Predecessor used ‘Dawn leaks’ to get extension, claims Gen Bajwa

Monitoring Desk Published March 30, 2023 Updated about 2 hours ago 0

FORMER army chief retired Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa has reportedly said that there was nothing credible
in the furore created over a Dawn story published in 2016, claiming that the issue was hyped up by his
predecessor in a bid to secure an extension from then-prime minister Nawaz Sharif.

The claim surfaced in the second part of the former army chief’s interview with journalist Shahid Maitla,
published on Wednesday by the news website Pakistan24.tv.

In his latest article, the journalist claims the former army chief rejected the impression that the ‘Dawn
leaks’ saga, as it came to be known, posed any threat to national security.

The Dawn story in question contained an account of a meeting between the country’s civilian and
military leadership, where the government told the brass that it should act against militants or the
country would have to face international isolation.

In the wake of its publication, civil and military officials had called the story ‘fabricated and concocted’
and a committee headed by a retired judge and consisting of members of the country’s intelligence
agencies, was formed to inquire into the matter.

“In fact there was nothing in the Dawn leaks,” Mr Maitla quoted the former army chief as saying in
response to a question.

“But wherever I would meet them, junior officers would ask me about [the issue]. I then talked to
Chaudary Nisar [then-interior minister] and Ishaq Dar [then-finance minister] and suggested that they
refer the cases of journalists [allegedly involved in the Dawn leaks affair] to CPNE because I didn’t want
to stir that hornet’s nest. And then administrative action was decided against others. Nawaz Sharif
wasn’t convinced over Pervaiz Rasheed but finally he agreed. Then it was decided to sack Pervaiz
Rasheed and Tariq Fatemi.”

Gen Bajwa is also said to have referred to his conversation with Nawaz Sharif, when the former prime
minister told him about his predecessor Gen Raheel Sharif, who he said was insisting on a three-year
extension, along with former DG ISI Rizwan Akhtar.

“When I talked to Nawaz Sharif about Dawn leaks, he told me that whenever Gen Raheel Sharif and Gen
Rizwan Akhtar came to see him, they insisted for three-year extension of Gen. Raheel,” Gen. Bajwa was
quoted as saying in the interview.

“In front of Gen Raheel, Gen Rizwan was always insisted on a three-year extension for the army chief.
But in private, he only asked for a one-year extension because he saw himself as the next army chief
after Gen. Raheel.”

After the first part of the interview appeared last week, Gen Bajwa approached various senior journalists
and broadcasters, who relayed the former army chief’s claim wherein he denied giving any interview to
Mr Maitla.

Earlier, Gen Bajwa is said to have spoken privately to various senior journalists, many of whom
published accounts of their conversations with the ex-army chief without attracting any denials.
 Democracy in Pakistan: Of the elite, for the elite, by
the elite
Civilians and the military have taken turns to rule Pakistan, but the system, arguably, has
remained the same, ‘unscathed’ by democracy.
Touqir Hussain Published March 29, 2023  Updated about 20 hours ago

One of the most perplexing debates around is on the subject of democracy, where it is
easy to confuse concept with practice, form with substance and illusion with reality.

There is another problem. Countries at varying stages of democratic evolution are all
called a democracy, which adds to the confusion, as we, in our mind, expect all these
models to be equally responsive in meeting the needs of society. That makes us tolerate
and endure a system that is not quite democratic and may never become so.

In Pakistan, democracy remains both illusive and elusive. What we have is something
that looks like democracy, but does not work like one. Democracy is a dynamic, not
static, process but Pakistan’s “democracy” is stuck.

If any “good” has come out of the current crisis, it is hopefully the realisation that the
conventional wisdom that Pakistan’s problems are due to a lack of civilian supremacy, or
because the “democratic system” has faced repeated interruptions by the military rule,
or that elected governments have not been allowed to complete their full term may not
be quite true.

Has the current crisis — and the way politicians’ brazen preoccupation with the struggle
for power is ripping the country apart while it burns — left any doubt that the
“democracy” we have has been part of the problem, not the solution? In fact, it is this
very “democracy” that has provided legitimacy to bad governance, produced weak
governments opposed to reforms for fear of losing elections, and has kept recycling.
Above all, it has lacked substance.

Form and substance

True democracy has both form and substance. The form manifests itself in electoral
democracy, sustained by a process of free and fair elections, and peaceful and orderly
change of governments. But the form must embody good governance to empower
people, and it can do so only by resting on free and representative institutions,
constitutional liberalism or any other value-based system, strong rule of law, and a just
and equitable social order. That is the substance. Without substance, democracy
remains hollow. It has no soul.

The intelligentsia in Pakistan, especially the liberal/secularist segment, is most

passionate about the Western liberal model focusing on freedom of choice, free speech,
civil liberties, independent judiciary, and of course elections.
Much of this class lives emotionally disconnected from the rest of the population and
their harsh challenges of survival and means to cope with them. It feels that all you need
is elections, free media, independent judiciary, and the Constitution.

Voila! You have democracy — and it will take care of the nation’s problems, including
those of the poor.

Democracy and progress

The secular/liberal class as a whole, and Western-oriented sections of it in particular, are
right in seeing a causal connection between democracy and progress in advanced
industrialised countries. They are, therefore, justified in emulating a similar democratic
political system and having high expectations from it.

Where they are at fault is that they do not grasp the full picture. Most of them forget
that democracy, which ostensibly brought progress in the West, was more than a
political system. It was also a society’s organising idea, whose substance was equality of
opportunity, fairness, rule of law, accountability, safeguarding of basic human rights and
freedoms, gender equality and protection of minorities.

In sum, democracy’s core idea was humanism. And the whole objective of giving people
the right to choose who will govern them on their behalf was to ensure the
implementation of this very ideal.

Otherwise, what is the purpose of self governance? Given the chance to self govern,
would people like to bring themselves to grief with their own policies? Certainly this was
not the intent.

Unless a nation shows this fundamental understanding of democracy and takes steps to
put itself on the road to democracy, it will never get there. It will keep moving in circles
or going backwards.

The poor cannot ‘feed’ on democracy

For much of the liberal class in Pakistan, especially its more affluent stratum, the form is
the substance. It looks at democracy as simply black and white — there can be no
gradation.

The fact is that Pakistan is, and is not, democratic.

Pakistan’s “democracy” is advanced enough to satisfy the liberals’ love of liberty and
enjoyment of certain human freedoms, but regressed enough to be exploited by the
elite for their purposes at the expense of the people.

In her book, ‘Thieves of State’, Sarah Chayes focuses on corruption in Afghanistan. Sarah,

who spent a decade in Kandahar, concludes that the concerns of most people did not
have much to do with democracy. Pakistan is, of course, no Afghanistan but the book
has a message that applies here as well.

Democracy is no doubt the best form of government but go and ask the masses in
societies that are grappling with serious state and nation-building challenges what is
most important in their lives. What is important for them, they will tell you, is social and
economic justice, human security and dignity and the hope for a better future. And they
will like any government that provides this kind of life.

A USAID official once asked me what the people of Pakistan want. Development or
democracy? Prompt came my reply — if democracy brings development, they want
democracy; if it does not, they want development.

Basically, you need a democracy that satisfies the human aspirations for freedom as well
as improves the quality of life for citizens at large.

Freedoms are meaningless if they do not provide for the whole society’s welfare and
progress.

Pakistan’s ‘democracy’ a political tool for power

In Pakistan’s case, “democracy” is just a political tool for the dominant social groups to
maintain their wealth and status. The other instrument is military rule.

But the beneficiaries are roughly the same in both models — the whole panoply of
power comprising the top tier of politicians, bureaucrats, the military and judiciary,
“business folk and the landed”, who among them monopolise the country’s economic
resources.

The civil and military leaderships may compete for power, but eventually cooperate to
maintain the status quo. Both use each other — the military using the failure of the
politicians as a pretext to come to power or to dominate it, and politicians using the
alibi of military interruption or dominance for their own failure. They are allies as well as
rivals.

In Why Nations Fail, Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson trace the evolution of
political and economic institutions around the globe and argue that nations are not
destined to succeed or fail due to geography or culture, but because of the emergence
of extractive or inclusive institutions within them.

They write:

“Extractive political institutions concentrate power in the hands of a narrow elite and
place few constraints on the exercise of this power. Economic institutions are then often
structured by this elite to extract resources from the rest of the society. Extractive
economic institutions thus naturally accompany extractive political institutions. In fact,
they must inherently depend on extractive political institutions for their survival … political
institutions enable elites controlling political power to choose economic institutions with
few constraints of opposing forces. They also enable the elites to structure future political
institutions and their evolution.”

In light of their thesis, we can see how powerful groups or institutions have long
dominated Pakistan’s body politic by taking advantage of its security issues, place of
religion in its national makeup and its feudal social structure. The political system that
emerges from this body politic is designed to empower only the powerful and privileged
and does little to foster the rule of law.

Musical chairs
Civilians and the military have taken turns to rule Pakistan, but the system, arguably, has
remained the same, ‘unscathed’ by democracy. There was no fear of accountability, and
no obstacle to electability. They did not need the people, so they did very little for them.
And neither of them faced the full wrath of the public as each deflected the blame on to
the other.

When the cost of maintaining a “democracy” led by civilians would become unbearable,
we would tolerate the army’s intervention to help us get rid of them. But instead of
returning to the barracks, the military would stay on. Then we’d long for democracy,
which would let us down yet again. The fact is that no institution is solely responsible for
democracy’s misfortunes in Pakistan. They all provided opportunity to each other to
come to power and supported the system.

In the civilian edition that now comprises the ruling coalition, politicians may be divided
into political parties but are united by the elites. Henceforth, whichever party comes to
power when the ongoing bloody struggle for power is over, it will likely be no different
from others in being invested in the system. It may disrupt the system, but will not
threaten it.

Liberty and order

Even if Pakistan had a fully functional Western liberal democracy, it was not going to
solve the country’s fundamental challenges. The fact is the Western liberal democratic
model has become too competitive. In their book, ‘Intelligent Governance for the 21st
Century’, Nicolas Berggruen and Nathan Gardels challenge the view that the liberal
democratic model is intrinsic to good governance. Examining this in relation to widely
varying political and cultural contexts, especially the Chinese system, the authors
advocate a mix of order and liberty.

When asked once on the Charlie Rose Show what he thought of Western democracy,

Lee Kuan Yew — the inaugural prime minister of Singapore — replied that the system
had become so competitive and combative that in order to come to power, the
opposition spent all its time planning to undermine the incumbent government by
misrepresenting or distorting issues and thus misleading the public. “It would be a sad
day when this kind of democracy comes to Singapore,” he said.

In his classic, The Future of Freedom, Fareed Zakaria states that Singapore follows its
own brand of liberal constitutionalism, where there are limits on political freedoms —
and it happens to be one of the most self-content countries in the world.

It boggles one’s mind that we in Pakistan tolerate the civil-military led political and
governance structure, which is rigged in favour of the elite, while using the full freedom
of a democratic system to play the game of politics at people’s expense. We put up with
it as if this behaviour is an acceptable price to be a “democracy”, which incidentally does
not quite happen to be a democracy. Indeed, there are institutions that one finds in a
democratic system, but they lack autonomy and integrity. They have failed in the moral
strength to serve the people, but not in the capacity to sustain the system.

You can see how millions of good Pakistanis are glued to TV or their phones every day
following the comings and goings of politicians as if they were going to solve the
country’s problems. We forget that their fights are about themselves, among
themselves.

Democratisation is a revolutionary struggle

You cannot change what you do not know. The creation of a true democracy is a
revolutionary struggle. And it must begin with the realisation that the “democracy” we
have will not solve our problems regardless of who is in power. We cannot also bank on
this “democracy” to become democracy by itself.

Countries change not because they have become democratic. They become democratic
because they have changed. In many ways, democratisation is a painstaking struggle,
indistinguishable from state and nation-building. Progressive movements and the civil
rights campaign in America, political and social movements in Europe and the Meiji
Restoration in Japan are a few such instances.

How will this change occur in Pakistan?

That is the subject of a much wider and complex debate. Briefly, one can say the
following: Pakistan has enormous strengths — remarkable resilience, faith-based
optimism, a sense of exceptionalism, a vibrant media and a promising civil society.

There is enormous talent available within the country — academics, journalists, authors
(many of them internationally acclaimed), political activists, retired public servants —
both civil and military — who all have shown extraordinary knowledge and commitment
to Pakistan. They can inspire and mobilise the young generation yearning for true
change that could provide stimulus and critical mass for social movements.
 I am not advocating for military rule or a technocratic government. Let the current
political process for all its flaws continue. It cannot or should not be overthrown but can
be undermined over time.

That will be the purpose of social movements — to remove the obstacles to a genuine
democracy in Pakistan. These include a misplaced focus on faith that has fostered
extremism and hindered openness and tolerance, and a feudal dominance that has
inhibited education, gender equality, openness to modern ideas and a credible political
process.

Not to mention the military’s pre-eminence that has led to the dominance of security
over development. The latter has skewed national priorities and resource allocation. All
this is hardly a life-supporting environment for democracy.

Can Pakistan truly become democratic? Yes, it can. Whether it will remains to be seen.

Kidney-punched
Shahzad Sharjeel Published March 30, 2023  Updated about 2 hours ago

NATURE has gone on the offensive, for we have been jabbing away
at the climate for far too long, and it is raining kidney punches.
Resorting to poetic licence and romanticising harsh realities is
what poets often do. In one such moment, poet Ishrat Afreen
wrote:

(How pretty appear the hands picking cotton: they seem like metaphors of
love of the soil).

It is hard to tell if Ms Afreen ever ventured into the cotton-growing fields. The
heat is enough to drive ordinary beings out of their ‘cotton-pickin’ minds.
While a 2012 World Bank report, Turn Down the Heat, warns us about rising
global temperatures and determines a rise of four degrees Celsius as the
redline beyond which the oceans boil over and Earth becomes uninhabitable,
we obsess about redlines at Zaman Park.

Local television shows and vloggers would have us believe that the law-
enforcement agencies raiding a suspect’s home in his absence is the height of
state callousness. It is left to a foreign news agency like Reuters to report that
women pick cotton at temperatures exceeding 50°C in the baking fields of
Jacobabad, Sindh, regularly.

Overexploitation of groundwater around Quetta and global warming have

destroyed fruit orchards around the valley; rampaging forest fires caused
mainly by rising temperatures have wreaked havoc on pine nut forests in the
rest of Balochistan. Both have depleted means of livelihood.
 Rising temperatures and melting glaciers can submerge Karachi by 2060.

Have you ever heard of an international athlete, who represented her country
not in one but two sports, resorting to illegal immigration across continents?
Faced with the double whammy of economic hardship and ethnic
discrimination, this is exactly what Shahida Raza of Quetta did recently. She
drowned off the coast of Italy in February. That she was reduced to such
desperate measures, despite having represented Pakistan on both the hockey
and football teams, is not considered the height of state callousness because
she belonged to the persecuted Shia Hazara community.

While traditional and social media in Pakistan continued to focus on leaked

audio-video tapes and their resultant pain and pleasure points, the New York
Times reported on Ms Raza’s fate.

An optimistic take on the economic and political crises caused mainly by poor
leadership over the decades leads us to believe that land, being inanimate, will
endure, and future generations can build a more equitable society.
Unfortunately, this is not a universal truth. While some regions on Earth may
fare better in the face of climate change, the fate of others may already be
sealed. The entire Maldives and large swathes of Bangladesh are at severe risk
of going under water before the end of the century.

The rising temperatures and the melting glaciers in both the Hindukush and
Himalayan ranges can submerge Karachi by 2060. Elfatih Eltahir, a professor
of civil and environmental engineering at MIT, has warned in a study
published in Science Advances that if temperatures continue to rise
unchecked, most of South Asia will become uninhabitable by 2100 due to the
unbearable heat and the crop failures caused by it.

According to a 2022 study, the world already loses 677 billion manpower
hours a year owing to the heat that makes outside labour impossible. This
translates to a loss of productivity equal to $2 trillion a year. South Asia
depends on its overseas labour for a large chunk of its foreign remittances.

A large segment of it comes from the Middle East, including the Gulf states —
a region beset with challenges of overreliance on hydrocarbons and extremely
hot climes. While policymakers in the South Asian capitals gloat over
remittances, the labourers are losing their kidneys sweating away in sheikhd-
oms at an alarming rate.

It is scientifically proven that extreme heat causes excessive sweating, and

that, combined with the lack of or delayed access to drinking water, it causes
saturation of insoluble salts that turn into kidney stones. Lack of economic
opportunity at home, worsened by the climatic conditions, deprives migrant
workers of any negotiating power for better work conditions abroad.
Devaluation of local currencies and skyrocketing prices lend further attraction
to earning in more stable currencies, but the physical and emotional price paid
in return is not captured in any index. It is befitting to end this piece with a
couplet by a gem of a poet, Ata Shad, who also happens to be from
Balochistan, M. Raza’s home:

A wake-up call
Zahid Hussain Published March 29, 2023  Updated a day ago

IT is nothing less than a strong critique of the chief justice by his

fellow judges as the long-simmering friction within the top
judiciary finally comes out into the open. The dissenting judges
have challenged what they call “the solitary decision of one man”
and they want the “unbridled power enjoyed by the chief justice” to
be restrained.

It may not be unusual for judges to have differences of opinion, but

the remarks made by Justices Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Jamal Khan
Mandokhail in their detailed dissenting note on the court’s ruling on elections
for the KP and Punjab assemblies go beyond the norm. They have not only
disputed the validity of the ruling but have also questioned the chief justice’s
discretion to reconstitute the bench.

According to them, last month’s proceedings, following the suo motu

notice taken by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial on the delay in elections, stood
rejected by a majority of 4-3, contrary to the 3-2 judgement announced by the
reconstituted five-member bench.

The release of the detailed dissenting note on the eve of the hearing of the
petition against the postponement of polls by the ECP, in violation of court
orders, has turned the entire case upside down, worsening the existing state of
anarchy.

Many legal experts may not concur with the two judges — that the suo motu
action was rejected by the majority — but questions about the chief justice’s
power to constitute benches at will appear valid. What is also being debated is
the validity of his decision to take suo motu notice on the election issue.

The dissenting note also brings into question the exercise of absolute power
by the CJ.

The controversy started after Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Athar Minallah
were not included in the reconstituted bench following their objections over
the notice. The ruling itself did not come as a surprise, as the reconstituted
bench changed the balance of opinion. Given that two other judges had
recused themselves, the argument that four out of the remaining seven judges
had rejected the suo motu action has some rationale.

Notwithstanding the validity of the majority ruling by the reconstituted five-

member bench, the chief justice’s decision not to go for a full court on critical
constitutional issues has created doubts in the minds of many over the
impartiality of the top judge and widened the cleavage within the institution.

It is not for the first time that the process of the formation of benches and the
absolute power exercised by the top judge have been questioned, but the
remarks of Justices Shah and Mandokhail show a breakdown in institutional
working.

Concerns that there is a deliberate move to keep out the senior-most judges,
and that critical constitutional cases are assigned to a particular set of judges
have contributed to making verdicts controversial. It has been asked why
Justice Qazi Faez Isa, the senior puisne judge who will be chief justice in a
matter of months, has not been included on these benches.

An outspoken judge known for some landmark judgements, Justice Isa has
been a strong critic of the arbitrary process of constituting benches. It is
perceived that he has paid the price for his convictions, but that has not
deterred him from speaking out. His exclusion from the bench in such a case is
a sad reflection on an institution that is expected to set the highest moral and
ethical standards.

The dissenting note also brings into question the exercise of absolute power by
the chief justice. The concentration of authority in the office of the chief justice
has created distortions and raised doubts about the fairness of the judicial
system. The increasing tendency of taking suo motu notice of political issues
has drawn criticism from both judges and lawyers.

As the judges asserted, “the court cannot be dependent on the solitary decision
of one man, the chief justice… “. They said, “The power of doing a ‘one-man
show’ is not only anachronistic, outdated and obsolete but also is antithetical
to good governance and incompatible [with] modern democratic norms.”

Some recent suo motu actions taken by the chief justice have indeed pushed
the apex court into political controversy, leading to questions about
institutional impartiality. It is not a good omen for the rule of law. Certain
decisions have been seen as an attempt to rewrite the Constitution.

Indeed, the collapsing democratic process and growing political confrontation

have made the court a battleground for the two major rival parties. That has
also drawn the court into political controversy, with each party expecting a
ruling in its favour. It is then not surprising to see the judges become targets of
criticism by those who disagree with their verdict.
Most of the criticism may be unfair, but the current political polarisation also
requires the judiciary not to extend its mandate or play the role of arbiter in
the power game. Unfortunately, some recent suo motu actions have done the
opposite. This happens when the powers of decision-making are concentrated
in the hands of one person.

The growing divisions within the court are alarming and there is an urgent
need to reform the system and establish a collective decision-making process,
particularly when it comes to suo motu actions and taking up cases that
should be decided in political forums.

Power vested in a single person has other perils, as we have seen in the past
when some chief justices acted more like autocrats encroaching on the domain
of other institutions. Some turned to populism for self-projection.

All this has tarnished the image of the apex judiciary and affected public trust
and confidence in the judicial process. The criticism from within must serve as
a wake-up call for the institution to reform the system. The dissenting note
may well reflect the sentiments of other fellow judges too. The chaos and the
problems within the system highlighted by the two judges must be taken
seriously to restore confidence in the legal system.

Opinion split in legal fraternity after bill clipping CJP’s

powers tabled in NA
Asad Rahim calls the proposed amendments "clownish", whereas Salahuddin Ahmed
deems them “excellent and much needed”.
Dawn.com Published March 28, 2023  Updated a day ago
LISTEN TO ARTICLE1x1.2x1.5x

After a bill aimed at curtailing the chief justice of Pakistan’s (CJP) powers to take suo
motu notices and constituting benches of the Supreme Court (SC) was approved by the
federal cabinet and presented in the National Assembly on Tuesday, the opinion in the
legal fraternity was split.

The cabinet summary for the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Bill, 2023, states
that “every cause, matter or appeal before the apex court would be heard and disposed
of by a bench constituted by a committee comprising the CJP and the two senior-most
judges,” adding that “the decisions of the committee would be taken by a majority.”

Regarding exercising the apex court’s original jurisdiction, the bill said that any matter
invoking the use of Article 184(3) would first be placed before the abovementioned
committee.

“If the committee is of the view that a question of public importance with reference to
enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Chapter I of Part II of the
Constitution is involved, it shall constitute a bench comprising not less than three judges
of the Supreme Court of Pakistan which may also include the members of the
committee, for adjudication of the matter,” the bill reads.

Here is what the legal eagles had to say about the bill’s proposed amendments to curtail
the top court’s powers.

Asad Rahim
Barrister Asad Rahim Khan told Dawn.com that the government’s legislation was a
“clownish attempt — in the same vein as Israel’s Netanyahu — to declaw the one
institution standing in the way of the Constitution’s violation”.

“It can’t be done through ordinary legislation, and it attacks both the independence of
the judiciary as well as the principle of trichotomy of powers,” he said.

Salahuddin Ahmed
Terming the amendments as “excellent and much-needed”, Lawyer Salahuddin Ahmed
said the proposed changes were in line with what all the bar associations had been
demanding.

Ahmed said the bill was in line with the suggestions of the bars regarding the CJP’s
“absolute discretion to constitute benches for well over a decade now”.

“In fact, even CJP Asif Khosa had proposed regulating the power of suo motu along
similar lines but unfortunately the Supreme Court did not frame rules in this regard,” he
said. “As a result, the Parliament has had to act in the exercise of its law-making powers
under Article 191 of the Constitution.”

Ahmed said the right of one appeal against decisions made by the Supreme Court in its
original jurisdiction under Article 184 (3) is also a long-standing demand of bars.

“Another excellent part of the bill is the stipulation that urgent matters will be fixed for
hearing within two weeks. Presently, urgent applications can remain pending before CJ
for months at end,” he added.

Abdul Moiz Jaferii

Lawyer Abdul Moiz Jaferii said the proposed act sought to override the relevant chapter
of the Supreme Court rules which have been in place since 1980 and termed it a “great
solution to suo motu engineering and unilateral bench fixing by the CJP that should have
come from the court itself.”

“Article 191 of the constitution makes very it clear that the Supreme Court can make
rules regulating the practice and procedures of the court, but this power is subject to the
constitution and the law.”

He added that an ordinary piece of legislation can effectively fill the void which exists in
the rules and better structure the discretion that vests in the chief justice with regard to
the formation of benches and the fixation of cases before them as well as the right of
appeal for suo moto decisions.

Muhammad Ahmad Pansota

Barrister Muhammad Ahmad Pansota said that while he supported the reform, the
manner in which it was being conducted was “improper and violative” of the
Constitution.

“I am all for reform in the power of the CJP to take suo motu action. It must be
structured, however, the process being adopted by the government in curtailing the suo
motu power through subordinate legislation is improper and violative of Articles
238/239 of the Constitution,” he said.

Hassan Niazi
Lawyer Hassan Niazi disagreed with Barrister Pansota’s take, saying the apex court’s
power was being “structured instead of curtailed”.

“The amendment does not appear to take away the SC’s original jurisdiction, it merely
describes how it will be exercised. That doesn’t require a constitutional amendment,” he
said.

He said the parliament was “well within its rights” to regulate how the CJP’s powers are
to be exercised, adding that it was a “longstanding” demand which should be welcomed.

Salaar Khan
Lawyer and columnist Salaar Khan said that while regulating the apex court’s procedure
did not necessarily require a constitutional amendment, it was possible that any law
passed would be struck down by the Supreme Court for “violating the promised
independence of the judiciary” since laws were still subject to the Constitution.

“One can even imagine the SC will consider such a law, or laws, within the present
context (the government’s design to delay elections, in violation of the Constitution). As
such, the SC may even fashion a way to bring that to the fore,” he explained.

He recalled that there were many calls for reforms over the years, including from within
the apex court and “this is not the first time this issue has been raised.”

He also pointed out that the issue of the provincial elections could not be separated
from the entire matter.

Basil Nabi Malik

Advocate Basil Malik said Article 191 of the Constitution allowed the appropriate
legislature to regulate practices and procedure of the Supreme Court.
“As such, certain subject matters of the bill, such as regulating bench fixing and exercise
of suo motu powers, appear to be within its competence via a simple majority,” he said.

“However, considering that the Constitution already delineates the Supreme Court’s
appellate powers, it is arguable as to whether the parliament, through a simple majority,
can carve out a fresh appellate jurisdiction in the Supreme Court against an order of that
very Supreme Court.”

Saving Pakistan
Ashraf Jehangir Qazi Published March 30, 2023 Updated about 2 hours ago 0

The writer is a former ambassador to the US, India and China and head of UN missions in Iraq and
Sudan.

PAKISTAN is imploding. The president and prime minister are at war. The judiciary is divided and the
military is considering its options. The Election Commission of Pakistan challenges the Constitution and
the Supreme Court. The prime minister of Pakistan attacks the chief justice of Pakistan. Government
leaders threaten it’s either Imran or them. The doctrine of necessity is being revived by a caretaker
government and its puppeteers pulling the strings.

The power of the state has again been elevated against the law of the land. The final betrayal of Pakistan
and its people is playing out. We will earn the contempt of being passive witnesses to the end of
Pakistan, or we will save our children and grandchildren from losing their country.

I have every confidence the Supreme Court will refuse to countenance the harm being done to the
country. It will protect the Constitution and ensure the victory of the rule of law over the law of the
jungle. This just might pave the way for the rebirth of Pakistan as a country striving towards democracy,
justice, prosperity, security and peace.

Meanwhile, the politics of the country has been reduced to whether we support or oppose Imran Khan.
This may sound ridiculous; but our national situation has been reduced to the ridiculous. So much so
that the climate catastrophe — which, according to the latest IPCC report, may become fatally
irreversible by the early 2030s, especially in the region Pakistan is located — barely finds mention in our
insane political discourse.

We must find common ground on which to move forward. Can support for Imran Khan provide it? He is
seen by many as an extremely polarising figure: U-turner, narcissist, populist, fascist, closet
establishmentarian, religious hypocrite, antifeminist, dissembler, etc. Yet he bestrides the political scene
in Pakistan like a colossus.

None of his opponents dare face him in a fair and internationally observed national election. Across the
class structure, including the civil-military, rural-urban, provincial and ethnic divides, the relatively young
of Pakistan still repose their hopes in him. Why?

The politics of the country has been reduced to whether we support or oppose Imran Khan.

The younger and the poorer of Pakistan by and large contrast the alleged human frailties and foibles of
Imran Khan with their perception of the cynicism and incorrigible corruption of his opponents. They see
his enemies as their enemies. This renders him electorally unbeatable. His panic-stricken opponents are
reduced to hoping his judicial or violent removal will enable the continuation of national betrayal in the
guise of hybrid governance.

That is why an interim consensus of support for Imran Khan may be the most practical way forward.
Those who believe in him should hold him accountable to his promises and their expectations.

Those who have much less faith in him should nevertheless acknowledge the fact that he has brought
about an unprecedented awareness of elite betrayal. If he is, accordingly, elected with a ‘sufficient’
majority he should be (a) relatively free of ‘electable’ and ‘establishment’ constraints that ruined his first
administration and (b) aware of the enormous burden of expectations and responsibility on his
shoulders. He will either rise to the challenge or forever discredit himself.

Imran Khan’s will to power has brought him to where he is. But to be more than a mountebank, he will
have to reinvent himself to join the ranks of true leaders, nation builders and servants of the people.

Wannabe leaders may have the courage of their egos but true leaders have the courage of their
convictions. Imran now has to demonstrate he is a true leader and will never again be a dependent
partner of the ‘establishment’. He knows what he owes himself, his trusting followers, the memory of
his mother, and his country.

Take the great leaders of recent times: Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, Deng Xiaoping, Quaid-i-Azam, Mahatma
Gandhi, Abe Lincoln, FDR, Lenin, Churchill, de Gaulle, Mandela, Lee Kwan Yew, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel
Castro, etc. What distinguished them? They saw themselves as serving a project much larger than
themselves. They knew their actions and accomplishments would define them far more than their
claims. They sought character, commitment, competence and sincerity in their comrades as much as
loyalty. They also sought to learn as much from them as to inspire them. They held themselves up to
extremely demanding standards. Do these qualities describe Imran Khan?

Political leadership also consists in sharing in the national sacrifices that national transformation policies
require of the people. Leaders and rulers who avoid such sacrifices merely continue class warfare, as the
tragedy of Pakistan demonstrates.

Moshe Dayan, when asked what he thought of the Egyptian army, answered: Fat generals and thin
soldiers! Pakistan has had more than its fair share of ‘fat cat’ leaders and impoverished ‘thin followers’.
During China’s Long March (which covered 6,000 kilometres of trekking, fighting and dying, not just a
few hundred miles of car cavalcades and rallies) Mao shared the same food, clothing and facilities as the
soldiers of his Eighth Route Army. Every people nation may not be blessed with a leader like Mao, but
his example must forever be relevant for a nation and a people in crisis.

As for manifestos, action programmes, budgetary priorities and resource mobilisation strategies, the
answers are accessible through reports, studies, analyses and expert advice. What needs to be done in
the fields of nation-building, education, health, human rights protections, land reforms, defence
expenditure reductions, taxation reforms, etc. are well known.

The development of an informed public opinion is an essential ingredient of radical national

reconstruction to enable Pakistan to meet and overcome the existential challenges it faces.

All of this will require nothing less than a comprehensive sociopolitical and economic revolution. But
Imran Khan has compromised with the establishment before, and now says he will step aside if it has a
programme. The only programme of the establishment is the status quo. But he seems willing to be co-
opted again.
Nothing would be more anti-people. There are parties of the people and parties of the establishment.
Unprincipled compromise will sink Imran and Pakistan.

Situationer: Reform package of dreams tainted by ‘bad timing’

Syed Irfan Raza | Malik Asad Published March 30, 2023 Updated about 3 hours ago 0

The bill aimed at curtailing the powers of the chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) may have sailed through the
National Assembly, but it has generated a new controversy as timing of this legislation is being called
into question; despite the fact that such reforms in the Supreme Court’s rules have been a dream of
nearly all mainstream political parties in the country.

Not only the parties in the ruling alliance such as the PPP and PML-N, but even the PTI had plans to
undertake comprehensive judicial reforms to address key issues, such as the appointment of judges,
powers of suo motu, formation of benches. However, they were either reluctant or unable to do so in
the past, when they held power.

Now, all eyes are on the Supreme Court, waiting to see how it will take the new legislation pertaining to
its own domain — will it be acceptable to the court or will it adopt a more or less similar course of action
through subordinate rules to put its own house in order.

The legal fraternity, however, seems divided on the proposed legislation.

Under the bill, the CJP has been deprived of his power to take suo motu action in an individual capacity,
as well as his discretion over the formation of benches. The bill has proposed a committee consisting of
three senior judges, including the CJP, to decide both matters.

One of the most significant aspects of the bill is that it has given, for the first time, a right of appeal to
parties involved in suo motu cases.

But while the bill tabled by Minister for Law and Justice Azam Nazeer Tarar was welcomed by the ruling
alliance, it was strongly rejected by the main opposition PTI, mainly because of its timing.

PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari, speaking on the floor of the National Assembly on Wednesday,
said that clipping the CJP’s powers on suo motu was a part of the Charter of Democracy, inked by the
PPP and the PML-N in 2006, in addition to being suggested in 18th amendment\\

Every party’s dream

Another PPP leader, Farhatullah Babar, told Dawn that although both parties had agreed upon judicial
reforms in the CoD, at that time PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif was reluctant to implement them as he
was of the view that it could be considered later in parliament.
\He said the PPP had demanded more, saying that there must a constitutional court in the SC which
would only deal with cases of a constitutional nature.

Referring to Article 191 of the Constitution, Mr Babar said if the apex court did not make the much
needed changes, the government could make the laws on its own.

Also speaking on the floor of the house on Wednesday, Defence Minister Khawaja Asif said that during
the movement of the “restoration of judiciary” — when the PPP was in power — his party wanted to
table a bill regarding judicial reforms, but the judiciary at that time was not ready for it.

PTI leader Fawad Chaudhry said that transparency in appointment of judges, use of suo motu powers
and formation of benches was also addressed in his party’s proposed judicial reforms. “The main
objection [we have now] is that the timing of the legislation only suits the rulers and does not serve the
purpose of reforms,” he added.

“The present National Assembly, with an opposition leader like Raja Riaz, is illegitimate and thus has no
moral authority to pass such legislation. The judicial reforms we have proposed should be discussed in
the next parliament,” he added.

Mr Chaudhry said the right to appeal provided in the law would only benefit Nawaz Sharif — who was
disqualified in the Panama Papers case, initiated under Article 184(3) of the Constitution.

Under normal circumstances, suo motu jurisdiction is invoked by the CJP alone and not by any other
judge. However, the stance of some apex court judges including Justice Qazi Faez Isa, Justice Yahya
Afridi, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Athar Minallah remained different, as they think that it
should be a collective decision.

No need for an amendment?

Sources in the judicial bureaucracy said there was no need to amend the Constitution through a two-
thirds majority, as the current legislation was aimed at amending the rules of the apex court and not
Article 184(3) of the Constitution, from which the court derives its power of suo motu.

The rules are subservient to the Constitution; the government approves the rules of procedures of
constitutional bodies and it is settled law that the authority that passed an order can undo it. The
Supreme Court in a numbe of judgements has endorsed this dictum, sources said.

They said that judicial scrutiny of the law was always a possibility and the Supreme Court or even the
high courts of the country had previously set aside a number of acts of parliament.

For example, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) partially struck down Section 20 of Prevention of Electronic
Crimes Act (Peca), and last year it also set aside a presidential ordinance on local governments.

The apex court had also entertained petitions against the 18th Amendment when parliament changed
Article 175 of the Constitution that deals with the appointment of judges in the superior courts and gave
equal share to the Parliament in judicial appointments.

The government at the time, in order to save the legislation, introduced the 19th Amendment.

But former IHCBA president Shoaib Shaheen, who petitioned the Supreme Court to hold elections in
Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa — a petition that was later merged into the suo motu proceedings —
thinks otherwise.
Granting the right to appeal and streamlining suo motu proceedings would require a constitutional
amendment, he said, adding that the government had introduced the “so-called reforms with mala fide
intentions”.

Giving retrospective effect to the legislation shows that it has been designed to benefit certain
politicians, he said, adding that these grounds were sufficient for the apex court of taking cognizance of
the matter and strike it down, as was done with the Hasba bill in the past.

View of the judicial community

However, the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC), the apex legal regulatory body in the country, has an
altogether different stance.

PBC Vice Chairman Haroon Rashid told Dawn that lawyers’ bodies from across the country were
demanding streamlining of the discretionary powers of the CJP.

He said that while the Constitution was silent on this matter (Article 184 (3) vests the powers in the
Supreme Court), the chief justice of Pakistan traditionally assumed this power, without proper
regulations.

It is worth noting that former chief justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, in his full court reference
on December 20, 2019, had said that “a working paper containing some proposed amendments to the
Supreme Court Rules, 1980 so as to regulate suo motu exercise of this Court’s jurisdiction under Article
184(3) of the Constitution and to provide for an Intra-Court Appeal in that respect has been presented
before the Full Court and the same is under active consideration.”

However, the full court of the apex court has yet to adopt these amendments.

According to Mr Rashid, the court can only set aside any legislation if it is deemed ultra vires to the
Constitution or contradictory to the law.

In his opinion, the proposed legislation appears to be legal and in accordance with constitutional
provisions.

Former Islamabad High Court Bar Association president Raja Inam Ameen Minhas also said that the act
did not curtail any judicial power of the CJP, rather it has broadened the scope of suo motu proceedings.

He said the apex court was being criticised over excessive exercise of its suo motu jurisdiction as in the
past, successive CJPs took notices on issues such as posting/transfers, sugar prices, construction and
other peripheral issues.

He noted that certain segments of society, including the lawyers themselves, were not happy with the
excessive suo motu notices, but now a voice for introspection was coming from within the Supreme
Court, he added.\

SC judge sticks to ‘4-3’ verdict as CJP seeks to ease tensions

Nasir Iqbal Published March 30, 2023 Updated about 3 hours ago 0

• Justice Bandial proposes polling over two days

• ECP lawyer asks court to make Oct 8 date ‘order of the court’ to deter deviations
ISLAMABAD: The March 1 Supreme Court judgement regarding elections in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP)
and Punjab seems to have become a bone of contention among top judges, as Justice Jamal Khan
Mandokhail, while sticking to his guns, wondered about the “order of the court” in the suo motu
proceedings.

The short order has two parts, one relates to the administrative authority with which “we will deal
internally by requesting the chief justice to constitute a committee”, whereas the other portion relates
to the suo motu hearing which was dismissed by a majority of four to three, explained Justice
Mandokhail.

Wednesday’s hearing attracted quite an interest among the politicians since a number of
parliamentarians came to Courtroom No 1. To date, no ‘order of the court’ has been released and in the
absence of such an order, how could April 30 be announced as the election date or its extension till Oct
8, Justice Mandokhail regretted.

In case of a split decision, the order of the court explains in the end about the “real order” and which
judgement was in majority or in minority, Justice Mandokhail observed, adding that even “if we
summoned the case file, one will find out there was no order of the court”.

Justice Mandokhail also asked Barrister Sajeel Shaharyar Swati — who was representing the ECP —
about the commission’s stance after the ‘4-3’ judgement by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice
Mandokhail in which they dismissed the suo motu proceedings and held their view as ‘the order of the
cout’.

In view of the observations made by Justice Mandokhail, “it is the need of the day for the sake of justice
that a full court be constituted”, emphasised Senator Farooq H Naek who filed an application for
impleadment of the ruling coalition partners in the case. Mr Naek emphasised that the fate of the
country depended on the outcome of the present petition and when the entire nation was confused.

“Why the full court; why can’t the seven judges who initially heard the suo motu hearing after two
judges withdrew out of the nine-judge bench hear the case,” retorted Justice Mandokhail.

‘Order signed by all judges’

Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial who was heading the five-judge bench asked Farooq
Naek to furnish written submissions in this regard. During the hearing, Justice Munib Akhtar wondered
how the “minority could claim to be in majority when the March 1 short order was signed by all five
judges”.

Justice Mandokhail wondered whether the note issued by Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Athar Minallah
had vanished in thin air or whether the CJP removed them from the bench. But the CJP observed that
“whatever happens behind the chambers should be kept among ourselves”.

Instead of harping on the same point, the CJP observed that Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Usman
Awan would assist the court on the footnote mentioned by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah in his
dissenting note on March 1 short order and had held that the opinions of Justice Afridi and Justice
Minallah will be considered part of the judgement.

‘Shortest possible plan’

During the hearing, CJP Bandial asked the Defence as well as the Interior Ministry to come up with the
shortest possible plan regarding the span of time in which the security and law and order situation in the
country would be improved. He also asked the ECP to come up with a code of conduct in consultation
with the political parties for holding the elections.

While pointing towards AGP Mansoor Usman Awan, the CJP regretted the political conflict between
major political forces which has also sucked in other institutions.

“In fair elections or a fair game, we witness sportsman spirit but if you have gladiators, all you do is chop
heads,” CJP observed, adding that “we do not need “gladiators but commitment”.

‘Lower political temperature’

Justice Bandial also asked the AGP to get a commitment on behalf of the government to lower the
political temperature while also reminding that the PTI chairman will also give such assurance in writing.

Justice Bandial reminded that the two provincial assemblies stood dissolved – an event that cannot be
rolled back and therefore “we have to move ahead”.

The CJP asked the ECP to come up with a practical plan for elections and said that polls could be held
over a span of two days instead of just one day.

The ECP counsel argued that the commission had implemented the March 1 order in letter and spirit and
“no deviation was or could ever be thought after which the election programme was issued”.

The Oct 8 election date was also not tentative, ECP counsel argued, adding the date was decided after
the intelligence agencies assured the commission that they could achieve peace by then if they got more
time.

Moreover, the intelligence agencies believe that the “threat level was very high and if we conduct
elections in different constituencies on different dates, the terrorists may focus their attention on areas
where the elections were being held”.
While citing a number of briefings and reports by intelligence agencies and other important
stakeholders about the law and order situation in the country, the counsel argued that being a
constitutional body, the ECP opinion, if reasoned on rational and bonafide intent, could not be
substituted unless it was declared to be mala fide or ‘coram non judice’.

The counsel emphasised that no mala fide intention had been attributed to the ECP for delaying
elections until Oct 8 in the PTI petition. He said Oct 8 could be made an order of the court to ensure that
the election was held on that date and no deviation was made.

PAC seeks end to free electricity for officers

ISLAMABAD: The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on
Wednesday directed the power division to discontinue the facility
of free electricity to government officers from Grade 16 to Grade
22.

The move will save the national exchequer Rs9 billion a year.

“We will also write to the prime minister to support this PAC decision that will
save the exchequer more than Rs9 billion a year,” Public Accounts Committee
Chairman Noor Alam Khan said while reviewing the Audit Report 2021-22 of
the Ministry of Energy (Power Division) and its attached entities.

“Gone are the days of these individuals living like royals. If parliamentarians
pay electricity bills out of their own pockets, the facility of free electricity
should be discontinued for judges and generals alike,” the PAC chairman said.

Move will save exchequer Rs9bn a year; power losses to hit more than
Rs590bn this fiscal year

The direction came after the federal secretary of the ministry of energy (power
division) Rashid Mahmood Langrial revealed that power losses would hit
more than Rs590 billion this fiscal year by June.

Line losses, electricity theft and failure to pay electricity bills, were some of the
reasons contributing to losses in the energy sector, the committee was
informed.

Describing the power division as the white elephant, Mr Khan lamented that a
major chunk of the loan from International Monetary Fund (IMF) went to the
energy sector.
“We keep dumping the loan money into the energy sector, which is an abyss.
We have asked the power division to control line losses,” the PAC chairman
said.

He also directed Mr Langrial to hold meetings of Departmental Accounts

Committee (DAC) to conduct inquiries against alleged corrupt officials and
suggest to PAC cases that needed to be handed to the National Accountability
Bureau (NAB) and the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA).

The PAC gave the federal secretary two weeks to complete the inquiry until the
committee met again.

In response to question, Mr Langrial attributed irregularities in the power

division to nepotism.

Some of the major discrepancies highlighted in the audit paras included

irregular award of contracts due to defective/deficient bid evaluation in
National Transmission and Dispatch Company (NTDC) worth Rs23 billion,
losses due to theft of electricity worth Rs2.81bn in Lesco, Pesco, Qesco, and
Sepco, false reporting of electricity bills by revenue officers Rs1.2bn and
blockage of funds due to unnecessary procurement of electrical equipment of
more than Rs1bn.

The committee expressed concern over failure to initiate the Dhabeji project in
special economic zone (SEZ) that resulted in the lapse of Rs958m fund and
directed the principle accounting officer (PAO), Rashid Mahmood, to hold an
enquiry to look into the reasons for the lapse of the huge amount and report to
the PAC.

Skyrocketing inflation challenges age-old charity traditions

Aamir Shafaat Khan Published March 30, 2023 Updated about 2 hours ago 0

A man fills ration bags at a North Nazimabad market on Wednesday.—Fahim Siddiqi / White Star

KARACHI: Commodity traders claim sale of various food items used for preparing ration packs has
remained highly subdued this Ramazan as compared to the last year due to skyrocketing prices and
shrinking purchasing power of the people.

There is a tradition that people prepare ration packets and distribute them among the needy especially
during Ramazan.

However, inflated electricity bills, gas tariff and rising petroleum prices are not allowing a large number
of people to take the good step in helping out the poor this year.
A commodity trader at Jodia Bazaar, Shakeel Ahmed, said the sale of various items like pulses, rice,
sugar, etc, was now 60 per cent lower than last year. Similarly, the sale of other items like ghee and
cooking oil, tea, flour, etc, also remained below expectations.

Distribution of ration bags among the needy severely affected by increased cost of commodities this
year

“When a person himself is facing a problem in arranging food for his own family due to the meteoric rise
in commodity prices, then how could he arrange ration bags for the others,” he asked.

Mr Shakeel said people were worried about rising political and economic crises in the country due to
unpredictable situation. “As a result, they are cautiously spending. Those who had arranged food items
for preparing 100 bags last year have procured commodities to make only 30-40 bags,” the trader said.

The price range of ration bags usually hovers between Rs4,000-8,000 but this year people prefer a
Rs4,000-5,000 bag due to rising cost of living, he said.

Mr Shakeel said the wholesale rates were almost double this year from the last year which was making it
difficult for the people to distribute handouts.

Commodity rates

Giving some wholesale rates, he said super quality basmati rice carried the price tag of Rs370-380 per kg
followed by flour Rs140-160 per kg, sugar at Rs110 per kg, moong dal at Rs245-260 per kg, masoor
Rs240-245 per kg, mash Rs400 per kg, black gram Rs180-185 per kg, white gram Rs295-370 per kg,
medium range basmati cost Rs350-300 per kg while good quality rice cost Rs 350per kg or more.

The price of good quality ghee and cooking oil ranges between Rs550-680 per kg/litre from Rs400-490
last year. Sugar sells at Rs110-120 per kg as compared to Rs83-95 per kg last year.

A good quality tea pack (less than 250 grams) now sells at Rs413-558 as compared to Rs250-260.

One kilo wheat flour now sells at Rs140-160 as compared to Rs65-75 per kg last year.
“Purchasing of various items usually kicks off from 15th of Shaban till the first week of Ramazan, but this
year the market lacked the hustle and bustle of buyers compared to the last year,” Mr Shakeel said,
adding that there was hardly any item whose price had fallen from last year.

Commodity trader/exporter Faisal Anis Majeed said the price of a ration pack of Rs2,500 last year had
now surged to Rs5,000.

In case a buyer has kept a fixed amount of Rs50,000 for making ration bags, then he has to compromise
on preparing a less number of bags this year or reduce the quantity of items, he said, adding that “the
sale of commodities to the consumers have dropped by at least 50 per cent than last year”.

General Secretary of the Karachi Retail Grocers Group (KRGG) Farid Qureishi said his permanent
customers had reduced the number of ration bags to 30-40 from 50 bags last year, while some buyers,
who used to make 100 bags, had ordered just 50 bags.

For charity distribution in the holy month, the total price of one bag is Rs4,000 (containing flour, sugar,
rice, pulses, tea, salt, oil and ghee, gram pulse and vermicelli) while another bag carries a price of
Rs6,000 with some additional items, he said.

Mr Farid said the hefty jump in gold rates over the last one year had also increased the zakat amount,
which is given each year to the deserving as per religious obligation.

Public Relations Director of the Alamgir Welfare Trust International Shakeel Dehalvi said that this year
the funding graph from the people was down by 50pc than last year due to a record high prices of
various food items.

A ration bag supplier said: “I cannot give you a specific percentage but the volume of ration bags supply
has drastically declined this year.”

He said a number of people had preferred to give cash as per their salaries and income to the poor
instead of providing ration.

Progress made on financing pledges from friendly countries, Senate panel told

Khaleeq Kiani Published March 30, 2023 Updated about 6 hours ago 0

LISTEN TO ARTICLE

1x

1.2x
1.5x

ISLAMABAD: The government on Wednesday said to have achieved ‘progress’ in external financing from
Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates direly needed to reach a staff-level agreement (SLA) with
International Monetary Fund (IMF) that has been in limbo since Feb 9.

The statement came from Minister of State for Finance and Revenue Dr Aisha Ghaus Pasha before a
parliamentary panel on a day UAE’s ambassador in Islamabad Hamad Obaid Ibrahim Salim Al-Zaabi met
Finance Minister Ishaq Dar and expressed UAE’s interest “in augmenting and furthering investment in
various sectors of the economy of Pakistan”.

Simultaneously, the foreign exchange association of Pakistan said billions of dollars could be diverted to
the system provided unnecessary controls and documentation were eased and unofficial outflows to
Afghanistan were contained.

Testifying before the Senate Standing Committee on Finance and later talking to journalists, Dr Pasha
said “there has been some progress from Saudi Arabia and UAE on external financing” — the only
pending thing after the completion of technical negotiations.

Deal with IMF will be signed shortly after verification, says state minister

Pakistan and the IMF Staff Mission had completed physical talks on Feb 9 for the conclusion of the 9th
review of the $7bn extended fund facility that had gone off track since September last year.

“There are some indications that something is coming very shortly and the matters with IMF are close to
settlement as the Fund had been looking for commitments from the brotherly countries. There has been
some progress on that,” she reiterated without elaborating but added that a trust deficit had been
delaying the SLA with IMF.

Responding to a question, she said Pakistan’s external financing needs were higher but support from
friendly countries followed by the IMF tranche would unblock flows from other multilateral agencies and
the matters would move forward towards normalcy.

The meeting presided over by Senator Saleem Mandviwalla was told by Exchange Companies
Association of Pakistan Chairman Malik Bostan that unnecessary controls were the key reason for
exchange rate instability. He said that if policies are revised and restrictions are relaxed keeping in view
the current economic situation, rate stability could be achieved.
He said the central bank should allow deposits of up to $10,000 without verification as people diverted
their resources to the black market. He said the exchange companies brought $4bn last year and can
bring $1bn every month.

Dr Pasha told the committee that all the prerequisite actions have been taken for the release of the
$1.1bn tranche, the only touch point is external financing which is being verified by the IMF from China,
UAE and Saudi Arabia.

She said all three friendly countries had extended full support in this regard. However, the verification is
still pending which will be done shortly after the IMF deal will be finalised.

Petrol subsidy

Answering a query about the petrol subsidy scheme, she said it had not yet been put into practice and a
plan was being worked out. She said the IMF opposed indirect subsidies but the petrol subsidy had not
been discussed with the fund.

She said the government would not provide any subsidy but once the scheme is finalised and it meets
the IMF parameters through cross-subsidisation, the fund may not have any objections.

Senator Farooq Naek suggested that there should be a proper regular programme on food subsidies for
the lower middle class to absorb inflationary impacts instead of providing free food that encouraged
behaviours of beggary.

Banking scam

On the question of State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) investigations into a banking scam alleging extra US
dollar rates charged by banks from customers for the opening of letters of credit (LCs). Officials of SBP
informed the committee that the investigation has been concluded and SBP was in deliberations with
Finance Division to determine whether the action should be on the fiscal end or regulatory. The SBP
representatives assured the committee that action will be taken soon. The committee directed the SBP
to submit its report on the matter within two weeks.

The chairman of the committee inquired about the current situation of LCs being opened by banks and
claimed that plenty of complaints had been received in which banks had refused to make payments
even after the opening of LCs. Officials of SBP claimed the central bank was monitoring the situation and
banks were being pushed to open LCs for all the necessary items.

Fake pensioners
On the matter of fake pensioners and further strategy to resolve the issue briefing was taken by the
Ministry of Finance. The committee was informed that for transparency and to facilitate pensioners, the
federal government has introduced the Direct Credit System (DCS) scheme for resolving the issue of fake
pensioners.

In this system, the amount is deposited directly in pensioners’ bank accounts opened in any scheduled
bank, including National Savings Centres for this purpose. The committee was told that the total number
of pensioners stood at 3.328 million. Out of which 71pc is on DCS while the remaining 29pc is being
operated manually.

Similarly, 40pc of military accounts are on DCS and 60pc are non-DCS. As per this system, if a pensioner
fails to submit a life certificate or undergoes biometric verification during March and October or does
not draw pension for consecutive six months, the account shall become dormant. The chairman
committee deferred the matter for further report and inquiry.

Veteran’s family breaks silence over civilian son’s court martial

Munawer Azeem Published March 29, 2023 Updated a day ago 0

LISTEN TO ARTICLE

1x

1.2x

1.5x

ISLAMABAD: The family of an army veteran on Tuesday made an impassioned plea to military and
judicial authorities to ensure that justice is done in the case of Hasan Askree, a civilian who was court
martialed after he wrote a critical letter to former army chief retired Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa.

According to a press release issued after the press conference, this was the first time Mr Askree’s family
members — including his father retired Maj-Gen Syed Zaffar Mehdi Askree, mother Wasima and sister
Zehra — had gone public with their ordeal.

They claimed that not only was Hasan unjustly tried in a Field General Court Martial (FGCM) and
summarily sentenced without even being informed of the actual charges, they insisted that he had been
incarcerated alongside hardened criminals and terrorists in a maximum security prison and had not
been transferred to Adiala jail, despite a court order.

Hasan Askree was picked up from his home in Oct 2020 and transferred to military custody. He was
convicted and sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment following an FGCM trial, although
neither he nor his family members have received a copy of the charges or verdict, despite repeated
requests.

Hasan Askree was allegedly convicted for writing a critical letter to former army chief

Hasan’s father, Maj-Gen Zaffar Askree said he had been seeking a short meeting with military authorities
for two and a half years and had written more than two dozen letters. However, he said, there has been
no response or communication of any kind to date.

He said that their ordeal was the result of certain alleged letters that his son had written to the former
chief of army staff and his top generals, expressing his concern over the probable impact of decisions
taken by the armed forces on Pakistan’s economic and political situation.

Hasan’s father said that the FIR lodged against his son made reference to an offense under Section 131
of the Pakistan Penal Code (abetting mutiny, or attempting to seduce a soldier, sailor or airman from his
duty) but did not contain any provision of the Pakistan Army Act.

Calling it a grave miscarriage of justice, Hasan’s family maintained that court martialing a civilian for
supposedly attempting to seduce military officials, made a mockery of the offense of mutiny and
insubordination.

They explained that the alleged letter just expressed the concerns of a patriotic citizen who never had
links with any organisation or political party, nor did it incite violence or anti-state sentiments of any
kind.

Despite this, his son was transferred to military custody by a magistrate without being given an
opportunity to defend himself, kept in solitary confinement for months without charge or access to a
lawyer and was only given permission to contact his family after he was charged.

Hasan’s sister, Zehra, told mediapersons that the verdict was never communicated his lawyer or family.

Zehra emphasized that it was almost impossible for her elderly and sick parents to visit Hasan in Sahiwal
under the strict visiting policy. She said her mother had been suffering from end-stage renal failure and
needed dialysis three times a week. Over the past two and a half years, she said, her mother’s condition
has deteriorated immensely. Her father was also 87 years old and suffering from multiple ailments, she
said, pointing out that in such conditions, traveling 14-15 hours a day for a half hour visit was next to
impossible.
She also showed an order of the Lahore High Court’s Rawalpindi Bench from June 14, 2022, which
contained directions to transfer Hasan from the High Security Prison in Sahiwal to Central Jail, Adiala,
Rawalpindi “within fortnight.”

But, despite the lapse of nine months, she said there had been no compliance.

Dawn reached out to the military’s public relations arm — Inter-Services Public Relations — for
comment but did not receive a response until the filing of this report.

Judiciary under attack amid growing fascism: Imran

Mansoor Malik Published March 30, 2023 Updated about 2 hours ago 0

LISTEN TO ARTICLE

1x

1.2x

1.5x

• Says govt’s attempts to attack SC, undermine its powers will be resisted by people

• Elahi says CJP red line of entire nation; insists legislation enacted without consulting opposition ‘has no
status’

LAHORE: PTI chief Imran Khan on Wednesday lashed out at the coalition government for allegedly
attempting to attack the Supreme Court, undermining its powers and taking the country towards fascism
by breaking into the homes of party workers and social media activists.

“Cabal of crooks attempts to attack the Supreme Court of Pakistan as well as undermine its powers is
being and will continue to be resisted by the people of Pakistan,” he tweeted on Wednesday.

In an earlier tweet, the former prime minister shared a screenshot of a passage describing how Hitler’s
Third Reich “was a police state characterised by arbitrary arrest and imprisonment of political and
ideological opponents in concentration camps”.

Mr Khan commented: “We seem to be heading towards a similar state of fascism the way things are
happening in Pakistan since last 10 months.”
He said “unknown” people were breaking into homes of PTI workers and social media teams, and
“terrorising and even abducting” their family members if the person being sought was not present at the
time of the raid.

“Abductions, custodial torture, multiple fake cases, total clampdown on media plus harassment of
journalists — this is the State of Pakistan today with no Rule of Law & complete violation of
Constitution,” he tweeted.

Later, speaking to a delegation of retired session judges at his Zaman Park residence, the PTI chairman
predicted that his party would form the next government with a full mandate and serve the country
“without the need of any crutches”.

Insisting that the PTI had never shied away from dialogue, he asserted that the announcement of
general elections should be the only agenda of a dialogue.

Judiciary is ‘red line’

Meanwhile, speaking to a delegation of former federal and provincial ministers and MPAs, PTI President
Chaudhry Parvez Elahi said Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif was trying to limit the powers of the chief
justice through constitutional amendments, creating a clash between the judiciary and the parliament.

He said a piece of legislation made without consulting the opposition “has no status”.

Mr Sharif also openly expressed anti-judiciary sentiments, Mr Elahi said, adding that all this was
happening at the behest of PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif.

“The judicial reforms are actually a failed attempt to put pressure on the Supreme Court. The ongoing
session was called to bulldoze democracy,” he said.

The former Punjab chief minister said the chief justice of Pakistan was the red line of not only lawyers
but the entire nation, which he said would not tolerate any restrictions on the independence of the
judiciary.

The government could not impose its unconstitutional rules and regulations on the Supreme Court, he
said.

‘Nation stands with SC’

Separately, senior PTI leader Fawad Chaudhry said in a tweet on Wednesday that the entire nation
stood with the SC. “We will not be concerned with the affairs of the judges, we will not allow the
Supreme Court to be weakened and we will not tolerate any attempt to influence their decisions,” he
said.

He asked the judiciary to leave the responsibility of implementing its decisions to the people and they
would do it accordingly.

Meanwhile, PTI’s central Punjab president, Dr Yasmin Rashid, said in a statement that the Pakistan
Democratic Movement’s (PDM) “cruel face” had been exposed. She alleged that the Nawaz and Zardari
groups had always pressurised judges and got decisions at will.

She accused PDM leaders of blackmailing and operating through the “law of the jungle”, violating basic
human rights and abducting citizens. She said the nation was standing behind the country’s judiciary.

She said the current government had made the National Accountability Bureau toothless and was now
after the Supreme Court.

Dr Rashid said the PTI had rejected the PDM’s “illegal legislation” to pressurise the judiciary. “Attack on
the superior judiciary is tantamount to an attack on Pakistan,” she said.

Clipped wings

Editorial Published March 30, 2023 Updated about 3 hours ago 0

LISTEN TO ARTICLE

1x

1.2x

1.5x

THE incumbent government’s move to unilaterally relieve the chief justice’s office of two important
discretionary powers cannot be condoned. To be clear, there is nothing repugnant in the changes being
sought.

In fact, it has been a long-held opinion in the legal community that the chief justice’s suo motu powers
ought to be regulated to prevent wanton invocation, and that benches formed to hear important cases
should be more inclusive to reflect the diversity of thought within the Supreme Court.
However, the manner in which these changes are being introduced — rather, enforced on the superior
judiciary — is problematic and likely to have long-lasting repercussions for the trichotomy of powers
envisaged under the Constitution.

The most the government ought to have done at this point was forcefully request the superior judiciary
to urgently convene a forum where they could settle the matter amongst themselves.

There is also the question of optics. It should be noted that the ‘amendments’ bill was slipped into an
ongoing session of the National Assembly through a supplementary agenda after its unusually prompt
approval by the federal cabinet. The government then seemed to be in a hurry to have it approved by all
relevant quarters so that it could be enacted into law post-haste.

The urgency with which the legislation was moved would suggest the government was never really
interested in any considered debate and deliberation on it.

There was also the question of timing: it was strange that the government sprang into action with a
legislative proposal so quickly after the surfacing of the dissenting opinion of two honourable judges of
the Supreme Court in which they objected to a suo motu notice taken by the chief justice.

Therefore, the question, ‘Does the government have a motive that goes beyond simply reforming the
practices and procedures of the court’, is inescapable.

Whether or not the government’s legislative intervention is legally sound is a matter best left to the
country’s legal minds. However, it appears this bill will more likely complicate the Supreme Court’s
problems rather than solve them.

If the divisions within the top court remain unbridged, the functioning of the three-member ‘committee’
proposed under the bill will be anything but smooth. And if the Supreme Court is unable to prevent itself
from repeatedly getting caught in an internal tug-of-war, other branches of the state will quickly find
they are freer to commit excesses.

This is why the matter ought to have been left to senior judges to decide with their collective wisdom.
However, the chief justice also needs to act. With pressures growing on his institution, he must restore
its unity and credibility. One proposal is to have the full court hear the election delay case. He should
reconsider it seriously.

Water shortages
Editorial Published March 30, 2023 Updated about 6 hours ago 0

LISTEN TO ARTICLE

1x

1.2x

1.5x

IT is that time of the year when Punjab and Sindh come face to face over the distribution of river water
— or, more appropriately, over the sharing of water shortages in the Indus River system — for the Kharif
crops between themselves. Theoretically, Irsa is supposed to allocate the available amount in
accordance with the outdated 1991 Water Apportionment Accord. The second paragraph of the accord
fixes the share of the provinces. However, owing to the unavailability of the envisaged amount of water
in the rivers, Irsa has evolved a ‘three-tier formula’ and has been distributing the shortages according to
it for over a decade, despite Sindh’s objections. The formula mostly relies on historical practice from
1978 to share water shortages and surpluses on a pro rata basis. It also exempts KP and Balochistan
from sharing the shortages. That means only Punjab and Sindh will see a cut in their share. Sindh is
opposed to it because of the impact of the regular shortages and the formula-based cut in its share of
water that is meant for agriculture. For many years, the matter has been under the ‘active’
consideration of the Council of Common Interests, which allows Irsa to apply the controversial three-tier
formula year after year, in violation of the accord.

It is also that time of the year when the capacity, or rather the lack of it, of Irsa — which is supposed to
play the role of arbitrator in case of a dispute between the federating units under the accord — to
correctly estimate the shortages is exposed. Punjab and Sindh don’t see eye to eye when it comes to
estimating the conveyance or system losses. Punjab says the losses are around 7pc to 8pc whereas Sindh
insists that system losses range between 35pc and 40pc, particularly on its territory between the
Chashma and Kotri barrages. That these kind of interprovincial disagreements and disputes are now a
regular feature of our water distribution mechanism underlines the need for revisiting the three-decade-
old accord. Much has changed since 1991. Pakistan is now one of the top 10 nations impacted by global
warming and may soon become one of the most water-stressed countries in the world as the shortages
increase. The federation and its units need to renegotiate a new water distribution agreement, free
from the shortcomings and controversies of the existing one.

Democracy summit

Editorial Published March 30, 2023 Updated about 6 hours ago 0

LISTEN TO ARTICLE

1x

1.2x

1.5x

THE second US-sponsored Summit for Democracy, which is currently underway, offers a small glimpse of
the tough choices countries will have to make as America and the West step up their geopolitical
confrontation against China, Russia and their allies. Though Pakistan was invited to the event, the
country politely declined to attend, with the Foreign Office saying it would engage with the US bilaterally
to discuss democratic values. It is largely assumed that Islamabad made the decision not to anger China
and Turkiye, as neither state was invited to the conclave by Washington. Pakistan also did not attend the
first edition of the event in 2021, when the PTI administration said it would engage with the US on
democratic issues at an “opportune time”. China had hailed Pakistan’s earlier decision.

It is quite apparent that the event was organised less out of love for democracy, and more to make
America’s geopolitical rivals look bad. It is puzzling why Turkiye was left out. While the country may have
internal political issues, it is not for the US to anoint foreign states as democratic or otherwise. China,
meanwhile, lambasted the US for organising the summit “in violation of the spirit of democracy”, and
was incensed that Taiwan had been invited to the event. Unfortunately, America and other members of
the Western club talk democracy when it suits them, yet have no qualms about dealing with
authoritarian regimes when required. The fact is that the West has often played an unsavoury role in
thwarting the evolution of democracy in the Global South. All states should have been invited to the
summit so that a healthier global debate about democracy could have ensued. Once can understand
Pakistan’s reasons for not attending — if based on a point of principle. At the same time, it could have
used the platform to call for the inclusion of Turkiye so that the discussion about global democracy could
have been a fuller one.

Israel flounders

Rafia Zakaria Published March 30, 2023 Updated about 6 hours ago 0

The writer is an attorney teaching constitutional law and political philosophy.

LISTEN TO ARTICLE

1x

1.2x

1.5x

MANY people point out that these are extraordinary times and that the world is in a state of ferment.
The last few years have witnessed increasing chaos as the planet contends with disease, the devastating
effects of climate change, a war between two nations that has caused misery worldwide, and growing
financial challenges for countries and societies.

Together, these have brought desperation and anger to a boiling point, as people curse their
governments for back-breaking inflation, for being unjust and using repressive tactics against them. The
citizens of Ghana, Pakistan, Iran and France are all out protesting. Some participate in large public
events, whose every moment is choreographed. Others just take to the streets in a swarm armed with
sticks and stones and other improvised ‘weapons’ to make their discontent known.

The protesters that have been crowding the streets of Israel are marching to demonstrate against Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s efforts to ‘reform’ the judicial system in that country and take away its
independence by giving parliament, and essentially the party in power, the right to appoint all the
judges. The protests have not simply meant people coming out to demonstrate. They have also meant
calls for strikes, with flights not able to leave the airports and hospitals cancelling non-emergency
treatment. Concerns have also gripped the forces, with military reservists joining the demonstrations.

While Israel has pretended to be the ‘only’ Middle Eastern nation to be a democracy, its actual politics
have not followed the expected democratic trajectory — especially where human rights are concerned.
It has been castigated internationally for treating Palestinians and Israeli-Arabs like criminals and
subjecting them to the daily humiliation of endless checkpoints and searches, besides wrecking their
homes, building on their lands and killing them with bombs and guns.

It is entirely possible that the Israelis are done with the autocratic drivel falling off the lips of a man they
once thought made sense.

Today, the zeal with which Israel’s far-right is trying to erode the powers of the instruments of state and
making institutions subservient to the government of the day is perhaps unprecedented, as it affects
more than just the Arab population.

On the face of it, Prime Minister Netanyahu has capitulated and delayed his ‘reform’ plans. With the
number of protesters threatening to grow even more, he agreed to withdraw his government’s proposal
if the protesters also retreated. Nor have the protesters been limited to Tel Aviv. The city of Jerusalem
saw 100,000 people in the streets — everyone seemed to be enjoying a party atmosphere. The stress on
the prime minister has been all too visible.

It is entirely possible that the Israelis are done with the autocratic drivel falling off the lips of a man they
once thought made sense but is now just desperately clinging to power by any means necessary. His
firing of his defence minister, Yoav Gallant, who had spoken out against the prime minister’s intention to
‘reform’ the judiciary, is further proof that Netanyahu’s goal is to only have those people around him
who agree with his plans and marvel at his brilliance.

Meanwhile, the Palestinians, whose protests have been trampled upon by bulldozers and bullets,
continue to witness the unfolding saga. In a telling article in Newsweek, a social activist in the Gaza Strip,
Muhammad Shehada, writes about how this long-forgotten segment of the population feels. “But
watching the protests as a Palestinian was bittersweet. … Most of us have never experienced the rights
and liberties that Israelis are fighting tooth and nail to preserve for themselves, and to us Palestinians,
this tension between what Israelis were willing to risk for their own rights, and how little they seem to
care about ours, was a painful juxtaposition.”

The real reason behind Netanyahu’s declining popularity and imminent downfall may well be that the
agenda of his far-right party — which prioritises ‘security’ at the cost of just about everything else — is
becoming redundant in the eyes of the people. The biggest challenge that the world faces today is not
the repercussions of the terrible events of 9/11 but the rapidly boiling earth surface. The mad hunting
down of international terrorists post 9/11 doesn’t quite impress people or make them feel instantly
patriotic as they once did. A large number of adults, the older Gen Z in particular, were born after 9/11
and remember the tragedy as a historical event rather than as an example of a clear and present danger.

The protests that are happening in Israel reflect similar discontent in other countries, where men and
women are taking to the streets to protest against one leader, cheer another and to reject old
institutions at least in the form they exist. Have the people of the world finally become fed up? These
emotions are going to change the globe.

Another bit of bad news for Israel has been the thaw between arch-rivals Iran and Saudi Arabia, who
agreed to step back from their hostile positions after a meeting negotiated by the Chinese. It could well
be that a peaceful Middle East, where Iran and Saudi Arabia are not in some perverse arms race, will
finally sound the death knell for the ongoing cash pipeline between the United States and Israel. That
same pipeline of cash is also threatening the rift emerging between the Israeli and American Jews. The
former have become used to being cruel and treating the Palestinians as inhuman, and the latter are
stunned when they learn of the bans on medicine and medical supply to the occupied West Bank.

This is a precarious time in Israel with internal dissent and geopolitical alliances changing fast. At a time
when people have decided to hold governments and institutions accountable, and new regional
influences are starting to exert themselves, it will soon find itself without recourse to a solution.

Faulty vision

F.S. Aijazuddin Published March 30, 2023 Updated about 6 hours ago 0

The writer is an author.

LISTEN TO ARTICLE

1x

1.2x

1.5x

ONE would have thought that having 20:20 vision would have been a prerequisite for the Central Ruet-i-
Hilal Committee. It is responsible for the sighting of the moon that signals both the beginning and the
end of the holy month of Ramazan. The committee has become instead a symbol of institutionalised
myopia.

By tradition, only a sliver of the new moon needs to be seen by the naked eye. In recent times, the
committee, however, has depended on 150 observatories of the Pakistan Meteorological Department
spread across the country, and on verifiable sighting by members of the public. The committee also uses
powerful telescopes as aids.
Despite this network of watchful trained observers and artificial devices, the Ramazan moon has
remained elusive, leading to controversies on the commencement of the first fast or the celebration of
Eid. This became particularly contentious during the 1960s, when Ayub Khan’s government ordered Eid
to be celebrated while others (especially in the then NWFP) defied its diktat.

On one such Eid, an imam was ordered by the military authorities to lead the prayers in Karachi’s polo
ground. To ensure his presence, two officers were posted beside him. The imam proved more ingenious
than they were attentive. During the prayers, the imam crept away, leaving the congregation in an
uncomfortably long sajdah.

The Ramazan moon has remained elusive, leading to controversies.

The present Central Ruet-i-Hilal Committee was constituted by the National Assembly in 1974. Even
though it is almost 50 years old, it still has no rules or regulations. It is nominally under the control of the
Federal Ministry of Religious Affairs and Inter-faith Harmony.

Its present chairman is Maulana Abdul Khabeer Azad who, like his father, had served as the khateeb of
the Badshahi Mosque in Lahore. He was appointed as chairman of the Ruet-i-Hilal Committee on Dec 30,
2020, succeeding Mufti Muneebur Rehman, whose tenure lasted for 22 long years, from 1998 until
2020.

Many suspected the ability of Mufti Muneeb to discern anything at all. He often found it difficult to
negotiate stairs and, especially in his later years, needed assistance to read documents. One expected
his successor to have better sight.

Maulana Azad, as khateeb of the historic Badshahi mosque, had the opportunity of escorting
innumerable VIPs on tours around it. Two such occasions he will certainly choose to remember were the
visit by the winsome Diana, Princess of Wales in 1991, and the subsequent visit by her son, Prince
William, and his wife, Catherine, in 2019. During the latter, he endeared himself to the prince by
showing him a photo of his late mother with himself.

A royal visit he may not wish to recall will be that of Prince Charles (now King Charles III) and his second
wife, Camilla (now Queen Consort), in 2006. Persons in attendance remember the occasion vividly. The
prince and his wife had made the obligatory stop to pay their respects at the tomb of Allama Iqbal.
While the royal couple were signing the visitor’s book, the khateeb took his position at the footsteps of
the mosque to await the royal couple.

Suddenly, an official from the protocol department appeared. He assailed him with: “How many times
have I told you to clear the prayer in advance with us?” One of those present tried to deflect the attack.
The official would have none of it. “Do you know what he said? He recited a prayer — and that too in
English — thanking God for bringing Prince Charles and his beautiful mother to Lahore.”

Maulana Azad has since been entrusted by the government to spot the Ramazan moon.

This year, the Saudi government, to avoid confusion, announced the date of the first fast well in time to
enable the public to make preparations. We in Pakistan had to wait until almost 10pm for the maulana
and his committee members to make up their minds either way.

Most Pakistanis take their religion as seriously as the minority of zealots do. They wonder with reason
why, when we are part of the Muslim ummah, when we read the Holy Quran in the original language of
its revelation, when we acknowledge the Saudi king as the trusted Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques,
do we still choose to observe common religious festivals on days different to the Saudis and other
Muslim brethren?

It has taken the Christian Church more than 500 years for its various churches — all followers of the
same Jesus Christ — to recognise the need for unity. Perhaps, by the time this holy month of Ramazan is
over, and fasting should have improved everyone’s eyesight, Muslims will be able to observe the new
moon at the same time and celebrate Eidul Fitr on the same day.

Offences against religion

Asfand Yar Warraich Published March 29, 2023 Updated a day ago 0

The writer is a barrister.

LISTEN TO ARTICLE

1x

1.2x

1.5x

AS has become our annual custom, yet another person accused of blasphemy was recently lynched;
accosted by a deranged mob in Nankana Sahib, which dragged him out of a police station, pummelled
the life out of him, and then attempted to set his body on fire before law enforcers found the guts to
intervene.

Last year, a teacher in D.I. Khan was fatally stabbed by her students, a handicapped man was forcibly
drowned in Ghotki, and a person, reportedly with a mental illness, was snatched from police custody,
hung by his neck to a tree, and stoned to death in Khanewal. All on similar suspicions. This is a sign: our
brutalisation as a society is nearing completion.
It is a pity that the only time we think it necessary (or perhaps possible) to turn our attention to the
prickly issue of blasphemy is whenever some hapless soul or another has found themselves killed in the
most monstrous of manners — axed, shot, set ablaze, or cooked inside a brick kiln.

By now, our response to these macabre instances has been finessed, standardised almost: the act itself
is censured to varying degrees, a round of generalised condemnation follows, similar occurrences in the
past are revisited, the word ‘reform’ is whispered (lest it ignite more trouble), and then we continue to
bear witness to such tragedies, even as they recur with an astonishing increase in frequency.

A study conducted by CRSS sheds shocking light on the phenomenon. From 1947 to 1990, only three
people were killed in blasphemy-related vigilantism. By 2021, this figure had jumped to 89. That is an
increase of 2,866 per cent. Just as disquieting is the rise in the number of criminal complaints being
processed. Till 1990, only 20 cases were registered, but by 2021, this number had leapfrogged to 701.

That represents an increase of 3,405pc. In tandem has been an escalation in accusations, from a measly
17 till 1990, to a whopping 1,306 by 2021 — an increase of 7,528pc. This is staggering data, and should
be a cause for deep unease for anyone who cares for the sanity of this polity.

What could cause such a sudden explosion of fiery allegations and fanatical murders? There are reasons
aplenty, the most obvious being this: the 1990s were preceded immediately by the Zia regime and its
politically coloured Islamisation project, which ushered in a sea change throughout our legal landscape
(and hence, our social fabric).

The most drastic alterations occurred in criminal law, that deeply sensitive realm where people are
disciplined and punished, and there, an attempt was made to implant an ultraorthodox understanding
of the Islamic concept of ‘hudood’ — a long-time demand of religious parties, some of whom played a
key part in sculpting its ultimate façade.

This is a sign: our brutalisation as a society is nearing completion.

Blasphemy laws as we know them today are a collection of crimes found in a specific chapter of our
Penal Code devoted to ‘offences against religion’. Before the programme went into full swing, it used to
have a handful of provisions that criminalised things like injuring or defiling a place of worship,
disturbing a religious assembly, trespassing on burial grounds, and insulting the religion or religious
beliefs of any class (this last one is Section 295A, enacted in 1927 after the colonial administration failed
to convict Hindu publisher Rajpal — killed shortly after by a young man named Ilmuddin in 1929, who
has since achieved ‘sainthood’ status).
Sentences under these provisions were comparatively lax, ranging from a maximum of one to two years
of imprisonment, or a fine, or a combo of the two. None of these offences were religion-specific. They
sought to control communal tensions by safeguarding religious sentiments, and the protection they
offered extended, at least in principle, to every religion. Zia and his henchmen changed all this.

Section 295A was strengthened with 10 years imprisonment. Additional crimes were introduced; this
time, they were all specific to Islam. Desecrating the Quran became punishable by life imprisonment.
Insulting the Prophet (PBUH) by life or death (the possibility of a life sentence was ruled out by the
Federal Shariat Court in 1990 as ‘repugnant to Islam’).

Also added was a provision (subject to three years’ max) that criminalised disparaging the sahaaba (the
National Assembly lately passed a bill proposing to extend this to 10 years), along with two other
offences (of equal severity) that were tailored to ensure that Ahmadi citizens would not be able to
“pose” as “Muslims”, or “propagate” their version of faith, or “in any manner whatsoever [outrage] the
religious feelings of Muslims” (the Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of these provisions in
1993, mostly on the rationale that since Islam and its epithets were the intellectual property of Muslims,
any public display by an Ahmadi of the same could cause offence to the community, spark an issue of
public order, and could therefore, reasonably, be curtailed).

And so, Pakistan took its place amongst a handful of countries with the harshest (and most
discriminatory) blasphemy laws in the world. If this was intended to deter blasphemers, it has done the
reverse. The issue has detonated into mind-numbing violence, especially in the last decade. Pinning all
the blame on Zia, however, is a bit disingenuous.

Islamisation of some form or the other is the logical conclusion of a theologically constrained
Constitution that demands the application of “the Injunctions of Islam”. Moreover, 30 years have passed
since, and by now, these laws have acquired an implicit democratic character (assuming one did not pre-
exist). So staunch is their support, in fact, that a sizeable demographic deems them ‘untouchable’,
effectively conflating calls for their reformation with heresy.

This attitude, in an age where information is being cross-pollinated across cyberspace at hyperspeed,
foreshadows disaster. Laws enacted through legislative assemblies are human products and must be
kept under supervision — to be studied for their effects, examined for their continued suitability, and,
should need ever arise, to be altered or removed, especially when their retention proves deleterious to
public interest.

To suggest otherwise is to compel ourselves to stagnation, and with polarisation and radicalisation
ascending with such velocity, we risk sinking further and further into this abyss, weighed down by the
incongruities of our own conscience.
Root of the issue

Tasneem Noorani Published March 29, 2023 Updated a day ago 0

The writer is a former bureaucrat and a member of the PTI advisory committee.

LISTEN TO ARTICLE

1x

1.2x

1.5x

THERE’S not an issue that hasn’t been highlighted amongst the problems faced by this country; there’s
not an individual that hasn’t been slandered; there’s no solution that hasn’t been put forth though
social, print and electronic media. And yet, we continue to be pulled downwards by a violent whirlpool.

Each group — political, social or ethnic — points fingers at the other. In an effort to find the cause of our
misfortunes, I thought we could compare countries in our region which were colonised by the British
and allowed self-governance some 75 years ago.

Britain set free the areas that make up Singapore, Malaysia, Burma, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and
Bangladesh. The recent per capita GDP of these countries stands at: Singapore $58,484; Malaysia
$11,136; Sri Lanka $3,689; India $2,900; Bangladesh $2,064; Pakistan $1,388; and Myanmar $1,333.

Pakistan and Burma are at the bottom. What is common between the two?

Burma became independent in 1948. Its first years saw communist insurgencies. By 1958, the country
was beginning to recover economically but starting to fall apart politically.

The role of the generals has been pervasive.

Army hardliners saw their opportunity and played their cards well, with a prominent political party
‘inviting’ army chief Gen Ne Win to take over the country. Ne Win’s caretaker government held elections
in 1960, but ultimately staged a coup along with 16 other generals in 1962.

Ne Win consolidated his position by establishing a one-party system. He retired from the army in 1972,
but continued to rule through his sponsored political party. A new constitution was promulgated in
1972, and Ne Win became president.

In 1974, the biggest anti-government demonstration broke out over the funeral of UN secretary general
U Thant, who was seen as a symbol of opposition to the military. The Burmese people felt that U Thant
had been denied a state funeral that he deserved. Various insurgencies continued against the
government, which were used by Ne Win to brutally suppress the dissidents.

He retired as president in 1981, but continued to hold power in the garb of chairman of the Socialist
Programme Party, a military-sponsored political party, until 1988.

That year, triggered by the brutal repression of students, widespread demonstrations broke out,
providing an excuse for another general, Saw Maung, to take over. The generals continued to rule, using
the fig leaf of democracy and holding elections but keeping power with themselves.

Elections were held in 1990, but because the military-sponsored political party did not win, power was
not transferred. In 1992, Saw Maung was replaced by Gen Than Shwe, who relaxed some curbs on the
popular leader Aung San Suu Kyi, and released her in 1995.

Than Shwe allowed elected representatives to meet but insisted on a major role for the military and
suspended the National Convention (equivalent to our National Assembly) repeatedly, finally dismissing
it in 1996.

The military again placed popular leader Suu Kyi under house arrest from 2000 to 2002. She was taken
into custody after one year of freedom. In 2005, the government reconvened the National Convention
for the first time since 1993 in an attempt to rewrite the constitution. Democracy was only allowed for
some handpicked parties, but not Suu Kyi’s NLD.

With the deteriorating economy, protests against the military started in 2007 but were crushed
ruthlessly. In 2008, a referendum was announced for a new constitution, with elections to be held in
2010.

The military-backed government introduced many democratic reforms in 2011-12 and released Aung
San Suu Kyi. These reforms were rewarded by the West, and Myanmar was made chairman of Asean.
Hillary Clinton visited the country, the first such visit by a US secretary of state in 50 years.

The 2015 elections gave Suu Kyi’s party, the NLD, a majority, and in March 2016, she assumed the role
of state counsellor, a post akin to prime minister.

In the 2020 polls, despite poor governance, the Rohingya crisis and ethnic strife, Suu Kyi’s NLD won 396
seats in a parliament of 476, while the military-sponsored USDP won only 33. The military detained Suu
Kyi in 2021 and handed over power to its chief, Gen Min Aung Hlaing, leading to a disobedience
movement by healthcare workers and civil servants. Despite their peaceful methods of protest, human
rights agencies report that over 2,000 people were killed. Hundreds of thousands were displaced
because of armed insurgencies and turmoil and tens of thousands fled to neighbouring countries.
The conclusion is that the role of the generals has been more pervasive and prolonged in Myanmar than
any country in the region, including Pakistan, so they are one notch below Pakistan in the well-being
index. Hence, the greater the involvement of the army in politics, the poorer the country.

Bulldozer democracy
Mahir Ali Published March 29, 2023 Updated a day ago 0
ON the last day of February 20 years ago, 23-year-old American activist Rachel Corrie wrote to her
mother from Rafah in the Gaza Strip: “I think I could see a Palestinian state or a democratic Israeli-
Palestinian state within my lifetime. I think freedom for Palestine could be an incredible source of hope
to people struggling all over the world. I think it could also be an incredible inspiration to Arab people in
the Middle East, who are struggling under undemocratic regimes which the US supports.”

A few days later, she asked her father: “Let me know if you have any ideas about what I should do with
the rest of my life.” It turned out to be her last email. On March 16, 2003, the rest of her life was stolen
from Rachel. She was crushed by an Israeli bulldozer for standing in the way of a house demolition, a
routine punishment for the families of purported or actual participants in the Palestinian resistance.

Last May, Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh was shot dead while doing her job: covering
a raid by Israeli Defence Forces on the Jenin refugee camp in the West Bank. The “most moral military
force in the world” first tried to pin the blame on Palestinian gunmen. When that fiction fell apart in the
light of investigations by US media outlets, it conceded possible culpability for an ‘accidental’ shot,
rather than the targeted killing that the evidence pointed to.

In both cases, the repercussions from Israel’s chief sponsor added up to zilch. In March 2003, the Bush
administration was invading Iraq and had no time for American humanitarians. In May 2022, the Biden
administration remained unmoved, beyond the occasional mumble. After all, throughout his political
career, Joe Biden has taken pride in being a more or less unquestioning enabler of the Zionist project,
regardless of what it entails.

Pause is unlikely to halt Israel’s drift towards fascism

The recent angst among the usual fans (with occasional reservations) of this project — from Thomas
Friedman and even Alan Dershowitz in the US, to the likes of Labour MP Margaret Hodge in Britain —
has been amusing to watch. Their quarrel with the latest Netanyahu administration is essentially
restricted to its attempted judicial coup.
That was stalled on Monday, after Benjamin Netanyahu’s dismissal of his Likud defence minister — a day
after the latter advised a cautious pause in pushing the legislation because soldiers and reservists were
rebelling — led to some of the biggest demonstrations Israel has witnessed amid a flurry of protests in
recent weeks, and the likelihood of a general strike.

The legislative changes are predicated on the assumption that the Israeli judiciary is too activist and
secular, and this could be fixed by giving the parliamentary majority in the Knesset the decisive say in
appointments to the benches. They would also make it harder for courts to challenge any legislation.
The idea, in other words, is fewer checks and more imbalances.

An impressive proportion of Israelis have rebelled against this diminution of their rights, waving the
national flag en masse to demand democracy — also known as the status quo. Netanyahu’s ultra-
Orthodox and extreme-nationalist coalition was hoping to push through the changes before Passover in
early April. Their idea of Israel does not include access for refugees, or equal rights for women or LGBTIQ
communities, let alone more hurdles to annexing much of the West Bank. And the courts, for what they
are worth, as well as the ‘anarchists’ defending the status quo, can’t be allowed to stand in the way.

It is likely that the reprieve will be brief. Netanyahu will return to this agenda soon, or else his coalition,
inhabited by the likes of the fascistic Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, will fall apart. Besides,
there’s a personal stake for Netanyahu in controlling the courts: the corruption charges he has faced for
years could still derail his political career.

What difference, though, will this make to the Palestinians stranded in Gaza, regularly gunned down in
West Bank towns, or subjected to the depredations inflicted by settlers — illegal except under Israeli
and US law — across the West Bank? ‘None whatsoever’ is a reasonable response.

A US billionaire-sponsored think tank, the Kohelet Policy Forum, is behind both the current judicial
agenda and the 2018 Nation-State Law, passed in 2018 under a previous Netanyahu administration, that
decisively — perhaps irrevocably — entrenched Israel as an apartheid state. The crimes committed since
1948 by Zionists who were well aware of the Nazi parallels have rarely attracted the concern or ire of its
sponsors or allies in the West, several among whom have effectively criminalised the anti-racist boycott,
divestment and sanctions campaign.

A variety of Israeli bulldozers, including Netanyahu, remain in place. When will they ever learn? Not in
my lifetime, I suspect.