Business Recorder editorial Aug 30, 2016

Saudi pressure again? Saudi Deputy Crown Prince, Second Deputy Premier and Minister of Defence Muhammad bin Salman paid a flying visit to Islamabad en route to East Asia on the invitation of the Pakistan government, during which he had one-to-one meetings with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Chief of Army Staff General Raheel Sharif. This visit and interaction can be seen within the context of Saudi concerns regarding the security situation in the region, particularly the series of setbacks the Saudis have suffered in their intervention in the Yemen civil war and the emerging trend of the US carrying out a rapprochement with Saudi Arabia’s rival Iran. Pakistan and the Saudis appear to have been more circumspect and diplomatic this time round, at least judging from the bland, generalised communiqué issued at the end of the two-day visit. This is certainly an improvement on the last time the Saudis and their Gulf allies approached Pakistan to militarily support them in Yemen. Pakistan already had, and has, its hands full with the struggle against terrorism at home and was obviously reluctant to get bogged down in the Yemen quagmire, which also has denominational overtones because the Saudis and Iran are backing opposite sides in the civil war whose divide is tinged by sectarian hues. Pakistan’s interests lay then and continue to lie in steering clear of the sectarian passions that are tearing the Middle East apart, from Yemen to Syria and beyond. It is also in Islamabad’s interest to retain and develop good relations with Iran, whose dividends are tantalisingly poised for realisation in the wake of the Iran-US nuclear deal and restoration of relations. These dividends beckon in the shape of the long stalled Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline, overland trade, economic cooperation, etc. Last time round, when Islamabad found itself on the horns of the dilemma of refusing the Saudi request for military assistance on its side in Yemen, the civil and military leadership deftly handled the situation by referring the issue to parliament where, after weighing the pros and cons, including the consideration of putting Saudi and Gulf states’ critical economic assistance at risk, parliament turned down the Saudi request. This produced consternation and even unprecedentedly undiplomatic ire across the Gulf, led most belligerently by the UAE. By now, tempers appear to have cooled amongst our Gulf friends and the fortunes of war turning increasingly against the Saudis in Yemen have produced a more nuanced and discreet approach. It needs to be noted in this context that the Saudi intervention in neighbouring Yemen has brought the war home to Saudi soil, as such interventions tend to do, manifested in almost daily attacks, shelling, etc, across the Yemen-Saudi Arabia border, producing in the process its deadly crop of casualties amongst Saudi citizens in the border’s vicinity. Hence, perhaps, the increasingly dire situation has induced more circumspection in Saudi Arabia’s approach to its friend and ally Pakistan. The thrust of Pakistan’s policy stance then was that it remained committed to the territorial integrity, sovereignty and defence of Saudi Arabia and protection of Islam’s holiest sites. It should be noted that whenever threats have emerged within the four corners of this policy stance in the past, Pakistan has not hesitated to come to Riyadh’s aid. Various such episodes regarding the threat from extremist elements challenging the Saudi regime on the basis of so-called ‘true’ Islam ended when Islamabad sent troops and succour and helped crush all such uprisings, including an attempt to capture the Ka’aba some years ago. Even now, Pakistan has some 1,000 military advisors stationed in Saudi Arabia, and Islamabad would not hesitate to beef up its presence if and when required. The defence of Saudi Arabia, however, is a very different kettle of fish from fishing in troubled waters in the neighbourhood at Riyadh’s behest. That should remain Pakistan’s position even now, and it should be put to the Saudis as gently and diplomatically as possible to avoid a repetition of the ruction of the recent past.

Business Recorder Column Aug 30, 2016

Lahore’s ruin at Shahbaz Sharif’s hands Rashed Rahman The Lahore High Court (LHC) has struck a blow for the preservation of the Punjab capital’s heritage and against the incremental tendency of the province’s PML-N government, and especially Chief Minister (CM) Shahbaz Sharif’s penchant for big infrastructure projects that have proved politically and electorally beneficial to the rulers at the expense of the historical character, culture and way of life of Lahore. I refer of course to the LHC’s verdict on Lahore’s Orange Line Metro Train (OLMT) project. Now in his third term as Punjab CM, Shahbaz Sharif has not outgrown his personal political agendas on display during his earlier tenures. In fact ‘success’ on this score in earlier tenures has if anything given the CM even more confidence and belief that he can do, and get away with, anything that pleases him. In his first, interrupted tenure of 1997-99, Shahbaz gave early warning of his tendencies. Lahore’s traditionally verdant boulevards, roads and streets were suddenly treated as though they were located in a Gulf desert kingdom. Dwarf palms, a necessity in cities like Dubai because of climate, water scarcity, etc, suddenly sprang up to line our main boulevards. The incongruity did not strike Shahbaz Sharif as odd. Also during this tenure, Shahbaz acquired a black mark as a CM inclined to give our brutal police carte blanche to conduct so-called ‘encounters’ (actually extra-judicial killings). The cases lodged against him on this score withered on the barren vine of our dysfunctional judicial system, and nothing has been heard of them since. In his second tenure, 2008-13, all the disturbing tendencies of CM Shahbaz Sharif as a ruler recklessly riding roughshod over the city and its people’s wishes and interests were in evidence with a vengeance. First and foremost, Shahbaz made no effort to reverse the long standing practice by successive rulers of concentrating development resources on Lahore to the detriment of the rest of Punjab, particularly its southern reaches and rural areas. Having inherited Musharraf’s prime (earlier finance) minister Shaukat Aziz’s opening up vehicle lease-purchase, which at its height brought 1,500 new cars/vehicles onto Lahore’s roads per month, Shahbaz sought the solution to the city’s growing traffic gridlock by widening roads. This meant the cutting of hundreds of trees along the main thoroughfares. Green, flourishing, shade and oxygen-giving trees were replaced by poor cousin shrubs and faux decoration that grated on the citizen’s aesthetic. In the case of one main thoroughfare, the Canal Road, burdened with the exponential growth of traffic serving the new colonies and businesses sprouting like mushrooms to the city’s south, a legal battle similar to the one now waged against the OLMT project by civil society groups and concerned citizens first promised a glimmer of hope that the wholesale massacre of trees to allow widening of the road would be halted, only to end in bitter disappointment when the Supreme Court allowed continuation on the basis of the doctrine of balance of convenience (saving the fait accompli of sunk capital investment). Whether the LHC’s OLMT verdict ordering a halt to construction within 200 feet of 11 heritage sites along the route will suffer a similar fate when the Punjab government implements its declared intent to appeal the LHC verdict, only time will tell. Without intending to cross the line of possible contempt of court even before the appeal has been lodged, one can say that the reasoning of the LHC verdict and the references to various national and international laws and conventions on the preservation of heritage leave little room to demur from the excellent verdict of the LHC. Consider that the Antiquities Act, 1975 and UNESCO conventions to which Pakistan is a signatory, clearly forbid any construction within 200 feet of protected heritage sites. In the case of the OLMT, the route passes perilously close to and threatens the preservation of 11 such sites, examples of which are: seven feet from Lakshmi Building, 33 feet from Shalimar Gardens (whose system of water fountains/cisterns was ruined by being paved over by a road by CM Shahbaz Sharif in an earlier tenure) and 39 feet from Chauburji (the Punjab government tried to justify the last by arguing it was improving the visibility of the monument from the windows of passing OLMT trains!). The OLMT route has uprooted thousands of low income families from their homes and businesses. Meagre compensation, which cannot replace these properties at current market rates, has only been available to those who could produce property ownership documents. Those missing out on even the crumbs from the government’s compensation table were low income denizens unable to produce satisfactory documents because either the record was lost in the mists of time or many victims had lived in these properties after migrating during the turmoil and horror of partition. How bitter that those who sought a new homeland in 1947 were turfed out onto the roads 69 years later. The petition before the LHC did not argue the uncompensated or inadequately compensated victims’ case, although concerned citizens connected to the heritage petition were vocal in their advocacy of justice for the people arbitrarily ground into the dust under the wheels of the OLMT juggernaut. The purpose behind rushing ahead pell mell with the OLMT, obliterating all obstacles in its path, is not hard to discern. As with the earlier Metro Bus project, the CM’s eye is fixed on the future election. The Metro Bus in the CM’s perception won him the 2013 elections. It has never caused even a crease on his forehead that for the money spent on the Metro Bus, which requires a considerable subsidy in perpetuity for each passenger ride, some 6-8,000 buses could have been introduced onto Lahore’s roads in an integrated mass transit plan that would have had the following benefits: not depriving the city of precious road space (as the Metro Bus lanes have done), coverage of public transport needs citywide, and avoidance of the heavy subsidy required throughout its life for the Metro Bus. The original plan for the OLMT, framed during Chaudhry Pervez Elahi’s chief ministership under the Musharraf regime, was an underground train to be financed by JICA (Japan’s aid agency) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB). It would have taken longer, but avoided the damage done to Lahore’s heritage, damage that persuaded the LHC to call a halt to the rape of the 11 identified heritage sites under threat. Merely because it was a political rival’s brainchild, the underground aspect was rejected, which led to the withdrawal of JICA and the ADB. Shahbaz had done the same thing to the Gowalmandi Food Street created by Pervez Elahi and which had become an international tourist attraction. The Gowalmandi Food Street did have some health and sanitation issues, but instead of improving things on that front, the whole project was sacrificed on the altar of political enmity. The loss for Gowalmandi has proved profitable for the Lahore Fort area’s new, flourishing Food Street, of course with the CM’s blessings. The OLMT not only suffered a similar fate, it was deliberately taken above ground so it would be ‘visible’ and visibly help Shahbaz’s electoral prospects in 2018. Of such stuff are our rulers made. Political expediency and interests trump public welfare (ironically, in the name of the poor travelling public) and waste huge resources because of the brutish manner in which the CM has attempted to impose another fait accompli on Lahore’s troubled citizens, proud of the traditions, culture, way of life, and last but certainly not least, their city’s rich heritage and history. Shahbaz sahib needs to read the excellent LHC judgment, educate himself in these matters, and learn the wisdom that there are more things under the heavens than mere electoral vote counts. rashed.rahman1@gmail.com rashed-rahman.blogspot.com

Business Recorder editorial Aug 27, 2016

MQM at turning point The extraordinary developments surrounding the MQM since its founder-leader Altaf Hussain’s diatribe on August 22 have left the party facing a turning point. Altaf Hussain’s speech was incendiary, anti-state, and incentivised violence and rioting against the media for not carrying his speeches. What followed was mayhem. That proved a speech too far for the governments in the Centre and in Sindh as well as the security establishment. While cases and arrests of those responsible for the riot on August 22 continue, the authorities have taken the decision to demolish or seal around 200 offices of the party in Karachi and conduct similar actions throughout Sindh. The justification being presented for these actions is that these offices were encroachments on state land. This is disputed by the MQM, which argues that not all these offices were encroachments and no notices were issued, as would be the normal legal procedure. To some this may appear too fine a point or quibbling after what transpired on August 22, but that could arguably be construed as a knee-jerk response or taking advantage of the MQM’s present difficulties to impose a fait accompli while the going is good. No one can dispute that the MQM’s rise to power owed not a little to its strong arm, criminal and even terrorist actions in Karachi over the years, which produced a climate of fear that the party rode to dominance. But this is only one side of the picture. The MQM still enjoys massive political support amongst the Urdu-speaking people of Karachi and throughout Sindh. It was to save the party and its constituent community that Dr Farooq Sattar took the unprecedented step of distancing MQM Pakistan from Altaf Hussain and the London Committee perceived to control the militant wing of the party. Sattar distanced himself from Altaf Hussain’s anti-state diatribe and the militant past of the MQM, stopping just short of a denouncement for tactical reasons. Now speculations are rife whether this represents a permanent or (as so many times in the past) temporary sidelining of Altaf Hussain, pending his perceived need for medical professional help and treatment. How long the mercurial leader would continue to eat humble pie and not reassert himself remains in the realm of conjecture. In the meantime, Farooq Sattar is poised on the horns of a dilemma. If he appears still loyal unreservedly to Altaf Hussain, he and his party may not be spared the unwelcome attention of the authorities. His attempt is to reposition the MQM as a law abiding mainstream party. This is an enterprise, despite its risks and potential pitfalls, which should not be dismissed lightly. For it to succeed, which appears to be in the interests of the MQM as well as the country, he needs to be cut some slack. Also, from the point of view of the state, the temptation to steamroll over the MQM in the favourable climate for it at this conjuncture notwithstanding, there is a need to proceed cautiously, circumspectly, and within the four corners of the law and constitution. Only thus can the state retain the moral high ground and help persuade the MQM’s considerable vote bank that their best option is going with Farooq Sattar and company and dumping Altaf Hussain and his London cohorts. Even if some or all of the MQM offices being demolished or sealed were illegitimate encroachments, surely this is not a fact that has suddenly come to the attention of the authorities. Most of these offices are decades old and were allowed to exist because military dictators backed the MQM and civilian governments chose expedient mollycoddling of the party to keep it from reverting to its worst avatar. Revenge should not appear as the motive for actions against the MQM, but rather the belated and long overdue re-establishing the writ of the state and the rule of law. The latter in particular will not be helped by actions deemed arbitrary. Ironically, while the demolition/sealing of MQM offices and the arrests of those suspected of being involved in the violence of August 22 continue, the federal and Sindh governments are playing ping-pong with who is responsible for these actions against the party. If legitimate, lawful actions against MQM were the order of the day, perhaps these governments would feel less hesitant, if not confident, of acknowledging their ownership. Legitimate actions would also help isolate Altaf Hussain and the London Committee further, establish the credentials of Farooq Sattar and MQM Pakistan, and help wean the Urdu-speaking community away from the men of violence and into the arms of a reinvented, acceptable MQM.

Business Recorder editorial Aug 24, 2016

IHK continues to bleed The wave of unbridled repression let loose by the Indian troops in Indian Held Kashmir (IHK) since the July 8 killing of militant commander Burhanuddin Wani and the consequent mass youth uprising shows no signs of abating. On August 23, Indian troops opened fire on protestors demanding an end to Indian rule in the southern Shopian and northern Bandipore areas, wounding at least 14 people to add to the mounting casualty toll in the troubled state. In Shopian, police claimed the troops fired after villagers pelted them with stones while they were clearing roadblocks set up by protestors in about half a dozen villages. Local residents however, said the clashes erupted after troops fired tear gas indiscriminately to intimidate the villagers while moving through their area. The agitated villagers retaliated with rocks, and were met by a hail of bullets and shotgun pellets. Clashes were also reported from at least two locations in the Bandipore area, where a woman was injured. This has become a pattern since the largest protests in IHK since the 2010 intifada broke out after July 8. Unarmed civilian protestors throwing stones and rocks or whatever is at hand are brutally killed and wounded by bullets and shotgun pellets fired directly at the defenceless crowds. At least 65 protestors have been killed and thousands wounded in this manner. Two policemen have been killed and hundreds of security personnel injured in the clashes. These figures are alarming enough, not to mention the horror of unrestricted use of live ammunition and pellets against unarmed protestors. The shotgun pellets fired indiscriminately at crowds and even passersby have resulted in thousands losing their eyesight or suffering horrendous wounds to the face and eyes. The Modi government seems to believe it can indefinitely keep up these atrocities in a continuing attempt to forcibly retain the people of Kashmir within India’s fold with the liberal use of the knout and at the point of a bayonet. History may not be on Modi’s side in this unremitting cruelty, but until it delivers its final verdict, the pain inflicted on the long suffering people of Kashmir has attained unprecedented heights. Not only is IHK continuing to bleed at the hands of Modi’s butchers, constant curfews and harassment of citizens going about their daily business, not to mention the gagging of the media in IHK, has made the life of IHK’s denizens miserable (the rest of the Indian media, with a few honourable exceptions, continues its long standing practice of turning a blind eye to the atrocities being perpetuated on defenceless people or toeing New Delhi’s line of denying the problem is indigenous and dumping it all in the basket of ‘terrorism’ or militancy allegedly being ‘exported’ from Pakistan). Regrettably, the voices of dissent in India from this cruel policy are still all too few and far between, the increasing disquiet and criticism of India’s opposition parties notwithstanding. Brave individuals such as writer and activist Arundhati Roy are charged with sedition for daring to challenge India’s officially certified truth in IHK. An Indian movie actor and onetime Congress MP Ms Ramya is similarly charged for contradicting Indian Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar’s description of Pakistan as ‘hell’, based on her recent visit to our country. Even respected human rights watchdog Amnesty International is roped into the sedition fold for critiquing the bloodshed. Sadly, neither the UN nor the international community has shed even a crocodile tear for the blood of innocent youth being butchered without mercy in IHK. One fruit of New Delhi’s attempts to pin the blame for the troubles in IHK on Pakistan is the impact on bilateral and South Asian relations. Indian Finance Minister Arun Jaitley has skipped the SAARC finance ministers’ meeting in Islamabad, sending the finance secretary in his place. In the current climate, the chances of Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry’s invitation to his Indian counterpart to discuss Kashmir seems unlikely to bear fruit. The Modi government is playing with fire by brutally suppressing the people of IHK and stubbornly refusing to engage in a dialogue with Pakistan or the people of IHK. Perhaps they need to heed the words of Arundhati Roy, whose subtextual meaning is that no people can be free if it oppresses another people. The clampdown on dissent over Modi’s IHK policy is living proof of that wisdom.

Business Recorder Editorial Aug 24, 2016

Altaf Hussain’s political hara-kiri The dizzying events in Karachi on Monday and Tuesday shook the country and left the political actor at the heart of what evolved into a major crisis, the MQM, reeling. First, a recap. MQM had mounted a hunger strike before the Karachi Press Club in protest at the alleged ‘disappearance’ of dozens of its workers at the hands of the security agencies, some of whom, according to the MQM, have been tortured or extra judicially killed. The pressure on the federal government first and foremost as the controller of the Rangers leading the operation in Karachi reached a critical point when the health of some of the hunger strikers, including parliamentarians, deteriorated. Islamabad then dispatched Information Minister Pervez Rashid to Karachi to hold talks with MQM leader Dr Farooq Sattar and his colleagues. At the end of their deliberations on Monday, it appeared as though a breakthrough had been achieved when the minister revealed that he had heard the MQM and conveyed to them the message of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif that an MQM delegation should visit Islamabad to see him and that the government would try to redress their grievances. After this announcement, it was stated from the MQM side that the hunger strike had been ended. What followed surprised all and sundry. Altaf Hussain, whose incendiary speeches from London have been banned from being broadcast on the electronic media, spoke to the to-be-dispersed hunger strike camp and delivered a broadside to beat all his previous efforts. Not only did he castigate Pakistan in terms that have been construed as treasonous (a case under Article 6 has reportedly been lodged against him and others), he instigated the hunger strikers to ‘attend’ to the media houses that were refusing to broadcast his speeches. Unfortunately for them, two media houses in particular were located near the Press Club and therefore were on the receiving end of the unwanted attentions of the angry MQM workers, led by women. Not only were the offices and studios of these media outlets trashed and staff attacked, clashes with the small contingent of police on the spot resulted in one death and about a dozen wounded. A police motorcycle was set on fire and many cars and vehicles smashed. Eventually, a heavier contingent of police arrived, along with Rangers, to quell the violence. The incident was condemned from all sides, including the prime minister. COAS General Raheel Sharif instructed the DG Rangers in Karachi to arrest all those involved in raising anti-Pakistan slogans in response to Altaf Hussain’s instigation and perpetrating violence against the media. In the evening. Farooq Sattar and other MQM leaders who arrived to conduct a press conference at the Press Club were arrested and taken away by the Rangers but then later released. MQM workers were arrested all over the city, all the party’s offices, including its headquarters Nine Zero, were sealed and some 13 workers allegedly guilty of the Monday violence were sent on police remand by an anti-terrorism court. The following day, Tuesday, Farooq Sattar held a press conference in which he made the startling announcement that henceforth, decisions of the MQM would be made in Pakistan (i.e. Karachi) and not in London. This effectively meant sidelining the MQM supreme leader Altaf Hussain and his London Committee, although Farooq Sattar and other MQM leaders cautiously tried to ‘balance’ the distancing from the supremo with ritual declarations of Altaf Husain still being the leader of the party. Farooq Sattar also distanced himself and the MQM Pakistan (as it is now being called) from the anti-Pakistan slogans authored by Altaf Hussain as well as violence in any form or for whatever reason. Sattar’s ‘caution’ was visible in his reluctance to answer journalists’ questions at the press conference. Clearly, Farooq Sattar has attempted damage control aimed at preventing the MQM being banned, as is being advocated by many quarters. He may also have had an eye on Karachi’s mayor and deputy mayor elections due today, in which the MQM obviously has a big stake. Sceptics though are wondering out loud whether this ‘distancing’ between Karachi and London is tactical or permanent, voluntary or establishment pressure-driven, and the final imposition of the ‘minus-one’ formula vis-à-vis Altaf Hussain. Of course the answers will only be available over time, and perhaps even over the next few days. Much will depend on Altaf Hussain’s reaction. This is not the first time Altaf Hussain has embarrassed his party on the ground in Pakistan by making outlandish speeches/statements. Each time it has been left to the likes of Farooq Sattar to pull the leader’s chestnuts out of the fire lit by his own hand for the sake of the survival of the party. Farooq Sattar’s attempts to present the MQM as a legitimate, moderate, parliamentary party were constantly undermined by Altaf Hussain’s ravings. Sattar was even ‘punished’ (verbal and physical abuse) in the past for allegedly defying the supremo’s orders or not following them to the letter. Farooq Sattar always attempted to put a brave face on this mistreatment and attempted to soldier on for the sake of the MQM’s survival. This time however, it seems Altaf Hussain has gone too far. Even his most ardent admirers and defenders in the MQM leadership have thrown up their hands if not thrown in the towel on this mission impossible. What follows could decide the fate of the MQM and therefore also of Karachi and the politics of mohajir ethnicity that has been the leit motif of the MQM for the last 32 years. Altaf Hussain may yet survive this crisis, but his penchant for committing political hara-kiri seems to have impelled him in the direction of one speech too far.

Business Recorder editorial Aug 17, 2016

Panama commission conundrum Finance Minister Ishaq Dar seems to have mounted a fresh effort to persuade the opposition, the PPP in particular, to cooperate in getting the stalled inquiry commission on the Panama leaks off the ground. In this regard, he reportedly recently met Asif Zardari in Dubai and has now followed that up with a meeting with the Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly (NA) Syed Khursheed Shah. To end the stalemate on the commission and its Terms of Reference (ToRs), Dar asked Khursheed Shah to agree a date for the meeting of the parliamentary committee to prepare mutually agreed ToRs for the inquiry commission. Khursheed Shah circumspectly responded by saying he would give his response in a day or two after consulting the Senate Leader of the Opposition Aitzaz Ahsan and other opposition allies. Aitzaz has been the party’s leading light in insisting that the probe must begin with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his family. Dar later addressed the media to say that the meeting with Khursheed Shah had been on the one-point agenda of discussing the draft of the government’s bill, The Commissions of Inquiry Act, 2016, in view of the opposition’s demand for a specific law under which the commission would investigate those owning offshore companies. The new Act is meant to replace the existing Inquiry Commissions Act 1956, which the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Anwar Zaheer Jamali categorised as “toothless” while rejecting the government’s proposed ToRs and asking for new legislation to empower the proposed commission. While this response of the CJP strengthened the opposition’s hand as it endorsed their demand for fresh legislation, Dar advocated the new and improved draft of the proposed bill. Dar also explained that since there was no convener of the 12-member parliamentary committee that has equal representation of the treasury and opposition, the government had to approach the Speaker NA or the opposition leader to agree a date for the meeting. The parliamentary committee has not met since June when, after a series of its meetings, the opposition decided not to hold further negotiations after the government’s refusal to accept its ToRs. Last month, the Speaker NA’s intervention had produced an agreement to meet on August 9, but it had to be postponed because of the Quetta attack on August 8. The main sticking point in the ToRs has remained the insistence of the opposition that the Panama probe must begin with the prime minister and his family. After the deadlock, the opposition parties separately have moved references before the NA Speaker and the Election Commission of Pakistan seeking the disqualification of the prime minister and his family for allegedly concealing assets abroad and details of taxes. The government’s fresh effort to break through the logjam on the Panama affair seems motivated by a number of developments after the negotiations broke down. First and foremost, the government wants to wean the PPP away from its recent flirtation with the PTI. The PPP in the past, especially during Imran Khan’s months-long Islamabad sit-in, had stood by the government’s side on the basis that they were defending the democratic system. But of late the PPP has been alienated by the government’s actions against and statements about the party and its government in Sindh, particularly Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar’s railings against the party’s leadership. Although the PPP’s attempt to sail in the same boat as the PTI and the rest of the opposition has not been smooth, it seems to have finally dawned on the government that the costs of alienating the PPP far outweigh any actual or perceived benefits. Second, now that Imran Khan has once more embarked on a series of protest rallies and sit-ins and intends to move the Supreme Court against Nawaz Sharif, it becomes even more imperative for the government to once again win back the PPP to at least a defence of democracy, which in the obtaining situation obviously helps the ruling PML-N. Whether the fresh government initiative will succeed or not only time will tell. But there now seems no escape from a Panama leaks inquiry after the necessary legislation is passed and provided the two sides of the political divide agree on what have proved contentious ToRs.

Business Recorder Editorial Aug 16, 2016

Addressing NAP lacunae In the third meeting of the top civilian and military leadership in the last six days, the final touches have apparently been administered to rejig the National Action Plan (NAP). The move comes after the military expressed concern about the lacunae and gaps in the implementation of NAP, reiterating on Monday, the day of the meeting, that failure to address the weak or unimplemented parts of NAP would make the consolidation of the successes of Operation Zarb-e-Azb difficult, if not impossible. In the wake of the August 8 Quetta carnage, the government seems finally to be moving to allay the military’s concerns. National Security Adviser (NSA) Lt-General (retd) Nasser Khan Janjua has been named to lead the new body constituted to oversee the implementation of NAP. Apart from the NSA, the body will include the military’s Director General Military Operations (DGMO), the Interior Secretary, DG National Counter Terrorism Authority (NACTA), the provincial Chief Secretaries, Inspector Generals (IGs) Police, Home Secretaries, an Additional Secretary of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) and representatives of the intelligence agencies (civilian and military). The decision to appoint NSA Nasser Janjua as the head of the new NAP implementation body reflects a ‘compromise’ on the original provisions of NAP, which saw NACTA in the role of the coordinating centre for implementation of NAP. But that plan fell foul of the tug of war between the prime and interior minister over who NACTA would report to, as well as the opposition of the military’s intelligence agencies to be answerable to civilians. NACTA therefore never took off. The new body will fill the void under NSA Nasser Janjua who, being a former General, seems to have proved acceptable to the military and its intelligence agencies. While this may allay some of the military’s concerns regarding NAP, that is not the whole story. The military seems concerned also about the uncertain future of the Protection of Pakistan Act (PoPA), liable to lapse if not renewed in January 2017 because of the two-year sunset clause slipped into it by parliament. Parliament had also wisely thought to limit the arbitrariness at the heart of the military courts set up under the Act to summarily try terrorism suspects by keeping their verdicts open to judicial review by the higher courts. In practice, this has led to many death and long prison sentences handed down by the military courts being suspended by the superior judiciary on the touchstone of due process and fair trial. And this in spite of the endorsement of these military courts verdicts by COAS General Raheel Sharif. At the time of writing these lines, reports speak of his endorsement of the death sentences by military courts of another 13 alleged terrorists, perceived as the military’s ‘answer’ to the Quetta atrocity. It remains to be seen, however, whether their fate will be any different from all the other military courts verdicts so far. Apart from the fate of PoPA, the military harbours reservations about the reluctance of the political leaderships to allow special powers to the Rangers in Punjab and the whole of Sindh, issues regarding preventive detention of terrorism suspects, and poor prosecution of terrorism cases. As far as the military’s concern about raising new wings of the Frontier Corps (FC) is concerned, a beginning towards eventually raising 73 new wings has been made by announcing the establishment of 29 new wings this year. The prime minister himself has promised all necessary funding and support for counter-terrorism. In addition, the Finance Ministry and the State Bank have been instructed to take action on terrorism financing. Another top level meeting is expected this week to be attended by all the provinces’ chief ministers. Further legislation that may be required and investing the new NAP implementation body with the authority it needs will also be dealt with. A mechanism for intelligence sharing amongst federal and provincial authorities and the intelligence organisations and other departments will be strengthened to plug this major coordination gap. Action is planned against proscribed organisations functioning under different names and the provinces will be provided more funds for the anti-terrorism drive. All this represents a new found resolve to plug the loopholes left over in the implementation of NAP. The response of the civilian authorities after the Quetta attack is to be appreciated, even if it is a case of better late than never. It may also serve to smoothen the rough edges and worries of the military regarding the tardiness so far of the civilian authorities to do the needful and ensure the full implementation of NAP. The struggle against terrorism requires nothing less than the complete and unhindered cooperation and coordination of all state stakeholders to ensure the success of the national endeavour to root out and eliminate the existential threat posed by terrorism.