Democracy in Pakistan: The Missing Link?

Sac #594

If you give anti democratic tirade without giving an alternative (We do not live in Utopia), it will be useless.

RIGHT TO EXIST/RIGHT TO JUSTICE

In the following letter to the Editor, Sabeen Jatoi calls for justice in the case of the murder of her father, allegedly at the hands of the police. How long should such a case take to decide? Why the public prosecutor is not attending the case/court proceedings? Does anybody know more about this case? Comments welcome.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Ashiq Jatoi`s murder case

IT has been a little more than a year since the present rulers proclaimed themselves as saviours` of this nation. But life for most Pakistanis is still the same. The political culture is the same, it is just the faces that are different.

The reasons for this cynicism are diverse. I shall take examples that concern me to illustrate my point. The police murdered my father Ashiq Hussain Jatoi on the 20th of September 1996. My confidence in law enforcers of this country is zero. Far from offering protection, they actually threaten most people.

The present rulers make tall claims about accountability and reform. Why then has one of the main accused, despite being accused in a pending murder trial, been appointed to work on police reforms at the `Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Cell` located in the Chief Executive`s Secretariat? Ironic that we are asked to pay taxes and offer support so that persons despite being accused of murder occupy high office and enjoy cushy jobs at our expense.

The public prosecutor has stopped attending hearings of the 70 Clifton case with the result that the case cannot proceed. His subordinate is absent from the hearings as well and on occasion arrives after the allocated time has passed. Whether it is lack of will, courage or honesty that motivates his lack of interest is not clear. The trial judge, who is fed up with this, has placed a reference to this effect in the High Court.

I have come to realize that justice is a luxury in Pakistan; I have studied law and it pains me to realize that my faith in the judiciary of my country hangs by a thin thread. I resent the fact that I have to write to `important` people constantly all the while `asking` for a fair trial. It is not like I am begging them to pervert the course of justice or do me some special favour. And despite all the efforts, four years after the crime was committed the trial is still pending.

What difference does it make to me who is ruling Pakistan, an elected civilian or a man in uniform? All I care about is who has the integrity to believe in justice and the courage to follow through his beliefs.

I believe that my father and our family deserve justice. Perhaps this is an isolated personal example, but a single example just like a single life lost is one too many.

SABEEN JATOI, Karachi

In response to sac (Reply # 495)
Dear sac:

This is a very good idea. May be you could send me a draft of your article at bahmad@home.com for my initial comments.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Dear Bilal/PM:

I`ll pen down my anti-democracy tirade in the form of an article as soon as time permits. I`ll try and give some of the sources as the professor desires.

later

-sac

PUBLIC DISCOURSE

In the following letter to the editor (Dawn, January 15, 2001), a Pakistani citizen has expressed views which provide support to democracy and for the need to engage in a public discourse and a struggle. Thanks Tahir Basharat Cheema.

– Bilal Ahmad

“Public debate on vital issues

IT is very common in Pakistan to watch grand inaugurations of projects, which are nearly always in direct conflict with national goals and aspirations and are not needed at all.

Actually, these are the true images of the people in power and are taken up purely to satiate specific requirements and nothing else. As soon as the next government is heralded in, these are correctly but belatedly dubbed mala-fide and corrupt.

Then the new people in power quickly proceed to demolish the very foundations of the same and no effort, is made to re-engineer any of these to suit the actual needs of that particular day. Thereafter, the same charade starts once again in fashion and style, only to fall in disgrace very soon.

As a consequence, billions of state funds have gone down the drain, for which no one has been held responsible or been taken to task. Prime examples would be the cooperative banks of the fifties, the basic democracies edifice of the sixties, the nationalization of the seventies, the so-called Islamization and the Nai Roshni Schools of the eighties and the utopian yellow cab and motorway projects of the nineties.

The present government has also chipped in with its devolution plan. However, there is no doubt that any scheme of things which has not been debated threadbare will never make a permanent mark, but will squander public funds.

It is not understood as to why no one learns the lessons of history and why public opinion is never considered. Similarly, dissent - a democratic right of all citizens - is wrongly considered as disobedience, disloyalty and something to be disregarded altogether. Why can`t we believe in debate and consensus. Is it because of a flaw in our national character or because of the fact that leadership is always lacking?

TAHIR BASHARAT CHEEMA, Lahore”

MINORITIES AND ELECTIONS

Omar Asghar Khan is a minister in General Musharraf`s cabinet. His letter to the editor suggests that minorities are not eligible for the posts of nazims and naib nazims. It also suggests that the question of joint/separate electorate will receive some attention by the decision-makers. Comments welcome

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

The News, Letter, January 13, 2001
``Clarification
Omar Asghar Khan

This is with reference to my interview published in ``The News`` on Sunday, January 7, 2001. In the interview, it has been inadvertently reported that many minority representatives have been elected as Nazims and Naib Nazims in the first round of local bodies elections held in 18 districts on December 31, 2000. The factual position is that some minority members have been elected as councilors where nominations were made by minority members against seats reserved for minorities. The demand of joint electorates and concerns over the system of separate electorates have been noted and these will be considered for elections to the Provincial and National Assemblies.

Islamabad``

Below is a description of an attempt to overturn the Raj-era Official Secrets Act of India (presumably still the law in Pakistan, as well) by the poorest of the poor at the local government level, and the efforts by the bureaucracy to thwart the effort. The battle has now been truly joined, and in the end I have no doubt that the Official Secrets Act will become history...

THE POOR WANT ANSWERS

Jan 11th 2001 | RAJSAMAND

From The Economist print edition

“THE TREASURE”, a comic play in one act, opened for a single matinée in Rajsamand last month. The players were activists and peasants from nearby villages, costumed in their usual turbans and saris. The theatre was the main street of this town in a drought-stricken district of Rajasthan in northern India. The plot: the capture of India’s wealth by a corrupt trio—a politician, a bureaucrat and a policeman. The point: the right to information is not merely a slogan for journalists but a matter of life and death for the poor.

The play is produced by a group called the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), which translates as the Association for the Empowerment of Workers and Peasants. It practically invented India’s growing right-to-information movement. Its agitation has already led to new laws in Rajasthan to open up government and inspired similar initiatives in other states. The central government is planning to rewrite the Raj-era Official Secrets Act, which still governs the public’s access to government data. “The idea is so seminal, we are sometimes awed by its implications,” says Aruna Roy, an ex-civil servant who is the best known of the two dozen people who constitute the MKSS’s “collective” decision-making body. She compares the movement to India’s struggle to free itself from British rule.

In this region, the comparison does not seem boastful. In drought years, four-fifths of the young men migrate in search of work. Many people who stay depend on government jobs to see them through the end of winter to the beginning of the next monsoon. Sometimes, though, the promised jobs do not materialise. Or the wages are lower than they are supposed to be. Some public works are built flimsily, or not at all. When people talk about famine, they think of corruption.

The MKSS stumbled on that connection in the mid-1990s, while campaigning for payment of minimum wages. Although it has made openness a national cause, its genius has been to rally villagers to challenge their own local governments on the issue. Gram panchayats—councils representing clusters of villages—ought to be the most accountable unit of government because they are closest to the people. Yet each is headed by a sarpanch who spends up to 100,000 rupees ($2,100), some of it on booze for prospective constituents, to be elected to a job that pays 400 rupees a month. So the balance has to come from diverting public money.

In and around Rajsamand district, the MKSS is the sarpanch’s nightmare. It has held a series of public hearings where villagers discover from official documents the discrepancies between what is due to them and what has actually been delivered. One, for five gram panchayats in January 1998, revealed misappropriations of at least 100,000 rupees in each. At some, officials have volunteered to return the money. After a 53-day sit-in in Jaipur, the state capital, in 1997 the MKSS won the right for citizens to obtain photocopies of panchayat records within four days.

Its battle in Janawad, south-west of Rajsamand, shows both the power of openness and of the resistance to it. In accordance with MKSS-inspired rules, the panchayat painted on the walls of its village hall an account of works done in the previous five years. It did not take villagers long to realise that much of the fresco was fiction. In 1998, for example, 80,000 rupees were supposedly spent on renovating Janawad’s dispensary. The nurse who lives beside it says no work was done. “If this board hadn’t come up, all would have been lost in papers,” says another local.

But the effort to get copies of those papers, now backed by the state bureaucracy, has so far taken nine months, not four days. Janawad’s administration recently won a court order to stay the release of documents, but the MKSS hopes the order will be rescinded this month. When The Economist attempted to speak to Janawad’s (now ex-) sarpanch, he excused himself, citing sudden news of an illness in his family.

Unlike most good-government campaigns, which rely on co-operation and consensus, the MKSS’s campaign mobilises the humblest people, encourages them to think of their interests rather than of traditional loyalties to caste or kin and invites the antagonism of officials. Its methods make it possible for women, illiterates and lower-caste people to assert an authority over government that for most has been merely a distant abstraction.

MKSSers live their egalitarian beliefs. The collective’s ten salaried members are an unlikely team of polished English-speakers, such as Mrs Roy, and local folk. Mrs Roy and several others live communally in a compound consisting of a few mud huts and one sturdier office. All receive Rajasthan’s minimum wage of 60 rupees a day.

Success is raising awkward issues. The MKSS, which describes itself as a “non-party political formation”, is coming under pressure to enter electoral politics. It has fielded three candidates for sarpanch so far (two won), and is wondering whether to enter elections on a larger scale and for higher office. Would that sharpen the MKSS’s campaign, or try the collective’s egalitarianism and test its ethics?

SPACES OF FREEDOM

Gulzar Wazir, a Pakistani citizen, has an interesting suggestion for the development of a culture of democracy (by building spaces of freedom of speech) in Pakistan. Can Pakistan afford such a freedom? Would the ruling elite be able to digest it?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

The News, Letter, December 12, 2001
``Freedom of expression
Gulzar Wazir

There is a park in London called Hyde park which is famous for the freedom of expression allowed in its premises. Virtually any person can express his/her opinion, whatever it may be. Looking at the chaotic conditions prevailing in our country, such parks are needed in all the major cities of Pakistan. People should be allowed to say anything against the police, judiciary, clergy, army, politicians, terrorists, defaulters or whosoever it may be. I am sure that this exercise will provide a big relief to the pent-up feelings of the people.

Peshawar``

JOINT/SEPARATE ELECTORATE

In the United States, African-Americans waged a long struggle against a policy of “separate but equal.” In South Africa, the black majority also struggled against the discriminatory policy of apartheid? In Pakistan, there is a state policy of segregation on the basis of religion as far as electoral politics is concerned. Why should there be joint/separate electorates on any basis?

May be the minorities want it? If so, why some religious groups boycotted the last local body elections? Are there some minority group who support joint electorate? What was the position of Justice Cornelius in this matter? Who should decide such matters?

The following letter presents one side of the picture. I will soon try to provide additional information on this issue.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Dawn, Letter, August 25, 2000
“Electoral apartheid

This refers to the article, `Why this electoral apartheid?` by Kunwar Idris (Dawn Aug 21). The writer has drawn a striking comparison between South Africa during Apartheid and contemporary Pakistan. I fail to fathom the logic of those advocating the retention of separate electorate, a system that has only served to widen the gulf between the Muslims and those belonging to other faiths in this state. What we, actually, continue to conveniently forget is that if Pakistan needs anything desperately today it is the unity in diversity. Division on religious lines has doubtless weakened us substantially. Recent announcement by the Chief Executive regarding the continuance of separate electorates has, moreover, come as a disappointment for many. The writer very aptly argues that just token representation on the basis of separate electorates will not end the oppression and alienation of the minorities as is being presumed in government circles. It has been almost a decade and a half that this obviously discriminatory system of electorate was put in place. This experiment further fragmented the society. That is why patriotic elements, human rights organizations and, above all, minorities that have felt marginalized ever since, have been consistently clamouring for its abolition. Moving as we are, now, towards some form of democratic dispensation, it is time that the government realizes the significance of reintroducing the joint electorate system. Later, civilian governments may not have the guts to bring about such a change. In view of this it is important that the government reviews its recent decision and reintroduces the joint electorate system.

– AFTAB AHMED SAHTO, Karachi”

Re: Ahmadb #586

I think I concur with the good Professor. A 40something % turnout is not a sign of regime illegitimacy per se. By this criteria, as Prof. Ahmad has pointed out, all US governments are illegitimate. I think that the low-voter turnout is more on the lines of voter-fatigue: no matter how many times they go to the polls, no government improves their lot. I`ll remind you that polls held just before the 1993 elections gave the Moeen Qureishi caretaker government an 80% approval rating AND expressed a wish that he would scrap elections and stay on in power for two years to set things aright.

Given such poll results and the dancing in the streets that accompanied the coup itself, its clear that a rank-ordering of the Pakistani people`s priorities would not give us elections, democracy, freedom of speech at the very top. It would give us law and order, an improvement in public services, economic growth (i.e., jobs), and punishing the corrupt. Now, you can well argue that the PM regime has fallen far short of these goals as well, but thats a different criticism.

As far as separate electorates goes, this was not a new invention of the current government`s. We`ve had them as far back as I can remember, i.e., Zia days. Probably they predate that as well. Perhaps Prof. Bilal can help us out there? Have we ever had combined electorates? If so, when were they eliminated?

However, reelecting PML, PPP hacks is another issue. In Pakistan the vote goes along biradari/ethnic lines, very premodern and not terribly enlightened of us. Perhaps the best thing to do is to forget elections and just hope for a competent administrator or two. Any of the old gora saabs want their job back?

re. sac #581

Dear sac,

But aren`t ALL theories/entities dealing with human behaviour `artificial constructs`-- their value lying in how closely they approximate reality/an ideal?

Surely, democracy and nation-state are not to be dismissed solely on these grounds?!?

regards,

PM

VOTER TURNOUT

In response to shammi (Reply # 585)
Dear Shammi:

Although Aparisim Ghosh’s opinion piece is informative, the voter turnout data is not sufficient to argue for the failure of the current Pakistan military regime (remember I am in principle an opponent of the dictatorial regimes).

In the 1996, US presidential election only 49 per cent of eligible voters actually turned out to vote (where 24 percent voted for Democrats, 20 percent voted for Republicans, and 5 percent voted for third party candidates).

This could be interpreted as if Bill Clinton actually represented only less than 25 percent of eligible voters. Source: http://www.turnout.org/

Now you could draw your own conclusion about the Pakistani situation. In my view, the voter turnout in the local bodies elections in Pakistan (18 districts only) was not too bad. A low turnout could be a result of several contingent factors.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

From CNN

Dictator`s Democracy

Pakistani voters send General Musharraf a message

By APARISIM GHOSH

January 10, 2001

Elections? Tell it to the marines, general. Pakistan`s first polls under dictator Pervez Musharraf have, predictably, turned out to be a farce. Last week`s local elections in a few scattered districts across the country were meant to be a first step in the return of democracy. But with less than 50% of voters showing up at the booths (about the same as in previous elections) it seemed a step backward, instead.

Clearly, voters were sending the dictator a message: without free choice, your ``election`` is no better than the rigged, corrupt polls of the past. They didn`t have free choice because the military regime banned political parties from contesting and, in seats reserved for minority communities, severely limited voters` options.

ASIA BUZZ

Subcontinental Drift: South Asian of the Year

...and why the heavyweights failed to make the grade

- Wednesday, December 27, 2000

Subcontinental Drift: Movers and Shakers

Your nominations for the South Asian of the Year

- Wednesday, December 6, 2000

Subcontinental Drift: Picking Winners

Name your own South Asian of the Year

- Wednesday, November 29, 2000

Subcontinental Drift: Queering the Pitch

Ending Indo-Pakistani cricketing ties is a mistake

- Wednesday, November 22, 2000

Subcontinental Drift: Musharraf`s Mind

The General has some pretty strange -- and dangerous -- notions

- Wednesday, October 25, 2000





ASIAWEEK

Intelligence

The story behind today`s news from the editors of Asiaweek

From Our Correspondent

Personal perspectives on the news





As is often the case in dictatorships, the curtailing of freedom was presented as a good thing for all concerned. In the months leading up to the polls, the local elections were billed as a new dawn for Pakistani democracy. By barring parties from contesting, the general said he was demolishing with a single blow the country`s deeply venal political establishment. Pakistanis, he promised, would welcome the chance to elect new, clean leaders.

Turns out most of the ``independents`` elected to local councils are former members of the Pakistan Muslim League and the Pakistan People`s Party. Voters, it seems, didn`t want any new, clean leaders.

No, seriously, the general obviously completely underestimated his people`s knowledge of electoral politics. The voter, he is now discovering, is fully conscious of the importance of political parties. This also gives the lie to the notion, championed by the regime`s apologists, that Pakistanis don`t understand (and therefore don`t need) the ``Western`` principles of democracy.

Musharraf`s spin doctors have pointed to low turnouts in previous elections to justify his October `99 coup. Their defense: the government he ousted was not really legitimate anyway, because the majority of Pakistanis didn`t vote in the polls that brought it to power. Well then, how legitimate are last week`s elections?

Not much -- and not at all for Pakistan`s minority communities. Under the new rules imposed by Musharraf, Christians, Hindus and Sikhs were not allowed to vote for Muslims, or vice versa. Less than 10% of the 962 seats reserved for non-Muslims were contested. Ditto half the 3,822 seats reserved for women. Here, too, Pakistani voters showed a much more sophisticated appreciation for democracy than the general expected: they rejected tokenism.

Hopefully, Musharraf will get the message from last week`s debacle and learn to give his countrymen more credit. If not, there`s worse to come. These elections were meant to be a dry run for national polls next year. If that was a dress rehearsal, then this critic`s verdict is: sack the director.

The army confronts only soft targets like the politicians because they have nominal following.

The madrissas can fight back,so live and let live

with them.

In response to sac (Reply # 581)
Dear Sac:

You argue that Pakistan is unnecessarily trying to pursue two different artificial constructs: (1) Nation state; and (2) Democracy. You also contend that both of these constructs are “heavily discredited in practical discourse.” Please explain your use of “artificial” and “practical” in “artificial constructs” and “practical discourse” respectively. Also explain me, who has discredited nation-state and democracy?

I have asked you pointed questions. Please give pointed answers. Such that I and other readers should be able to adequately understand your critique. May be there are some aspects of your argument that I, at least, agree with you.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

re PM #578 and bahmed #580:

Dear PM/Bilal:

I pointed out some sources in one of my earlier posts on this thread. Please take a look at some of them if you get a chance.

Pakistan is guilty of trying to pursue two different artificial constructs. (i) Nation state.

(ii) Democracy. My contention is that both of them are heavily discredited in practical discourse. The erstwhile professor(and most idealistic folks out there) would have us believe that what Pakistan needs is more democracy to cure it of its present ailments. You also wonder along the same lines-whether there is something that can be done to bring Pakistan out of its present crisis in governance.

I would be the last person to admit that I have any solutions. But if I don`t have any solutions that does not mean I can`t point out the fallacies inherent in pursuing the same path that have led countless others into intractable nothingness. Self-sufficiency is just not possible in today`s day and age. Pakistan is not a Bhutan and the theory of comparitive advantage is way too powerful!! China cut itself off in the bginning of the century and historians are left to muse what might have been had it not. So is there no hope for Pakistan? Unfortunately I believe so(sorry Professor). Pakistan in its present shape has as much chance of surviving as Clinton has of remaining celibate for the rest of his life. An artificial entity with a completely unconsciable elite will sooner or later meet its fate at the hands of the law of increasing entropy. Out of that disorder maybe hope will be reborn.

Dear Bilal:

My thoughts are definitely influenced by what I read,hear and observe. However as mentioned in my earlier posts, I am not an academic and I don`t follow the standard regimen of quote and enhance followed in academic discourse. You may choose to ignore my posts(selectively I hope) on that ground. I`ll understand.

later

-sac