Status of Democracy and Democratic Institutions in Pakistan (JR 127)
This page will present monthly updates regarding the
developments related to intensification of democratic traditions and
institutions in Pakistan.
Status of
Democracy in Pakistan, August, 2019
1. Media courts: Aug., 1, 2019: The Government of Pakistan on July
24 proposed to establish media courts to resolve issues related to the media
industry and ensure timely justice to the victims of media, besides introducing
a new advertising policy and issuing licenses to 58 new TV channels. Soon after
the federal government’s announcement, print media bodies and journalist’s
unions including the Council of Pakistan Newspapers Editors (CPNE), All
Pakistan Newspapers Society (APNS) and the Pakistan Federal Union of
Journalists (PFUJ) criticized this proposal. APNS President Hameed Haroon and
Secretary-General Sarmad Ali also rejected the proposed decision of federal
government and said that in the presence of complaints resolution forum like
Press Council of Pakistan (PCP) and PEMRA there is no need to form special
courts for media. s.”. The President and Secretary General of APNS has urged
the federal government to withdraw the proposal of media courts immediately if
it does not intend to strangulate the media in the country. CPNE President Arif
Nizami and Secretary General Dr Jabbar Khattak in a joint statement said, “The
formation of media courts is discriminatory step and such a move will be
considered an attack on media freedom and tantamount to increasing pressure on
media and journalists.”
2. GEO relocation: Aug., 1, 2019: The Pakistan
Broadcasters Association (PBA) has condemned the relocation of Geo News from
its original position to later numbers of channels by the media regulator
Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra). The PBA demanded Pemra
restore the channel immediately and specify in case there was any complaint
against the channel or if it had violated the code of conduct. According to the Committee to Protect
Journalists (CPJ), Geo News was forced off the air or its channel number was
abruptly changed in many parts of the country. “The blockage of Geo
News just as Prime Minister Imran Khan visits Washington is an unfortunate
illustration of how widespread censorship has become in Pakistan,” said Steven
Butler, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator. “US officials who meet Mr Khan should
make clear that these blatant attacks on press freedom are unacceptable,” he
said.
3. Corruption
and development: Aug., 2, 2019:
As economic stress inflicts pain on Pakistani
households and the accountability process led by the National Accountability
Bureau continues, it has become an oft-repeated view that corruption is to
blame for the country’s financial woes. This line has been largely pushed by
the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf, with Prime Minister Imran Khan using his
pulpit to make the point both at home and abroad. Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI),
which ranks countries based on “perceived levels of public sector corruption
according to experts and businesspeople”, is one of the most widely used source
of information when it comes to comparing corruption across countries. The CPI
gives each country a score of 0 to 100, where "0 is highly corrupt and 100
is very clean." According to the 2018 index, more than
two-thirds of the 180 countries assessed had a score of below 50, and the
average score was 43. This highlights the fact that corruption is a global
problem. With a score of 88 (a drop of three points over three years), Denmark
ranked first, followed closely by New Zealand on 87 (a drop of fours points
since 2015). The United States, the world’s largest economy, came in at 22
(score of 71) while China, the world’s second-largest economy, was ranked 87
(score of 39). India was ranked 78 (score of 41), Pakistan 117 (score of 33)
and Bangladesh 149 (score of 26). The data does not seem to suggest a
direct link between rates of economic growth and corruption. India is ranked
higher than China, but has struggled to keep up with the Chinese growth rate;
Pakistan is tied with Vietnam and is ahead of Bangladesh, but its economy has
fallen behind both. .
Pakistan is a state with weak institutions, where political instability is the
rule and bureaucratic and political corruption is pervasive. This leaves
businesses and entrepreneurs with no option but to resort to unlawful practices
in order to push things along and circumvent ineffective regulations and
countless political, bureaucratic and judicial hurdles.Corruption therefore
ends up being the grease that makes the wheels of the economy turn; without it,
there is a potential risk that the machine may come to a halt. In Pakistan, the perspective that corruption
is to blame for the country's economic woes needs to be rooted in robust
empirical evidence. Otherwise, it's just a mantra and an uninformed crusade
against it might not yield positive results.
4. Senate no
confidence motion: Aug., 2, 2019:
Senate Chairman Sadiq Sanjrani on Thursday survived a motion of no-confidence
pushed by the opposition. Mere hours before the final result, the
resolution to move a no-confidence vote against Sanjrani had been passed
comfortably by opposition senators, with 64 voting in its favor. Needing only 53 of the 64 senators'
votes to send Sanjrani packing, the opposition instead fell three short when
the results of the secret ballot were announced. The final vote count was 50
votes in favour of the motion, five votes rejected, and 45 cast against. Having fallen short of a simple
majority of the house, the motion was dismissed. ".Later, Senate Deputy
Chairman Saleem Mandviwala also survived the no-confidence motion moved against
him by the government due to an opposition walkout. According to initial reports,
only 32 votes could be cast in favour of the no-confidence motion. The
government had required at least 53. The opposition abstained from the vote,
leaving the house before its members could cast their vote
5. Freedom of Speech: Aug., 4, 2019: many media
house owners don’t want to annoy powerful politicians, judges and generals. For
them, the bottom line is what counts, not abstract ideals like the freedom of
speech. But Khan is not the only politician to benefit from a fawning
media that is driven by the search for higher ratings and increased
circulation. The reality is that the public prefers flamboyant figures like
Boris Johnson, Donald Trump and Imran Khan to grey, anonymous
politicians. Pakistan is witnessing an escalating crackdown on critical comment.
Opposition voices are being stifled as interviews with
prominent politicians are pulled in mid-sentence. Editors are more careful than
ever to avoid giving offence to power centers like the executive, the judiciary and the security
establishment
Khan is allergic to criticism, given its narrow parliamentary majority, it is
doubtful if the PTI government could have made a noisy and exuberant media come
to heel so quickly, had it not received open-ended support from the ‘third
umpire’. Khan is perceived as having the establishment and the judiciary on
his side, a luxury neither of his two predecessors enjoyed. Thus his
government’s media crackdown continues without check. The electronic
media regulator, PEMRA, is a creature of the security state, ready to axe any broadcast
that might annoy the powerful. So we
6.
Senate
vote: Aug., 7, 2019: It was all supposed to be predictable. When
64 senators gave their support for a no-confidence motion against the Chairman
of the Senate, Sadiq Sanjrani, it seemed like the opposition might as well get
the mithai ready for
distribution. They only needed 53 votes to succeed after all. Except when the
votes were counted, the opposition found themselves three votes short. Our
democracy, inspired by our cricket team, is nothing if not unpredictable. In
the aftermath of the vote, everyone from the establishment to the guy who mops
the floor was blamed for the opposition’s failure. Fourteen senators had done
the proverbial 180 on their own political parties. However, it is hard to deny
that the secret ballot does create a conducive environment for selling votes,
horse-trading, and voters being influenced. So how do we solve this conundrum
and come out of it with a stronger, more democratic Senate? The way forward is
to change the way people are elected to the Senate. Last year’s Senate
elections saw horse-trading run rampant after the overthrow of the Zehri
government in Balochistan. No democratic system should take such
desensitisation towards the buying of votes lightly. Making members of the
Senate directly elected by the people will also make the argument for removing
the secret ballot stronger. Because then, the people, the demos in democracy,
have a right to know how their elected representatives are voting. That is a
far better reason to do away with the secret ballot than the reasons being
given by the opposition currently. Furthermore, it makes sense, given how the
Constitution makes an exception for the elections of Prime Minister and Chief
Minister, the reason being that those posts come about through direct elections
as well. If the Senate was directly elected, then, the secret ballot can be
taken away in the greater interest of democracy. That the working of the Senate
is flawed may be something that the PTI and the opposition can agree on. Both
have now felt the pain of a faulty democratic procedure: the PTI last year and
the opposition parties last week. Perhaps for once, both can agree on something
and make our democracy stronger?
7. Justice Isa :
Aug., 8,2019: Justice Qazi Faez Isa challenged in the
Supreme Court on Wednesday the filing of a presidential reference against him,
wondering if it was moved by a proxy with mala fide intention to achieve a
collateral purpose. “This petition is not just about a judge but sends a signal to
all, that they too will be subjected to the same treatment if they persist in
acting independently and decide cases according to the Constitution and the law
by disregarding vested interest,” said Justice Isa, himself a Supreme Court
judge, in the petition. It also sought a restraining order against the SJC till
the disposal of the petition since the references undermined the independence
of the judiciary. While rebutting the allegations of possessing properties in
the United Kingdom in the name of his wife and children, Justice Isa criticised
the “unreasonable conduct” of SJC Secretary Arbab Mohammad Arif, who happens to
be the Supreme Court registrar, and asked why Barrister Mirza Shahzad Akbar,
chairman of the Assets Recovery Unit, and Zia-ul-Mustafa Nasim, the ARU’s legal
expert, were carrying out the functions of bureaucracy when they were not civil
servants.
“To the best of petitioner’s knowledge both these gentlemen are
not civil servants; they are also not bound by the rules of confidentiality
applicable to the civil servants,” Justice Isa contended, adding that those not
in the service of Pakistan could not be assigned functions of the executive.
The petition wanted to know about the political affiliation of the two
gentlemen, especially with the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf or its coalition
partners, wondering whether both acted independently. “By whom these two
gentlemen have been employed? What were the terms and conditions of employment
of these two gentlemen? Are both Pakistani, foreign or dual nationals? What
were the past and present political affiliations of the two gentlemen and what
were the income status, wealth tax status and history of the two with
supporting documents, before and during the present employment?” it asked. The
petition alleged that the SJC secretary had discriminated against Justice Isa
by granting every conceivable advantage to the government and two complainants
[of private reference]. It said the secretary did not disclose to the SJC that
a large number of complaints/references — long before the two references
against Justice Isa — were still pending and listed both references out of turn
before the council. “As per normal procedure, the rule of first-in-first-out
applies and the earlier matters must be listed and decided before subsequent
ones, unless of course on account of some urgency,” the petition argued. It
said the SJC did not direct an out-of-turn hearing of the two references,
alleging that the secretary, who is a government servant on deputation, must
have been pressurised to list both references before all other pending ones.
Thus without seeking an order from the council and without giving any reason,
the normal procedure was not followed by the SJC secretary when Article 10A
guaranteed due process. The petition asked if the SJC had the
jurisdiction to consider the conduct of judge’s wife, examine her income tax
history and applicability or non-applicability of Income Tax Ordinance 2001.
8. ECP appointments: Aug., 23,
2019: President Arif Alvi on Thursday made two
appointments to the Election Commission of Pakistan, much to the chagrin of the
opposition, which said it was not taken into confidence while making the
decision. Khalid
Mehmood Siddiqui has been appointed from Sindh and Munir Ahmed Khan Kakar has
been appointed as a member from Balochistan. In March this year — after
the government had already missed the deadline of
making the appointments — the prime minister had sent three names for each of the vacancies to Leader of the
Opposition in the National Assembly Shahbaz Sharif. The move only came after criticism from the
opposition as well as from legal circles over the refusal of the prime minister
to hold direct mandatory consultation with the opposition leader as required
under the Constitution. The government had also faced criticism when Foreign
Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi had sent the nominations and
that too through an additional secretary working in the foreign ministry. The opposition’s amended list included the
names of three out of six nominees dropped by the government. Mengal. The government and the opposition had
exchanged lists of their nominees during a meeting of the parliamentary panel
on appointment of ECP members held on June 14. The committee then held a meeting
on June 19 with the aim to finalise one name each from Sindh and Balochistan
for ECP members. However, no consensus could be developed and the issue remained in a deadlock, with both the government and the
opposition insisting on having a member of their choice from Sindh and giving
the right to pick a member from Balochistan to the other.The opposition
rejected the two new appointments, announcing they would take legal action
against the move. PPP leader Khursheed
Shah said that the government had not taken the opposition into confidence
before making the announcement and had moreover, appointed their own candidates
when there was a clear lack of consensus. "The appointment of the two ECP
members is illegal. It is in violation of the Constitution," said PPP's
Khursheed Shah. "With such a decision, the ECP will no longer remain
independent and impartial," he said, adding that the decision raises many
questions about the role of the Commission. "The Constitution has no room
for such appointments to be made," said the PPP leader.
9.
ECP appointments: Aug., 24, 2019: Chief
Election Commissioner on Friday refused
to administer the oath to newly appointed members
of the Election Commission of Pakistan,
. Earlier on
Thursday, President Dr Arif Alvi had appointed Khalid Mahmood Siddiqui and
Munir Ahmad Khan Kakar as ECP members from Sindh and Balochistan,
10. Judge transferred: Aug., 29, 2019: District and Sessions Judge Masood Arshad was forced to
stop the hearing of alleged drug smuggling case against Pakistan Muslim
League-Nawaz (PML-N) Punjab President Rana Sanaullah on Wednesday, saying that
he has been transferred to the Lahore High Court (LHC).The LHC had not issued
any notification of the judge’s repatriation.
“I received a WhatsAap message just now,” he said, adding that he was
told to repatriate his services. “I cannot continue to hear the case,” he
said. It is worth mentioning that the
law and justice ministry issued a notification on August 26, repatriating the
services of district and session judges Mushtaq Elahi and Muhammad Naeem Arshad
[of Accountability Court-I and Accountability Court-V] and District and Session
Judge Masood Arshad [of special court CNS Lahore]. It is also pertinent to mention
that Judge Naeem Arsahd was hearing the Ramzan Sugar Mills case against PML-N
President Shehbaz Sharif, Chaudhry Sugar Mills case against Maryam Nawaz and
her cousin Yousuf Abbas and money laundering cases against Hamza Shahbaz and
Salman Shehbaz. Talking to media, Sanaullah’s counsel described the latest
development unprecedented, saying that the government was trying to decide
which judge it wants on the case.
11.
Status of
Democracy in Pakistan, July, 2019
1. Journalist Assaulted: July,3,2019: Imtiaz Khan Faran,
senior Pakistani journalist and president of the Karachi Press Club (KPC) was
physically assaulted by Masroor Ali Sial, senior leader of Pakistan
Tehreek-i-Insaaf (PTI) during the recording of a talk show on June 20, 2019.On
June 24, a video of the incident had gone viral on social media in which Sial
and Faran were seen entering into an argument during the recording of the
program ‘Newsline with Aftab Mugheri’ on K21 News channel.
2. IGP: July,3, 2019: Lahore: Punjab
Inspector General of Police (IGP) Arif Nawaz Khan has issued a new media policy
through which certain restrictions have been imposed on media interaction. A
circular issued by PRO Bahawalpur is also making the rounds on social media.
The notification reads that no police officer can leak any information
concerning the department. If one is found guilty of doing so, strict legal
action will be initiated against them.
3.
Horse trading; July, 4, 2019: A panic-stricken prime minister seems to have
lost all sense of proportion. His most recent harangue in the National Assembly
and his midnight address to the nation leave one wondering about
his capabilities when it comes to navigating the country through the present
financial and political morass. It’s a Greek tragedy unfolding. It was
reminiscent of the sordid game that has long plagued Pakistani politics when
the prime minister recently met some opposition legislators reportedly willing
to cross the floor. A federal minister claims there were many more from Punjab
waiting in line to shift their political allegiance. Khan’s ‘Wasim Akram-plus’
seems to have finally blossomed into a fine craftsman engineering defections
within the opposition ranks. Meanwhile, a dexterous provincial governor
through a ‘magic wand’ is said to have won enough numbers to change the PPP
government in Sindh. “It’s a matter of time when the PTI will form the government
in the province,” boasted a federal minister. Those of us who are familiar with our sleazy
political culture know well how political engineering is done. There is no
difference between the infamous ‘Changa Manga’ episode and the ‘Banigala’
meeting though the mechanics may vary. It is so pathetic to see PTI ministers
hailing the turncoats selling their political loyalty. It is not opportunism or
monetary incentive alone that lures opposition members to the ruling party;
security agencies too are often instrumental in securing defections. Their
footprint has been too obvious in the latest political maneuvering. The main
objective is to prop up a weak coalition in the face of an increasingly
aggressive opposition.Although last week’s gathering of opposition parties has
not been able to come up with any concrete plan that could threaten the
government, it has pressed the panic button in PTI ranks. The smooth passage of
the budget has not helped calm Khan’s anxiety.
Most disconcerting is the arrest of a senior opposition MNA for
allegedly carrying a large quantity of heroin.
Equally disturbing is the unannounced censorship of the media and
growing restrictions on freedom of expression. Taking TV programmes off air
without providing a sound reason illustrates the stifling of dissenting voices.
Intriguingly, TV channels are not supposed to telecast interviews of detained
political leaders facing graft charges while there is no bar on them under the
law to speak in parliament. Such draconian measures do not bode well for the
democratic process. It is a sign of the government’s weakness and exposes its
lack of confidence in handling the opposition. While in opposition, Imran Khan
had benefited most from the free media but now he is afraid of it. More troubling
is that the government maintains it has nothing to do with the press curbs.
Irrespective of who is doing it, it is ultimately the responsibility of the
government to ensure media freedom. It is extremely dangerous to leave it to
security agencies to run the affairs of the state.
4.
Sanaullah arrest: July, 4 , 2019: On Monday afternoon,
law-enforcement personnel intercepted the PML-N leader while he was travelling
from Faisalabad to Lahore and arrested him in a narcotics case involving banned
outfits. According to a statement by the ANF spokesperson, drugs were
also recovered from his vehicle; in a video message, the information minister
said the cache was worth between Rs150m to Rs200m. Mr Sanaullah was
yesterday sent to jail on a 14-day judicial remand by a district court. Mr
Sanaullah recently claimed that Mr Khan had directed the chief of Punjab’s
Anti-Corruption Establishment to find “some material” to use against him. How
plausible is it that despite being convinced he was in the government’s cross
hairs, the PML-N leader would be travelling with narcotics worth millions of
rupees
5.
Video: July, 7,2019: PML-N Vice President
Maryam Nawaz on Saturday revealed a ‘damning’ video that purportedly shows
accountability court judge Arshad Malik admitting that he had been
‘blackmailed’ into convicting jailed ex-premier Nawaz Sharif despite the fact
there was no evidence of corruption against him in Al-Azizia reference. The ‘explosive video’, which has yet to be verified
independently, was shown to media persons by Maryam at a crowded news
conference in Lahore where she was flanked by senior PML-N leaders, including
Shehbaz Sharif, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi and Ahsan Iqbal. In the video, the judge is purportedly
having a conversation with a man, named Nasir Butt, who Maryam described as a
PML-N worker. The judge can be heard telling Butt that he had been
‘blackmailed’ using a private video of him shot 10 years earlier. Malik allegedly goes on to say that he
considered committing suicide after the blackmailers threatened to go public
with that video if he did not convict Nawaz and had no other option but to give
in to pressure as he had seen the consequences faced by others who had defied
them. The
judge allegedly tells Butt that there was no evidence of corruption against
Nawaz and the entire premise of assets-beyond-means case was inherently flawed
as there were no assets that could be legally associated with the former prime
minister with documentary evidence. “If the assets were determined on the basis of the former
prime minister’s tax returns and if they were incorrect, it was at best a case
that should have been dealt under tax laws,” the video purportedly shows the
judge saying. It
further shows the judge telling the PML-N worker that there was no evidence of
the former premier’s son Hussain Nawaz running a business in Pakistan or that
he and Nawaz had transferred money from Pakistan to another country.The
purported judge says that the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) or National
Accountability Bureau (NAB) were neither able to establish how Hussain had set
up his business out of the country and earned money, nor did they try to gather
evidence from Saudi Arabia involving its judicial system about embezzlement of
funds. The purported video also shows the judge
maintaining that the prosecution had failed to link Nawaz with the acquisition
of properties in London in the Panama case that led to his disqualification.
“When there are multiple possibilities, the one which is most favourable to the
accused has to be adopted and should not be stretched in favour of the
prosecution. The court’s decision in Hill Metal case was illegal as it violated
this law,” the alleged judge is heard as saying
6. Channels withdrawn: July, 9, 2019: The Pakistan
Broadcasters Association (PBA) on Monday said that a complaint has been lodged
by three of its members — AabTak, 24News and CapitalTV—
against the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) for
"taking their channels off air from cable networks without assigning a reason
or giving them a hearing". (There seem to be an even larger number of
channels that have been stopped from broadcasting).
7. Zardari interview: July, 9, 2019: An interview of
former president Asif Ali Zardari was stopped from being aired shortly after it
started on a private news channel on Monday. Hamid Mir, who was the interviewer
of the program on Geo News, took to Twitter to express his outrage over the
incident. “I can only say sorry to my viewers that an interview was started and
stopped on Geo New[s] I will share the details soon but it’s easy to understand
who stopped it? We are not living in a free country,” he wrote.
8.
Judges videos: July, 11, 2019: PML-N leader Maryam Nawaz on
Wednesday shared two more video clips on Twitter to corroborate her claim that
Accountability Judge Arshad Malik allegedly met a PML-N ‘sympathiser’ to
confess that he had been "pressurised and blackmailed" to convict her
father, former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, in the Al-Azizia reference. Taking to Twitter today, Maryam
shared a new video which she claimed shows Judge
Malik's "official car with a green number plate" coming to escort
Nasir Butt, who then allegedly follows the car to the judge's residence. This
video, shot by a person riding a motorcycle, appears to show a white sedan with
a green number plate approaching a Land Cruiser before both vehicles drive away.
None of the occupants of the vehicles are clearly visible in the video. The
video "belies all claims of Judge Arshad Malik [sahib] that he mentioned
in his press release," Maryam claimed. She tweeted a second video which she claimed shows Nasir Butt
entering the judge's residence. "Judge Arshad Malik sb comes in, greets
Nasir sb & switches the lights on," she wrote.
9.
Freedom of speech: July, 12, 2019:
Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi was greeted by empty seats at a media
conference in London as journalists protested over ‘free speech concerns’ in
Pakistan. Qureshi, who is in the British capital on an official visit, attended
the #DefendMediaFreedom conference with journalists posting videos of a nearly
deserted hall. Qureshi was questioned about the censorship in Pakistan.
10. Maryams interview: July, 12, 2019: An interview of Maryam Nawaz Sharif, a vice president of the
PML-N, was "forcefully" taken off air soon after it was run, it was
reported on Thursday. The move came as Prime Minister Imran Khan's
administration vowed to block any media coverage and interviews of politicians
“who are convicts and under trial”. In the inyerview Maryam claimed that judge
asked for forgiveness from Nwaaz Shariff.
11. PTI: July, 13, 2019:
The government seems to have decided how it wants to be hailed at the
completion of its first year in power. It wants to be known as your infamous
headmaster who was happy to declare all suspects equally guilty and who did not
discriminate while punishing them. Worse still, Prime Minister Imran Khan looks
to be increasingly enslaved by his own logic that leaves him in a perfect
situation to fuel adversarial relationships. It is the image of a disciplinarian prime minister who
doesn’t mind being taunted as a dictator while following his own accountability
map. There was news in Tuesday’s
papers about the impending media ban
on those who have been convicted as well as the ones who are under trial (read:
opposition politicians). At first it, appeared as if this was a joke by someone
in the middle of all the fake news flying around. But quickly, there was a
realization that the sentiment expressed therein did not militate against the
general thrust of the direction set by the prime minister, most consistently in
a series of statements which can easily be titled as ‘No NRO to anyone’. Only
recently, channels were taken off air for running an interview of Mr Asif Ali
Zardari. A ban on media appearance by him and other suspect politicians looked
logical. ? And it is just not the
prime minister’s camp that is moving with utmost care, mindful of the unseen.
There are players in the opposition as well who are ready to stake their
critical assets in an effort to upset and upstage the still young government.
Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari’s stance for the removal of the Senate chairman is one
example of the desperate opposition moves to unsettle Prime Minister Khan, that
could ultimately place the PPP and its allies in an awkward position. The
Senate chairman was elected in a visibly engineered election in which the PPP
acted as a willing tool. No one should know it better than the Zardaris
operating in the power politics of Pakistan that if it were possible for the
‘hidden hand’ to present the post of chairman of the Senate to a favourite then
the power brokers are quite capable of pulling the strings to get some shocking
results. If Mr Asif Zardari is willingly or unwillingly prepared to launch an
offensive on the strength of the opposition’s numbers in the upper house, there
must be solid reasons for his actions. Perhaps for the opposition this is not
at all the riddle some others, including journalists, make it out to be. It could
well be that the top opposition politicians recognise the danger inherent in Mr
Imran Khan’s daily declarations. Most disturbingly for them, they appear to
realise that this is not a short burst at trying to malign the opposition
leadership. They seem to know that their trial is going to be much more intense
in the coming times and their best bet is to try and somehow force the
government to return to the past routine where the two sides — the opposition
and the government — recognised the worth of giving each other some breathing
to space in order to not jeopardise the system. This fear of worse in store,
manifest in signs such as the arrest of Rana Sanaullah, could well have been
the clinching factor which forced Ms Maryam Nawaz to come out with what the
PML-N calls clear evidence of the government’s prejudice and witch-hunt. This
was critical capital, the judge who had ruled against Mian Nawaz Sharif
‘allegedly’ confessing that he was under pressure to convict the former prime
minister. This could perhaps have fetched the PML-N greater points if it had
been made public at some later stage. Ms Nawaz, it seems, thought otherwise and
true to her reputation as a politician wanting to live in the present moment
instead of following a more patient line, she came out with it, convincing
herself, and more importantly PML-N veterans, that holding on to this
ammunition in the face of an Imran Khan poised to suppress the media and
politicians and everyone else in his wake amounted to dying. It could well be
that we have already reached the most crucial part of this decisive battle.
12. Muffling dissent: July, 15, 2019: In PLD 2016 SC 692, the Supreme Court held that “the
concept of freedom of media is based on the premise that the widest possible
dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is sine qua
non to the welfare of the people”. It seems that the federal cabinet has
ignored such wisdom when it recently directed Pemra to ban all broadcast
interviews of undertrial or convicted politicians. But can such a directive
even be issued under the law? While Section 5
of the Pemra Ordinance gives the federal government the right to issue binding
directives to Pemra on issues of policy, a nexus between these directives and
the authority’s power to prohibit broadcasts under Section 27(a) is tenuous at
best. In fact, the last
caretaker government tried to rectify this problem through the Pemra
(Amendment) Ordinance, 2018, amending Section 5 to allow the government to
issue directives to Pemra to block content under the restrictions provided by
Article 19 of the Constitution. However, this ordinance was never confirmed by
the present parliament and has therefore lapsed. Thus, it can be argued that
the government’s power to issue directives under Section 5 cannot be used to
direct Pemra to block content under Section 27(a) because parliament never
intended for the government to have any such power. Secondly, can
Pemra, a federal executive body, form an opinion and restrict content under
Section 27(a) if it believes the content “is against the ideology of Pakistan
or is likely to create hatred among the people or is prejudicial to the
maintenance of law and order or is likely to disturb public peace and
tranquillity or endangers national security or is pornographic, obscene or
vulgar or is offensive to the commonly accepted standards of decency”? I would
argue ‘no’. This is because reasonable restrictions to free speech enumerated
under Article 19 are not self-executing provisions. In PLD 1992 SC 595, the Supreme
Court defined the test for identifying such provisions: “Constitutional
provisions are not self-executing if they merely indicate a line of policy or
principles, without applying the means by which such policy or principles are
to be carried into effect, or if the language of the Constitution is directed
to the legislature, or it appears from the language used and the circumstances
of its adoption that subsequent legislation was contemplated to carry it into
effect.” When one reads the entirety of Article 19, which provides for
the right to freedom of speech and expression, it is clear that the
constitutional provision is divided into two parts. The first guarantees the
right to freedom of speech and expression for every citizen. This part is
self-executing as all fundamental rights in our Constitution usually are. The
next part, however, lays down that this right is “subject to any reasonable
restrictions imposed by law” under seven enumerated subject headings. The use
of the words “by law” makes it clear that this part is not self-executing, as
parliament is the only institution as per our constitutional scheme empowered
to make law. Thus, for true adherence to our constitutional legal
framework, it should be parliament, not the federal government or Pemra, that
interprets and legislates what should be reasonable restrictions on our free
speech “in the interest of the glory of Islam or the integrity, security or
defence of Pakistan or any part thereof, friendly relations with foreign
states, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court,
commission of or incitement to an offence”. Lastly, can parliament delegate
such an important legislative function to the executive? Quite simply, no. In
Pakistan Tobacco Company vs Government of NWFP (PLD 2002 SC 460), the apex
court held that the legislature cannot delegate essential legislative functions
to the executive, especially without providing guiding principles. This is the
very essence of a democratic political system; any substantive restrictions by
law to limit the exercise of the fundamental rights, especially content-based
restrictions on the right to free speech, must necessarily be made by our
elected parliament through legislation. Parliament makes, the executive
enforces and the courts interpret law: that is how our Constitution has divided
the powers of the state — and it is time we pay heed to its wisdom. Thus,
there is an urgent need for our constitutional courts to interpret Article 19
in a holistic and comprehensive manner that is in line with our constitutional
ethos and the constitutional principles that have been established by our
courts over the course of our history. One would hope that our courts seize the
opportunity with this current illegal decision of the federal cabinet to make a
historic ruling so that our speech remains free and protected.
13. Dysfunctional democracy: July, 17, 2019: Recent events in Pakistan’s political trajectory serve
as an antithesis of the principle enunciated by Professor Shapiro, that,
“Democracy is an ideology of the opposition as much as it is of the
government”. The Venice Commission lays down that the opposition promotes the
interest of their voters, improves parliamentary decision-making procedure by
ensuring debates, scrutinises legislative and budgetary proposals of the
government, supervises and oversees the government to enhance accountability in
the political process. An example of an overreach of the current government in
going after the opposition is the proposal for introducing legislation to
prevent an “accused” Parliamentarians from entering Parliament. PM Imran Khan
quintessentially referred to the British Parliament for banning participation
of its “accused” member parliamentarians in the affairs of the Westminster
Parliament. Here’s an insight into the legislation the PM referred to. The
British Representation of People Act 1981 does not in any way make a ground for
an accused MP to be disqualified or circumscribes his participation in the
affairs of Parliament, while only disqualifying them if they have been
convicted under the law. Further in 2015, Britain passed a law which does not
prevent an “accused” MP to attend parliamentary sessions or to vote and debate.
Once an MP has been “found guilty” by a court of law, a by-election in that
MP’s constituency will not be held at the behest of the government but, only
when 10 per cent of the total constituents in his constituency sign a
resolution calling for a by-election. The rationale of the lawmakers in
drafting this law is that, an accused is innocent no matter what the nature of
crime, until proven guilty. Whereas in Pakistan it is charmingly eloquent to
castigate the opposition as corrupt and lacking moral authority to remain in
Parliament hence it is barred from entering Parliament. Similarly, all NAB
authorities have to allege is that, the person was unable to account for a
particular six years old entry in his account, therefore based on that alone he
must be presumed guilty. The Islamabad High Court in ‘Nawaz Sharif v The State case’,
admitted that the scope of Section 14(b) of the NAB Ordinance essentially
opposes the well settled principle of law that an accused is innocent until
proven guilty. The second rationale for drafting this British legislation is
that removing or suppressing a particular member Parliament due to mere
accusations is tantamount to a breach of trust of a section of public. The will
of the people dictates that, the public had exercised their will in the
elections through voting so as to bestow their trust in a particular individual
for voicing that section’s concerns and grievances. Therefore, the government
should not be empowered to arbitrarily intrude in that trustee-beneficiary
relationship. Doing so would marginalise the constituents who had voted for the
opposition candidate. Finally, the
matter of executive overreach has reached the hallowed gates of the guardians
of our democratic values, the courts. Any executive overreach or even coups
have always in the past sought validation from the courts. In the seminal case
of Asma Jillani v Government of Punjab, the Supreme Court while declaring Yahya
Khan’s martial law invalid, held that no absolute power can ever be vested with
the single person commanding the majority. Thus, the way to prevent the executive
building a narrative of loot and depredation caused by the opposition even
before the court has rendered the verdict on these legal issues is by an ease
in granting of bail if, the accused does not pose a substantial risk of
absconding. The esteemed court in relation to NAB in Wali Khan Case held that,
bail must not be withheld as a tactical medium of punishment. Since the
conviction rates in Pakistan are abysmally low, bail is often tactically
withheld so as to acquiesce the accused. If the courts remain passive without
taking cognizance of the democratic values at stake, then the people would soon
be spectators to a weak parliament being run at the whims of the executive
which will dysfunction Pakistan’s democratic future.
14. Journalists protest: July, 17, 2019: Pakistani
journalists held nationwide protests Tuesday to denounce rampant censorship by
the country’s powerful security services, massive layoffs due to budget cuts
and months-long delays in payments of their wages.The rallies, dubbed Day of
Protests, were spearheaded by the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists, which
said that journalists, who face the roughest phase in the country’s history,
have decided to “fight the unprecedented censorship.” Journalists and press
freedom advocates say that the Pakistani military is pressuring media outlets
to quash critical coverage while the newly elected government is slashing its
advertising budget, squeezing a key source of revenue for private newspapers
and TV stations. In the last few months, hundreds of journalists have been laid
off as media houses came under financial constraints after government
advertising was drastically reduced.
Authorities control “even minute details of the media content these
days, and dictate who will be the face of print and electronic media,” Butt
said. Zafar Abbas, editor of the leading
Dawn daily which has faced increasing pressures, said Pakistani journalists
have seen severe restrictions in the past, including shutting down of newspapers,
imprisonment of journalists and direct censorship.
15.
Media coverage; July, 18, 2019: The ruling party has linking critical coverage by
the press to potential “treason” in its latest broadside against the country's
beleaguered media. The
official account of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) fired off over two dozen
tweets in English and Urdu late Tuesday, lambasting the press for criticism,
saying it can be deemed “Anti-State”.“Freedom of Expression is beauty of
Democracy. Expressing Enemy's Stance is Not Freedom of speech but treason against
its people,” read one tweet. “Media houses & journalists must take care
that in their quest for criticism on State, they intentionally or
unintentionally do not end up propagating enemy's stance,” read another, with
the hashtag JournalismNotAgenda. Pakistan
routinely ranks among the world's most dangerous countries for media workers,
and reporters have frequently been detained, beaten and even killed for being
critical of the government or military.In recent years, the space for dissent
has shrunk further, with the government announcing a crackdown on social
networks and traditional media houses decrying pressure from authorities that
they say has resulted in widespread self-censorship. Media watchdog Reporters
without Borders recently warned of “disturbing dictatorial tendencies” after
three Pakistani TV stations were briefly taken off air in what it called
“brazen censorship”. The Committee to Protect Journalists last year warned that
the military had “quietly, but effectively, set restrictions on reporting”.
16. Treason: July, 20,
2019: Discrediting the media On Tuesday, it was dialled up a notch when
the PTI’s official Twitter account fired off over two dozen tweets in English
and Urdu suggesting that some journalists were engaged in anti-state propaganda
and that certain reportage could be considered “treason”. In the echo chamber that
is social media, several hashtags targeting journalism soon made an appearance,
with two of them trending at the top in Pakistan. Analysing some of the data, a
report in Dawn on Thursday revealed that besides the PTI’s official account,
several verified Twitter accounts of the ruling party’s regional chapters were
participating in the campaign. The prime minister’s focal person on digital
media described the Twitter campaign to this paper as an effort to “educate”
journalists which had been “blown out of context”. The PTI’s antipathy to a
vibrant media that presents diverse points of view has become quite apparent
since it came to power last year. The party’s supporters on social media also
tend to display a rigid mindset that brooks no dissent, a characteristic that
by definition puts them at odds with what journalism stands for — not a public
relations exercise but a means to hold the powerful to account. Some
journalists have in the recent past been accused of anti-state activities; some
are still under a cloud of suspicion, deliberately created to silence them and
discredit their views as being dictated by a foreign agenda. However, for the
government to imply from an official platform that some media persons are
guilty of committing treason is dog-whistle tactics of the worst kind and
should be roundly condemned. Pakistan, particularly under authoritarian
governments, has a disgraceful history of labelling as a traitor anyone who can
act as a check on absolute power or who propagates a point of view that does
not conform to the official narrative. Let alone others, even the sister of the
nation’s founder was not spared. To conflate journalism — or certain types of
journalism — with crimes against the state, even while lauding the concept of
freedom of speech as a pillar of democracy, is sheer sophistry. Moreover, in
Pakistan’s polarised and hyper-nationalistic atmosphere, the dangerous
consequences of being labelled a traitor can never be underestimated. There is
a vast difference between critiquing policy — in other words, fair comment —
and conspiring to overthrow the state. Perhaps the government needs to
“educate” itself.
17. Pakistani Media: July, 22, 2019: The
media in Pakistan today is in a multifarious crisis of major proportions. Much
less loved today than it was a decade ago at its peak of popularity, when it
flexed its muscle to help political forces to hound out a military dictator
from power, needled democratic governments on governance and championed a Naya
Pakistan when it still sparkled in popular imagination and literally helped
Imran Khan into power, it is now mired in a crisis of credibility. The media
seems to have lost its missionary zeal to report a changing Pakistan. Just like
the rise of multi-channel current affairs television sidelined print media
about 20 years ago, the rise of the internet and the ubiquity of social media —
popular among a largely adult but mostly young population in Pakistan — has
overtaken TV as one of the key sources of news and information. This is
upending traditional media markets and threatening jobs in mainstream media
enterprises and shaking up existing media business models. Steadily growing
manipulation of the media by a coarsening regulatory regime, driven by
political compulsions of the deep state, is robbing the media of its integrity
and, hence, audiences and influence. A tottering economy is the bitter icing on
this crumbling cake. The valour and vivaciousness that characterised the
media’s ability to influence independent news’ agendas is gone and its voice is
stuttering. Despondency among media practitioners — and even owners — reigns as
censorship increases by the day, fear stains the proverbial newsprint and huge
question marks hover over the media landscape about whether Pakistan’s media
‘revolution’ — for whatever it was perceived to be — is over. From a ‘player’
it is becoming an ‘observer’ in the state’s structure. Sustainability of the
media is severely threatened in the current bust phase of its business cycle
and, with it, the ability of the plural and diverse Pakistan to conduct a
decent dialogue with itself . The media is no longer making the money it did a
few years ago, according to media owners and managers. The slide began even
before the Nawaz Sharif government eventually gave way to the Imran Khan
dispensation after the 2018 elections Afzal Butt, the president of the Pakistan
Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ), says the number of journalists ballooned
from about 2,000 in 2019 to over 20,000 and the overall number of people
associated with the media industry to about 250,000. This expansion in the size
of the media industry came off the back of improving economic fundamentals, an
increase in per capita income and a rise in the consumer economy with growing
surpluses in private incomes accompanied by an expanding advertising s.
Pakistan`s media industry, once viewed as among the most vibrant in South Asia,
started contracting with up to 3,000 journalists and media workers laid off.
Several outlets shut down, such as Waqt TV and the bureau offices of several TV
and print media outlets in Peshawar, Quetta and Multan. Partly affected by the
outcome of the July 2018 elections that brought to power a party not seen as
friendly to business and partly affected by an ailing economy coupled with the
withdrawal of government subsidies and dwindling advertising revenue, even big
and stable media groups were forced to shutter their publications and sack journalists.
The Jang Group the country`s largest media group shut down three of its
publications and two bureau offices, leaving more than 900 journalists and
related staff jobless in one single day. The Express Media Group and Dunya
Media Group also reportedly laid off over 200 journalists, apart from cutting
the salaries of the remaining workers by15 to 35 percent in recent months. Pay
cuts are rife now and even traditionally steady employers such as the Dawn
Media Group induced pay cuts. Herald, an icon of Pakistani journalism, has just
produced its last edition. Only a few channels manage to pay salaries on time
so much so that the largest channel, Geo T V, now often runs in arrears for
several months in payment of salaries to its staff, shifting the blame to the
curtailment of government and private advertising. In 2019, the media industry
is looking definitively shaky. While the print media continues to adopt a
hardline stance against governments, its news reporting, in general, is not
equally independent perhaps reflecting the over dependence on government
advertising. Things have, however, been changing since the elections in July
2018 brought the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party to power, which has shown
hostility in its dealings with all media: it has heavily slashed government
ad-spends former Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry admitted so in many press
conferences forcing the media to cut jobs while some TV channels and newspapers
have even been shut down.
However, the digital media in Pakistan is not supported by the government and, therefore, exhibits a relatively independent streak in its editorial positions, sustained as it is by the private sector rather than the public sector. A big part of what`s killing independent media is censorship with a vengeance. Pakistan`s chequered political history of long stretches of martial law, the subjugation of representative governments by the deep state, and a brutal domination of the media landscape ownership for most part of the country`s existence almost ensures that media independence has been mostly fiction. The government has for long been a big advertising client for the media. Money is often used as a censorship tool that brings short-term gains for corporate media but dilutes its relationship with media consumers, contributing to the crisis slowly killing off the media. Especially since broadcast liberalisation in 2002, the state has remained one of the most important sources of funding for Pakistan`s private media sector, as for both broadcasting and the printing press in Pakistan, government advertisements have historically acted as the backbone of their finances. The federal and provincial governments have often bought airtime on leading TV channels during primetime hours, subsidising their financial operations. Similarly, governments have also traditionally subsidised operations of leading newspapers by providing them with advertisement revenues. The advertising market size in Pakistan grew from Rs 66.9 billion in 2014-15 to Rs 87.7 billion in 2016-17. In August 2018, the Senate was informed that the government provided advertisements worth Rs 15.7 billion to print and electronic media from 2013 to 2017. This money clearly buys influence. But so does a slash in government advertising, say media managers. After the July 2018 elections, the provincial governments of Punjab and Sindh the main contributors of advertisement revenues for the print and electronic media and the federal government in Islamabad, have slashed their advertisement budgets by 70 percent, leaving the media industry in a bad financial situation. The crisis is closely entwined with politics. The collapsing media economy is in a key part also the result of the overall shrinking space for media being engineered as part of the censorship of political dissent,` he says. All of the editors, media managers and senior journalists consulted for this analysis agreed with this assessment, asserting that one of the key characteristics of Imran Khan government`s first year in power is the continual suppression of media, the intimidation of journalists, the shutting down of TV channels, restrictions on live coverage of opposition leaders, crackdowns on online freedom of expression and the use of procedural mechanisms such as the Pakistan Electronic Crimes Act (Peca) and Pemra to impose widespread censorship. They feel this is in aid of effecting a growing hush that includes silencing political discourse of all kinds. All this is being done with the outright support, if not encouragement, of the powers-that-be currently busy with aggressive manipulation of the political landscape. The media industry is collapsing not just because the money is being squeezed from government coffers but because the media legal regulatory regime, already not very supportive of media independence, is being used to muzzle the media,` says Alam. He points out the government`s attempt to extend its coercive and punitive reach to online spaces by floating the idea to merge online regulation with the print and media regulators into a single Big Brother-type Pakistan Media Regulatory Authority (PMRA). He laments that Pemra has consciously chosen to become more of a media content regulator than a media industry regulator. This partly explains how, in July 2019 alone, over two dozen news TV channels were officially censured for airing opposition leader Maryam Nawaz`s press conference about an accountability judge. Additionally, three TV channels were taken off air for the same `crime` while two separate channels were forced to take off-air interviews of Asif Zardari and Maryam Nawaz. Most of Bilawal Bhutto`s public engagements are never shown on TV while the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement`s public activities are completely censored.`The current laws governing market competition in the media sector are insufficient in ensuring fair-market practices,` says Alam. `There is an absence of a modern regulatory framework that adequately covers aspects such as audience share, circulation, revenue, distribution of share capital or voting rights, etc. Similarly, due to the absence of a comprehensive framework to ensure network neutrality, the state is blocking `undesired` content online, banning inappropriate` websites and shutting down the network arbitrarily in the guise of security. The work of Pakistani media practitioners and their employers is cut out for them. They have to go where the technology and money is, and that is where sustainability lies. But censorship will have to be battled in a concerted fight by the media and the political classes with the real censors. If Pakistani media is not to be swamped completely by the current endemic, this is the road to take. It needs to come out of its comfort zone.
However, the digital media in Pakistan is not supported by the government and, therefore, exhibits a relatively independent streak in its editorial positions, sustained as it is by the private sector rather than the public sector. A big part of what`s killing independent media is censorship with a vengeance. Pakistan`s chequered political history of long stretches of martial law, the subjugation of representative governments by the deep state, and a brutal domination of the media landscape ownership for most part of the country`s existence almost ensures that media independence has been mostly fiction. The government has for long been a big advertising client for the media. Money is often used as a censorship tool that brings short-term gains for corporate media but dilutes its relationship with media consumers, contributing to the crisis slowly killing off the media. Especially since broadcast liberalisation in 2002, the state has remained one of the most important sources of funding for Pakistan`s private media sector, as for both broadcasting and the printing press in Pakistan, government advertisements have historically acted as the backbone of their finances. The federal and provincial governments have often bought airtime on leading TV channels during primetime hours, subsidising their financial operations. Similarly, governments have also traditionally subsidised operations of leading newspapers by providing them with advertisement revenues. The advertising market size in Pakistan grew from Rs 66.9 billion in 2014-15 to Rs 87.7 billion in 2016-17. In August 2018, the Senate was informed that the government provided advertisements worth Rs 15.7 billion to print and electronic media from 2013 to 2017. This money clearly buys influence. But so does a slash in government advertising, say media managers. After the July 2018 elections, the provincial governments of Punjab and Sindh the main contributors of advertisement revenues for the print and electronic media and the federal government in Islamabad, have slashed their advertisement budgets by 70 percent, leaving the media industry in a bad financial situation. The crisis is closely entwined with politics. The collapsing media economy is in a key part also the result of the overall shrinking space for media being engineered as part of the censorship of political dissent,` he says. All of the editors, media managers and senior journalists consulted for this analysis agreed with this assessment, asserting that one of the key characteristics of Imran Khan government`s first year in power is the continual suppression of media, the intimidation of journalists, the shutting down of TV channels, restrictions on live coverage of opposition leaders, crackdowns on online freedom of expression and the use of procedural mechanisms such as the Pakistan Electronic Crimes Act (Peca) and Pemra to impose widespread censorship. They feel this is in aid of effecting a growing hush that includes silencing political discourse of all kinds. All this is being done with the outright support, if not encouragement, of the powers-that-be currently busy with aggressive manipulation of the political landscape. The media industry is collapsing not just because the money is being squeezed from government coffers but because the media legal regulatory regime, already not very supportive of media independence, is being used to muzzle the media,` says Alam. He points out the government`s attempt to extend its coercive and punitive reach to online spaces by floating the idea to merge online regulation with the print and media regulators into a single Big Brother-type Pakistan Media Regulatory Authority (PMRA). He laments that Pemra has consciously chosen to become more of a media content regulator than a media industry regulator. This partly explains how, in July 2019 alone, over two dozen news TV channels were officially censured for airing opposition leader Maryam Nawaz`s press conference about an accountability judge. Additionally, three TV channels were taken off air for the same `crime` while two separate channels were forced to take off-air interviews of Asif Zardari and Maryam Nawaz. Most of Bilawal Bhutto`s public engagements are never shown on TV while the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement`s public activities are completely censored.`The current laws governing market competition in the media sector are insufficient in ensuring fair-market practices,` says Alam. `There is an absence of a modern regulatory framework that adequately covers aspects such as audience share, circulation, revenue, distribution of share capital or voting rights, etc. Similarly, due to the absence of a comprehensive framework to ensure network neutrality, the state is blocking `undesired` content online, banning inappropriate` websites and shutting down the network arbitrarily in the guise of security. The work of Pakistani media practitioners and their employers is cut out for them. They have to go where the technology and money is, and that is where sustainability lies. But censorship will have to be battled in a concerted fight by the media and the political classes with the real censors. If Pakistani media is not to be swamped completely by the current endemic, this is the road to take. It needs to come out of its comfort zone.
18. Geo News: July, 24, 2019: The transmission of Geo News television
channel was taken off air and its channel number abruptly changed in many parts
of the country hours before Pakistani Prime Minister, Imran Khan’s visit to the
Washington, D.C., for an official visit on July 20, 2019.
19. Silencing the
majority: July, 26,2019: PML-N leader Maryam
Nawaz on Thursday urged unnamed institutions to "not come face to
face" with the people of Pakistan for the sake of what she called the
"incapable" government of Imran Khan. Addressing the "respected
institutions" of the country, Maryam said that these institutions
represented all the provinces of Pakistan, "but you are not the
institutions of Imran Khan. You are not the representatives of the man who
brought historical failure to Pakistan.""Don't pick a fight with the
people for the incapable and failed Imran Khan," she said while addressing
the unnamed institutions. Claiming
that the people of Balochistan, Punjab, Sindh and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were upset
with, but "want to respect", the institutions, she urged these powers
to "come forward and hug" the people of various provinces and solve
their issues. She also asked them to "honor the vote" and let the
people's representatives be elected. Maryam said the opposition
parties were observing 'Youm-i-Siyah' today because a year ago on this day,
"Your vote was crushed under the foot." She questioned the origins
of the ruling Baluchistan Awami Party (BAP), saying it was imposed upon the
people of Baluchistan after "snatching" their right to elect their
representative. The people's "true representatives" were asked forced
to switch their loyalties and "fake cases" were instituted against
those who refused to comply, the PML-N leader alleged. d by the PTI
20. Freedom of Press: July, 27, 2019: During PMs joint press conference with President Donald Trump, Mr
Khan declared: “To say there are curbs on Pakistani press is a joke.” Later, in
an interview
with a US think tank, he went so far as to say that the media in Pakistan is
freer than that in Britain, adding “it is not just free but it is out of
control”. It has been revealed in Karachi that the government is planning to
set up media courts,
ostensibly to resolve journalists’ grievances. Former president Asif Zardari’s
interview was pulled
a few minutes into transmission; 21 TV channels were sent show-cause notices for airing Maryam Nawaz’s live press conference; three
channels were taken off air without assigning any reason; another channel, a few
hours before the prime minister arrived in the US, was either forced off the
air or had its channel number changed in many parts of the country. The unrelenting assault
on editorial independence includes orders — sometimes in the guise of ‘advice’
— to give a particular spin to news reports, drop certain stories and even omit
specific quotes by elected individuals. In such a situation, where the
journalist community’s first and foremost grievance is a lack of freedom, media
courts signify a step towards institutionalized government regulation —
official censorship — so that the state’s stranglehold on the media will be
complete. No democracy can thrive without a free press, and a government secure
in its mandate to rule, must be open to fair comment. In fact, for the
wall-to-wall coverage of its 2014 dharna, the PTI has much to thank the far
freer press of the time.
21. No confidence motion: Jul, 30, 2019: The government giving clear indication that
there would not be voting on a no-confidence motion against Senate Chairman
Sadiq Sanjrani when the house meets on Aug 1.`The house has been summoned to
meet on August 1, and then there will be seven days [for voting],` Minister for
Parliamentary Affairs Azam Swati told a press conference here on Monday. The
remarks evoked a strong reaction from the opposition which has been accusing
the government and the Senate secretariat of using delaying tactics. PPP
parliamentary leader in the Senate Sherry Rehman said the rules were very clear
and the notice period had started the day the notice for a motion for leave to
move a resolution under Article 61 of the Constitution read with Article 53 (7)
C for the removal of the Senate chairman had been circulated among the members
of the house.
22. Press freedom: July, 31, 2019: The press
freedom issue has blown up to the extent
that it has now turned into the one embarrassing question the government cannot
provide adequate answers to, especially internationally. Foreign Minister Shah
Mehmood Qureshi faced it
during his appearance at a conference on the media recently, while Imran Khan
was asked about it
more than once during his trip to the United States. It can only be hoped that
it cost him at least one sleepless night as it was the one answer of his which
was judged to be far from satisfactory by many of the observers who otherwise
praised his visit to Washington. The issue gained intensity after interviews of
Asif Ali Zardari
and Maryam Nawaz
were pulled off air within minutes of the program beginning. Then came the news
of the latter being banned from air altogether. And the government appeared to be the
culprit What makes the issue particularly complex is that it is hard to tell
who is eventually responsible for these decisions which are being passed
on.
Status of
Democracy in Pakistan, June, 2019
1.
PTI government: June, 6, 2019: PTI
beleaguered administration is confronting several fronts. The emerging political alignment that has brought bitter rivals
the PML-N and the PPP together is ominous, although it may be sheer
political expediency that has forced the two to join hands. Indeed, it
signifies the shifting
sands of Pakistani politic. These disparate opposition groups may not be able to bring
down the government through street power. Yet jointly, they have already made
things more difficult for Imran Khan, who is struggling to come to grips with a
dire economic situation. The main opposition parties have announced they will
launch nationwide anti-government protests after Eid. Even more worrisome,
however, is the looming confrontation between the government and the legal
fraternity that is now up in arms on the issue of the presidential references
against superior court judges. The Supreme Judicial Council is due to take up
the reference against Justice Qazi Faez Isa on June 14.. Accusing the
government of having mala fide intentions, the bar associations have threatened
to “lockdown the courts” if the reference is upheld. The stand-off is
turning serious with the government refusing to withdraw the reference. The
cabinet has warned against agitation over the issue, insisting that the
references have been filed according to the law. According to the government,
there is no sacred cow and no one is above the law. That seems to have
further infuriated the lawyers. In a hard-hitting statement, the president of
the Supreme Court Bar Association threatened to go beyond street agitation and
protest inside the courts. The lawyer community has rallied behind the SCBA
call. Such unity of lawyer bodies is rare — and extremely alarming given the
rising political temperature. Either
way, whether the references are upheld or not, it will not be a happy situation
for the government. The issue has already galvanised the opposition parties, rights
groups and civil society.
Questions
have also been raised about the timing of the move against the judges,
notwithstanding its legality. Meanwhile, the government is under attack for
allegedly putting curbs on media freedom. A generally depressing economic
outlook — high inflation, rising utility bills, etc — has fuelled the public’s
discontent. A government under distress has given the opposition a huge
political boost.
Can
the government end this siege that it is responsible for? There is a huge question
mark over its capacity to deal with these multiple challenges. It is hard for
any government to fight on so many fronts and, indeed, much more so for a
coalition riven by serious internal differences. The government seems to be on
auto pilot and completely oblivious to the gathering storm that could bring it
down. Sensing the gravity
of the situation, some of the coalition partners have started reviewing their
options, further adding to the government’s woes. Akhtar Mengal, whose party
support is critical for the survival of the coalition administration, now
regularly appears with the opposition. Some other allied parties, too, have
publicly expressed their reservations over policy issues. It has been the
establishment’s backing that provided a semblance of stability to Imran Khan’s
government so far. In fact, the establishment has gained far more space now as
the government loses control. Its role is much more expansive than under any
civilian administration in the past. But with the worsening crisis of
governance, things could change dramatically. Too many fronts are hard to
defend.
2.
PBC:
June, 10, 2019: The Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) on Saturday
announced that the legal fraternity will record a nationwide protest on June 14
in response to a reference filed against senior Supreme Court judge Justice
Qazi Faez Isa.PBC members also demanded resignations of the law minister and
the attorney general of Pakistan, stating that the May 28 reference against the
top court judge was based on ‘mala fide’ intent. Expressing the fraternity’s
intentions of staging a peaceful sit-in, PBC vice chairman Amjad Shah urged the
government to immediately withdraw the reference. Purpose of the protest is to
guard the essence of the Constitution and preserve the supremacy of law, he
explained
3.
Judiciary: June, 10,
2019:
Once again, the judiciary is under threat.
Supreme Court judge Qazi Faez Isa heard a suo motu case regarding the
violence that TLP thugs indulged in during the Faizabad sit-in last year. The
dharna resulted in millions in losses and destabilised the PML-N government.
Justice Isa was particularly critical of the role of intelligence agencies in
imposing ‘self-censorship’ on the media: “No one, including any government,
department or intelligence agency, can curtail the fundamental right of freedom
of speech, expression and press beyond the limits mentioned in Article 19 of
the Constitution.“Those who resort to such tactics under the mistaken belief
that they serve some higher goal delude themselves.” The judgment mentions the
pressure that the Dawn and Geo media groups are being subjected to. the
self-censorship contributors and editors are forced to currently exercise. Gen
Musharraf, for all his faults, never exerted this kind of crude pressure to
block criticism. Critical bloggers, even though they have a limited readership,
have been picked up by unidentified men, and allegedly subjected to torture
before being released. In fact, some have fled the country. Journalists have
reported similar tactics. Many newspapers have been deprived of government
advertisements, and have been forced to slash costs by making many of the staff
redundant. These crude strong-arm tactics have cast a chill across a
once-vibrant media landscape. But the judiciary and the media are not the only
pillars of democracy under attack. Free and fair elections are the bedrock of
any democratic dispensation. While polls in Pakistan have always been
contentious, the results have mostly reflected a rough approximation of the
popular will. However, last year’s general elections that brought Imran
Khan to power were widely viewed — here and abroad — as seriously flawed.
Foreign observers and journalists reported on widespread electoral fraud.
Opposition candidates were allegedly threatened and forced to change
allegiance. No wonder the prime minister serves at the pleasure of higher
powers who despise democracy, but recognize they have to put up with it. Fed up
of Nawaz Sharif and Asif Zardari, they have placed their bet on Imran Khan this
time. The current government’s role has been craven, to say the least.
Granted that it owes its electoral victory to non-political forces, but it has
been unable to assert itself, and is being used as a rubber stamp on all
important issues. After all, it has a significant support base, and should be
able to speak to its mentors as an equal. But there’s room for only one at the
top of the power pyramid. No prizes for guessing who that is. Meanwhile, Pemra,
the state regulator for the electronic media, has blocked comment on the issue.
It has issued directions to the electronic channels not to air any discussion
or analysis on the references filed against the judges of the superior court.
But bar associations across the country are gearing up to combat this blatant
attempt to neuter an institution that, despite its flaws, remains the arbiter
of last resort. The ease with which most of the media has been marginalised
underlines the fragility of our democracy. After years of fighting for freedom,
journalists thought our independence was now virtually guaranteed. How wrong we
were. The assumption that elected governments would protect this hard-won
freedom has been upended with Imran Khan in power. Thus far, he has not uttered
a word in defense of newspapers and television channels that are being bullied
and harassed.
4.
Reference against
judiciary: June, 11, 2019:The ruling elites’ Justice
Qazi Faez Isa in 2019 looks chillingly similar to the one against former chief
justice Iftikhar Chaudhry in 2007 the
institution of the reference looks more like a witch-hunt than part of an
accountability Firstly, Justice Isa is
one of the foremost critics of the unconstitutional actions of the ruling
elites especially the military elite, a critic of the mullah-state collusion
and a sceptic of the accountability process especially against opponents of the
current government. What an amazing coincidence that post-2008, the first
presidential reference against a sitting Supreme Court judge is against a
critic of the ruling elite. Secondly, the Faizabad dharna judgement is a
damning critique of the unconstitutional actions and inactions of the ruling
circles, especially the military elite, and the role of the PTI. Multiple
review petitions have been filed by numerous government departments against the
judgement but the ruling elite clearly realises that review petitions are
rarely successful. Therefore, what a coincidence that the Faizabad dharna
judgement was announced on Feb 6, 2019, and within a couple of months, a
presidential reference was filed against Justice Isa out of nefarious
intentions to seemingly pressurise him, or have him removed, so that he does
not hear these review petitions. Thirdly, only last year, a mysterious
petition questioning the appointment of Justice Isa as a judge was pursued in
the Supreme Court but the latter recognising it as frivolous petition dismissed
it. The present reference is a continuation of the earlier witch-hunt. But the
larger purpose of this reference is to send a clear message to all independent
judges — fall in line with the state’s unconstitutional designs or be prepared
to be shipped out into the wilderness. The root cause of the ruling
elites’ conflict with independent judges is structural, ideological and
strategic
5.
Vawda: June, 13, 2019: the federal
minister for water resources blithely declared, not once but twice, that, “If we had it in our
power to hang 5,000 people, the future of 220m people would be transformed”. Not content with this vile remark,
he went on to disparage the Constitution, saying that if one waited to do so
within its ambit, such a purge would take 20 years. The obvious implication is
that in Mr Vawda’s eyes, the Constitution — which enshrines fundamental rights,
including the right to security of person and due process — is a hindrance to
‘real’ progress. By his words,
Mr Vawda has undermined the very basis on which a democracy functions. Clearly,
the minister has little appreciation of the enormous responsibility — not to
mention honor — that being a member of the House of Representatives entails. His remarks are indicative of a fascist
mindset willing to go to any length to achieve its objectives, and one hopes it
is limited to this one individual. The government must immediately censure its
MNA for his appalling remarks, and disabuse him of the notion that the
Constitution is a piece of paper to be trampled upon at will.
6.
Journalist slapped: June, 19,
2019: Federal Minister for Science and Technology
Fawad Chaudhry on Sunday said he had slapped a journalist because he had
knocked the door of all government institutions for justice but no one heard
him. Fawad exposed the performance of institutions of his own government. In an
interview, Fawad said he had approached the Pemra and then FIA but to no avail.
When suggested that he should have registered his complaint with the
departments concerned instead of taking law into his own hands, he replied that
no institution redressed his complaint, as unfortunately no department was
working. The minister said his character-assassination was being carried out
daily. He said there remained just two options: either to tolerate humiliation
or teach lesson to those who attack you. Tensions between Fawad Chaudhry and
anchorperson Sami Ibrahim intensified after the latter accused the former of
slapping him at a wedding event in Faisalabad on Friday. According to the
anchorperson, the minister used objectionable language against him, slapped him
and then left the venue.
7.
Blogger killed: June, 26, 2019: Social media activist and blogger
Muhammad Bilal Khan was killed by unidentified assailants in Islamabad late
Sunday night. Khan was stabbed in the capital’s G-9/4 area and was shifted to a
hospital where he succumbed to his injuries. According to police, the
assailants called Khan to meet them after which they attacked and subsequently
killed him. He hailed from Gilgit-Baltistan and was a Shariah graduate from
the International Islamic University of Islamabad (IIUI) . Khan had more
than 16,000 followers on Twitter and over 48,000 subscribers on YouTube. He was
active on social media where he tweeted and talked about sensitive political
issues.
8. Senate
Chairman: June, 27,2019:
Opposition party leaders during a multi-party conference (MPC) in Islamabad on
Wednesday finally reached consensus on the removal of Chairman Senate Sadiq
Sanjrani.
9.
Judiciary and military relations: June, 30, 2019: The judicial side of this civil-military conflict has either been
denied by contending that the judiciary has been the alleged ‘B team’ of the
military or, if acknowledged, the judicial-military conflict has been perceived
more as an aberration and less as an emerging trend. Between 1947 and 1971, Pakistan had a
colonial-minded but independent judiciary, which meant a judiciary which
provided legal justice impartially and independently but did not question the
legitimacy of unconstitutional regimes or question their fundamental
unconstitutional actions. Mohammad Munir, the Machiavellian chief justice, and
A.R. Cornelius, the decent chief justice, were really different sides of this
same colonial-minded but independent judiciary. The breakup of Pakistan in 1971
led to the establishment of both democracy and democratic constitutionalism (ie
adult franchise democracy and the 1973 Constitution) in Pakistan. This laid the
foundation for a fundamental structural contradiction between the roles of the
judiciary and military. On one side, protection of democracy and a
democratic constitution guaranteed the tremendous power of the judiciary; on
the other, the de facto power of the military elite was fundamentally
threatened by both democracy and democratic constitutionalism. Thus came about
a structural contradiction between these state institutions. But this
contradiction coexisted with the inherent weakness of a judiciary having no
coercive power to protect itself or implement its decisions. This gave rise to
the paradox of both continuing collusion and emerging dissent with the military
elite. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s judicial murder and the legitimisation of
the martial laws of Gens Ziaul Haq and Pervez Musharraf are examples of this
continuing collusion. But judges refusing to take the martial law oath in 1981,
2000 and 2007, the judicial examination of the military’s role in the 1990s
elections, the missing persons cases, and Musharraf’s treason trial ordered by
the Supreme Court are some examples of emerging dissent. Former chief
justice Jawwad S. Khawaja may have been right in noting the 2007-2009 judicial
movement as a watershed point for the judiciary’s increasing independence from
the military elite; but 2007 only accelerated the existing structural
contradiction and consequential historical conflict. Therefore, this structural
and historical context explains both Justice Faez Isa’s current critique of the
militarisation of politics and the militarisation of constitutionalism and also
explains the witch-hunt in the form of a presidential reference against him,
manufactured and processed by Musharraf’s loyalists in the law ministry and the
attorney general offices. Justice Isa’s legal confrontation: The
Faizabad dharna judgement dated Feb 6, 2019, authored by Justice Isa, contains
a summary of what he thinks is wrong in Pakistan — violation of citizens’
fundamental rights, illegal tactics used to achieve political agendas, lack of
security mechanisms to protect citizens, violation of their constitutional role
by the military and intelligence agencies, violation of media independence and
inaction of Pemra, the weak role of the Election Commission and the misuse of
Islam. But as far as the civil-military conflict is concerned, this judgement
makes two key points. Firstly, it contains a stringent critique of the
militarisation of politics and civilian affairs due to the recent alleged
unconstitutional role of the military elite especially the intelligence
agencies. In short, this is a no-holds-bar critique of the security
establishment. Secondly, far-reaching policy directions are issued on
sensitive issues such as the regulation of intelligence agencies and initiation
of action against armed forces’ interference in political and civilian matters.
More importantly, these directions are based on the untested liberal
presumptions that the law and Constitution can on their own restrain the
tremendous de facto power of the security elite and such judicial directions
controlling de facto military power will be implemented without the need to use
force as the judiciary has no coercive powers of its own. Chief Justice
Khosa’s dialogical approach: In his address of Jan 17, 2019, at a full court
reference for former chief justice Saqib Nisar, Chief Justice Khosa proposed a
different, indigenous approach to problems of institutional conflict especially
the civil-military conflict. Such an out-of-the-box approach has four distinct
elements. Firstly, there is the need for an inter-institutional dialogue at the
summit level to be convened and chaired by the president of Pakistan. This is
based on the premise that there is nothing in the separation-of-power doctrine
which “demands institutional isolation or forbids collective efforts to achieve
the common good”. Secondly, such a summit should be attended by the top
parliamentary, judicial and executive leadership including the military and the
intelligence agencies. Thirdly, the result of this exercise will be a
“charter of governance” so as to ensure that we don’t “keep drifting or
floating aimlessly”. Fourthly, the underlying purpose of this
inter-institutional dialogue is to bolster constitutionalism and the rule of
law, strengthen democracy and create conditions for inter-institutional working
towards the “real issues of the citizens of this great country”. To put it
differently, such a dialogical approach is rooted in legal realism, which realizes
the destructiveness of an all-out institutional conflict between different
state organs as well as the need for dialogue in order to ensure judicial
independence, constitutional democracy, human rights and effective state
authority. The consequences of non-mitigation of such a conflict will be tragic
because military domination of both politics and constitutionalism will lead to
an isolated, ungovernable and unsustainable Pakistani state in the 21st
century. On the other hand, demoralization of the military resulting from the
mishandling of this conflict may lead to grave threats to the internal and
external security of Pakistan.
10. Army Chief’s remarks: July, 1, 2019:On Friday, army chief
Gen Qamar Bajwa, speaking at a seminar on the economy at the National Defence
University, contended that “fiscal mismanagement” and timid decision-making in
the past are responsible for the dire straits the country finds itself in.
Further, he endorsed the PTI government for the “difficult decisions” it has
taken to resuscitate the economy, citing examples of other countries having
overcome similar challenges with the same approach. It is indeed imperative
that Pakistan get its house in order, for as the army chief rightly stated,
“there can be no sovereignty without economic stability”. The military has
demonstrated its own commitment to what is likely to be a long and arduous
exercise by foregoing the annual defence budget increment. The military leadership should not allow
itself to be sidetracked from its core responsibilities — which include keeping
the eastern and western borders secure — and instead apply its energies to its
area of expertise. Maintaining the separation of powers as defined in the
Constitution strengthens institutions and, in turn, the overarching governance
framework. However, by endorsing the PTI government’s actions, the army chief
is expressing an overt political opinion. That is undesirable for more than one
reason. Politics is seen as the art of the possible, which means it can — even
in the most evolved democracies — require some bending of principles and the
forging of improbable alliances. That is why it is best left to the politicians
while other institutions remain above the fray. Moreover, the armed forces play
an important role in the conduct of elections; the appearance of impartiality
on their part thus has a critical bearing on the credibility of the polls. The
PTI government has thrown itself with gusto into the task of attacking the PPP
and PML-N for alleged mismanagement of the economy when they were in power; the
opposition has responded fiercely to its accusations. This is the nature of the
political back and forth in a parliamentary democracy, even a dysfunctional one
as ours. Gen Bajwa’s remarks unnecessarily expose the military to accusations
of encroaching on the political realm. The PTI, by including the army chief in
a top economic consultative body — the first time this has happened in a
civilian government — will be much to blame if there are negative repercussions
for the military’s public standing, and Gen Bajwa’s legacy.
Status of
Democracy in Pakistan, May 2019
1. Attack on
Journalists: May, 4, 2019: A Pakistani journalist was beaten up by unknown
persons in Lahore, the capital city of Punjab province.. Asad Kharal, an investigative
journalist, was thrashed by some masked armed persons near Allama Iqbal
International Airport Lahore on night between Tuesday and Wednesday. He
received multiple injuries and was rushed to Services Hospital Lahore. A
British-Pakistani commentator was briefly ‘abducted’ in Lahore, the capital
city of Punjab province of Pakistan. Gul
Bukhari, a contributing writer of Daily The Nation, Lahore, was intercepted by
some unidentified persons in Cantonment area of Lahore, while she was on her
way to appear in a TV show of Waqt News Channel, Tuesday night.
2. Ban on Dawn: May
14, 2019: Two of Pakistan’s main media
associations strongly condemned the government for imposing a ban on official
advertisements to the Dawn Media Group including newspaper and television
channel.. The Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) has condemned the
government’s decision to impose a ban on advertisements to the Dawn Media Group
and termed it a move against media freedom.
3. Journalist implicated in treason: May, 19, 2019: Each
morning, in the last few months, journalist Shahzeb Jillani would wake up to a
barrage of notifications on Twitter. But on March 24, he admits, `something
changed.` That was when he posted a tweet criticizing the decision to decorate
a senior military intelligence officer `widely accused of political
engineering` during the July 2018 election . A troll warned him that he would
soon lose his job at Dunya News channel. A few weeks later, Jillani was, in
fact, sacked from his job. FIA had filed
a case against him on charges of cyber-terrorism, which carries a maximum jail
sentence of 14 years. According to the First Investigation Report, Jillani was
accused by a viewer of `articulating defamatory remarks against the respected
institutions of Pakistan`, a crime under the Pakistan Electronic Crimes Act
(Peca) 2016. The complainant alleged
that Jillani was toeing the `line of foreign agencies on social media and had
also been blogging in order to implement his agenda against the sovereignty of
Pakistan`. The complainant further claimed that the act of the `suspect` was
`in collusion with the enemy countries that seems to intense [sic] conspiracy,
which directly or indirectly damaged and defamed the State of Pakistan by
casting audacious aspersions against sacred institutions. The statement of the
FIA cybercrime reporting centre in Karachi mentions that, during the course of
the inquiry, it was found that `Jillani had with criminal intent and ulterior
motives and without any lawful justification made sarcastic, derogatory,
disrespectful remarks and used defamatory language against Pakistan, the
Election Commission of Pakistan, and the armed force In the latest update till the filing of this
report, the FIA has withdrawn the cognisable charges (cyber-terrorism) as well
as the charge of hate speech in its final investigation report submitted in the
court. However, the case is still under trail for charges of defamation under
Section 20 of Peca. an officer or
another cannot, on its behalf, invoke this section of the law,` she points out
Earlier, in December 2018 journalist Raza Rumi, then editor at The Daily Times,
was the target of an online campaign against him after he published an
editorial by an Ahmadi author in criticism of an online influencer. `Between
December 31 and January 2, more than 2,000 tweets were sent out against me,`
says Rumi. This barrage of abuse and defamatory content has been and can be a
threat to real life employment. This is preemptive harassment that often leads
to dangerous consequences. It not only encourages self-censorship online but
also influences editorial policy. According to Saeed Rizwan, a cultural
anthropologist specializing in big data, users populate the hashtags using a
structured network. The users who are predominately alleged supporters of PTl
based on their bio description and profile pictures running the campaigns were
only invested in amplifying the abuse hashtags and maximizing mentions of the
journalists being targeted. They did not engage in individual trolling the
common targets for mentions, he confesses, are journalists. `They are closer to
news. If you get their attention, the word spreads around faster,` he says
There`s a bias in how these negative social media campaigns are dealt with,
however. On March 13, in a leaked letter online, the cybercrime wing of the FIA
was ordered to initiate inquiries against five journalists and parties for
allegedly executing what it called `a targeted social media campaign` against
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman during his February visit to Pakistan.
The `campaign` in question consisted merely of users changing their profile
photos to that of journalist Jamal Khashoggi who was murdered inside the Saudi
consulate in Istanbul in October as a form of protest during the Saudi royal`s
visit. This `conveyed a very disrespectful message` towards the visitor, the
letter said, adding that a few social media activists and groups remained
particularly active in running the campaign till the very last day of the
visit. There was no prior communication from the FIA regarding the enquiry,`
Murtaza Solangi, one of the journalists named in the list, tells Eos over the
phone. `As soon as I tweeted a picture of the letter I received via my sources,
a swarm of pro-government accounts started to attack me online. They [tro11sl
began challenging me to put up Khashoggi`s picture again after the letter came
out. They feel so empowered that they can intimidate journalists and suppress
critical voices,` he says. According to Solangi, no enquiry has been initiated
against the journalists named in the letter as per his knowledge. Given the
concurrent trend of criticism online and the government`s lack of
acknowledgment of the same, information practitioners wonder if the real
motivation is to peddle the larger narrative of regulating digital media. Read
more at https://epaper.dawn.com/DetailImage.php?StoryImage=19_05_2019_521_001
4. Case dropped: May, 22, 2019: Citing lack of evidence, the
Session Court in Karachi has dismissed the case of cyber terrorism against
journalist Shahzeb Jilani who was charged defamatory remarks against security
and law enforcement agencies of Pakistan. During the hearing on May 18, the
court has declared that the First Information Report (FIR) against Jilani is
non maintainable and Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) has failed to produce
substantial evidences against the journalist. FIA’s Cyber Crime Reporting
Centre on April 6, 2019 had lodged FIR against Jilani and other staff members
of Dunya News television channel under the Pakistan Penal Code and Prevention
of Electronic Crimes Act. The FIA had booked the journalist in a case
registered under Sections 10 (a) (cyber terrorism), 11 (electronic forgery) and
20 (malicious code) of the Pakistan Electronic Crime Act, 2016, on the
complaint of Moulvi Iqbal Haider, a resident of Karachi.
5. NAB Chairman: May,23.2019: Javed Chaushry’s interview with NAB
Chairman : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLMFT2B7cy4 : A video claims
that NAB Chairman hasd conversation with a woman,https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=610757286103368&_rdc=1&_rdr. Both have been
denied. PMLN demans a parliamentary probe. Both have been denied by NAB
Chairman, PMs close associate also implicated in the later video release. The
woman in the story has her own story: https://www.facebook.com/100008181316006/videos/2349475788668442/UzpfSTY1OTY2MjUwMDoxMDE1ODcxMzkxODA3NzUwMQ/
6.
Status of PTI
government: May, 26, 2019: as worries about the economy deepen and the
entire top finance team is changed with a number of old faces being brought
back to the helm, the ship seems no steadier than it was. Experts talk of
structural changes and reform — which will be painful in the extreme
particularly to the most vulnerable — as being inevitable and a bitter pill
that has to be swallowed if years of malaise resulting in mounting debt and
deficit are to be corrected. While the prime minister is keen on being seen as the
man in charge, every day evidence emerges to the contrary as the roots of each
new appointment to important decision-making positions fills one with a sense
of déjà -vu. One whose appointment
as chairman of the Board of Investment was touted as being synonymous with an
event that would open the floodgates of direct foreign investment in the
country is no more in office. His
‘resignation’ was greeted with horror by several knowledgeable people. Perhaps,
it was this horror and criticism at his exit that prompted one of Prime
Minister Imran Khan’s top aides to defend the decision in a TV interview.
Jahangir Khan Tareen, the man disqualified by the Supreme Court from holding
public office for mis declaration of assets and not speaking the truth,
appeared on TV and claimed that the BoI chief was sacked and did not resign. Mr
Tareen also said anyone not delivering would be changed by ‘the decisive’ prime
minister. He may not have named Asad Umar but it was clear that he was implying
that the finance minister’s sacking had been on similar grounds. This spin was aimed at showing a prime
minister fully in charge — and Jahangir Tareen (disqualified or not) as having
the former’s ear and being at the heart of PTI decision-making. It may work in
the short term but will do little to lessen the extreme pain many of the
vulnerable are already feeling. With a dramatically depreciating rupee, most
likely under IMF diktat, triggering inflation unseen in recent years, a rise of
one and half per cent in the interest rate to over 12pc, may check the
downslide somewhat but will also have other undesirable consequence. The prime minister, as he addressed a
fund-raiser of his Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital, described the
opposition leadership gathered for a strategy meeting over Iftar as a
congregation of ‘shaitaan’ — Satan to rapturous applause by his donors and
supporters. The use of such language was indeed in bad taste, particularly when
used by a country’s chief executive for its main opposition leaders. All one can
say is that he reacted thus as he was feeling the pressure of the coming
together of most of his political opponents in one place.
7.
NAB Chairman: May, 30, 2019: personal moral standards ought to be a prerequisite for holding high
public office, particularly in the case of those whose task it is to judge the
morality of others. But unfortunately, such high standards are in short supply
in this land of the pure. That has led to diminishing public trust in our state
institutions. In the wake of recent allegations of turpitude involving the head
of the country’s top accountability bureau, the question of morality and ethics
in public office has assumed greater relevance. As played out on social media,
in mainstream media and in the public discourse, the allegations of immoral
behaviour on the part of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) chief are too
serious to be dismissed as a ‘conspiracy to malign him’.Justice Javed Iqbal has
been in the eye of the storm for some time now, because of the controversy surrounding
the draconian accountability process. His
public stance has not helped ensure impartial implementation of the law. His
latest remarks to the local media have brought into question the entire
anti-corruption drive. His comments about opposition leaders seeking some kind
of a deal to extricate themselves from the graft cases against them, and
pressure from different quarters on him not to act against certain elements,
has prompted questions about his own impartiality. Being a former judge of the
Supreme Court, one expected from him a greater degree of caution. A
major question is whether he should be speaking to the media at all and giving
his personal views. The reaction of the opposition parties and the storm his
remarks have stirred were predictable, and have reinforced perceptions of the
accountability process in the country being politically motivated. The
clarification issued by NAB did not satisfy the critics. More damaging,
however, have been the video and audio recordings that purportedly showed the
NAB chief engaging in overly familiar conduct with the wife of a man under
investigation by the bureau. A mainstream private TV channel was the first to
air the videos. Although they were immediately taken off air on Pemra’s orders
and the channel tendered an apology, the recordings went viral on social
media.While the authenticity of the recordings is yet to be proved, the damage
has been done. Again, the official NAB statement left many questions
unanswered. It was not enough to dismiss the recordings as fake.NAB has
reportedly filed a reference against the woman and her husband, who is believed
to be in the bureau’s custody, on blackmailing charges.A major question is
whether Justice Iqbal had any contact with the person in the recording. The opposition’s
demand for a parliamentary investigation into the matter is valid. There is
also a need for a forensic examination to ascertain whether the recordings are
real or fake. It is a serious allegation against the holder of a high and
important public office and must not be set aside. . .More importantly, it is
the reputation of NAB as an impartial investigative body that is at stake. The
latest allegations against its head have brought this premier anti-corruption
body under intense public scrutiny. It is crucial to reach a conclusion on the
scandal.
8. Attack on Judiciary: May, 30, 2019:
Against the backdrop of reports regarding institution of references against
superior court judges, a sitting judge of the Supreme Court on Wednesday
approached President Dr Arif Alvi, complaining that selective leaks to the
media amount to his character assassination, thus jeopardising right to due
process and fair trial. Justice Qazi Faez Isa also said he would be obliged if
the former could let him know if it was correct that a reference had been filed
against him under Article 209 of the Constitution in the Supreme Judicial
Council (SJC). Legal observers believe
that the current campaign against Justice Isa was launched after he authored a
strongly worded judgement on Feb 6 in a case relating to the Nov 2017 Faizabad
sit-in by the Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan, directing the defence ministry and
chiefs of the army, navy and air force to penalise the personnel under their
command found to have violated their oath. Justice Qazi Isa is in line to
become the chief justice of Pakistan
Media reports suggest that a number of references have been filed in the
SJC under Article 209 of the Constitution against a Supreme Court judge and a
judge of the Sindh High Court and another of the Lahore High Court on the
pretext of undeclared foreign assets, as well as a retired superior court
judge. The other highlight of the day was the resignation of Additional
Attorney General Zahid F. Ebrahim, a son of the late chief election commissioner
Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim. He left the coveted office by stating that in his
opinion the attempt (to file reference) was not about accountability of judges
but a reckless attempt to tarnish the reputadon of independent individuals and
browbeat the judiciary. `Unless resisted, it will cause irreparable damage to
the institution which is the protector of our fundamental rights and the
bedrock of our fledgling democracy,` Zahid Embrahim said in a separate letter
to the president while tendering his resignation at the same time.
9. IK: May, 30, 2019: the drift towards ceremonial irrelevance
continues for the prime minister. The enormous adjustment that this government
is gearing up to undertake pursuing a revenue target that is 35 percent higher than
the revenues collected this year will take a rain of taxes and every ounce of
goodwill at the White House in order to pass the reviews through which the Fund
will be grading the government`s performance. Pressures on Pakistan are
mounting to deliver on the Taliban talks table, and the conventional wisdom in
the corridors of power is that `we should be prepared for a backlash in case
the Americans don`t get a political settlement on their terms`. This is serious
business, and preparations such as these will require the state to be standing
on the widest possible patch of solid ground economically speaking as well as
politically. Quicksand is no place to make a stand. The levers of power that
the superpower wields over a small country like Pakistan are still intact,
notwithstanding the stupendous damage that the superpower has suffered to its
own standing in the world community as well as the erosion of its economic
supremacy. Consider the language in the IMF statement that points towards the
inclusion of FATF conditions in the Fund program, even though these have little
to no direct economic significance. Consider also this line from the latest
Sentinel report put out by the US Department of Defence: `The DoD identified
the Haqqani Network, the Eastern Turkestan Islamic Movement (E TIM), and
Lashkar-e Taiba as groups that present the greatest threat to US and allied
forces in Afghanistan. There is a subtle but important change that has just
taken place here. This is the first time that groups like LeT and ETIM have
been designated by the defence department as `groups that present the greatest
threat to US and allied forces in Afghanistan`. This has been discussed
verbally between Pakistan and the United States for years, but never found its
way into writing. Apparently, some amount of discussion and debate went into
the decision to put these names out in writing because the same report also
says that `The DoD disagreed with the characterisation of ETIM as a comparable
threat to the Haqqani Network and Laskhar-e-Taiba but did not provide a
separate assessment of the group` All previous reports mentioned only the
Taliban,Haqqani Network, the militant Islamic State group and Al Qaeda as
operating in Afghanistan that represent a direct threat to US and allied
forces. The sudden expansion of this list did not happen without any triggers.
And it is hard to find what those triggers might be if one looks at all the
attacks that have happened against the US and allied forces in Afghanistan from
December 2018 onward. In subtle and barely perceptible moves such as these,
the architecture of what such a `backlash` might work through is being put in
place. Towards the end of 2019, and in the opening months of 2020, Pakistan`s
position could be under tremendous pressure if the talks have not yielded fruit
by then. Awareness of this seems to be driving a sense of urgency in the
security establishment. It would be a mistake to take one`s own power for
granted in times such as these. When gripped too hard, power has the tendency
to slip through one`s fingers like sand. It is easy to see this when it happens
to others, less so when it happens to oneself. That is why those who wield
power with any wisdom keep an ear to the ground, to hear where the rumblings of
discontent are coming from, and how they can be defused without resort to
kinetic measures. Who is running the country today? I want to know because I
want to do everything in my power to convey the importance of this message to
that individual. Looking at the prime minister the past few days does not
convey the impression of a man who is running things in the midst of so much
turmoil, so much noise and clamour. He does not look like a leader preparing to
meet massive challenges, who is in touch with his people, one who cares about
and feels their anxiety, their pain, hears their voices and understands their
fears. He looks lost in his own world.
Status of
Democracy in Pakistan, April 2019
1. Journalists investigated : Apr.,4,2019:The Federal
Investigation Agency (FIA’s), Cyber Crime Wing has initiated investigation
against five prominent Pakistani journalists, an activist and four groups for
‘executing a targetted social media campaigns’ during the Saudi Crown Prince
Muhammad bin Salman visit to Pakistan in February of this year.The five
journalists names included in the FIA’s list are Matiullah Jan, former host of
talk show at Waqt TV; Umar Cheema, investigative reporter for The News; Murtaza
Solangi, news analyst at Capital TV and former director general of state owned
Radio Pakistan; Azaz Syed, senior correspondent at Geo TV and The News; and
Ammar Masood, columnist at daily Jang. Also on the list is the name of
Ahmed Waqas Goraya, a social media activist who is currently in self imposed
exile in Netherlands after his release in January 2017 from 25 days abduction.
A letter written on March 13, 2019, Chaudhary
Abdul Rauf, Additional Director Cybercrime Wing said the six had displayed the
image of slain Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi on their Twitter account and
“it conveyed a very disrespectful message” to the visiting Saudi crown prince.
The letter directed concerned FIA officials to initiate inquiries and to submit
reports on their inquies on a daily basis. Solangi, one of the journalists
named in FIA’s inquiry list said “FIA action was not only against the
constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression but also in violation of the
international covenant signed by Pakistan. This is nothing but senseless
harassment of independent journalists. Masood, another journalist named in
FIA’s letter questioned whether Pakistani journalists would now be punished for
changing their display photos. He added, Freedom of expression is under real
threat in Pakistan.” Goraya, who’s name was also included in the list sent a
message to FIA that he will not stop his campaign. Goraya added that, “I am a
Pakistani citizen and I am fighting for democracy and rule of law in Pakistan”
The letter also included the names of four religious groups including
Hizb-ul-Tahrir Pakistan, Majlis-e-Wahadat-e-Muslimeen (MWM), Tameer-e-Watan
Party and Imamia Students Organization (ISO) and they were accused of targeting
the Saudi crown prince on social media.
2.
Anti terrorism Act: Apr.,8,2019: The overstretched breadth of the
ATA makes it dangerously simple to turn a blind eye to the distinction between
an ordinary criminal and a militant — or for that matter, an adult and a minor.
The misuse of the ATA artificially inflates the number of terrorism cases in
the country by including ordinary criminal offences. A report by Justice
Project Pakistan, Terror on Death Row, in December 2014 discovered that more
than 80pc of prisoners tried in ATCs were not ‘terrorists’ as the term is commonly
understood. This overburdens police, prosecution services and courts, resulting
in delays in the administration of ‘real’ cases of terrorism. More than 17,000
cases were still pending under the ATA in July 2014. By July 2017, more than
5,000 cases were pending in around 50 ATCs in Sindh alone. Because of the lack of procedural safeguards
in the ATA, the convictions for ordinary criminals are very high. It provides
law-enforcement agencies, including police, with enhanced powers and extended
discretion that pose a direct threat to safeguards that provide protection from
torture enshrined under the Constitution and international human rights
conventions. This, in many cases, becomes a fundamental element that aids in
coercing the alleged criminal into confessing guilt in a crime he may not have
committed at all. In 2017, a three-member Supreme Court bench had cautioned the
lower courts to keep ordinary crimes from being pushed into the murky pool of
terrorism-related cases. The apex court now has a unique opportunity to declare
the problematic and overly broad Section 6 of the ATA ultra vires and issue
directions for a more precise and unambiguous definition to be enacted by
parliament.
3.
Political
instability: Apr., 9, 2019: The acrimony between the PTI government
and the opposition, within and outside parliament, shows no sign of abating, or
at least abating for long enough to appear more than a just a strategic and
self-serving blip. The latest back-and-forth between Prime Minister Imran Khan
and Asif Ali Zardari is a classic illustration of the vitiated atmosphere. Mr Khan could have chosen to ignore
provocative statement pf AAZ . Instead, while addressing a public gathering in
Khyber district, he declared he could arrange a container for the PPP leader in
Islamabad — alluding to his own extended dharna atop one in late 2014 — but
that Mr Zardari would not be able to sustain such a protest for more than a
week. .PTI has goaded and sidelined the
opposition, even if that has thrown a wrench in legislative proceedings; which
is perverse, because these tactics largely derail the government’s own agenda.
For example, it took nearly six months to form the National Assembly’s standing
and functional committees because Mr Khan was adamant Shahbaz Sharif not be
given the PAC chairmanship, a post that by parliamentary convention goes to a
member of the opposition. There is a similar impasse over a proposed briefing
by the PTI government to lawmakers about NAP implementation; the opposition
demands it be held in parliament while the government wants only the heads of
the parliamentary parties to be privy to it. Another stand-off between both
sides, which is only just showing signs of being resolved, pertains to the
appointment of two ECP members. The PTI, with its razor-thin majority in
parliament, can ill afford to be so inflexible. The effects of the prevailing
dysfunction on governance are deleterious. Politicians in a fight to the death
against each other ultimately hollow out the democratic process from within.
4.
Hanif Abbassi : Apr., 14,
2019: Hanif
Abbasi, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader from Rawalpindi, has
finally been given some relief as the Lahore High Court special bench suspended his life sentence in the ephedrine quota case and
granted him bail. It was always expected that Abbasi would be freed whenever a
higher court would take up his appeal, as the prosecution never submitted any
solid evidence in the court of law. In fact, the way Abbasi was awarded a
life sentence by the anti-narcotics court was strange and unprecedented. The
judge who awarded this sentence admitted that he took the
help from Google to become aware of the definition of ephedrine and based on
this Google search the anti-narcotics court sentenced him to life. The seven
other accused, including Abbasi’s business partners, were given a clean chit in
the same case as the court cited a lack of evidence, but the benefit of the
doubt was not awarded to Abbasi. Suspiciously, the ephedrine case was pending
in higher courts for the last five years when suddenly, days before the 2018
General Elections, the High Court ordered the anti-narcotics court to take up
Abbasi’s case on the basis of daily hearing and announced its verdict on July
21st Abbasi always maintained
that he was convicted in order to give Sheikh Rasheed and other political
rivals an edge in the elections. After Chaudhry Nisar’s departure from
PML-N, Abbasi became one of the main figureheads in the party’s Rawalpindi
division alongside Chaudhary Tanvir Khan. His absence not only dented PML-N’s
campaign in Rawalpindi and adjacent areas but also divided the different groups
within PML-N who were not awarded tickets and were only silent because of
Abbasi. Putting him aside was thus a very strategic move. Abbasi made a name
for himself in Rawalpindi during PML-N’s five-year tenure, and those within
political circles are also aware that Imran Khan chose not to contest
against Abbasi as he was advised that the result might not be in his favour. It
was only Abbasi’s controversial conviction and his absence from the ballot that
allowed a politician like Rasheed to win the seat against the lesser known
PML-N worker Sajak Khan. Abbasi not been
disqualified, he would not only win his own seat but also seats for Malik
Ibrar, Danyal Chaudhary and others in Rawalpindi. Now that Abbasi is free, will
anyone be held responsible for his unfair imprisonment and the mental torture
his family has been through? Abbasi is not an ideal politician by any means;
often times he ends up using the same tone and language that the Pakistan
Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and Rasheed are often criticised for. But there should be
no doubt that his conviction was unjust and it is now glaringly obvious that
the case against him was politically motivated. Just like the era of Pervez Musharraf, once again
institutions like the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and the
anti-narcotics courts were used to target PML-N. After all, without its main
crowd-pullers, PML-N could not repeat the success of the 2013 Elections. His
release also validates PML-N’s position that the courts have been used to
victimise the party and give an edge to its political rival in the elections.
After all, this is not the first case where PML-N has been proven right; Nawaz
Sharif and his daughter Maryam Nawaz’s sentences were also suspended. Shehbaz Sharif was
also given bail by the higher
courts. Saad Rafique and his brother
Salman Rafique are in jail, but it is expected that the moment their appeal
will be heard by the higher courts, the decisions given by the lower courts
will be reversed. This sheds light on the poor prosecution and inability of the
lower courts to sustain under pressure, and the honourable Supreme Court needs
to fix this issue and bring reforms to the judicial system. However, yet
another suspended sentence for the PML-N not only makes one question why they
were handed out in the first place, but also makes one wonder why the party is
suddenly getting relief from all quarters. Does this mean Shehbaz has mended
fences with the actual players of the chessboard? The silence from Maryam and Nawaz
is only adding to the impression that Shehbaz’s narrative has finally
prevailed. This may seem hypocritical to many, but this is how politics is
conducted. While the ‘respect my vote’ narrative is ideal and PML-N was able to
use it to create a wave of sympathy, under the prevailing system this narrative
cannot bring the PML-N back into power. So it seems that Shehbaz’s plan to
compromise in order to get back into power is what is allowing PML-N workers to
breathe a sigh of relief.
5.
Present status: Apr., 15, 2019: In a parliamentary form of government such as ours, it is the House of
Representatives where political debate should take place, where differences
between parties should be aired. However, in the country’s current political
climate, politicians are butting heads in rallies and on Twitter in a manner
that smacks of a fierce election campaign. What is worse, given we had a
general election less than a year ago, there is already increasing talk by
opposition politicians to collectively bring down the new PTI government. On
Tuesday, after meeting with former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, JUI-F chief
Maulana Fazlur Rehman told this newspaper he was confident he could mobilise
the efforts of the opposition to dislodge “an installed government led by a
puppet prime minister”. Some days ago, Asif Zardari said as much at a rally to
commemorate Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s death anniversary, exhorting party supporters
to be prepared to march on Islamabad and throw out the government. Imran Khan,
at another gathering, declared in response he would provide a container for Mr
Zardari in Islamabad, taunting him that he would not be able to sustain a
weeklong protest. There is a growing
realisation that the PTI government is proving alarmingly clueless about how to
rescue an economy in free fall, perhaps the biggest challenge at this point.
Given this and the drastic cuts in development budgets, all the talk about
poverty alleviation seems little more than populist hokum. In short, the
situation provides plenty of fodder for the opposition, in parliament and
outside. Granted, the accountability process appears blatantly one-sided, and
the government gratingly self-righteous. However, the opposition should be
aware that the timing, tenor and content of its recent rhetoric about regime
overthrow comes across as being motivated by the fact that many among its
senior leadership are facing corruption charges. True or not, that does
undermine what could be legitimate criticism of the government’s performance.
6.
Freedom of Speech: Apr., 17, 2019: Pakistan seems to be facing its
own set of challenges. Journalist Shahzeb Jillani has been named in an FIR for
pointing fingers in a direction deemed unacceptable by the complainant while
reporting on enforced disappearances, it seems. On the other hand, Ishaq Dar is apparently
not acceptable on television. A recent interview of his was pulled off air
shortly after it began. Earlier, a couple of his interviews had been broadcast;
perhaps it was due to the element of surprise. Those who caught on late to this
trend of ratings were punished for their tardiness and the programme pulled off
the air. Our freedom of
expression is now limited by a growing number of no-go areas. And it is now
routine for the ugly ‘C’ word to be bandied about. So much so that it is now a
truth universally acknowledged and universally discussed in Pakistan. Every seminar,
literature festival and tweet, as well as story in the foreign press, makes
mention of it It is unfortunate that the
PTI, which attributes its rise and success to the media, is now allowing
opposition and dissenting voices to be suppressed. For who else would have
reason to object to Dar spluttering away on television? Surely those who were
discerning enough to vote for the PTI are also intelligent enough to understand
what Dar did to this economy and how irrelevant his commentary is at the moment.
The silencing of his voice achieves little but to hurt the government. It
paints the picture of a government scared of criticism, even if it will deny
its hand in the ‘disappearance’ of that interview. But more importantly, those
in power should not forget the importance of a credible and free press. ? But
if this message is to remain credible, then it is up to the state to ensure
that when that anchor or anyone is speaking, their voice is seen to be free and
independent. For only then will they be believed? These voices do not just
criticise a government or more. Sometimes these voices are necessary for
reporting other truths also, but for that, the environs in which they speak
also have to be credible.
7.
Presidential system: Apr., 18, 2019: There is a growing scepticism
within the ruling PTI and the establishment over the viability of the existing
parliamentary democracy. In a recent media interview, President Alvi revealed that the PTI has seriously been
discussing whether to switch to a presidential rule. For many in the party,
only a centralized power structure could ensure political and economic
stability in the country. Such arguments are not new. They manifest an
increasing tendency towards authoritarianism. It’s more about the crisis of
governance rather than failure of parliamentary democracy. It is apparent that Imran Khan is not
comfortable working within the confines of the parliamentary system. He has
been voicing his frustration at various forums. He feels constrained without absolute
power. He would not even attend parliamentary sessions because of a vociferous
opposition. He would not interact with the opposition leaders even on issues
that require consultation according to the law and the Constitution. Lacking a clear majority in
parliament, the prime minister needs the support of the opposition to
legislate, but he would not seek it. As a result, the government has failed to
do any legislation in the last eight months. Can this be described as a failure
of the system or as Imran Khan’s own egotism? In a parliamentary democracy one
needs to learn to make compromises where they are needed. One cannot blame the
opposition for one’s own ineptitude and mistakes. Instead of trying to change the system, the government must focus
on removing the shortcomings in the existing political order by working with
other political forces. The country cannot afford to experiment with a system that has
long been thrown into the dustbin of history.
8. Underperforming
PTI government: Apr., 21, 2019: Interestingly
enough, up to the eve of the reshuffle which left the finance minister Asad
Umar and health minister Amir Kiani without a cabinet position and several
other ministers in new ministries, top government spokesman Fawad Chaudhry was
vehemently denying any such move
Although addressing the media the following day after he’d tweeted
confirmation that he was leaving the government as his ‘captain wants to see me
in another cabinet role’ he was not interested in, he also said he was made
aware of the decision late the night before. Another source said that the
decision was taken after an angry message was given to the prime minister. In
all likelihood, he was persuaded to replace his finance minister by the
argument that it would serve his and his government’s best interests. Even then
the prime m inister, who has held up Asad Umar as one of the brightest stars of
his party even since the latter joined the PTI seven years ago, allowed his key
lieutenant the dignity of announcing his own departure rather than removing him
via an official statement. Others were not so lucky. Amir Kiani’s replacement
was publicised in a statement. A source said Kiani had to go because of the
spiralling medicine prices some of which were attributable to his decisions. Petroleum
minister Ghulam Sarwar was shifted to aviation because he is said to have
mishandled the LNG orders and sharp rises in domestic gas prices. News reports
suggest he is unhappy with the move and may not agree to head the aviation
ministry.Perhaps, one the most controversial additions to the cabinet was
Nadeem Babar’s who’s been made in charge of the petroleum ministry despite
being a major shareholder in a power company which is a huge defaulter of
SNGPL. Even earlier cries of conflict of interest were ignored when he was
named to head the energy task force. Azam Swati was made minister. He
resigned from the cabinet late last year after an angry Supreme Court chief
justice took a dim view of the minister using his influence to have the
capital’s police chief removed. The minister was reportedly angry as the IGP
did not take his calls when he wanted a poor neighbour living next to his
palatial farm house ‘sorted out’.However, the most controversial decision was
the elevation as full minister of retired Brig Ijaz Shah who was given charge
of the powerful interior ministry. Mr Shah was one of the key lieutenants of
the former military ruler Pervez Musharraf and is said to have had a hand in
the formation of the PML-Q and the PPP Patriots before and after the 2002
elections respectively. The former intelligence official will now lead the
PTI’s ‘accountability drive’ and will be one of the main arbiters regarding who
gets to be put on the infamous and much-abused Exit Control List. If a new
steward of the economy was seen as a must for better handling of the nation’s
finances and economic growth, an equally important prerequisite, political
stability, seems to have been ignored in Shah’s appointment. Earlier this week,
he threatened opposition activists with ‘beatings’ and other harsh measures if
they gathered for any public protest. The events triggered by the so-called
Dawn leaks (some 30 months ago) began to spell the end of the Nawaz Sharif
government. When the military’s apparent disposition towards the PML-N seemed
unchanged after the baton of command passed from Raheel Sharif to Qamar Bajwa,
it was clear the Sharifs had to go, given the country’s power equation. What
was then visualised, and it is apparent that no stone was left unturned to
attain that, was an administration ‘chosen by the people of clean and
competent’ people to steer the country to stability and prosperity. Tragically,
that project seems not to have delivered so far. What if things remain the same
going forward?
9.
Justice system: Apr., 23, 2019: Between 2010 and 2018, the Supreme Court
overturned death sentences in no less than 78pc of the 310 appeal cases that
came before it during this period, ordering either an acquittal or a review, or
commuting the sentence. In 2018 alone, it upheld the death penalty in only 3pc
of the capital punishment cases that came before it. These are just a few among
the findings of a research project by two human rights organizations — one
Pakistani and the other UK-based — that were presented on Friday in a report to
the federal law minister. Consider another statistic in the document: of the
apex court’s reported judgments in capital cases between 2010 to 2018, 39pc
were acquittals. In other words, the court found that those sentenced to death
in nearly two out of five cases were wrongfully convicted — people who could
have paid the ultimate price for a crime they did not commit. Pakistan’s criminal justice system
reeks of dysfunction at every stage. Planted evidence, custodial torture,
forced confessions, false testimony, endless adjournments — these are only some
of the problems it is riddled with. And yet, or perhaps it is further evidence
of its being cruel in the extreme, there are 27 capital crimes on the statute
books. Litigants without resources are of course the most affected: they cannot
afford to bribe their way out of the legal quagmire, and their fate is often in
the hands of overburdened state-appointed counsel. However, as one can see from
the above study, and umpteenth others, trial courts have few qualms about not
only convicting the accused on flimsy evidence but also sending them to death
row. It is almost as though the state revels in its power to take the life of
its citizens. Even a reprieve sometimes comes too late: in 2016, the Supreme
Court acquitted two brothers of murder, only for it to be discovered they had
been executed the year before. Military courts, set up in the wake of the APS
attack — and thankfully not given a second extension — sentenced at least 310
people to death and executed around 60 through an unprecedentedly opaque modus
operandi. True justice is based
on a respect for human rights, the acknowledgement that every individual has a
legitimate expectation to be judged for his actions fairly and transparently.
The socioeconomic status of litigants must not determine their chances of
having their liberty, let alone their life, snatched away. Most nations, except
for some of the most retrogressive ones, have abolished the death penalty. We
must do the same, and do so without delay. The collective conscience of this
nation must refuse to accept any more state-sanctioned murder in its name.
10. WPFI: Apr., 23, 2019: Reeporters Without Borders (Reporters Sans
Frontieres or RSF) has released its world press freedom index, which shows some
countries slipping from their position, while others remaining in the worst of
circumstances. Norway claimed the top spot for the third consecutive year,
followed by Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands. Pakistan has slid down three
places as, according to the report, the media suffered brazen cases of
censorship, especially during the general elections. Distribution of newspapers
was interrupted; media outlets were threatened with the withdrawal of
advertisements, while signals of TV channels were jammed. According to the RSF,
the situation was worsened by resort to crude methods, for instance
intimidation, physical violence and arrests. The report noted that the new
government announced the creation of a Pakistan Media Regulatory Authority last
year, a name in which “regulation” was clearly intended to mean “censorship”.
The report found that journalists working in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
were at the highest risk — at least three journalists were killed in connection
with their work.
11. HRCP: Apr.,23,2019: ISLAMABAD: the overall state of human rights remained
grim in the country in the year 2018, shows the Human Rights Commission of
Pakistan (HRCP)’s annual report ‘State of Human Rights in 2018’ launched on
Monday. The report says that progress and observation of human rights stayed in
the background during 2018 due to general elections but the elections
themselves were plagued by allegations of pre-poll manipulation and vote
rigging – never fully resolved – and some appalling outbreaks of violence. The
report acknowledged the fact that there were more women candidates for general
seats in these elections than in any past election, and for the first time,
transgender candidates contested the polls. It appreciates the acquittal of
Aasia Bibi by the Supreme Court and opening of visa-free Kartarpur Corridor.
The report also welcomes the approval of Transgender Persons (Protection and
Rights) Act 2018 besides the establishment of the National Commission on the
Rights of the Child (NCRC). The report mentions that the federal parliament
made a total of 39 laws in 2018, a slight increase from 2017 when 34 laws came
into effect. The report also notes steady decline in conflict-related deaths in
the country. At the same time, the report raises serious questions regarding
the implementation of laws. It says that by year end, there were close to 1.9
million cases pending in over 250 lower, special, and superior courts. The
National Accountability Bureau filed 440 corruption references and apprehended
503 accused persons. Overcrowding continues to be a major challenge with jails
across the country holding up to 57 percent more inmates than their capacity.
HRCP monitoring data showed 845 incidences of sexual violence against women,
and 316 crimes in the name of ‘honour’ perpetrated against both men and women.
Child sex abuse incidents remained on the rise. One report showed an increase
of 32 percent in the first six months of 2018 compared to the same period the
previous year, a 47 percent increase in cases involving boys, and a 75 percent
rise in sexual violence against children in the age group of 0-5 years. Despite
legislation, violence against the transgender community continued during the
year and cybercrime and online harassment across Pakistan saw an exponential
rise in cases. About protection of religious minorities, the report says that
there was no noticeable abatement in violence against religious minorities, as
attacks on people and property continued to be reported. While presenting the
situation of minority community, HRCP Council Member Josef Frances demanded law
to ban conversion of religion before the age of 18. He said that in only last
week, four cases of forced conversion were reported in Punjab. Speaking about
the freedom of expression, Council Member for HRCP Ghazi Salahuddin expressed
concern over curbs on freedom of opinion and expression escalated to
unprecedented levels during the period of the elections. He said that media
coverage was severely inhibited and journalists intimidated into self-censorship.
He also expressed reservations on the government’s intensions to a ‘Pakistan
Media Regulatory Authority’. About freedom of assembly, the report says that
pre-emptive detention of activists was frequently employed to restrict or
disrupt rallies and protests. It terms barriers to setting up unions and
restrictions and banning of INGOs an attempt to restrict freedom of
association. The report says that despite the legislation enacted for women’s
rights in recent years, violence against women and unlawful practices persist
and continue to escalate. Despite legislation on the employment of minors, this
practice persists in industries and homes and the cases of abuse of child
domestic workers continue to surface. Only four percent of children in Pakistan
receive a ‘minimally acceptable diet’ according to a UN report. In the Thar
region of Sindh, 638 children died of malnutrition in the period 1 January to
31 December 2018. Whereas the National Commission on the Rights of the Child
(NCRC) Act was passed in 2017, and the Commission has yet to be constituted.
About labour rights, it says that in general, implementation of international
ILO and UN conventions and covenants relating to labour standards and human
rights is an ongoing problem in Pakistan. Pakistan ranked 8th on the Global
Slavery Index 2018, with an estimated three million living in modern
slavery/bonded labour and an estimated 12 million children are involved in
child labour in the country. The annual report mentions that statistics on the
number of persons with disabilities (PWDs) in the country vary in the absence
of verifiable survey data, but the prevalence of disability has been estimated
at 15 percent by WHO. Schooling, training, and employment of children and
people living with disabilities is a much neglected area. Stigma and
superstition attached to disability in Pakistan prevents the visibility,
inclusion, and participation of PWDs in society. About education, the report
mentions that the number of out-of-school children was reported to have risen
from 22.63 to 22.84 million. Another report spoke of a promising trend as the
children between the ages of six and 16 enrolled in schools had risen from 81
percent in 2016 to 83 percent in 2018.On health, report says that the country’s
spending on the health sector is still less than one percent of its GDP whereas
WHO recommends it should be around 6 percent. The unsatisfactory quality and
coverage of public health services means a high dependence on the private
sector which is too costly for many. As a result, people are driven to consult
unqualified medical practitioners and quacks, often with dire
consequences. In its section on
environment, the report says that air and water pollution, lack of sanitation,
and exposure to heavy metals are responsible for approximately 340,000 deaths
annually in Pakistan. It says that Pakistan is among the top ten countries most
affected by climate change, with wide-ranging impacts on the population and
economy due to extreme weather events over the last two decades.
12. Suo Motto Powers: Apr, 26, 2019: The Supreme Court on Wednesday announced the restoration of all taxes
charged by cellular service providers on mobile phone top-up cards. Chief
Justice Asif Saeed Khosa read out the short order, saying the top court
"would not interfere in the matters of public revenue and tax
collection". The court also withdrew the stay order placed on the
collection of mobile phone taxes while wrapping up the suo motu case.In June
2018, the apex court had suspended the deduction of taxes on prepaid cards
provided by mobile phone service providers. This is another decision by the ex
CJP that has been withdrawn.
Status of
Democracy in Pakistan, March
2019
1. Kidney research Center: Mar., 19, 2019: today Pakistan
Kidney and Liver Institute and Research Center (PKLI&RC) announced it has conducted its
very first successful liver transplant at the state-of-the-art public health
facility, located in a suburban area of Punjab capital city. The surgery,
conducted yesterday, took place nearly two weeks after a three-judge Supreme
Court bench reversed all previous orders passed by former chief justice Mian
Saqib Nisar in a suo motu case against alleged corruption in the PKLI and huge
salaries of its president and other staff.Roughly a year ago, the ex-CJP had
taken notice of the disparity in
salaries paid to doctors in public hospitals versus those employed by the PKLI,
the brainchild of Dr Saeed Akhtar. Along with former Punjab chief minister
Shehbaz Sharif, the noted urologist was hit hard by the top court in a
subsequent hearing, when it learnt from the Anti-Corruption Establishment
(ACE), which was ordered to hold an inquiry into the alleged irregularities and
misappropriation of funds at the institute, that the PKLI project was supposed
to complete by December 2017.“The former chief minister, out of affection, gave
the hospital’s [charge] to some doctor,” said the then-CJP, who was heading a
two-member bench, in December 31st hearing. “The doctor [Dr Saeed Akhtar] added
to the trust some who had no role. The entire hospital is a mess.”The PKLI
president, who had acquired success and recognition in the US where he served
as chairman of the Department of Urology at the Texas Tech Health Sciences
Center, before relocating to Pakistan, was also barred from leaving the country
after his name was placed on Exit Control List (ECL). Dr Saeed Akhtar has
consistently claimed his innocence, denying any wrongdoing. The former chief
justice had also appointed an ad hoc committee headed by a retired judge to run
the institute on behalf of the apex court and ordered amendment to Pakistan
Kidney & Liver Institute and Research Centre Act 2014, only to be disbanded
by a three-judge bench on Feb 28, 2019 (months after his retirement on Jan 17).
Through a two-and-a-half page order, the apex court recalled the earlier orders
placing Dr Akhtar’s name on ECL while restoring the PKLI board constituted
under Sections 6 and 8 of the PKLI Act.Under the Pakistan Kidney and Liver
Institute and Research Center Act 2014 promulgated by the Punjab Assembly, the
PKLI is run on a not-for-profit basis by a board headed by the CM, comprising
the secretaries of health and finance and 11 members nominated by a private
trust.This means that the provincial government exercises control through
budgetary grants and the board dominated by private members runs day-to-day
management, with the CM and relevant secretaries providing oversight but
without undue interference. The SC bench also withdrew the ACE inquiry and its
report, which had recommended registration of an FIR against the management of
the PKLI and others, as being unnecessary and a judicial overreach, and
directed that if the anti-corruption department brings any action against
anyone, the competent forum will decide the matter without being influenced by
any order of the SC. As of the case is closed now, and the man behind the whole
project allowed to go abroad, the details of March 11, 2018 meeting between Dr
Saeed Akhtar and former CJP Saqib Nisar have been revealed for the first time
by lawyer-writer Babar Sattar. “Dr Akhtar says he had met CJP Nisar through a
mutual friend, and thought prodding the SC to enforce its edicts against sale
of kidneys and livers could help curtail illegal transplants that jeopardise
the lives of healthy donors. The ex-CJP probably wanted ideas for his imagined
crusade in the health sector. So Dr Akhtar and his wife Dr Masooma Saeed were
invited to his house along with Sheikh Amin (CJP Nisar’s class fellow and PKLI
board member) and his wife,” Sattar writes in his article for The News. He
narrates the story of Dr Akhtar from an otherwise pleasant meeting that took a
U-turn when Dr Sajid Nisar, the younger brother of CJP Nisar and a professor
working at Services Hospital Lahore, stopped by at the place.“Soon after
arrival, Dr Sajid Nisar launched a harangue about the injustice of squandering
millions on foreign-returned PKLI-types when professors in public hospitals
were being paid far less,” Sattar writes, highlighting the fact that the
ex-CJP’s brother “didn’t mention anything about the moonlighting income doctors
get from private practice while he was dwelling on the pay disparity that
perturbed him”.After Dr Akhtar tried to defend the PKLI model and its rationale
and critiqued lack of professionalism in public-sector healthcare as it stands,
CJP Nisar got agitated, almost angry as the story goes on.“While sitting in his
house with guests he had invited over, the ex-CJP announced that he would take
suo-motu notice of the issue his brother had just drawn his attention to. Dr
Akhtar and his wife took that as a cue to leave. But the die had been cast.
Within weeks, during a hearing at the Lahore Registry, suo-moto notice of all
things PKLI had been taken.” Why did PKLI get fried? If CJP turns on you, armed with suo
moto, you're toast: you have nowhere to hide, no remedies to avail, nothing in
our scheme of checks & balances will rescue you & given our culture of
sycophancy no one will speak for you https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/441475-righting-wrongs
….A
living donor liver transplant in Pakistan costs between US$35,000 and
US$45,000.Now after delay of one and half years, the brainchild of Dr Saeed
Akhtar has started bearing fruits as patients, seeking liver transplant, will
not have to spend millions in foreign hospitals as PKLI will serve them now.
The first sign of which is a successful liver transplant surgery by Dr Faisal
Dar at the PKLI.It was Dr Akhtar who managed to convince Dr Dar of Shifa (who
set up Pakistan’s only Liver Transplant Unit at Shifa, which has performed over
700 transplant surgeries since 2012) to divide his time between Shifa and the
Hospital.
2. Election Commission of Pakistan: Mar., 19, 2019: The constitution
requires that the PM and leader of Opposition discuss and agree upon the new
ECP appointments, this has not happened as the PM refuses to meet the Leader of
Opposition . This has held back appointments to the vacated positions in ECP .
3.
World Bank Appraisal: Mar., 20, 2019: Pakistan could become a $2 trillion economy in the next
28 years if it remains steadfast in its reforms and manages to reduce its
population growth rate to 1.2%. The $2 trillion economy means an upper
middle-income country where per capita income will be $5,702 but it will have
to halve its population growth rate to 1.2% by 2047 .According to the report, Pakistan’s economy
right now is captured by four influential groups that have frustrated efforts
to bring reforms but the country now stands at a crossroad and it has to decide
whether it wants to become an upper middle-income nation or stay poor. Elite capture continues to constrain economic
policymaking. Since the 1980s, the share of industrialists in the National
Assembly and parliament has doubled, blurring the barrier between politicians
and businessmen. Elite capture in Pakistan has affected policymaking, as in
certain circumstances political leaders lack incentives to formulate policies
in response to citizens’ demands, or to work toward effective policy
implementation. The WB report states that a unique feature of Pakistan’s
history is that economic, social and security policies gave rise to various
elite factions that sustain economic and political power until today. There
exist at least four influential groups that gained power through historic
events and continue to leverage their influence on the political system for
personal gain. These are civil servants, landowners, industrialists, and the
military. The WB states that there was evidence that Pakistan’s elites have
used this power in the past to undermine reforms that would have reduced their
influence. For instance, landowners and industrialists have leveraged their
political representation to oppose reforms that would have enhanced tax-revenue
collection from agriculture and the private sector. The influential military
class favors a security-centric policy framework to maintain its influence and
access to state resources, which reduces the scope for regional cooperation.
While each group affects development differently, they share the common trait
of having gained and retained influence throughout Pakistan’s history. The
shortcomings of Pakistan’s institutional framework that have enabled elites to
retain power persist today and are precisely those factors that prevent
effective reform implementation. It argues that instability in the political
system has reduced accountability and skewed leaders’ incentives away from
long-term reforms. The characteristics of Pakistan’s political system have
weakened the link between citizens and political leaders that is so crucial to
sustaining the triangular relationship. First, frequent regime changes from
civilian to military governments have highlighted the power of the military to
sanction political leaders, competing with the sanctioning power of voters.
Second, Pakistan’s political system is characterized by an incumbency
disadvantage, which means that incumbent politicians have a reduced likelihood
of being re-elected. As a result, the direct accountability between citizens
and political leaders is undermined, as politicians face the risk of being
sanctioned even if they implement citizens’ demands, simply because they are
incumbents. This shortens leaders’ incentives and time horizon, leading them to
prioritize short-term projects and making them more likely to engage in extractive
behaviour. The WB also highlights the role of industrialists in financing
political campaigns. It says campaign financing regulations in Pakistan provide
a key channel for elites to gain political influence. Pakistan can boost its
growth by investing in people, improving productivity, reforming institutions
and protecting the natural environment,” said
The decisions over the next decade will determine Pakistan’s future
where it will stand in 2047. Will Pakistan rise to the challenges ahead and
transform its economy or will Pakistan continue with the mixed record of reform
implementation, failing to address the key constraints to growth, while another
generation of Pakistanis sees limited welfare improvements, says the WB. .The economic growth has declined because the
country is not investing enough in either physical or human capital, and
because misguided economic policies mean that limited resources are not used in
the most productive way. The limited fiscal space, the result of rigid current
expenditures and low revenue mobilization, has given rise to low public
investment levels. The low tax revenues and high current expenditures leave
limited space for public investments. The WB says the current expenditures
exhibit structural rigidities due to high debt-servicing costs, high defence
expenditures, and significant subsidies, salaries, and wages. The WB recommends
broadening the tax net by including the agriculture sector, which accounts for
over 20 per cent of the GDP but generates a meager 0.22 per cent of total
direct tax revenue. The tax system is also riddled with legal loopholes that
facilitate tax evasion and need to be rectified. Productivity is also affected
by weak public services provision whether it be energy, livable cities, a
healthy and educated population, or security
4. Update: Mar., 21, 2019:Election Commission of
Pakistan appointments : Prime
Minister Imran Khan wants the appointment of the members of the Election
Commission of Pakistan (ECP) from Sindh and Balochistan to be made without
fulfilling mandatory constitutional requirement of consultation with opposition
leader Shahbaz Sharif. This was claimed in a letter written to National
Assembly Speaker Asad Qaiser by the opposition leader. The letter said that the
opposition leader received a notice on March 11,seeking to propose three names
each for members of the ECP from Sindh and Balochistan. With reference to the
notice dated March 11, 2019, the referral of three names to the parliamentary
committee for the appointment of the Election Commission of Pakistan members
from Balochistan and Sindh is a violation of Article 213, clause (2A) of the
Constitution as the Prime Minister has failed to consult Leader of the
Opposition on the issue,` the letter said. `The meeting of the said parliamentary
committee cannot be called till the required consultative process as enshrined
in the Constitution has been completed’, it added. Under Articles 213 and 218
of the Constitution, the prime minister in consultation with the opposition
leader forwards three names for the appointment of a CEC or commission member
to a parliamentary committee for hearing and confirmation of one name. In case
a consensus cannot be reached between the prime minister and the opposition
leader, the law says that each will forward separate lists to the parliamentary
committee for finalisation of names. National Assembly Speaker Asad Qaiser had
constituted a bipartisan parliamentary committee for the appointment of chief
election commissioner (CEC) and ECP members even before the retirement of the
two members. The 12-member committee had also elected Human Rights Minister Dr
Shireen Mazari as its chairperson. However, the parliamentary panel can act
only after it receives either consensus or separate lists from the prime minister
and opposition leader. Members from Sindh and Balochistan Abdul Ghaffar Soomro
and retired Justice Shakeel Baloch had retired on January 26 and their
replacements under the constitution should have been appointed by March 12.
5.
NAB investigative methods: Mar., 23, 2019: The anti-graft watchdog NAB decided to investigate
Munir, a former member of the Capital Development Authority (CDA), and others
for allegedly abusing their powers to restore a plot in F-11 of Islamabad while
violating rules and regulations. In a last note accredited to him, Munir had
appealed to the chief justice of Pakistan to bring changes in the NAB’s
operations where “incompetent people are playing with life and honor of
citizens in name of accountability”.“I am committing suicide to avoid
humiliation, being handcuffed and paraded in front of the media,” he had
allegedly written. He had also reportedly requested CJP Khosa to “take notice
of NAB officials’ conduct” to avoid the conviction of government officials “for
crimes they have not committed” NAB has committed other excesses in the past ,
where University Professors were presented in court hand cuffed and a suspect
died during investigations in hospital where he was hand cuffed etc.
6.
Suo Motto Powers: Mar., 26, 2019: THIS is the story of two men, of whom only one wanted to take the path
less travelled. One was interested in ‘public welfare’, including building a
dam, and months after his retirement, he is still travelling around the world,
being feted and photographed. The other had grand ambitions too — to reform the
system he had worked his way through, but it is an agenda not as
straightforward and popular as the first one. In
this tale of two men, it seems that the first had it easy, even though his
cause had more news value. In hindsight, it was more about flourish than
content. Later, he even conceded that his movement was more for the sake of awareness than for actually building the reservoir, even though the fund continues
to be in the news. Reform, on the other hand, has fewer cheerleaders. Few have
even noticed the effort that Supreme Court Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa is
putting into it. When he was taking over, he famously said, “I would also like
to build some dams: a dam against undue and unnecessary delays in judicial
determination of cases, a dam against frivolous litigation. and a dam against
fake witnesses and false testimonies... and would also try to retire a debt,
the debt of pending cases, which must be decided at the earliest possible.” And
he has been at it. He has written more than one judgement on fake testimonies and how they are to be treated — but they get little
attention, or not as much had he called some government officials in to berate
them in court, or if he had passed pithy remarks about corruption. In that
speech, the now chief justice had also spoken about using the court’s suo motu powers sparingly — but it is said he had greater plans. He
wanted to draw or redraw some of the parameters of the powers under Article
184(3). There is, however, an eerie silence from the big white building on
Constitution Avenue on this issue. That the chief justice has not changed his
mind is evident from his own prudent use of these powers — he has only now
taken his first such case (the alleged suicide of
retired Brig Asad Munir). He resisted the temptation to do so when the Sahiwal firing
incident
happened, which would have caused many a gavel-holding finger to itch.But the
larger questions around the issue of suo motu actions under Article 184(3) have
not been addressed. There was an
intriguing report in an English-language paper last month about a full-court
meeting that was apparently held quietly. The report went on to discuss the
difficulty of making changes to Article 184(3) because it would mean judicial
consensus. And this might not be easy considering that the majority of the
judges have been part of one suo motu case or another. From the
disqualification of politicians and the matter of school fees to the Faizabad dharna,
it is hard to find a robed one who did not find something that involved
‘fundamental rights’. Also, there is the question of whether this is a matter
for the judges or the legislature.It is said that this elusive consensus is the
reason for the apparent silence on this issue. But it seems as if Justice Khosa
is a lonely man, in more ways than one.Recently, he also tried to curb the
trend of applications for registration of an FIR being heard by a sessions
court judge before the complainants have exhausted the police system till SP
level. A national judicial policymaking committee meeting said that
applications under Section 22-A of the CrPC should not be heard by courts
unless accompanied by district SP complaints. This section gives sessions and high
court judges the power to order the registration of an FIR or a criminal
complaint if the police are not doing so. But the committee, which includes all
the chief justices, felt that such an application should not come to the courts
till the police forums — up to SP level — had been tried and found wanting.This
is because this section is seen to involve the judiciary in executive
functions, while adding to the burden of the judiciary. A report in a national
daily said that from January 2017 to February 2019, over 600,000 applications
were filed with the district judiciary in this regard. But this time, it
was the lawyers that took
umbrage:
it would give the police too many powers which the force would obviously abuse,
and how could the legal community, which always has the public’s interest at
heart, leave the poor people at the mercy of the big bad cops? This appeared to
be the gist of the long press release which also warned of a protest if the
decision was not reversed.Probing further, it does not seem as if the issue is
as straightforward. Apart from the debate over judges (instead of the
legislature) modifying the law, this was also about the judiciary having
consulted the lawyers and taking them on board first. Such major decisions
cannot be taken unilaterally, it was argued.But then keep the discussion going
and probe a little deeper and it turns out that there is another heft, material
reason at play. The lawyers get paid to take such complaints to the sessions
judges who can order the police to register complaints. A ‘senior’ lawyer, who
clearly did not want to be named, has been reported as saying that 95 per cent
of the complaints in the lower courts are applications under this section,
asking the courts to direct the police to do this or that. So, it seems, that
reform is hard work. Especially because it hurts those who have learnt to
profit from an imperfect system. And this makes it unpopular work. And
this is also why it is easier to dabble in building dams or berate weak
politicians for corruption or negligence; both make for great news stories and
require little dogged application and effort. Perhaps this is why more will
follow Saqib Nisar than try to fill the shoes of Asif Saeed Khosa.
7.
Military
courts: Mar., 31, 2019: Military
courts, which were set up under the National Action Plan (NAP) in 2015 to try
civilians on terrorism charges, ceased to function on Sunday following the
expiry of their second two-year constitutional term. The government has already
made the decision to give another extension of two years to the military
courts. However, it lacks the support of opposition parties over the issue as
it does not have the required two-thirds majority in any of the two houses of
the Parliament to carry out the constitutional amendment for the purpose. In
its effort to generate consensus on the issue, the government had planned a
meeting of parliamentary heads of opposition parties on March 28. However, due to the prevailing
tense political situation, the opposition parties boycotted the meeting which
led to its cancellation.
Status of
Democracy in Pakistan, February
2019
1. Judicial Activism: Feb., 2, 2019: The
populist judge seeks legitimacy by framing the judges’ role as championing the
will of the people against those that undermine that will. As former Chief
Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja
stated “Judges of the Supreme Court are sitting here
as representatives of the will of the people.” If the populist judge is
championing the will of the people, like all populists, the question stands:
who are the ‘people’? The unelected judge builds its conception of the people
through the loudest voices within its immediate social and professional
networks: lawyers and the media. Our bar associations are populated by urban
middle-class lawyers who possess a potent combination of disenchantment and
efficacy. Their disenchantment stems from being unable to realise the
expectations of upward mobility and the privilege that comes with it, in a
pyramidal legal profession with an entrenched elite of powerful and privileged
law firms. Their efficacy comes from their visibility in the courtrooms, in the
bar rooms and through their unique potential for collective action that was
demonstrated during the Lawyers’ Movement. They are frustrated by their limited
professional fortunes and have the means to effectively voice this frustration
and pressure judges to pay heed to their concerns. The urban middle-class, more
broadly, is also disenchanted because of the inability to realise the
privileges of upward mobility and it is efficacious as the primary constituency
for Pakistan’s new media, which gains an audience through providing coverage to
urban middle-class concerns. Middle-class anger, both inside and outside the
bar, is directed against elite privilege, most visibly manifested through the
ability to bypass bureaucratic and judicial procedures to which the rest of
society is subject. This anger is directed against the entrenched elites, the
procedures that the elite seem to either benefit from or bypass entirely and
the personnel within the state institutions that allow the elites to continue
operating this way. Therefore, the populist judge channels this anger to build
legitimacy for his own expanding role. The judge smashes past precedential and
procedural restraints that seemingly entrench elite impunity and impede
middle-class empowerment, directs their rhetoric against the symbols of elite
privilege and deploys the symbols of anti-elite defiance. This is not to say
that the judges themselves do not often sincerely agree with many of the
stances they take, but this middle-class, as represented in the media and the
bar, shapes the judge’s conception of the people he or she claims to represent
— and the elites he or she claims to oppose A judiciary that expands its role
in Pakistan’s political system and liberates itself from constitutional
restraints on the basis of channeling public anger thrives on the inadequacies
of Pakistan’s bureaucratic and judicial institutions. Critics of judicial
populism have commented on the neglect of the Supreme Court in remedying the
sorry state of subordinate judiciary as it intervenes in other branches of
government. However, the superior judiciary derives its legitimacy from public
frustration with the sorry state of the lower courts. Just as the military used
public outrage against the state of security in Pakistan after the Army Public
School attacks in 2014 to further expand its policing and judicial powers, the
Supreme Court uses public outrage against the state of Pakistan’s subordinate judicial
bureaucracy to disregard procedural limitations on its original jurisdiction
and expand its authority over the issues lower courts appear unable to deal
with. Where a member of the general public expects that it would take an
impossible amount of time and resources to get a fair hearing in the lower
courts, writing a letter to a Supreme Court judge or making a direct plea in
front of a camera promises a simpler and more comprehensible route to gaining
access to justice. Thus, the flip side of the sorry state of Pakistan’s lower
courts is the expansion of the superior judiciary’s role. Finally, if judicial
populists focus on confronting and defying the visible symbols of elite
privilege and impunity, then it is these symbols that will draw the greatest
scrutiny .Judges preceding Iftikhar Chaudhry and succeeding Saqib Nisar have
all sought to burnish their populist credentials by targeting these visible
symbols: from political corruption to elite-controlled bureaucratic and
judicial appointments to real estate scams and price hikes that
disproportionately affect the middle-classes. These are the visible symbols of
elite privilege that matter the most to the judges’ audiences. The courts have
rightly come under criticism from sections of the intelligentsia for focusing
their scrutiny on the political elite more than the military elite. And this is also why another populist judge,
Justice Shaukat Siddiqui, in a bid to gain some legitimacy against charges of
judicial misconduct, positioned himself as a defiant challenger against an
allegedly military-controlled Supreme Court. This defiance would gain him
limited credibility outside the legal community today, but it continues to
resonate within sections of the bar.Thus, Justice Nisar’s populism may have polarised
opinion on the role of the judiciary, but it is not an anomaly that will go
away.It is increasingly the norm of Pakistani judicial behaviour shaped by a legal culture that rewards
symbolic defiance and anti-elitism over adherence to procedure and precedent. A
favourite maxim in the Pakistani legal community is "not only must justice
be done; it must be seen to be done." For today’s populist judge, the
question is who is ‘seeing’ it, and what justice looks like in the eyes of the
beholder.
2.
Dialogue: Feb., 4, 2019: The
realization has been growing over the past few years that Pakistan needs some
kind of dialogue among state institutions at the highest level. The thought
behind this is that various organs and institutions of the state seem
to be increasingly encroaching on each
other’s space. After an extended
period of hyper activism and repeated encroachment of other state organs’ domains
by the Supreme Court during the term of former chief
justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, the four succeeding top judges opted not to follow this
approach. But judicial activism returned with a vengeance during the second
half of Saqib Nisar’s term as chief justice. It is not only the judiciary which
is seen to be encroaching on the turf of other organs. Political interference
in such executive functions as postings, transfers and promotions is common
knowledge. Military dictation, perceived or real, in certain policy areas has
also been much talked about almost since Independence. One, therefore, may
differ about the extent and nature of the inter-institutional encroachment but
the problem is real and needs to be dealt with. Senator Raza Rabbani has been
one of the most outspoken critics of such interference and he formally proposed
a ‘grand dialogue’ among parliament, the judiciary, the executive and
especially the military. During his term as Senate chairman, history was made
when a sitting chief justice, Anwar Zaheer Jamali, addressed the Senate
Committee of the Whole in November 2015. Army chief Gen Qamar Bajwa also
briefed the committee in December 2017. The briefing was followed by a
question-answer session described as “very candid, very free, very frank, very
objective” by ISPR. Later, the Senate chairman also met chief justice Nisar in
January 2018 to discuss parliamentarians’ concerns about the perceived lack of
powers of the parliamentary committee on the appointment of judges whose powers
were clipped at the apex court’s direction during Iftikhar Chaudhry’s term. In addition to these dialogues
occurring as special events, the National Security Council (NSC) was created in
2013 as a premium forum for civil-military dialogue, which included top
military commanders and key federal ministers under the prime minister’s
chairmanship. Despite these channels and dialogue forums, the idea of a grand
dialogue keeps coming up. The most recent and perhaps the strongest voice for
such a dialogue was raised by Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa just a day before
he assumed the office of top judge. The extraordinary proposal surprised many
because it had come from the then chief justice-designate in the form of a
well-considered dialogue blueprint. Justice Khosa also proposed that the top
leadership of three state organs — parliament, the judiciary and the executive,
along with the top leadership of the military and intelligence agencies should
participate in the dialogue. He candidly identified trust deficit amongst
different state organs, encroachment of a state organ’s domain by the other and
the need to discuss issues jeopardising good governance as key reasons for the
dialogue. His proposal is the ambitious agenda of the proposed dialogue which
comprises stocktaking with reference to mistakes made by state organs;
solutions to encroachment of an institution’s domain by another; pendency of
court cases; restricting the legislature to its domain while denying
development funds to legislators; political influences in posting, transfer and
promotion of public servants; operational autonomy of executive authorities;
the role of armed forces and intelligence agencies in the governance paradigm;
civilian supremacy alongside civilian accountability; missing persons issue;
and complex subjects such as a ‘charter of governance’. There is, however, room
for improving the effectiveness of such forums as the NSC by, for example,
meeting at least once a month. No dialogue forum, however, exists where the
judiciary is formally represented alongside the representatives of parliament
and the executive. One may argue that there is good reason for not formally
inducting the judiciary into such dialogues because involvement in decisions
taken at the dialogue may make the judiciary a party to these decisions and
this may compromise the independence and neutrality of the judiciary when it is
later approached for adjudication. In addition, there is hardly any
international example where the judiciary is part of such a wide-ranging
dialogue. The need for effective inter-institutional dialogue to address such
critical issues as the encroachment of domains is well established. There is,
however, a need to explore the ways to making existing channels and forums of
dialogue more effective before initiating a new mechanism. There is also a need
for informed exchanges of views on the formal participation of the judiciary in
such a dialogue.
3. Police Reforms: Feb., 5, 2019: Prime Minister Imran Khan’s new
ToRs for a committee
tasked with suggesting amendments to the KP Police
Act, 2017, and to the Punjab Police Rules, indicate a shift towards rolling
back the operational independence granted to the police. In fact, rather than
any reference to enhancing that independence, the ToRs speak of a ‘police for
the government’. Ominous signs of this changing approach came days after PTI
took power at the centre. There was the overnight abrupt transfer of the
Pakpattan DPO on orders that a Nacta inquiry concluded came from the new Punjab
chief minister’s office. Not long after that fiasco, the Islamabad IG was
transferred, this time on the prime minister’s orders and again without giving
any reason. When the highly regarded former IG KP, Nasir Durrani — whose
services Mr Khan has often lauded — suddenly resigned as head of the Punjab
Police Reforms Commission, it could only be surmised that it was for lack of
confidence in the government’s intentions. If the PTI’s campaign promises of
reform in law enforcement along the lines of what it had achieved in KP have
not quite unraveled, they have certainly lost their shine. (The K-P Police Ordinance
2016 has definitely minimized the discretion of political masters by giving
tenure security to the Provincial Police Officer and fully empowering him to
transfer and post officers of his choice. By abandoning the powers previously
enjoyed by the chief minister, the K-P government has set a commendable
precedent towards ensuring autonomy of police and prevention of political
interference. Furthermore, through various commissions and bodies, the law has
attempted to create a system of police accountability to the public. The public
safety commissions will review performance of the police and will approve
policing plans, whereas regional complaint authorities will enquire into
citizen’s complaints. The district assemblies will be able to recommend the
premature transfer of district police officers on grounds of unsatisfactory
performance, but only after passing a resolution with two-thirds majority and
only once during their tenures).
4.
PMRA: Feb., 5, 2019:
PTI government in the centre recently approved the formation of a new
regulatory body, known as the Pakistan Media Regulatory Authority (PMRA). From
now, all media, including print, electronic and social, will be simultaneously regulated by
this newly established body. Organizations such as the All Pakistan Newspapers
Society (APNS), Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ), and the Council
of Pakistan Newspaper Editors (CPNE) have already disapproved of the formation
of the PMRA and have cautioned against it, terming it an attack on the freedom
of press and expression. The PFUJ categorically rejected PMRA This move comes at a time when not only
journalists but both print and electronic media are facing invisible curbs and
financial turmoil. In light of this, the PMRA seems yet another effort to
silence digital and social media the way mainstream media is being limited.
After all, over the past several months, journalism in Pakistan has faced a
severe crisis, with hundreds laid off and many famous journalists either being
let go or facing the issue of self-censorship. Under these circumstances, the
move to further regulate the media only raises more suspicions about the
authoritarian nature of the PTI government. Bringing all media under one
umbrella does not seem like a constitutional move, for not only does the 18th
Amendment bring press-related laws under the ambit of the provincial
governments, this also reduces the effectiveness of Article 19 of the
Constitution, which guarantees freedom of the press. Additionally, nowhere in
the world do we see instances of print and digital publications being brought
under the same domain that monitors electronic media. In the presence of a code
of ethics and self-regulatory laws such as the Press Council Ordinance for
print media and the Cybercrime Act for digital media, establishing the PMRA can
only be termed an unnecessary new tool created to limit freedom of the press. This
also includes the proposition that licenses will require renewal every year,
which means that publications may self-censor or not report against the status
quo in fear of their licenses being cancelled
5. Supreme
Court of Pakistan: Feb., 7, 2019:
The Supreme Court on Wednesday wrapped up a suo motu case of the 2017 Faizabad
sit-in staged by the Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) and directed the
government, law enforcers, intelligence agencies and the army's media wing to
operate within their mandate. In its conclusions to the judgment, the court
directed the federal and provincial governments to monitor and prosecute those
advocating hate, extremism and terrorism. It also ordered the government ─
through the defence ministry and respective chiefs of the armed forces ─ to
initiate action against armed forces' personnel found to have violated their
oath. Police and other law enforcement agencies were directed to develop
"flexible" standard operating procedures to deal with similar
protests in the future. The judgment states that any person who issues an edict
or fatwa that "harms another or puts another in harm's way must be
criminally prosecuted under the Pakistan Penal Code, the Anti-Terrorism Act,
1997, and/or the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016." The court notes
that citizens have the right to form and be members of political parties, subject
to "reasonable restrictions" imposed by the law. Each citizen and
political party retains the right to peaceful assembly and protest, as long as
it complies with the "reasonable" legal restrictions "in the
interest of public order"."The right to assembly and protest is
circumscribed only to the extent that it infringes on the fundamental rights of
others, including their right to free movement and to hold and enjoy
property."The court asserted that "protesters who obstruct people's
right to use roads and damage or destroy property must be proceeded against in
accordance with the law and held accountable". The judgment notes that the
responsibilities of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) ─ as laid out in
the Constitution ─ must be fulfilled. The court stated that the ECP must
proceed in accordance with law against political parties violating the
law."The law is most certainly not cosmetic as contended on behalf of the
ECP," the order said, adding: "All political parties have to account
for the source of their funds in accordance with the law." The judgment
noted that the state's failure to "prosecute those at the highest echelons
of the government who were responsible for the murder and attempted murder of
peaceful citizens on the streets" of Karachi during the May 2007 lawyers'
protests "set a bad precedent and encouraged others to resort to violence
to achieve their agendas"."The state must always act impartially and
fairly. The law is applicable to all, including those who are in government and
institutions must act independently of those in government," the court
asserted. The
court also directed the federal and provincial governments "to monitor
those advocating hate, extremism and terrorism and prosecute the perpetrators
in accordance with law". The judgment said that Inter-Services
Intelligence, the Intelligence Bureau, Military Intelligence and the
Inter-Services Public Relations "must not exceed their respective
mandates"."They cannot curtail freedom of speech and expression and
do not have the authority to interfere with broadcasts and publications, in the
management of broadcasters/publishers and in the distribution of
newspapers."The judgement said that intelligence agencies "should
monitor activities of all those who threaten the territorial integrity of the
country, and all those who undermine the security of the people and the State
by resorting to or inciting violence." It added that it would be appropriate to
enact laws "which clearly stipulate the respective mandates of the intelligence
agencies" in order to "best ensure transparency and the rule of
law". "The
Constitution emphatically prohibits members of the armed forces from engaging
in any kind of political activity, which includes supporting a political party,
faction or individual. The Government of Pakistan through the Ministry of
Defence and the respective chiefs of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force are
directed to initiate action against the personnel under their command who are
found to have violated their oath," the court said. The court directed the police and other
law enforcement agencies to develop standard operating procedures and plans on
"how best to handle rallies, protests and dharnas, and ensure that such
plans/procedures are flexible enough to attend to different situations". The judgment
stated that cable operators who had stopped or interrupted the broadcasts of
licensed broadcasters "must be proceeded against by the Pakistan
Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) in accordance with the Pemra Ordinance”.
However, it added, "If this was done on the behest of others then Pemra
should report those so directing the cable operators to the concerned
authorities." Additionally,
the court said that broadcasters who broadcast "messages advocating or
inciting the commission of an offence" are in violation of the Pemra
Ordinance and the terms of their licenses, and must be proceeded against by the
watchdog "in accordance with law". The judgment also warns those
"spreading messages through electronic means" that statements that
"advocate or incite the commission of an offence are liable to be
prosecuted under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016". The court had
said that people taking part in the sit-in and their leaders were ostensibly
advocating a religious cause but had not moved the courts, including the
Federal Shariat Court. They were taking the law into their hands and were
sowing divisions (‘tafarruqu’) and differences (‘ikhtalafu’)
against the clear proclamations by Almighty Allah in Surah Ash-Shura
(42) ayat 13 and Surah Al-Imran (3) ayat 103 and ayat
105.
6. Corruption: Feb., 7, 2019: Transparency
International has issued the Corruption Perceptions Index 2018. Pakistan is
placed 117 with a score of 33. India has a score of 41 and is placed 78. There
is only one Asian country in the first 10, Singapore. The highest ranked South
Asian country is Bhutan with a score of 68 and rank 25. The highest placed
Muslim nation is Qatar with the score 62 and rank 32.
7.
Supreme
Court Judgment: Feb, 9, 2019: THE Supreme Court’s verdict on the Faizabad dharna,
delivered on Wednesday, is a searing indictment of state institutions and
oversight authorities who have time and again failed the people of this
country, either by exceeding
their mandate or by abdicating their duty. It was a judgment uncompromising in
its insistence that people’s fundamental rights as guaranteed by the
Constitution must always be paramount; that authority is a sacred trust which
must be exercised transparently; that no one is above the law. This shameful episode was an event foretold,
incubating since long in the many distortions of democratic principles. It was
the culmination of years of political engineering, manipulation of public
opinion and the use of force to crush peaceful protests even as blatantly
illegal, violent hate-mongers met no consequences. The ongoing suppression of the media,
denounced in the verdict as “unconstitutional and illegal”, is part of the same
playbook. “When institutions stay within their designated constitutional boundaries
and there is an effective system of check and balance, citizens stay safe and
the state prospers. The trouble starts with self-proclaimed saviors,” reads the
judgment. The political class also has much to answer for. While successive
governments have repeatedly kowtowed to anti-democratic forces in the hopes of
weathering the inter-institutional power imbalance, opposition politicians have
colluded with such elements to destabilize and bring down elected governments.
By these short-sighted and self-serving tactics, they have ceded control over
their right to freely exercise the mandate to rule the country if voted into
government by the people. Thus, when confronted with tricky, quasi-manufactured
crises such as the TLP protest, they are unsure how to respond, losing further
credibility in the process. Towards the end, the judgment reminds us that
Pakistan was achieved by “men and women of integrity, sincerity and good
manners” and quotes the Quaid as saying he visualized Pakistan “to be based on
the fundamental principles of democracy, not bureaucracy or autocracy or
dictatorship”. In essence, the highest court in the land has told us,
resoundingly and memorably, that this country belongs to all of us.
8. Oppositions’ absence: Feb.,19,2019: PTI`s government`s
did not to invite PML-N and PPP leaders
to official engagements during the state visit of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad
bin Salman. Government representatives spent the last few days vociferously
defending the prime minister`s decision. While the government`s principal
defence seems to be that prominent opposition leaders `don`t deserve` to be
invited to official functions as they face corruption cases, justifications of
various hues were offered including the excuse that there was not enough space
in the banquet halls to accommodate everyone. The decision does not assist in
creating democratic traditions and send positive messages o visitors.
9. Social Media: Feb., 20, 2019: According to the
communication that kept doing the rounds on social media on Friday, most of the
physical and digital activities were Karachi based. It reveals that so far 19
Facebook pages and 20 Twitter URLs have been processed for blocking. It asks the
authorities concerned to immediately block the processed accounts. The PTA and
the cybercrime wing of the FIA have been asked to track the activists and block
the accounts.
10.
Ex CJP:
Dam fund: Feb., 25, 2109: Ex CJP
and PM Pakistan made appeals for funds to construct Dams. Those who contributed
their savings under the impression that they were making a sacrifice for a
national cause will be disappointed to learn that their money will, in fact,
not be used for the dams’ construction( to be used to create awareness) , and
that the fund they contributed to may never reach its goal. The entire episode
serves as a warning for leaders of institutions to avoid overstepping their
domain and exploiting well-meaning citizens by promising something beyond their
intellectual and financial capacity. As it stands, the dams remain a pipe dream
and a cautionary tale for citizens perpetually on the lookout for a savior.
11.
Judicial Activism: Feb.,26,2019: In the first
two weeks after he assumed office, Chief Justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khosa
has shown no intention of continuing the high-pitched, high-profile,
media-dependent ‘activism’ his predecessor, Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, became
known for. The reasons could include his personal disposition and, equally
importantly, a desire to distinguish himself from his predecessor. This
suggests that, given the absence of headline-grabbing judicial activism, the
Supreme Court will be markedly different over the next 11 months from what it was
till recently. It is widely recognized by jurists
that Article 184(3) does not give the Supreme Court the power to carry out a
judicial review of actions taken by individuals in their private and personal
capacity. In constitutional democracies the world over, this power is confined
to a scrutiny of the state’s actions — and that too only in order to protect
constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights. Seen in Pakistan’s context,
judicial overreach weakens civilian government’s vis-Ã -vis the military. An
in-depth analysis of the Supreme Court’s working under both Justice Chaudhry
and Justice Nisar will reveal that they never really challenged the military’s
dominance in the polity. The latter, indeed, endorsed the idea of a civilian’s
trial by a military court because of the “existential threat” faced by the
country. A judicial review may be legitimate only if it is guided by the
constitutional scheme of separation of powers which regulates the relationship
between different pillars of the state. How Justice Khosa ensures that the
judiciary’s independence is protected from the excesses he has mentioned in his
essay will be the biggest test of the effectiveness of his term as the chief
justice of the Supreme Court.
Status of
Democracy in Pakistan, January
2019
1. Democracy Index.
Pakistan is placed poorly in the democracy index.
Asia & Australasia
2018
|
|||||||||
Overall score
|
Global Rank
|
Regional rank
|
I Electoral process and pluralism
|
II Functioning of government
|
III Political participation
|
IV Political culture
|
V Civil liberties
|
Regime type
|
|
New Zealand
|
9.26
|
4
|
1
|
10.00
|
9.29
|
8.89
|
8.13
|
10.00
|
Full democracy
|
Australia
|
9.09
|
9
|
2
|
10.00
|
8.93
|
7.78
|
8.75
|
10.00
|
Full democracy
|
South Korea
|
8.00
|
21
|
3
|
9.17
|
7.86
|
7.22
|
7.50
|
8.24
|
Flawed
democracy
|
Japan
|
7.99
|
22
|
4
|
8.75
|
8.21
|
6.67
|
7.50
|
8.82
|
Flawed
democracy
|
Taiwan
|
7.73
|
32
|
5
|
9.58
|
8.21
|
6.11
|
5.63
|
9.12
|
Flawed
democracy
|
India
|
7.23
|
41
|
6
|
9.17
|
6.79
|
7.22
|
5.63
|
7.35
|
Flawed
democracy
|
Timor-Leste
|
7.19
|
42
|
7
|
9.08
|
6.79
|
5.56
|
6.88
|
7.65
|
Flawed
democracy
|
Malaysia
|
6.88
|
52
|
8
|
7.75
|
7.86
|
6.67
|
6.25
|
5.88
|
Flawed
democracy
|
Philippines
|
6.71
|
53
|
9
|
9.17
|
5.71
|
7.22
|
4.38
|
7.06
|
Flawed
democracy
|
Mongolia
|
6.50
|
62
|
10
|
9.17
|
5.71
|
5.56
|
5.00
|
7.06
|
Flawed
democracy
|
Indonesia
|
6.39
|
65
|
11
|
6.92
|
7.14
|
6.67
|
5.63
|
5.59
|
Flawed
democracy
|
Singapore
|
6.38
|
66=
|
12
|
4.33
|
7.86
|
6.11
|
6.25
|
7.35
|
Flawed
democracy
|
Sri Lanka
|
6.19
|
71=
|
13
|
7.83
|
5.71
|
5.00
|
6.25
|
6.18
|
Flawed
democracy
|
Hong
Kong
|
6.15
|
73=
|
14
|
3.08
|
6.07
|
5.56
|
7.50
|
8.53
|
Flawed
democracy
|
Papua New Guinea
|
6.03
|
75
|
15
|
6.92
|
6.07
|
3.89
|
5.63
|
7.65
|
Flawed
democracy
|
Fiji
|
5.85
|
79=
|
16
|
6.58
|
5.36
|
6.11
|
5.63
|
5.59
|
Hybrid regime
|
Bangladesh
|
5.57
|
88
|
17
|
7.83
|
5.07
|
5.56
|
4.38
|
5.00
|
Hybrid regime
|
Bhutan
|
5.30
|
94
|
18
|
8.75
|
6.79
|
2.78
|
4.38
|
3.82
|
Hybrid regime
|
Nepal
|
5.18
|
97
|
19
|
4.33
|
5.36
|
5.00
|
5.63
|
5.59
|
Hybrid regime
|
Thailand
|
4.63
|
106=
|
20
|
3.00
|
4.29
|
5.00
|
5.00
|
5.88
|
Hybrid regime
|
Pakistan
|
4.17
|
112
|
21
|
6.08
|
5.36
|
2.22
|
2.50
|
4.71
|
Hybrid regime
|
Myanmar
|
3.83
|
118
|
22
|
3.67
|
3.93
|
3.89
|
5.63
|
2.06
|
Authoritarian
|
Cambodia
|
3.59
|
125
|
23
|
1.33
|
5.00
|
2.78
|
5.63
|
3.24
|
Authoritarian
|
China
|
3.32
|
130
|
24
|
0.00
|
5.00
|
3.89
|
6.25
|
1.47
|
Authoritarian
|
Afghanistan
|
2.97
|
143
|
25
|
2.92
|
1.14
|
4.44
|
2.50
|
3.82
|
Authoritarian
|
Laos
|
2.37
|
151=
|
26
|
0.83
|
2.86
|
1.67
|
5.00
|
1.47
|
Authoritarian
|
North Korea
|
1.08
|
167
|
27
|
0.00
|
2.50
|
1.67
|
1.25
|
0.00
|
Authoritarian
|
Source: The Economist Intelligence Unit.
|
|||||||||
Pakistan has an overall score of 4.17,
better than only six nations which include: Myanmar; Cambodia; Afghanistan;
Laos; China; and North Korea. Pakistan is globally ranked at 112 (a
decline as Pakistan was placed 110 in the previous index). Pakistan
is characterized as a hybrid democracy. After a fiercely contested election,
the ruling Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), or PML (N), lost power to the
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), led by Imran Khan. The polls took a sour turn
when the defeated parties alleged widespread election rigging. Although electoral
malpractice has been a long-running feature of voting in Pakistan the scale of
abuses on this occasion appears to have been substantially larger than during
the last election in 2013. Pakistan’s democracy is not a sturdy one. In fact,
in the 2018 Democracy Index, its position declines to 112th from 110th
previously. Nevertheless, an argument can be made that, flawed as the polls
were, the Pakistani electorate still managed to push out the incumbent
government for high levels of corruption and lack of transparency. Nawaz
Sharif, the honorary leader of the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), or the PML
(N), was disqualified as prime minister by a Supreme Court ruling in July 2017,
based on a preliminary investigation into corruption charges stemming from a set
of leaked financial documents known as the Panama Papers.
2
Press Freedom:
While talking to reporters after
attending an event arranged to honor the late JI leader Qazi Hussain Ahmed in
Lahore, Chohan was asked about Haq’s claim that the ruling party had not taken
any “step towards building a Madina-like Islamic state”. The question angered
the provincial minister, who criticized the media for being “inconsiderate” for
asking him about Haq’s comments at an event arranged in memory of Hussain, the
late JI Emir.“You should not ask such a question which can create a
contradiction, out of respect,” Chohan told media representatives. Press Council of Pakistan has unanimously rejected the proposed
creation of Pakistan Media Regulatory Authority (PMRA) and urged the government
to ensure the Freedom of Press, if it intends to streamline the various
institutions then it should table a Bill in the Parliament, says press release.
The Press Council of Pakistan’s General Council, which met here on Friday, said
the Press Council of Pakistan is the only forum which deals with the public
complaints and redresses the grievances of people. In The Press Council of Pakistan has unanimously rejected the proposed
creation of Pakistan Media Regulatory Authority (PMRA) and urged the government
to ensure the Freedom of Press, if it intends to streamline the various
institutions then it should table a Bill in the Parliament, says press release.
The Press Council of Pakistan’s General Council, which met here on Friday, said
the Press Council of Pakistan is the only forum which deals with the public
complaints and redresses the grievances of people. .
3.New
Chief Justice: Asif Saeed
Khan Khosa; The new
Chief Justice of Pakistan gave his opening address ,of special relevance is the following
excerpt of CJP-designate address today: "Let us also discuss, without
mincing words or feeling shy, the role of the armed forces and the intelligence
agencies in the governance paradigm. Civilian supremacy as well as civilian
accountability is sine qua non for democratic sustainability. Let us deliberate
how civilian supremacy can be ensured alongside civilian accountability without
the process of accountability destabilizing democracy. And, let us not forget
or fail to discuss the issue of missing persons and of enforced disappearances
and their adverse impact upon the constitutional scheme of things as well as
national cohesion. It needs to be realized and appreciated by all the
stakeholders that statecraft is too serious a business to be reduced to a game
of hide and seek and that in a constitutional democracy national security
cannot be pursued by employing methods which are offensive to the
constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights to life and liberty. Instead of
adopting a trigger-happy approach or a devil may care attitude on these
delicate and sensitive issues we need to find solutions from within the
Constitution and the law. Let us, therefore, sit together and discuss. Let us
not keep drifting or floating aimlessly. Time has come to reflect upon the
past, learn from the mistakes and to define the future course of action with
clarity lest the rudderless ship may be swept away by the storm of unbridled
emotions and selfish short-sightedness. Let us not shy away from all such
critical issues or look the other way in careless abandon and let us catch the
bull by its horns if we want to make any progress as a forward looking and
democratic nation governed by a Constitution. Let us call a spade a spade, rise
to the occasion and try to emulate our founding fathers in an effort to rebuild
our nation on the foundations of freedom envisioned by our revered elders.I
would, therefore, with the approval and support of my colleagues, propose
holding of an inter-institutional dialogue at the summit level and would
request the worthy President of Pakistan to convene a meeting and to chair the
deliberations. I am of the opinion that we have reached a stage in our national
life where we must take stock of the mistakes committed in the past and to come
up with a Charter of Governance so as to ensure that such mistakes are not
repeated in future. I would propose that such a summit may be attended by the
top parliamentary leadership, the top judicial leadership and the top executive
leadership including the military and the intelligence agencies. After bringing
all such major stakeholders in the national governance on one table under the
patronage of the President of Pakistan an effort should be made through such
proposed exercise to heal the wounds of the past, attend to the sore points and
work out a practicable policy framework where under every organ and institution
of the State exercises its powers and performs its functions within its
constitutionally defined limits. The sole purpose of the proposed exercise
should be to bolster constitutionalism and rule of law, strengthen democracy
and create an environment where in the State and all its organs and
institutions may be able to devote their wholehearted attention to the real
issues of the citizens of this great country and, as envisaged in the Preamble
to our Constitution, “So that the people of Pakistan may prosper and attain
their rightful and honored place amongst the nations of the World and make
their full contribution towards international peace and progress and happiness
of humanity”.
4. Foreign Policy: “Parliament should be made
fulcrum to formulate Pakistan’s foreign policy,” he stressed. “A parliamentary
committee on national security should immediately be constituted to look into
matters pertaining to the country’s security and foreign relations.” PPP Senator Raza Rabbani presented a bill in the Senate, seeking to
bind the government to place agreements and contracts to be signed with other
countries, donors and international monetary organizations before the
Parliament for ratification.
5. Judicial
activism : Jan.,31,2019:The entrenched and nearly universally
accepted principle, that judicial review of private actions is not available,
was put under serious challenge by the Nisar-led court .First, the action taken
by the Supreme Court against private hospitals for allegedly charging exorbitant
amounts from patients; second, the order requiring private schools to reduce fees; and
third, the order for imposition of tax on water extraction by bottled
water companies. In the first two cases, transactions between private citizens
were scrutinized and action taken and orders passed to ensure that fundamental
rights of citizens (right to education and health) were directly enforced
against other private citizens (owners of private hospitals and private
schools).In none of the three cases were the private entities violating any
laws. There is no law which requires private medical hospitals or schools to
reduce fees. It is therefore difficult to see how the insistence of the Supreme
Court on reduction of fees can be viewed as anything other than direct
legislation threatening the sanctity of the separation of powers doctrine. In
the third case, there was no law which imposed any tax on water extraction and
a tax was introduced by the Supreme Court itself which was surely a decision to
be taken by the government and implemented through appropriate legislation.
6. PEMRA: Jan., 8, 2019: The federal cabinet approved the
formation of new regulatory body called Pakistan Media Regulatory Authority
(PMRA) with the merger of all media regulating bodies including print,
electronic and digital media. The meeting was held on January 24, headed by
Prime Minister and attended by the journalists’ associations. The All Pakistan Newspapers Society (APNS),
Council of Pakistan Newspaper Editors (CPNE) and Pakistan Federal Union of
Journalists (PFUJ) opposed the decision of federal cabinet. The current media
laws including Press Council Ordinance, Press Newspapers, News Agencies and
Books Registration Ordinance and PEMRA are being annulled which were enacted
after consultation by the government with the media bodies. The APNS has urged
to all democratic forces to raise voice against the undemocratic and
anti-public step of government to safeguard the democratic norms in the
country.
No comments:
Post a Comment