Business Recorder Column July 17, 2018

A controversial election

Rashed Rahman

Before even a single ballot has been cast in the July 25, 2018 general elections, the whole exercise has been rendered controversial. So much so that this election is being described as the most partisan, unfair and non-transparent in our history. While the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and its leading family the Sharifs feel hard done by at the hands of the judiciary and the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), not to mention their allegations of the deep state indulging in pre-poll rigging, almost all the mainstream political parties, including the Left but excluding only Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf (PTI), now are chiming in with similar reservations about these elections not providing a level playing field to any party except the PTI.

The PML-N in particular has had many of its candidates ‘nudged’ into defecting. The other parties, including the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), are now complaining of restrictions on their electoral campaigns. Terrorism that struck in Peshawar on July 10 (killing Haroon Bilour and 19 others), Bannu (targeting Akram Durrani who survived but four of his companions were killed) and Mastung on July 13 (in which Nawabzada Siraj Raisani and 129 others were massacred) has added another dimension to the troubled scenario. Claims of responsibility for these terrorist atrocities have come from Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Daesh. The only point of agreement between the PTI and all other political parties is against terrorism (for a change Taliban Khan having seen sense), which is perceived as having been currently unleashed to sabotage the elections. Across the board (including Imran Khan) there is moaning about the failure to implement the National Action Plan against terrorism and extremism. The country is now paying the price of leaving counterterrorism dangling in the breeze after the success of the counter-insurgency military operations in erstwhile FATA. Instead, a new affliction has been visited on us in the shape of the mainstreaming of proscribed terrorist groups and/or their co-option by some political parties. On all other issues, this election’s divide resembles nothing more than a fight between the allegedly establishment-backed PTI and the rest.

Nawaz Sharif and his daughter Maryam Nawaz’s return from London, arrest and transportation to Adyala Jail has the country in its grip, whether you are a supporter or opposed to the PML-N. Even Co-chairperson of the PPP Asif Zardari has felt compelled to condemn the terrorism charges framed against top PML-N leaders on the basis of the clashes between the PML-N workers and police on the occasion of Nawaz and Maryam’s landing in Lahore on July 13. Zardari has also spoken against the curbs on the media and expression in the middle of an election. Contrary to some (weak) speculations that Asif Zardari had struck a deal with the establishment to position his party as the power broker and king maker in a widely anticipated hung parliament to emerge from the July 25 polls, Imran Khan through his bad mouthing the Sharifs and Zardari in the same breath has made any ‘alliance’ between the PTI and PPP that much more remote if not impossible. In fact Zardari has criticised Imran Khan for his constant bad mouthing of rival parties, especially his latest gaffe of describing PML-N supporters who turned out to protest Nawaz and Maryam’s being sent to jail as ‘donkeys’. Zardari pointed out that the bullet (meaning terrorism) and bad mouthing (Imran) are enemies of democracy. The PPP too has been complaining of the absence of a level playing field, restrictions on Bilawal Bhutto Zardari’s campaigning, and the absence of effective security for the contending candidates in the field.

Meanwhile our very own ‘Prisoner of Zenda’ and his daughter have released video messages after being jailed. Nawaz Sharif has described the situation as one in which the whole country has been turned into a prison, a turn when the time has come to break all the shackles. Maryam argues her imprisonment is owed to her being Nawaz Sharif’s daughter. Further arrests of PML-N leaders and workers are being planned by the caretaker governments at the Centre and in Punjab. With each new arrest, the PML-N’s narrative of giving respect to the vote will find fresh traction with the people at large.

A considerable body of opinion amongst the political parties with the exception of the PTI argues that the results of the July 25 elections have already been made controversial and have been almost already rigged. Mainstream political parties have even taken the unprecedented step of naming names of deep state functionaries indulging in pre-poll rigging. The PPP is yet undecided if it will accept the results of this gerrymandered election or come out in protest. If the PML-N and other non-favoured parties join this rejection of the results, a grave political crisis could follow, with unforeseen consequences. Even if this worrying scenario does not emerge, a hung parliament in which no party has a simple majority will likely yield a weak, disparate, unwieldy coalition led by the PTI with the support of smaller parties, independents (especially those sporting the ‘jeep’ symbol), etc. Such a government will not be able to tackle the serious challenges confronting the country, whether in the realm of the economy, internal security, defence or foreign policy. If it surrenders the last three to the establishment, its own credibility will start approaching zero.

If none of the rival mainstream political parties, large or small, can be enticed into such a coalition in significant numbers, the opposition benches in parliament, with the PML-N and PPP at their core, will make life difficult for the government both inside and outside parliament.

The forthcoming picture therefore is of tension, polarisation, conflict, instability and possible chaos. Hardly a cheery prospect.

rashed.rahman1@gmail.com

rashed-rahman.blogspot.com

Business Recorder Column July 17, 2018

A controversial election

Rashed Rahman

Before even a single ballot has been cast in the July 25, 2018 general elections, the whole exercise has been rendered controversial. So much so that this election is being described as the most partisan, unfair and non-transparent in our history. While the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and its leading family the Sharifs feel hard done by at the hands of the judiciary and the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), not to mention their allegations of the deep state indulging in pre-poll rigging, almost all the mainstream political parties, including the Left but excluding only Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf (PTI), now are chiming in with similar reservations about these elections not providing a level playing field to any party except the PTI.

The PML-N in particular has had many of its candidates ‘nudged’ into defecting. The other parties, including the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), are now complaining of restrictions on their electoral campaigns. Terrorism that struck in Peshawar on July 10 (killing Haroon Bilour and 19 others), Bannu (targeting Akram Durrani who survived but four of his companions were killed) and Mastung on July 13 (in which Nawabzada Siraj Raisani and 129 others were massacred) has added another dimension to the troubled scenario. Claims of responsibility for these terrorist atrocities have come from Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Daesh. The only point of agreement between the PTI and all other political parties is against terrorism (for a change Taliban Khan having seen sense), which is perceived as having been currently unleashed to sabotage the elections. Across the board (including Imran Khan) there is moaning about the failure to implement the National Action Plan against terrorism and extremism. The country is now paying the price of leaving counterterrorism dangling in the breeze after the success of the counter-insurgency military operations in erstwhile FATA. Instead, a new affliction has been visited on us in the shape of the mainstreaming of proscribed terrorist groups and/or their co-option by some political parties. On all other issues, this election’s divide resembles nothing more than a fight between the allegedly establishment-backed PTI and the rest.

Nawaz Sharif and his daughter Maryam Nawaz’s return from London, arrest and transportation to Adyala Jail has the country in its grip, whether you are a supporter or opposed to the PML-N. Even Co-chairperson of the PPP Asif Zardari has felt compelled to condemn the terrorism charges framed against top PML-N leaders on the basis of the clashes between the PML-N workers and police on the occasion of Nawaz and Maryam’s landing in Lahore on July 13. Zardari has also spoken against the curbs on the media and expression in the middle of an election. Contrary to some (weak) speculations that Asif Zardari had struck a deal with the establishment to position his party as the power broker and king maker in a widely anticipated hung parliament to emerge from the July 25 polls, Imran Khan through his bad mouthing the Sharifs and Zardari in the same breath has made any ‘alliance’ between the PTI and PPP that much more remote if not impossible. In fact Zardari has criticised Imran Khan for his constant bad mouthing of rival parties, especially his latest gaffe of describing PML-N supporters who turned out to protest Nawaz and Maryam’s being sent to jail as ‘donkeys’. Zardari pointed out that the bullet (meaning terrorism) and bad mouthing (Imran) are enemies of democracy. The PPP too has been complaining of the absence of a level playing field, restrictions on Bilawal Bhutto Zardari’s campaigning, and the absence of effective security for the contending candidates in the field.

Meanwhile our very own ‘Prisoner of Zenda’ and his daughter have released video messages after being jailed. Nawaz Sharif has described the situation as one in which the whole country has been turned into a prison, a turn when the time has come to break all the shackles. Maryam argues her imprisonment is owed to her being Nawaz Sharif’s daughter. Further arrests of PML-N leaders and workers are being planned by the caretaker governments at the Centre and in Punjab. With each new arrest, the PML-N’s narrative of giving respect to the vote will find fresh traction with the people at large.

A considerable body of opinion amongst the political parties with the exception of the PTI argues that the results of the July 25 elections have already been made controversial and have been almost already rigged. Mainstream political parties have even taken the unprecedented step of naming names of deep state functionaries indulging in pre-poll rigging. The PPP is yet undecided if it will accept the results of this gerrymandered election or come out in protest. If the PML-N and other non-favoured parties join this rejection of the results, a grave political crisis could follow, with unforeseen consequences. Even if this worrying scenario does not emerge, a hung parliament in which no party has a simple majority will likely yield a weak, disparate, unwieldy coalition led by the PTI with the support of smaller parties, independents (especially those sporting the ‘jeep’ symbol), etc. Such a government will not be able to tackle the serious challenges confronting the country, whether in the realm of the economy, internal security, defence or foreign policy. If it surrenders the last three to the establishment, its own credibility will start approaching zero.

If none of the rival mainstream political parties, large or small, can be enticed into such a coalition in significant numbers, the opposition benches in parliament, with the PML-N and PPP at their core, will make life difficult for the government both inside and outside parliament.

The forthcoming picture therefore is of tension, polarisation, conflict, instability and possible chaos. Hardly a cheery prospect.

rashed.rahman1@gmail.com

rashed-rahman.blogspot.com

Business Recorder Editorial July 6, 2018

Voters’ anger

What started as an unprecedented collaring of Sardar Jamal Leghari by angry and disillusioned voters in his traditional constituency in Dera Ghazi Khan has by now begun to acquire the contours of a movement with momentum. His constituents did not even offer Jamal Leghari the normal respect and even obsequiousness reserved for tribal chiefs. The questions they put to him in no uncertain terms were where he had been since the last elections five years ago, what had he done for them during this period, and why should they, on the basis of his indifference to their problems, once more vote for him. And they would not be pacified or calm down even in the face of Jamal Leghari’s pulling social ‘rank’ on them. This is indeed unprecedented in our political culture, where tribal, caste, landowning and religious factors traditionally play such a huge role in determining political affiliations and voting patterns, particularly in the rural areas. Sardar Jamal Leghari is not the only one to have had to face angry and insistent questioners amongst his constituents. To take just a few examples, Farooq Sattar of MQM-P faced a hostile reception in Memon Masjid, Karachi, PTI’s Arif Alvi and PPP’s former chief minister Murad Ali Shah, PPP chairperson Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, all received a ‘roasting’ at the hands of dissatisfied voters in their respective constituencies. Former prime minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, Awais Leghari, former leader of the opposition Syed Khursheed Shah, former federal ministers Sikandar Bosan, Zahid Hamid and Afzal Rana too have been on the receiving end of their voters’ pent up wrath. Former Punjab law minister Rana Sanaullah and PTI’s Sheikh Khurram Shahzad have fallen foul of the Faisalabad powerloom workers for similar reasons. The idea of ‘naming and shaming’ the elected representatives seeking votes for re-election is new, and has found traction because of mainstream and social media exposure and sharing of such ‘confrontations’.

While this new phenomenon reflects an increase in political consciousness on the part of the electorate, credit is also due to the continuity of democracy, however flawed, for the last 10 years, during which the first transfer of power through the ballot box from the incumbents to the opposition in our history took place in 2013. While the right to hold elected representatives accountable is unassailable and should be welcomed as a maturing of political consciousness amongst the masses, the resort to physical misbehaviour or violence is a stretch too far. Pushing, shoving, attacking with sticks and stones (as happened to Bilawal Bhutto Zardari’s cavalcade in Lyari, and which the PPP has blamed ‘rivals’ for orchestrating) is not within the parameters of democratic accountability nor sanctioned by the law or election rules. Such outbreaks of resort to violent means in the midst of an already tense political atmosphere rife with accusations of pre-polls rigging, stacking of the deck against one particular political party, etc, is not conducive to the peaceful exercise of the right of franchise by the electorate, which is one of the foundations of any democratic order. The disappointment and disillusionment in the existing mainstream political parties on the part of their voters has accumulated slowly but surely, is by now at an all-time high, and arguably has been incrementally fuelled by social media sharing of experiences and issues. This effect is in fact a strong argument in favour of freedom of the media and expression, which is the greatest conduit for informing and making the masses aware and conscious. The electorate now is impatient for the redressal of its issues of socio-economic justice, employment, poverty, civic facilities such as potable water, electricity, gas, garbage disposal, health and a myriad other issues that make life for the ordinary citizen a constant struggle and irritant. The traditional political class had better wake up too to this new awakening amongst hitherto passive and accepting voters. Their day in the old style seems to be done, and if they fail to respond to the new zeit geist amongst the people, their political future cannot be as sanguine and guaranteed as it has been in the past.

Business Recorder Editorial July 5, 2018

Uncertainty in the time of elections

Seldom in our history has there been the kind of currents, cross-currents and uncertainty that swirl around this election. The travails of the former ruling party, the PML-N, continue to grow, take on new forms and directions, and reinforce in the process the perception that all is not above board. So much so that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) has felt constrained to take notice of the reports that some PML-N candidates have been pressured into giving up their party tickets and opting to run as independents, with the ‘jeep’ the election symbol of choice. The ECP has asked the caretaker Chief Minister of Punjab (where most of such incidents have been reported) to ensure the safety and security of all candidates to ensure a level playing field and free and fair elections. Meanwhile the judiciary and the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) are at pains to deny any role in the election process. The mere fact that the need for such denials has been felt underlines the storm of rumour and speculation that has overtaken the polls exercise. Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF) and their local counterpart the Freedom Network (FN) have added their voices to those abroad and at home who are pointing to and questioning the obvious and unseen intimidation, threats, censorship and self-censorship the mainstream media and journalists are being subjected to. Critics and dissidents on the social media are also under threat and a cloud of ‘silencing’. The pertinent question RSF and FN have raised is how a free and fair election can be held amidst curbs on the media and freedom of expression.

Asif Zardari has stated in a television interview that he does not see 100 percent free and fair elections. He points to the arrest of one of his close aides, Ismail Dahiri, near his home in Nawabshah as a ‘message’ to him. Asif Zardari uses this incident to clinch his denial of any deal with the establishment, a rumour that has been strongly doing the rounds for some time. Had he had such a deal, Asif Zardari argues, he would have been the one ordering people’s arrest and not been on the receiving end of such unwanted attention. What is intriguing about this incident is that it was carried out by the Rangers. This follows on the heels of the claims by some of the PML-N candidates who have returned their party tickets and opted to run as independents that they were ‘visited’ by people in black uniforms and civilian clothes to be delivered the ‘message’ that it would be in their and their families’ interests to dump the PML-N. If all this begins to assume a definite shape and pattern in people’s minds, the question inevitably arises who or what is behind such dangerous shenanigans and to what end. In this matter, the ECP, whose constitutional duty it is to ensure the elections are held in a free, fair and transparent manner, expresses its helplessness to stymie or reverse this trend of intimidation by pleading that all it can do is write to the caretaker governments to ensure such happenings are not repeated and the life and limb of all candidates, irrespective of political affiliation, are secure and free of any shadow of discouragement or nudging in a particular direction. Since the ECP’s powers do not go beyond this, and it is not clear what if anything the caretaker administrations can do to prevent such practices despite the federal Information Minister Ali Zafar’s ‘assurance’ that complaints in this regard, if filed with proper evidence, will be acted upon, public confidence in the current elections process has fallen to an all time low. This election is rapidly turning into one of the most controversial in our history. That does not engender confidence that its outcome will be satisfactory, credible, and acceptable across the board by all stakeholders. If this conclusion has even a grain of truth in it, it seems fresh political trouble and instability lie ahead.

Business Recorder Editorial July 3, 2018

Judicial populism

All is not well in the hallowed halls of justice. First and foremost, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Saqib Nisar has admitted that he and the superior judiciary he leads have been unable to reform the judicial system. While this is an honest and welcome admission, the huge backlog of cases stuck up in the wheels of the system causes immense agony, incurred costs, loss of time and hope amongst millions of litigants, their lawyers, and even arguably the judges and other officers of the courts. The CJP’s critics would argue that contributing to this mountain of pending cases (two million by one account) and inability to reform procedures to quicken case disposal has been the diversion of the superior judiciary (especially the CJP) towards suo motu notices under Article 184(3), some of which have transgressed into the domain of the executive and legislature. No one doubts the good intentions of the CJP or the superior judiciary in attempting to address perceived fundamental rights’ transgressions through judicial activism. But this well-intentioned activism runs the risk of crossing the line into the other two pillars of the state’s constitutional structure, i.e. the executive and legislature. That is why jurisprudence generally, including ours in the past, has relied on temperance and restraint so as not to appear to be using the undoubted powers of the judiciary in a manner likely to arouse doubts and criticism, neither of which are helpful to the sustenance of the dignity and respect of the judiciary as an institution. Recent unprecedented examples of the fallout of the judiciary’s activism in recent years serve to illustrate this contention. The Karachi Bar Association has felt compelled to pass a strongly worded resolution of protest against the CJP’s alleged public disparagement of an additional district judge in Sindh, who reportedly resigned after the incident. The Pakistan Bar Council has in turn passed a resolution against suo motu actions. The Islamabad High Court’s (IHC’s) Justice Shauqat Aziz Siddiqui has protested in open court against the alleged derogatory remarks against him by the CJP for orders in a private school fees case, saying while the CJP has the powers to set aside, modify, uphold verdicts of judges, he has no right to humiliate them. He argues that all judges are equally respectable. It is not for this outburst or because his pending reference’s time had come, Justice Siddiqui has been summoned by the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) on July 7, 2018 on a charge of misconduct. And speaking of the SJC, Siddiq-ul-Farooq of the PML-N, the party that feels most hard done by judicial activism, has filed a reference against the CJP for failing to uphold the trichotomy of powers amongst the judiciary, executive and legislature, and intervening and interfering in the domain of the latter two to the detriment of parliament’s powers and the executive’s governance. Reportedly, a sessions judge from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and a former IHC judge have also set a controversial example by filing complaints against the CJP.

This situation is unprecedented in the history of our country. It may be read as the unintended consequences of judicial activism tending to cross the line into populism because of a sincere desire to fix the myriads of flaws that afflict our state and society. Unfortunately, as this experience shows, the judiciary is constrained in many ways from being able to correct all the wrongs of our system and cannot, in the process, entirely avoid the risk of the kind of backlash we are witnessing now. Any sensible well wisher of the country would rue such a turn of events. However the various cross-currents and eddies of what increasingly appears to resemble a clash of institutions and conflict within the judiciary itself pans out from here, the object lesson in the whole affair suggests a return to the time honoured principles of restraint and temperance on the part of the judiciary that have served it well in the past, and may be the only way to overcome the present ruction that is, justifiably or not, sullying the repute, dignity and respect of the judiciary as an institution.