Tareen, and the court ensures the autonomy of NAB and the Federal Investigation Agency. But any indecision after Sharif’s case would be seen as selective accountability.
There is a larger issue here. By delinking disqualification from serious crimes and linking it to a minor issue, there could be challenges for relatively honest persons like Imran who may have erred on a minor issue too.
But it has allowed corrupt persons like Sharif to claim bias for being barred for a minor act. It is better to quash this strict verdict and precedent in review.
The logic for the court’s unusual inquiry against Sharif was executive agencies’ fear of trying the powerful. But this logic applies well to another case which executive agencies and even prime ministers fear pursuing: Musharraf’s case. Given civ-mil imbalances, the court must itself fast-track it. His guilt is self-evident. So can he be convicted sans trial? As a true believer in the rule of law, I oppose even that. But his trial should end soon.
Nawaz Sharif should be punished for his crimes. His NAB cases present an opportunity to do so. But verdicts like this one only backfire.
However, for many educated people, all this is irrelevant. A lack of regard for the rule of law plagues not only our elites but vast sections of our educated middle class too which support coups, military courts and iffy verdicts.
Source: dawn.com/news/1348849/a-harsh-verdict
-----
Justice in Times Of Civil-Military Conflict
By Munir Ahmed
01-Aug-17
The disqualification of (former) Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on the basis of an undeclared salary that he never received is disappointing to say the least. Political analysts, constitutional experts and well-respected lawyers count the Panama Papers verdict among ‘flimsy’ and ‘lousy’ decisions in the country’s judicial history. If the same precedent were applied to every Parliamentarian, no one would turn out to be ‘truthful’ and ‘reliable’ under the Articles 62 and 63 of the Pakistan’s Constitution.
In my previous op-ed pieces, I had expressed concerns over the conduct of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) and the process of its investigation. I believed that deliberate efforts were being made to send the former Prime Minister packing by hook or by crook. Last Tuesday, I had written, “Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif knows that he has to go.” It was not just a wild guess from statements and body language of different leaders of the ruling party and other stakeholders. Undoubtedly, it was evident from day one based on the JIT’s conduct.
Ever since the announcement of the decision, most analysts have termed it as a result of civil-military conflict. Notwithstanding the facts that Nawaz Sharif has been known as an ‘Army friendly’ politician, he has suffered the most from conflicts with the military. It has been obvious from the situation and from statements of the former Prime Minister and his cabinet and the ISPR that under his command the executive and the Army were not on the same page.
An impartial analysis of the situation would enable us to exactly determine who had been encroaching upon the mandate of whom. But what remains certain is that no one seems to be thinking about strengthening democratic institutions in Pakistan. Whether it’s internal elements and forces or their external partners, everyone has wanted their hegemonic designs to rule over the will and the mandate of the people of Pakistan. A politically- and economically- weak country that shall always beg the World Bank and the IMF and look forward to US support suits them.
General Ziaul Haq’s martial law had culminated in two major disasters. Firstly, the judicial murder of Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto who was not only the blunt and bold voice of Muslim countries but also the strongest voice of Asia against hegemonic strategies of the US and the United Nations. So, it was necessary to eliminate him by hook or by crook. The regime used the judiciary to do it, quite injudiciously. Secondly, General Zia quite shrewdly used the name of Islamic Jihad to fight America’s proxy war against the United States of Soviet Russia (USSR). It had been disastrous for the land and the people of the country that is still facing the consequences — the Taliban, black-dollars, poppy trafficking and the Kalashnikov culture.
It is obvious from the situation and from statements by the former Prime Minister and his cabinet and the ISPR that under Sharif’s command — the executive and the Army were not on the same page
Why it was necessary to topple the Pakistan’s democratic government in 1999? Was it only an outcome of a conflict between the Prime Minister and the Army Chief or was it part of a larger plot connected to the 9/11 incident and the subsequent attack on Afghanistan. After all, the US and its NATO allies would have needed a government in Pakistani likely to bow down to their ‘request’ for assistance. General Musharraf, then Pakistan’s Army chief and the chief executive, supported the US strategic objectives wholeheartedly almost 10 years. Regarding Nawaz Sharif, we should remember that the US had had a bitter experience with him during his second term as elected prime minister. Sharif had not bowed down to the US ‘request’ when he proceeded with nuclear tests in response to India’s nuclear tests.
What is the civil-military conflict now? Does the matter concern only corruption cases against the former prime minister and his family? If yes, then why couldn’t the judicial process come to a justifiable organic conclusion? Why did the Supreme Court judges have to take resort to the matter of unwithdrawn salary to send Sharif packing? Has the judiciary once again been used, intentionally or unintentionally, to punish the democratically-elected PM for not safeguarding strategic and economic interests of the US or for giving his consent and support to the CPEC projects and other economic growth initiatives in the country? Or, is Sharif’s ouster linked to his sovereign strategic and moral support to countries that do not fall in the strategic framework of hegemonic global powers?
Corruption, no doubt, is a deep-rooted menace in our society and it should be uprooted at any cost. Nevertheless, accountability should be for all corrupt politicians, bureaucrats, army officers, business tycoons, mafia dons and media persons. Corruption cases should not be politically or strategically motivated, infatuated or influenced.
Source: dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/01-Aug-17/justice-in-times-of-civil-military-conflict
----
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/pakistan-press/since-afghan-taliban-were-honest/d/112037