The Issue Is Democracy By I.A. Rehman: New Age Islam's Selection, 03 August 2017
New Age Islam Edit Bureau
03 August 2017
• The Issue Is Democracy
By I.A. Rehman
• Afghan Tragedy — Two Very Bad Choices
By Harlan Ullman
• Riding the Green Line
By Chris Cork
• Power Struggle at Constitution Avenue
By Babar Ayaz
• Shehbaz Sharif’s ‘Dynastic’ Nomination
By Zulfiquar Rao
• Shameless Evasion
By Farhan Bokhari
• Uncertainty After Panama
By Shahid Mehmood
• Net Security
By Bina Shah
• Prime Minister of Twitter
By Adam Weinstein
Compiled By New Age Islam Edit Bureau
----
The Issue Is Democracy
By I.A. Rehman
August 03, 2017
WHENEVER an abnormal change in Pakistan’s political superstructure has taken place, mostly in the form of coups against elected governments, the charge sheet against the deposed politician(s) has included some derogatory remarks about the system in vogue. The ouster of Nawaz Sharif from the prime ministership through a judicial order also will give rise to some criticism of the parliamentary democracy that allows for the kind of wrongdoings the prime minister was accused of.
The criticism of the system has, however, been quite sketchy, Ghulam Mohammad justified the sacking of the Constituent Assembly on the grounds of its failure to draft a constitution, which was incorrect. While replacing an elected government with martial law, Iskander Mirza not only abused politicians, he also denounced as unworkable the 1956 Constitution that he had sworn to uphold. Gen Ayub Khan too rejected Western democracy while condemning politicians because, firstly, democracy could not be cultivated in Pakistan’s climate and, secondly, it did not suit the genius of the people. Even such outlandish theorising was not challenged because many people were waiting to eat out of the dictator’s palm.
The man who went after the parliamentary system with a vengeance was Gen Ziaul Haq. In the beginning, he found little wrong with the 1973 Constitution except for the need to insert a few Islamic provisions, which he continued doing during the 1979-84 period. Then he noted an imbalance between the powers of the president and the prime minister and corrected it by increasing his own powers, including the acquisition of the power to sack elected governments under Article 58-2(b). Finally, he came out in favour of the presidential form of government. Unfortunately, even the Shura committee on reforms did not agree with him. That the system became presidential without being christened so was beside the point.
No system can realise its potential if it is as frequently disrupted as has happened in Pakistan.
In the course of his campaign, Gen Zia relied for a short while on a diary of the Quaid-i-Azam in which the latter was reported to have favoured the presidential system. This did not help him because between 1938 and 1940 the Quaid was rejecting any form of representative government for India as it would turn Muslims into a permanent minority. This was in continuation of the Indian Muslims’ reservations about democracy, from Sir Syed Ahmed Khan downwards. Thus, the Quaid’s observations relating mostly to the Indian context could not be applied in Pakistan.
Besides, Zia did not come to the Quaid with clean hands. He rejected Jinnah’s ideal of excluding religion from politics, his pledge of equal citizenship for non-Muslims, and his affirmation of the sovereignty of parliament; Zia feigned ignorance of the Quaid’s declaration that the Constitution would be made by the representatives of the people (except that Pakistan would be a people’s democracy). For such a person to seek the Quaid’s help, only to promote a presidential system, demanded extraordinary proficiency in dissimulation that Zia alone was capable of.
The case in favour of the parliamentary form is quite simple. It is the system ordinary citizens have become familiar with through more than a century of usage. It is based on the principle of the diffusion of power and transparent decisions, which is preferable to the concentration of power in a single person’s hands and secret rule. Further, elected representatives are accountable to the electorate to a greater degree than in other systems. This is fundamentally important in a federation as a concentration of power in the hands of the president can spell disaster. True, the performance of parliamentary democracy has not matched its promise, but no system, parliamentary or presidential, can realise its potential if it is as frequently disrupted as has happened in Pakistan.
Advocates of the presidential system claim that it is more effective but so is dictatorship; effectiveness does not always mean efficiency or public good. The argument that the presidential system allows the employment of experts to run the administration instead of less qualified ministers in the parliamentary form is based on a misconception. Governance comprises two parts — making the right choices to meet the demands of the people (and this can only be done by people’s representatives), while for the other part, namely, proper realisation of popularly chosen objectives, experts can be hired under any system.
The most decisive argument against the presidential system is that it has already been tested and found unsuitable. Powerful presidents of Pakistan, from Iskander Mirza to Zia and Pervez Musharraf, have done more harm to Pakistan than all the much-maligned leaders of the parliamentary system put together.
What is ignored in the debate on the presidential vs the parliamentary form of government is the fact that both will have difficulty in surviving in Pakistan because, to the extent they are democratic in character, they are not in accord with the culture of the rulers or the ruled. Democracy cannot flourish in a country that permits belief-based discrimination, where women suffer patriarchy at its worst, where pseudo-religious practices are treated as divinely ordained, where feudal norms dominate and land reform is forbidden by law (and the Supreme Court cannot decide the challenge to this gross injustice for years), and where civilian authority holds power at the pleasure of the military. Because of these factors, no attempt to improve the system — through controlled democracy, the induction of technocrats in parliament, restricting parliament’s membership to graduates, and emphasis on the bogey of morality — has been fruitful. The main charge against all the governments that we have had is that they failed to remove the boulders lying across the path to a democratic dispensation.
The problem is that democracy cannot be abandoned, for to be ruled by elected representatives is a basic human right. And the people of Pakistan have confirmed their allegiance to democracy by sweeping away dictatorships every few years. Respect for that will of the people is the only issue in Pakistan.
Source: dawn.com/news/1349254/the-issue-is-democracy
---
Afghan Tragedy — Two Very Bad Choices
By Harlan Ullman
03-Aug-17
The Trump administration reportedly is in the throes of concocting a ‘new’ strategy for Afghanistan. No White House wants to lose a war especially one that has its provenance in 1980 with the decision to arm the Afghan Mujahedeen against the invading Soviet army and in 2001 with the US invasion into Afghanistan to punish al Qaeda for the attacks of September 11th. The war is now in its sixteenth year with no end in sight.
About this war, Secretary of Defence Jim Mattis bluntly observed: “we are not winning.” Nine years earlier in January 2008, another Marine four star general and former NATO military commander James Jones signed out a report for the Atlantic Council (in which I participated) that began “Make no mistake: NATO is losing in Afghanistan.” The reaction was so intense that the sentence was softened to read, “The West is not winning.”
Why is the diagnosis today as stark as it was nearly a decade ago? The answer in part explains the tragedy engulfing Afghanistan. In simplest terms, no feasible solution to the conditions in Afghanistan ever existed beyond stationing several hundreds of thousands of troops for an indefinite period to ‘pacify’ the country. And history showed that this option never worked. Nor has convincing or coercing Pakistan to alter its policies towards Afghanistan and the Taliban succeeded.
Pashtunwala, that is the Pashtun creed that stresses honour, hospitality and revenge, and the diverse ethnic divisions along with the de-centralisation of power and authority away from Kabul were never conducive to any regime imposed by outside forces. With corruption a way of life and essential to basic societal functions including the conduct of business, Western culture and politics were anathema to Afghans regardless of ethnicity. But the British, Russians, Soviets and today America and NATO failed to understand or ignored that Afghanistan was a graveyard of empires.
The first of the current strategic blunders was George W. Bush’s shift of aims from capturing or killing Osama bin Laden in 2001 to what was euphemistically called ‘nation building.’ The central idea was that by modernising Afghanistan, Afghans would be better able to make the country safer, more secure and more stable. A constitution was written as the American Founding Fathers rather than Afghans would have preferred. The noble goal of educating women became vital to this mission.
Unfortunately, a very diverse Afghan society was not prepared to accept westernization. Selecting Hamid Karzai as the first president ensured a dysfunctional government would follow in which corruption flourished. And isolating Iran as part of any solution was foolhardy.
President Barack Obama’s ‘surge’ of military forces in 2009 yielded only a temporary respite. But a whole of government beyond over reliance on military action was desperately needed if there were any chance of ending the conflict successfully. Ashraf Ghani, a western educated economist, ascended to a presidency crippled by a political negotiation that made his Tajik rival and adversary Dr Abdullah Abdulla a co-CEO, a situation that was untenable.
With corruption a way of life and essential to basic societal functions, including the conduct of business, Western culture and politics were anathema to Afghans regardless of ethnicity
Former Vice President Joe Biden’s much earlier recommendation of shifting to a counter-terrorist strategy and reducing the size of the western commitment might have worked. But Barack Obama made Afghanistan “the good war” and instead reinforced the Bush strategy with the surge of 30,000 forces. Today only two choices exist. And both are not good.
Cutting and running which is how the US vacated Vietnam in 1975 were and are politically unacceptable. Hence, the US can persist with the current commitment perhaps augmented with a few thousand more troops for, possibly, many more decades. There is precedence: American forces are still deployed in Germany and Japan seven decades after World War-II with a profound exception. Both states were and are at peace.
Second, the US and its allies can adopt a variant of the Biden strategy, namely a small presence designed to contain the terrorist threat and resurgence of al Qaeda or the growth of the Islamic State. This is not a short-term either. But it would be conducted with far fewer forces and with minimum emphasis on nation building. Training of Afghan security and police forces would continue possibly conducted by civilian contractors to lessen the military profile.
Neither of these choices is appealing and indeed has enormous flaws and risks. Tragically, after sixteen years of committing substantial treasure in blood and money — possibly in excess of a trillion dollars — with no end in sight to make Afghanistan safer and more secure, the alternative ranges from bad to worse.
Source: dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/03-Aug-17/afghan-tragedy-two-very-bad-choices
----
Riding the Green Line
By Chris Cork
August 3, 2017
Stumbling through the ruins of the demolished Bahawalpur station in the small hours of the morning with kids, luggage and the Missus is not an activity for those of an irritable disposition. Then waiting for an hour and 20 minutes beyond the scheduled time for a train that was allegedly ‘always on time’ further raised the possibility of a story headlined ‘Gora runs amok with axe on railway station’ — and then there it was, the fabled Green Line, and it really was rather good.
Pakistan Rail and I have something of a love-hate relationship. I love travelling Parlour Class in a retro bubble that takes me back to childhood and British Rail — and hate the often slovenly service, the filthy toilets and the virtually universal absence of anything like up-to-date information as to when the next museum-piece engine and coaches might approach the platform where I have been waiting since Tutankhamun was a mere stripling.
There had been a couple of previous attempts to get a Green Line ticket that had failed because of ‘fully booked’ ‘Sir…must book a week ahead.’ So we booked 10 days ahead — successfully — and wandered into the world of PakRail 2.0.
Things got off to a promising start with a snap inspection of the loo. It was…errr…clean. I’ll just repeat that shall I? Clean. And this on a train that has started in Pindi hours before. Strike one for PakRail. There was good-ish news when we found our compartment. It was also clean. Ish. The kids were quickly installed on the upper bunk and asleep, whilst the adults attempted to make themselves comfortable on the freshly-hewn granite blocks that were masquerading as ‘comfort’ closer to the floor. Business class? Hmmm…
Several hours later and aching in every part of the body that had contact with the sleeping surface; it was time for brekkers and a distinctly underwhelming omelette that had the taste and consistency of a robust sheet of brown paper. On the other hand, the tea was terrific. Fast broken, it was time for the first of several visits by a couple of cleaners who were polite to the point of us wondering if PakRail had opened a Charm School for its employees. Every speck of litter which rained down from the eyrie where the kids were consuming more sweeties than was good for them was picked up. Surfaces wiped. Even the shoes on the floor got lined up to perfection. Big tick to PakRail.
Lunch was a chicken karahi that was delicious, the toilets remained impeccable throughout the 11-and-a-half hour journey from Bahawalpur and a decent cuppa chai appeared with comforting regularity. It was cheaper and quicker (by four hours) than the bus and if I could have got the Wi-Fi to work it would have got top marks. The kids loved it, especially when they discovered that a family was bringing their white cat on a lead with them. Not something you see every day. Cats on leads on trains. But hey…
The railways get a rough ride from the press in Pakistan and often deservedly so. Accidents are far too common, much of the infrastructure has changed little since the colonial era (…but I was oh-so-sad to see the wonderful Victorian station at Bahawalpur in ruins, it could so easily have been developed as a heritage attraction as well as a station but I digress) and it is clearly massively underfunded.
Recent years have seen the middle-class travel market hovered up by the long-range buses that have got increasingly sophisticated and comfortable and run on time. Business is booming. Railway has been slow to exploit this niche, but the introduction of Business Class trains running through Lahore has proved the model. It is a bit of a stretch to call the Green Line ‘business class’ — perhaps as here better written in lower case, but it is a step up and in the right direction though I doubt it will ever replace Parlour Class in my own affections. Staff clearly have customer awareness ingrained, and the service deserved the tips that we gave as we disembarked. Recommended for the stoic traveller happy to nap on concrete surfaces and children who like a bit of an adventure. Tootle-pip!
Source: tribune.com.pk/story/1472715/riding-green-line/
-----
Power Struggle at Constitution Avenue
By Babar Ayaz
03-Aug-17
The judgment of the Supreme Court was both expected and unexpected. The unexpected feature of the judgment was indeed the disqualification of the Prime Minister under Article 62(f) on a small intentional or inadvertent mistake of not declaring the receivable salary (10,000 Dirham) at the time of filing the nomination form with the Election Commission. Under the statutory tax laws, if a person is maintaining the cash accounting system then receivable cannot be considered as asset. But Supreme Court is all powerful to give these laws new interpretations and one cannot question the wisdom of the learned judges.
Sharif and his family should have been tried for the Panama Leaks money laundering case by the lower trial court so that they had a fair chance of going to the superior courts to appeal if the verdict was against them. That is what is called the right of fair trial. Prima facie it seems that the money sent by Sharif’s father to buy a steel mill in Dubai was not through a proper banking channel which is why they could not provide the first link of the chain. It is also possible that the money was transferred in the 80s through the Foreign Exchange Bearer Certificates (FEBCs) the instrument introduced by Dr Mahbubul Huq to ease the strict foreign exchange control laws that prevailed in the 80s.
It is not only the issue of jurisprudence in such cases. Interpretations have been subjective whether the issue is legal or attached to the religious interpretation of the Holy Quran or the tradition. Just to refresh your memory take a snapshot of the Islamic jurisprudence evolution. We have five major ‘Fiqahs’ that rule the Islamic jurisprudence and are accepted by the Muslims of the world.
One Quran and a number of traditions (Sharia) and Ahadith, have been interpreted by Imam Abu Hanifah (80-150 AH), Imam Malik bin Aas (94-179 AH), Imam Ash Shafi (150-204 AH), Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (164-204 AH) and Imam Jafar Sadiq (80-148 AH). Although some of them had teacher-pupil relations, they disagreed with each other. (The schism created by these different interpretations has divided the Muslims into a number of sects, who at times settle their ideological scores violently. But to be fair with Islam this is what happened to all religions and even scientific, social and political ideologies with the passage of time). The rulers took full advantage of this disagreement.
For instance in the case of the firebrand Sufi Mansur al-Hallaj “(t)he two judges called upon to consider the case had both found the opinion itself to be heretical, but had disagreed over the legal consequences that flowed from Al-Hallaj’s ownership of the document. One of them, a Hanafite, had ruled that the mystic could escape punishment by disowning any belief in the heresy. But the second, a Malikite had found him to be incapable of sincere repentance (a la’ Rushdie apology) and liable to execution.” (1) The Caliph al-Muqtadir’s Wazir used the Malikite interpretation thus the man who became the symbol of speaking truth in our religious folk lore was done with.
Similar problem exists with our Constitution which gives too much space to the interpreters of this written document which is almost 45 years old. But in the case of religious tradition the first interpretation came almost 100 years after the oral scriptural and traditional history. This is the time when the constitution exists as a fresh and dynamic document as it would be seen when amendments of fundamental natures were made. And yet even the most clearly written clauses are being called to interpretation by the courts, but so far the cunning and clever government has not fallen in that trap.
General Zia-ul-Haq, who considered himself a kind of religious guardian of the country, added sombe disputable clauses to Articles 62 and 63 of the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan
In modern times we have seen how clergy out-witted all sections of the society which took part in the revolution of democratic Iran in 1979. The Iranian Constitution provides for an institution of the “Religious Guardianship (Velayat Faqiye).” This “Guardianship of the Just Man of Religious Law (Fiqiyeh-e-Adl) is on “the basis of the continuous Guardianship and leadership (Imamate) ...under all conditions...” According to my limited knowledge, there is no precedent of such an institution in the Muslim states’ history.
What reminds me of this institution is the recent decision of the Supreme Court disqualifying the Prime Minister. It has referred to some clauses of the Constitution which has raised alarm-bells. General Ziaul Haq, who considered himself a kind of religious guardian of the country, added some disputable clauses to Articles 62 and 63 of the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan.
Until the judgment of the honourable Supreme Court, these clauses of the Constitution had remained dormant. Nobody had sought disqualification of any member of the parliament, the president and the prime minister by invoking these clauses.
The PML-N and PPP should now be regretting that they did not strike down Article 62 and 63 of the Constitution when they were working on the 18th Amendment. I had raised this issue with some of the members of Parliament at that time but they said that religious parties are not willing to budge on this issue.
The liberal parties should get together with PML-N in the parliament to flush out Articles 62 and 63 from the Constitution. They should remember that the process which had started with PML-N’s Prime Minister will not stop and will disqualify their leadership also. It’s time to reflect on this seriously instead of celebrating Nawaz Sharif’s ouster.
Source: dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/03-Aug-17/power-struggle-at-constitution-avenue
----
Shehbaz Sharif’s ‘Dynastic’ Nomination
By Zulfiquar Rao
03-Aug-17
Last week when the Supreme Court disqualified Nawaz Sharif from holding any public office, the ruling party PML-N nominated premier’s brother and Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif as his successor. However, as Shahbaz Sharif is yet to be elected to National Assembly, another party man Shahid Khaqan Abbasi will serve as interim PM. Many in the public and media criticised it as perpetuation of dynastic politics. It was no less ironic to see even those who are third and fourth generation of their respective families in parliament condemning this decision.
Political dynasties generally draw a disdain from the public globally yet people keep voting the members of these dynasties into public offices. And it hardly matters if the electorates are from the US where they have kept electing scions of the Adams, Kennedys, Roosevelts, Bushes and Clintons, or from India where Nehru family has wielded unmatched sway over voters’ choice for decades. In Pakistan, while the Bhuttos have enjoyed this dynastic status at national level, and Sharifs have risen to the same status in the last 30 years, both families’ political founders acquired charismatic image through their own credentials although both grew under the auspices of two different military regimes. It’s no coincidence that these two families had to grow under military regimes as military has ruled this country for 33 years.
In Pakistan, where the military has acquired incomparably greater influence and power, no ordinary civilian Prime Minister can stand the pressure and challenges of competing civil-military relations
Particularly in Pakistan, where its turbulent political experience and history have hardly allowed the growth of political parties and democratic institutions, dynasties were natural to have arisen. We know what existed before the British occupation of the Indo-Pak subcontinent was just rule of hereditary Rajas and Maharajas under Mughal or Delhi Sultanate. So it was understandable that people at grassroots have continued voting for those who were historically identified as having means to cultivate relations and proximity with central powers. Certainly, we don’t see the ilk of Makhdooms, Lagharis, Syeds, Rajputs, Khataks, Afridis repeatedly elected to national and provincial assemblies and governments for no other reason than their dynastic influence and acumen in power politics.
What we perhaps err when we get impatient with the very existence of political dynasties and families is that we tend to overlook the sociological triggers to political evolution. Electorates entrust their chosen candidate to represent them and govern over them on the basis of a complex criteria which might include ideology, previous performance, credible promise, and more importantly the candidate’s ability to challenge and successfully face the forces that voters see as adversaries. If the democratic process is allowed to evolve and continue uninterrupted, the influence of political dynasties will minimise. But it never disappears.
Paradoxically though, if it was not for political dynasties we would not have seen women entering powerful political offices be it Hilary Clinton, Mrs Bandaranayke, Indira Gandhi, Marine Le Pen, and our own Benazir Bhutto in addition so many who occupy the seats in all parliaments of the world. Imagine, what would be the probability of Benazir becoming the first Prime Minister of Pakistan if she weren’t from Bhuttos? The point is so long as succeeding members from a political family are delivering the goods and enjoy the trust of their electorates, disbanding them is anything but justice. In any way, not all scions of political families attract the trust of same electorates who may have supported their family members in past; Rahul Gandhi is case in point and so is Bilawal Bhutto, at least thus far.
In Pakistan where the institution of military has acquired incomparably greater influence and power, no ordinary civilian Prime Minister can stand the pressure and challenges of competing civil-military relation. Just look at the former prime ministers such as Raja Parvez Ashraf, Yousuf Raza Gilani, Zafarullah Jamali and Shoukat Aziz; did they stand any chance of winning the argument from as powerful an institution as Pakistan military? Zulfikar Bhutto, Benazir Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif so obviously did.
In his book What’s to Be Done Vladimir Lenin writes “workers, average people of the masses, are capable of displaying enormous energy and self-sacrifice in strikes and in street, battles with the police and the troops, and are capable (in fact, are alone capable) of determining the outcome of our entire movement, but the struggle against the political police requires special qualities; it requires professional revolutionaries”. In the absence of true revolutionaries with us, for the time being our best bet against political police is a powerful dynasty and Shahbaz Sharif’s choice makes sense.
Source; dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/03-Aug-17/shehbaz-sharifs-dynastic-nomination
----
Shameless Evasion
By Farhan Bokhari
August 03, 2017
THE last act of Pakistan’s finance minister Ishaq Dar in the closing days of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif’s regime was a telling one. Amid much fanfare, he oversaw the publication of yet another annual directory documenting taxes paid by members of parliament. And yet again, in the absence of evidence it would lead to any reform of Pakistan’s largely dysfunctional tax collection system, it appeared to be a largely meaningless exercise.
Four years after Sharif began his third tenure as prime minister amid promises of putting Pakistan on a path to bold reforms, and more than a year after the widely publicized Panama leaks case was initiated in the Supreme Court, Pakistan’s tax collection system remains as dilapidated as before.
The very fact that less than one per cent of Pakistan’s population pays income tax speaks volumes for the state of the tax collection system. However, even more importantly, it is a significant indicator of Pakistan’s poor economic governance, notwithstanding Dar’s repeated claims of having successfully overseen the completion of the last IMF loan programme.
This Is A Chance To Reform Pakistan’s Resource Base.
With some of Pakistan’s key economic indicators, notably the current account deficit and the trade deficit ballooning alarmingly in recent times, a return to another IMF loan programme looks inevitable. The question is not ‘if’ but ‘when’.
The one possible light at the end of the tunnel are the proceedings and the outcome of the Panama leaks case in the SC. Has a precedent been clearly set to begin putting Pakistan on the path to reforms and begin ending the widespread and shameless tax evasion that continues unabated? That question has emerged as more pertinent for the country’s future than ever before, with a ray of hope emerging from the prosecution of the former prime minister.
Unless bankrolled by manna from heaven, such as the once abundantly oil-fed Middle Eastern economies, it is difficult to name any prosperous, stable, modern-day economy that became a model of economic success without an efficient tax collection system. As for the argument by the former prime minister’s key supporters that the case against Sharif and his children was driven by his pursuit of CPEC, it seems hollow for two key reasons. First, the foundations of CPEC were laid by the Chinese years before Sharif’s 2013 electoral victory, underlining a long-term commitment to the future of Pakistan rather than to a single leader.
Second, with its associated debt of more than $50 billion, CPEC must be accompanied by a vigorous set of domestic reforms to generate Pakistan’s own resources to service and repay its debt. It is a key paradigm shift which appeared to be the missing element in a raft of infrastructure projects pursued under the Nawaz Sharif regime.
The blind pursuit of new initiatives without an accompanying assurance of enhancing the means to foot the bill has repeatedly prompted warnings from economic experts that it could lead to deterioration in Pakistan’s financial health.
While the odds are indeed formidable, the opportunity to begin reforming Pakistan’s resource base is also unprecedented. On the heels of a prime minister recently sent home after a detailed investigation of his family’s overseas wealth, a promising precedent has now been set for others to be held accountable for similar deeds.
The matter of the iqama or residence permit in one of the Middle Eastern countries has long been ignored and treated as a status symbol by Pakistan’s rich and powerful political and business families. The ability to maintain another full-time residence in countries, at a flying distance of just three to four hours, has allowed many of the wealthy elite to establish businesses and make investments through money funnelled illegally out of the country.
Across Pakistan, widespread evidence of these privileged individuals living well beyond their means is abundantly available. In recent years, under successive governments, officials from the Federal Board of Revenue have made it known that their ability to target large-scale tax evasion has improved considerably through tracing expenditures that are well beyond declared incomes. With that being the case, the fundamental issue that has repeatedly obstructed calls for sweeping and enduring tax reforms has been lack of intent.
Further delay in tackling this challenge will only come at the cost of Pakistan’s most vital national interests. However, more importantly, an unprecedented opportunity has arisen with the proceedings against the former prime minister, and it must be utilised immediately.
Undoubtedly, making this happen is much easier said than done. But Pakistan throughout its history has repeatedly missed out on pursuing opportunities to reform itself. While Sharif’s departure may have polarised Pakistan’s politics for some time to come, the upside of using that precedent to boldly crack down on tax evasion simply cannot be missed once again.
Source: dawn.com/news/1349261/shameless-evasion
-----
Uncertainty after Panama
By Shahid Mehmood
August 03, 2017
THE Panama verdict has raised a plethora of questions, most centring around legal nuances and technicalities. Some questions, however, are non-political in nature, and concern the possible fallout on Pakistan’s economy and its prospects for growth. Will our economy be able to sustain the growth momentum it has lately experienced? Will investments under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) be affected?
Considerable research has been carried out on these questions, which suggests that political events and economic growth are interconnected. The causation usually runs from the former to the latter.
In a seminal paper, Alberto Alesina et al studied the impact of political instability on economic growth in 113 countries, from the period of 1950-1982. They found that political instability, whether through constitutional or unconstitutional means, results in significant decline of economic growth. In an analysis of Pakistan’s financial market from 1999-2006, Ahmed Khalid found that political instability due to a domestic or international event tends to instigate increased volatility, which in turn has effects on domestic economy and financial markets.
Outside the realm of academia, Venezuela’s present predicament offers a vivid example of how political instability has led to its economic crisis and brought the country to the brink of collapse.
For a start, consider the uncertainty that may have arisen out of our present situation. A significant extent of it was avoided when the ruling party accepted the verdict. Had it not done so, confrontation between the executive and the judiciary would have wrought substantial uncertainty, and given rise to probable risks.
In the short term, the continuity of policies regarding CPEC is essential for maintaining macroeconomic growth.
Given that negative political fallouts tend to affect economic growth negatively due to the ambiguity they create, it would seem that the economy might not be significantly affected by this event. Any probable risks would be further attenuated due to the fact that the interim prime minister is from the same party, for it ensures the continuity of the policies under Nawaz Sharif’s government. This is good news overall, especially for the business environment.
Of late, the momentum generated by investments under CPEC have largely driven the improvement in Pakistan’s macroeconomic indicators. Policymakers are banking heavily on its success, not only to sustain this momentum but also to attract new investments in the economy. With Nawaz Sharif’s disqualification, a question mark has arisen over its continuation (especially the early harvest projects).
But much of the speculation has been quelled in light of the Chinese ambassador’s assurances of continuity irrespective of regime changes. Besides this assurance, there are good reasons to believe that the verdict will not affect ongoing work under the CPEC umbrella.
First, the Chinese side is largely taking care of financing requirements at this moment in time. Second, more than one Pakistani institution is involved in CPEC. Especially important is the role of the army, which has pledged its resolve to ensure CPEC’s completion at any cost. Above all, as stated above, CPEC is the cornerstone of the recent surge in our economy’s growth rate. Any politician or political party, regardless of affiliation, is highly unlikely to undermine this effort at the cost of economic growth.
Complementing CPEC are the investments bundled under the Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP), which witnessed a record budget outlay in the present fiscal year. Government-led investments (at both federal and provincial levels) have always been a significant presence in Pakistan’s economy and in efforts aimed at capital accumulation (ignoring issues like the productivity and efficiency of these investments).
If the budgeted PSDP expenditures do materialise, considerable investment would be infused in the economy; that could further boost the growth rate. Despite issues that the Federal Board of Revenue faces in revenue gathering for this purpose, it is likely that a considerable portion (if not all) of the PSDP funds will materialise given that FY2017-18 is also an election year, a time when public sector expenditures traditionally witness an increase.
Besides these major determinants, other factors are also unlikely to pose a significant challenge to the economy’s growth prospects in the short run. Reserves, although made up largely of borrowed money, may be enough to cater to short-term demands. The number of foreign firms that have come to Pakistan because of CPEC and our economic growth are not expected to wrap up their investments and operations. Public sector investment will pick up pace as the election nears.
Stock market swings will continue, however, since political instability is not the only determinant of its performance. And repayment pressure on accumulated debt will remain manageable, at least until the next year, when economic forecasts suggest they will become a problem. Ideally, policymakers should not fall prey to irrational exuberance over this small window, because factors like increasing circular debt and loss-making public-sector enterprises will pose problems even in the short term.
In conclusion, unless there is some major political upheaval the economy will likely sustain its momentum, with perhaps a few minor hiccups. This scenario though, is largely dependent upon the continuity of policies initiated under the former prime minister. But it is wise to be cognisant of the fact that the above analysis stands true only for the short run. More important for the economy is the long run, and policymakers should not be oblivious to the momentous challenges that Pakistan’s economy will face in the future.
These include the dangerously elevated current account deficits (which recently hit a historic high), circular debt, persistent fiscal deficits, decline in exchange earning avenues (exports, remittances and FDI), total accumulated debt, maintaining a healthy level of FX reserves, hefty repayments on loans (including those on CPEC), rising inequality, creation of employment opportunities, etc.
As a leading economist once remarked, the fruits of political stability depend on the extent to which it translates into good governance. In the long run, to sustain Pakistan’s growth momentum, the primary goal must be good governance.
Source: dawn.com/news/1349258/uncertainty-after-panama
-----
Net Security
By Bina Shah
August 03, 2017
LAST year, Pakistani law student Khadija Siddiqui was stabbed 23 times by a classmate named Shah Hussain, leaving her lying on the road in a pool of her own blood. But Hussain didn’t just step up out of nowhere to try and kill Siddiqui. They’d been friends in law school until Hussain became “coercive” against Siddiqui. She cut off all communication between them, but he hacked her social media accounts and continued to harass her until the day he drew up alongside her car, wearing a motorcycle helmet and armed with a knife.
Siddiqui’s case illustrates that sometimes online violence against women precedes real physical violence. If the government takes an extremely strong line against online violence committed by men against women, boys against girls, the perpetrators can be stopped before their online violence escalates into actual physical assault, rape or murder.
Unfortunately the relative safety and anonymity that women experienced online in the first years of social media has been replaced by an unsafe online environment for women the world over. But what does online harassment and violence against women look like? It can take many insidious forms: being blackmailed with personal photos or information, or receiving unsolicited messages and repeated requests for contact, which often become more and more abusive and violent in nature when ignored.
What Does Online Violence Against Women Look Like?
Women have their social media accounts hacked and used to upload obscene images or messages. Their phone numbers or email addresses are shared online without their consent. They are stalked by harassers who even reach out to their friends and family. They are doxxed, which means their addresses and other personal identification information is leaked online. Their pictures are photoshopped and shared without their consent. They may be threatened with sexual and physical violence. All of this has an overwhelming effect on the mental health of a victim, and may result in her becoming traumatised or even suicidal.
At this point, it’s important to address the Pakistani myth surrounding cases of online harassment and violence against women: people mistakenly believe that this can be eliminated by women simply not going online or not sharing their photos. I won’t attempt to insult my readers’ intelligence by attempting to explain why these are unrealistic expectations in 2017.
Pakistan’s Digital Rights Foundation (DRF), an NGO committed to digital privacy and women’s online safety, started a project called Hamara Internet in 2014. This programme trained 1,800 female university students all over Pakistan on cyber harassment and digital security. The online part of the project urged women to tell their stories of online harassment and record incidences on an eMap to see where it was occurring. And it was happening in all four provinces, to Pakistani women from all walks of life.
In 2016 DRF created a gender-sensitive, confidential safe space for women: a cyber harassment helpline, the first of its kind in Pakistan. In their recently released report, they say they’ve received about 80 calls a month, mostly from women, talking about themselves or inquiring “on behalf of a friend” or relative.
The helpline engaged counsellors, psychological and legal advisors online to deal with the fallout of these crimes. But they were limited in what they could do to help, beyond offering advice and recording data. They informed callers about the FIA’s National Response Centres for Cybercrime (NR3Cs), the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, and the mechanisms by which they could go to the authorities and register their complaints. But the final decision to go to the authorities always rested with the callers, never the helpline staff.
Unfortunately the NR3Cs are located in the main cities, so callers from outside those cities have limited access to the centres. The FIA requires a harassment victim to present herself in person at the office to register the case, submit personal photographs and CNIC information, and come back regularly at various points in the investigation. These are two major factors that discourage victims from reporting these crimes.
In order to succeed, the NR3Cs need more resources, clear and consistent standard operating practices, and better case tracking and management systems. Most of all, the FIA must devote more resources to making the NR3Cs accessible to all women across Pakistan, with gender sensitivity training and psychological support available to those who avail of its help. And it must ensure that its services are private, confidential and safe.
Pakistan’s economic future will be shaped in part by the internet, and the young women who are being trained to join the workforce. Yet these women’s talent and potential is being blighted with online violence that can quickly and easily spill over into real life. It is Pakistan’s moral obligation to ensure the safety of women and girls as they conduct their daily lives, both professional and personal, online and offline.
Source: dawn.com/news/1349263/net-security
-----
Prime Minister of Twitter
By Adam Weinstein
03-Aug-17
Social media has shaped politics around the world and its influence is growing. Google executive Wael Ghonim used a Facebook group to help spark the Egyptian Revolution in 2011. President Trump told Fox News that “maybe I wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t for Twitter.” But is social media a threat to Pakistan’s revolving door politicians, dynastic political parties, and their devoted patrons? Maybe.
Imran Khan’s entry into politics has altered Pakistan’s political discourse. His potent message of economic independence, anti-corruption, and standing up to the US has proven popular. After the US raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound, Imran Khan asserted that “the biggest lesson to learn is that Pakistan should stand on its own feet, say no to aid and be a sovereign country.” On June 30, 2017 he tweeted the cover of a new book by Raymond Davis, the CIA agent who was permitted to leave Pakistan after killing two individuals in an altercation, and urged Pakistanis to read it so they could understand why Pakistan is “treated with so little respect internationally.”
As an outsider Imran Khan has always benefited when press freedoms are liberalised. In a 2008 interview at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a DC think tank, he described a “silent revolution in Pakistan” that was led by independent television channels. He added that current-affairs programs were more popular than soap operas in Pakistan and General Pervez Musharraf permitted such programs to exist early in his tenure as prime minister until they ceased to benefit him. This led Musharraf to order Geo and ARY One World off the air in 2007 and PML-N has attempted its own curtailments via the passage of the Pakistan Electronic Crimes Act, 2016. But the beauty of social media is that it’s a voluminous forum to monitor and even more difficult to censor.
Already known for his ability to shut down cities with rallies, Imran Khan’s virtual megaphone is enviable. PTI’s Twitter account recently celebrated reaching three million followers compared to PPP (excluding@BilawalHouseKhi) and PML-N which combined have 623,000 followers. Meanwhile Imran Khan’s personal Twitter account has 5.92 million followers and grew by 300,000 last month. Bilawal Bhutto Zardari and Maryam Nawaz Sharif have a larger online presence than their parties with 2.09 million and 3.57 million followers respectively.
Social media sites serve as an open forum for political aspirants in Pakistan but still have a limited reach. Despite the Supreme Court’s recent decision to disqualify Nawaz Sharif as prime minister, the PML-N need not be too concerned about losing its constituents in rural Punjab just because of PTI’s effective social media campaign. PML-N’s positioning of Shahbaz Sharif to eventually take the reins from Shahid Khaqan Abbasi demonstrates its confidence. The same holds true for the PPP in Sindh and among liberals. Political discussion is still dominated by the print media, talk shows, and conversation.
Cracks are beginning to form in Pakistan’s political dynasties. If parties do not adjust then the age of mass communication and the Internet’s ability to give outsiders a voice will not be kind to them
Going into the US presidential election many commentators discounted Trump’s Twitter tactics because in 2016 only 21 percent of American adults were active on the website with a slant towards the young, educated, and middle-class, all of whom were likely Hillary Clinton supporters. But what analysts missed was that Trump’s tweets were shared on websites like Facebook as memes and screenshots where 79 percent of online American adults have a profile. The power of social media should not be underestimated in a country like Pakistan where cell phone and internet use is growing exponentially.
Even the casual observer of the recent US election and current Pakistan election season cannot help but see similarities. Online critics of PTI portray its adherents as being quintessential ‘burgers.’ The Twitterati of the traditional parties castigate Imran Khan fans as privileged idealists bearing resemblance to the Clinton supporters who labelled online defenders of Bernie Sanders as misogynistic hipsterfied internet trolls or “Bernie Bros.” Imran Khan faces his own charges of misogyny and Ayesha Gulalai is his latest high profile accuser. PTI supporters are depicted as Taliban apologists and haters of all things progressive, most notably Malala. PPP members in particular make this charge and it’s reminiscent to the way Democrats attacked Trump’s followers as closet racists, Christian fundamentalists, and overall deplorables. But when Imran Khan is met with disdain and mockery this only amplifies his anti-elitist image.
Donald Trump demonstrated to the world that a political outsider with celebrity status, a populist message, and a strong social media presence is a force to contend with. But ultimately the goal of any politician is to be elected and so Imran Khan cannot rely on his outsider status forever. His message of economic independence means nothing without a tangible policy. His calls for law and order will be questioned when Arif Khan, alleged murderer of Mashal Khan, left Pakistan on PTI’s watch. And his aspirations for unity will be tested when he embraces such polarizing figures as Irfanullah Marwat or Mithu Mian. Most risky is his self-cultivated image of unimpeachable honesty because unlike other figures a relatively minor scandal could upend his campaign. His message may be more sustainable as an outside critic than leader of Pakistan and if he is elected who is to say that PTI will not become a ‘PTI-IK’ that permanently revolves around one charismatic figure.
Many factors affect elections and we should not exaggerate the significance of what transpires online. It is quite possible that a 28-year-old with the right name and party behind him could win an election. Far from defeated the Sharifs may yet rise again. Imran Khan may never be elected or when elected become everything he criticizes while falling prey to Articles 62 and 63 himself. But cracks are beginning to form in Pakistan’s political dynasties and if parties do not adjust then the age of mass communication and internet’s ability to give outsiders a voice will not be kind to them.
Source: dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/03-Aug-17/prime-minister-of-twitter
----
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/pakistan-press/the-issue-democracy-ia-rehman/d/112065