1

Missing links

THE deplorable practice of enforced disappearances is an affront to due process and

the rule of law. Pakistan has struggled for decades to root out this evil, with various
dispensations promising to recover the ‘missing’.

These efforts have met with varying degrees of success, but the fact is that people continue to
‘disappear’ in the country. Civil society and the courts, as well as the relatives of the missing, have
maintained pressure on the state to trace disappeared individuals and to abide by the law when
detaining suspects.

The current administration has, like those before it, promised to look into the issue. The federal
law minister told a media briefing recently that the Islamabad High Court-mandated committee
probing enforced disappearances was being reformed. He observed that though the issue could
not be solved “overnight”, the reconstituted body would have a “parliamentary presence”.

While it is welcome that the government appears to be serious about the issue of missing persons,
it should be remembered that this is at least the third official body probing the problem. Aside
from the aforementioned committee, the Supreme Court had formed in 2011 a Commission of
Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances, while upon the provincial high court’s orders, Balochistan’s
administration had constituted a similar body in 2022.

It would not be wrong to say that numerous commissions or committees will not end the practice,
though these bodies may be important. Instead, what is required is the will of the state to ensure
that all individuals picked up by security agencies are done so as per the law, their families are
informed of their detention, and they have access to counsel to defend themselves in court.

Perhaps the government’s move to include parliamentary oversight of the committee could bring
more transparency and ensure that those within the state machinery responsible for illegal
detentions are held accountable. The state will have to pursue this issue with determination and
empathy, and pledge to reform its practices so that they are in consonance with constitutional
demands, and the requirements of due process.

Sadly, in the past, certain state functionaries, among them those occupying the highest offices in
the land, have belittled the issue, making controversial claims that many people ‘disappear’ on
their own. Such a condescending attitude will not help end this practice. According to the Supreme
Court-mandated commission, 23pc of cases are still pending.

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 2

The state’s job should be to solve all the remaining cases, and make sure that no more are added to
the list of the missing. Pakistan can very much battle insurgency, terrorism and crime using the
tools available within the law. As the past decades have shown, the country has not been made
more secure by ‘disappearing’ people suspected of wrongdoing.

Published in Dawn, April 27th, 2024

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 3

Freedom to report?

AN accountability court has barred former prime minister Imran Khan and his wife
from criticising the establishment and the judiciary. This order, coupled with
directives that restrict the media’s ability to report on these statements, raises
serious concerns. The media’s role in society is to inform the public and offer a
platform for diverse voices, including those of individuals on trial. When the court
curtails this function to preserve “judicial decorum”, it inadvertently casts a shadow
on the need for justice to be seen to be done. The court’s request for the media to
refrain from highlighting “political or inflammatory” statements by Mr Khan, as per
Pemra guidelines, is another dimension where the essence of media freedom is
being challenged. The guidelines are ostensibly designed to prevent matters that are
sub judice from being discussed in the media. However, when applied in a manner
that effectively shields public institutions from scrutiny, they serve as tools for
stifling criticism and depriving the public of crucial information. In democratic
societies, the media serves as a watchdog, a guardian of public interest. When
journalists are asked to selectively report, or worse, to ignore, certain aspects of
legal proceedings, the very foundation of democracy is weakened. Media freedom
must prevail; it is not just a right but a necessity for maintaining the checks and
balances that hold the powerful accountable.

The restrictions placed on media reporting in Mr Khan’s case are indicative of a broader pattern of
eroding media freedoms. It is a matter that should concern every citizen, for it strikes at the very
heart of basic democratic principles: transparency, accountability, and the right to a fair trial. The
judiciary and the government should reconsider these prohibitions and ensure that Mr Khan’s
trials, like those of his predecessors, are conducted in an open court. Only then can justice prevail.
Furthermore, the continued insistence on holding Mr Khan’s trials within the confines of Adiala
Jail, rather than in a regular courtroom, merits scrutiny. In the past, high-profile leaders,
including prime ministers, all faced their trials in court, regardless of the security risks involved.
These precedents underline a concerning deviation in Mr Khan’s case. It is incumbent upon the
state to ensure the security of an undertrial prisoner, and to facilitate their right to a public
hearing.

Published in Dawn, April 27th, 2024

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 4

After Bismah

BISMAH Maroof’s contribution to Pakistan cricket extends beyond the field. The 32-
year old, Pakistan’s most-capped One-Day International women’s cricketer, has
announced her retirement after a 17-year career in which she inspired countless
young women to take up the sport. Not only does the former captain retire as the
country’s leading international run scorer, she also leaves behind a legacy as a
champion of women’s rights. Just months after becoming a mother for the first
time, Bismah led Pakistan at the 2022 World Cup in New Zealand where she and her
daughter gained a massive following. It was the story of the tournament — a woman
playing at the game’s grandest stage soon after giving birth. Not just that. After she
announced that she would be going on an indefinite maternity break, the Pakistan
Cricket Board included a clause in central contracts for women cricketers that
allocated 12 months of paid parental leave. Her sudden decision to retire, though,
just after Pakistan lost a three-game ODI series at home to the West Indies, means
she was unable to get the fitting farewell she deserved. Bismah had been named in
the squad for the Twenty20 series against the West Indies that began on Friday but
perhaps she felt she had run her race having scored just 91 runs across the three
ODIs.

Pakistan now face the challenge of replacing the prolific Bismah. That task will fall on the
shoulders of the reconstituted selection committee, which has been expanded to seven members to
cast a wider net for potential women players. The hope is that with more investment in women’s
cricket, new talent will emerge. Bismah might have retired but she remains an asset to Pakistan
cricket and the PCB could use her expertise in mentoring fresh talent — not just in terms of
cricketing skills but also in how women cricketers can become role models for the next generation
of aspiring players.

Published in Dawn, April 27th, 2024

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 5

Censorship and disinformation

DIGITAL disinformation has emerged as a formidable threat in the digital era,

warping public perceptions and jeopardising fundamental democratic structures. It
undermines the integrity of informed public discourse and governance, posing
critical challenges to the foundational principles of truth and transparency in our
interconnected societies. A subtler yet profoundly impactful fallout of digital
disinformation is its utility as a tool for higher content-control, cloaking overt
censorship under the guise of ‘protecting citizens from online harms’.

This pretext of safeguarding the public, or curtailing the spread of false information ‘in the public
interest’, often serves as a convenient facade for targeted bans, or even blanket censorship, by both
governments and social media companies. Paradoxically, censorship itself often acts as a
significant catalyst for the proliferation of digital disinformation, particularly the kind that can
distort democratic processes and shape public opinion. This form of control enables dominant
narratives to flourish unchallenged, simultaneously silencing dissenting voices and alternative
perspectives, thus skewing public perception and undermining the very essence of democratic
dialogue.

A case study illustrating the impact of digital censorship on the spread of disinformation is the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The conflict has been plagued by significant misinformation,
disseminated through various channels such as misleading narratives, out-of-context imagery, and
false claims across multiple platforms. Human Rights Watch has documented instances where
posts advocating for Palestinian rights were either hidden or received notably diminished
engagement on platforms like Instagram and Facebook. This practice, often termed ‘shadow
banning’, effectively limits the visibility of pro-Palestinian voices. In my view, this silencing of pro-
Palestinian voices has substantially contributed to the spread of disinformation. These actions can
distort public discourse and affect how people perceive a certain conflict, potentially influencing
public opinion and international policy decisions based on incomplete or biased information.

In recent months, Pakistan’s decision to suspend the social media platform X has spotlighted a
critical issue: while intended to curb disinformation, such measures can paradoxically foster an
environment where misinformation thrives more freely. This development offers a poignant
example of how censorship, rather than containing disinformation, might actually exacerbate it.

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 6

Social media platforms like X play a crucial role in the modern public sphere. They enable the
rapid dissemination of information, facilitate public engagement, and allow for the communal
vetting of facts and ideas. This interactive ecosystem is pivotal in debunking falsehoods and
fostering informed communities. When access to such platforms is restricted, it disrupts these
processes, removing a public tool for fact verification and debate. Consequently, misinformation
can migrate to less regulated and more opaque channels, such as public and private WhatsApp
groups, spreading without the counterbalance of community scrutiny or expert fact-checking.

The handling of the X blockage by

regulatory bodies and the government is a
reminder of how misinformation is
manipulated for political ends.

Journalistic fact-checking outlets, or even individual, credible journalists who regularly debunk
misinformation, serve as the critical first line of defence against digital disinformation, rigorously
scrutinising and debunking false narratives that permeate online spaces. They are essential in the
fight against digital disinformation, considering the broad reach and real-time nature of social
media platforms. They use these platforms not just to debunk false claims but also to educate the
public on recognising and questioning misinformation. The suspension of X in Pakistan has
significantly handicapped these efforts.

The handling of the X platform blockage by regulatory bodies and the federal government serves
as a stark reminder of how misinformation is often manipulated for political ends. The sudden
and unexplained blocking of the platform left both the public and the media in a state of
confusion, as the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority remained tight-lipped and evasive in its
communications. Even when the ban faced legal challenges in the Sindh High Court, a PTA
representative confidently asserted that the platform was operational, going as far as to
demonstrate its functionality on his mobile phone. It was only after sustained legal pressure that
the PTA reluctantly submitted a document to the Sindh High Court, revealing a letter from the
interior ministry directing the blockage of X. However, the credibility of this document is marred
by discrepancies in dates and other key details.

Legal battles over the X ban are ongoing in the high courts with the interior ministry stubbornly
citing online harms as the primary justification for the ban. In a report submitted to the Islamabad

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 7

High Court on April 17, the interior ministry attempted to link the ban to the “misuse of the
platform”, claiming it was essential for upholding security, “maintaining public order, and
preserving the integrity of our nation”. The report further accused X of being a potential catalyst
for “chaos and instability” and condemned its failure to address “defamatory campaigns”.

These allegations, however, overlook a critical aspect of digital and social media platforms; while
they can indeed be used to spread disinformation, they also serve as crucial tools for countering
and responding to such campaigns, and countering harmful disinformation. By cutting off
mainstream access to X, the government has inadvertently created an environment where
misinformation can thrive unopposed, particularly in less public spaces like WhatsApp groups.
This restriction severely hampers the ability of fact-checkers to reach and correct public
misconceptions, allowing disinformation to spread unchecked and unchallenged.

To effectively combat disinformation without resorting to heavy-handed censorship, governments

should consider alternative strategies that focus on transparency, public education, and
collaboration with technology platforms governed by principles of human rights, transparency and
multistakeholderism. Enhancing media literacy among the populace — or ‘inoculating’ them
against disinformation — can empower individuals to critically analyse and question the
information they encounter.

Through such collaborations, governments can develop more nuanced strategies that address
disinformation while respecting freedom of expression. Inversely, when official channels suppress
communication, people may turn to less credible sources, potentially increasing their exposure to
disinformation.

The writer is a media strategist and trainer, and founder of Media Matters for Democracy, a
media development organisation.

Published in Dawn, April 27th, 2024

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 8

The grand delusion

A LONG-STANDING narrative has been in play in the country that Pakistan’s myriad
development challenges and sub-Saharan African under-performance have been
entirely due to a weak economy. This narrative does not explain, however, why the
economy has remained a serial non-performer over a protracted period. What
differentiates Pakistan from India on this count, for example?

The ‘it’s the economy, stupid’ argument has spawned several variants in terms of policy
prescriptions since the 1990s, ranging from the so-called Bangladesh model, charter of the
economy, to the national security policy — each reducing Pakistan’s foundational governance
failure to the failure of one part of the whole ‘system’. The root causes have been variously listed as
a lack of ‘elite consensus’, the absence of a ‘charter of the economy’, a missing ‘national
government’, to poor ‘regional connectivity’ and not according primacy to ‘geo-economics’. Since
2022, ‘coordination failures’ has been added to the list.

More recently, a rehashed version of the Bang­la­desh model has surfaced as the panacea to Pak­is­-
tan’s problems, calling for a government of ‘experts’ under explicit army rule for a period of 10
years. Apart from the fact that the timing of this narrative is suspect, coming as it does in the wake
of highly controversial and disputed national elections where an egregious denial of the people’s
mandate took place, the narrative itself is deeply flawed and riven by internal contradictions.

Each of the purported solutions to Pakistan’s challenges are either red herrings at best, or facile
arguments to divert attention from the 800-pound gorilla in the room: Pakistan has been poorly
governed by an extractive elite that includes both civilians as well as non-civilians. Without a
foundational change in how this elite behaves and functions, and without a change in behaviour of
its international support system, there is little hope for fundamental reform leading to a lasting
improvement in the economy.

Economic survival, let alone revival, can no

longer be divorced from political reform.

A useful starting point to deconstruct the argument at hand is by asking a simple question: is
Pakistan in the condition it is in simply because the economy has performed poorly, or, has the

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 9

economy performed poorly because of the way Pakistan has been governed? In other words, it is
more than the economy in Pakistan that is broken and needs to be fixed.

Hence, it is no coincidence that Pakistan ranks 130th out of 142 countries in the World Justice
Project’s 2023 Rule of Law Index, or in the 23rd percentile for control of corruption in the
Worldwide Governance Indicators. Or has the highest number of out-of-school children in the
world, or the highest rate of stunting for children under-five years. Or ranks an abysmal 164th on
the UNDP’s Human Development Index.

These failures are not coincidental, and cannot be looked at through the narrow prism of a
faltering economy, completely in isolation from the issue of governance. There is a common
thread that weaves through these sorry statistics: a disinterested and ‘extractive’ elite. In essence,
the country faces a classic principal-agent problem, where a toxic governance model has been in
play for 77 years that has caused entropy, affecting not just the economy but all facets of the polity.

The argument for authoritarian governments can be further deconstructed on several levels. The
first is international experience. While Singapore, South Korea and China are routinely cited as
shining examples of the economic wonders of non-democratic set-ups, an unending list of
autocratic basket cases from history, such as North Korea, Myanmar, Egypt, Nigeria, the
Philippines, Tunisia, the Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly Zaire), Haiti, Peru, Guatemala,
Nicaragua, Venezuela, etc are never mentioned. Much of Africa and Latin America has remained
chronically poor under the yoke of dictatorships.

Rather than the form of government, the differentiating factor between a small band of fast-
developing emerging economies and the rest, is the nature of the governing elite present in these
countries. This is in line with the Acemoglu-Robinson hypothesis. An ‘inclusive’ elite under
autocratic or democratic set-ups will always trump an ‘extractive’ elite under either system.

The other simplistic assumption underpinning the argument is that the ruling elite in Pakistan is
factionalised, with a ‘good’ faction waiting to rescue it. This is completely contrary to the facts on
the ground, as proven so dramatically by developments since April 2022. The ruling elite, whether
civilian or non-civilian, is a unified whole, bound by deep intertwined political, social, familial,
marital, economic, commercial and financial interests. The misrule in Pakistan has happened
under the collective watch of the ruling elite, with the privileges, perks, pelf and patronage of the
system-of-spoils put in place benefiting all segments of this sliver of the population.

Much else is wrong with the argument. A large part of the infrastructure for well-functioning
markets is tied to establishing and enforcing ‘rules’ — such as property rights, contract

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 10

enforcement, fair and equitable taxation, non-discriminatory treatment by regulators, protection

from expropriation, safeguards against unilateral and retroactive changes in policies, protection
from corruption, among others.

This market infrastructure, in turn, is provided by a strong institutional framework. Under

conditions of strong elite capture, the kind Pakistan has experienced and is experiencing, an
inevitable corollary is institutional atrophy — the exact opposite of a robust institutional
framework. Extractive elites have weak incentives to strengthen institutions that can provide
effective checks and balances to their misrule.

Finally, Pakistan’s own history and experience with numerous previous failed attempts by
autocrats to ‘fix’ the economy bears testimony to the weak foundations of the argument for
autocratic rule.

The bottom line? Status quo insiders have little incentive to change. In other words, expecting an
improvement under an elite under whose watch Pakistan has been brought to this sorry pass is the
triumph of hope over experience.

Pakistan’s only hope is the democratic displacement of the ruling elite, beginning with giving true
voice and participatory representation to the citizens of Pakistan, and respecting the people’s
mandate delivered in elections. Arguments for ignoring the collective expressed will of the people
are agenda-driven and self-serving — and are on the wrong side of history as well as wider
development experience.

The writer has been a member of several past economic advisory councils under different prime
ministers.

Published in Dawn, April 27th, 2024

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 11

Investment hurdles

“IN the realm of business, confidence is king.” This assertion by Apple CEO Tim
Cook brings to light the crucial role that confidence in the legal/ judicial systems
plays in fostering economic growth and att­r­a­cting foreign investment. For Pakistan,
as it teeters on the edge of securing a transformative investment of up to $25 billion
from Saudi Arabia, the establishment of a robust and independent judicial system
within the Special Investment Facilitation Council (SIFC) is pivotal. Despite
scepticism from many economists about the SIFC’s ability to attract substantial
foreign investment, this institution exists and must be leveraged to the fullest, even
if it might not represent the concept of separation of powers envisaged in the
Constitution.

The SIFC was established with the aim of boosting Pakistan’s investment appeal by streamlining
processes and creating a business-friendly environment. However, to fully realise this potential, it
is imperative that the SIFC adopt a robust legal framework inspired by global financial hubs like
Abu Dhabi Global Market. As a financial free zone, ADGM operates with its own set of laws,
offering a world-class legal system and regulatory regime. This independent framework is
meticulously designed to foster economic activity by providing a secure, transparent, and efficient
legal environment tailored for international investors.

For Pakistan’s SIFC to truly become effective in attracting foreign investment, it needs to establish
its own sets of civil and commercial laws based on international standards. These laws must be
enforced through special courts to ensure swift and reliable legal proceedings, thus echoing the
exemplary practices seen in ADGM. This move would not only enhance the credibility of the
economic environment but also ensure that legal proceedings are predictable and transparent,
which are essential for building confidence among international investors.

The need for such a judicial overhaul in Pakistan is made urgent by the challenges faced by
investors. These include prolonged litigation times, inconsistent judicial rulings, and a perceived
susceptibility to external influences, all of which create an environment of uncertainty and risk.
Such conditions are in stark contrast to the stable and predictable legal systems that characterise
successful investment destinations globally. To highlight the urgency of these issues, my last
article on these pages pointed to these judicial inefficiencies as significant hurdles to attracting
foreign investment.

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 12

Our legal framework must meet foreign

investors’ expectations.

Implementing a specialised court system within the SIFC, similar to those found in the ADGM,
Singapore International Co­m­mercial Court (SICC) and Dubai Inter­national Financial Centre
(DIFC), could radically transform Pakistan’s investment landscape. This would facilitate the
effective resolution of disputes, a critical aspect for investors who prioritise efficiency and fiscal
prudence.

Moreover, by customising the legal framework to specifically address the needs of foreign
investors and the complexities of international business transactions, Pakistan could position
itself as an appealing destination for global capital. Pakistan’s strategic location as a gateway to
Central Asia offers unique geopolitical advantages that further its appeal as an investment
destination. The proposed $25bn is a testament to the immense potential that awaits realisation,
contingent upon essential reforms.

However, to capitalise on these advantages, Pakistan must ensure that its legal/ regulatory
framework meets the expectations of foreign investors. This involves not only establishing an
independent judiciary within the SIFC but also ensuring that this system is robust, accessible, and
in line with inter­national best practices.

It is important to acknowledge that Pakistan’s overall legal system and its somewhat archaic laws
will take time to evolve and improve. The legal framework in many areas is burdened by
inefficiencies and outdated regulations that do not meet the fast-paced demands of modern
international commerce. In this context, establishing a specialised, independent judicial system
along the lines of ADGM, SICC and DIFC is a pragmatic and strategic approach. This initiative can
serve as a catalyst for broader legal reforms aligned with international standards.

By taking these steps, Pakistan will not only foster a favourable environment for foreign
investment but will also reinforce the foundational principle that justice in governance is
intrinsically linked to success in development. This is an opportunity for Pakistan to profoundly
transform its economic landscape, ensuring that the judicial system within the SIFC becomes a
beacon of integrity and efficiency that drives future prosperity.

The writer is an advocate of the Supreme Court.

Published in Dawn, April 27th, 2024

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 13

Fighting terrorism

TERRORISM is as old as war, which means as ancient as the first traces of organised
human community. In the middle of the last century, Sindh suffered the ravages of
terrorism, despite the fact that its perpetrators lacked today’s deadly sophistication.

It was a Sindh without roads. You stepped out of Karachi, and the only vehicle was the bullock
cart. But even in this state of what the media would today call ‘underdevelopment’, terrorists
managed to continue their bloodthirsty campaign in a way that called for action.

In a letter addressed to the viceroy, Victor John Hope, Haji Sir Abdullah Haroon, a Sindh Muslim
League leader who was a close associate of the Quaid-i-Azam, drew the viceroy’s attention “to
widespread terrorism” that had made people’s lives miserable. As chief of the Sindh Muslim
League and as a lawmaker, Haroon pointed out that “during the last four years”, Sindh had known
no peace owing to “the weakness of the administration of law and order. Terrorist crime has
become almost a normal feature of life. Hundreds of people have fallen [prey] to the assassins’
hatchet, and armed gangs of terrorists have been carrying [on] their depredations without any fear
of the arm of law reaching them”.

Writing to the viceroy as chief of the Sindh Muslim League and as a lawmaker in what today we
would call the federal assembly at Delhi, Haroon argued that if the viceroy called for “a
comprehensive list of crimes of this nature, committed during the last three years”, he would
“easily be in a position to realise the gravity of the situation”. The matter would appear all the
more serious if the viceroy took “note of the fact that hardly one per cent of the offenders involved
in this type of crime has been brought to book. This scandalous state of affairs has been there for
several years without the administration having been able to improve it even in the slightest
degree”.

Sindh’s worsening law and order situation was a source of unending worry for Haroon, because he
was chief of the Sindh Muslim League, and the people looked to him for reversing the situation. In
his presidential address at the seventh session of the 1920 Sindh Provincial Conference at Sukkur,
Haroon spoke of “repression” in Sindh and how people from both Muslim and Hindu
communities were being subjected to oppression by government officials. He spoke of “the
aberration of mind” which Sindh officials had developed. “Losing their balance completely”, they
“launched […] a policy of repression” in a province which otherwise was largely peaceful. They
started “with indiscriminate house searches at Karachi, and arre­sted innocent men for conspiring

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 14

against the government”. He named the two Hindu leaders who were arrested for a leaflet “all­eged
to have been seditious”, which sho­uld not have in any case upset the “peace of mind of any sober
mind”, and “undue sentences were passed against both of them.”

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 15

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce
 16

He regretted that the government was using the Khilafat Movement to round up innocent people
and branding it a religious question, even though the Khilafat issue had nothing to do with
religion.

Before he entered politics, Haroon was known initially for his charitable work that included the
establishment of orphanages and schools, for he knew what poverty was. Devoted to his mother,
Haroon was intelligent enough to learn from poverty and from the interplay of business and
human nature, for the boy who sold haberdashery during Karachi’s burning afternoons one day
came to be known as India’s ‘sugar king’ beca­use he was the leading importer of a commodity the
subcontinent didn’t man­u­facture.

Haroon entered politics to one day become a close associate of Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali
Jinnah and was part of that Muslim League committee which drafted the Pakistan resolution. By
any standards, Haroon had a personality which a relative described as “massive”. He was six feet
tall, “well-built and strong [and] had honey-coloured almond eyes”.

He died on April 27, 1942, and those who condoled with the family besides Jinnah included
Mahatma Gandhi and admirers from all over India and abroad.

In his condolence message to the family, Jinnah said he was “deeply grieved to hear the sad news
of the sudden death of Haji Sir Abdullah Haroon. Sir Abdullah was one of the strongest pillars of
the Muslim League and had rendered great service not only to the Musalmans of Sindh but also to
Muslim India as a whole. As a member of the working committee of the Muslim League he made
very valuable contribution to its delib­e­r­ations. With his keen business instinct, he made himself a
­
very valuable member of the working committee: My deepest and sincere sympathy go out to Lady
Haroon, Yusuf Haroon and other members of his family in this bereavement”.

The writer is Dawn’s External Ombudsman and an author.

Published in Dawn, April 27th, 2024

www.facebook.com/csspmsce www.facebook.com/groups/cssce