Words to heed
Sunday, July 15, 2012
If any proof were needed that the PPP is on a collision course with the superior judiciary, much was furnished in the last few weeks in the shape of the new contempt law and the move to do away with the bar on dual-nationality holders contesting elections in Pakistan. The Supreme Court, on its part, gave the government some breathing room by granting Prime Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf two weeks to inform the court if he would write the Swiss letter or not. Two weeks later, July 25 hangs on the prime minister’s – and the country’s – head like D-day, and it is more and more likely that another chief executive will have to be unceremoniously shown the door for failing to follow court orders and obey the law. Whether democracy can withstand the ousting of another PM is a question the PPP doesn’t seem to have factored into its calculations. Meanwhile, speculations abound about the ‘dark forces’ of extra-constitutionalism waiting in the wings to seize the day and of democracy itself being under threat. Fortunately, though, the one force that is willing to put its weight behind the democratic order, the constitution and the rule of law is the judiciary. On Thursday last week, Chief Justice Iftikhar sent a much-needed message and warned that were parliament to come under attack, the judges would be the first to rise to its defence, and no judge would take oath under an unconstitutional setup. He reminded that the ideas and aspirations behind the lawyer’s movement had not died and every person would have to fulfil his or her responsibility to protect the constitution if circumstances so demanded.
The chief justice’s message that the court will never accept any extra-constitutional measure in the country could not have been more opportune. However, as we have said time and again, it is not for the courts to constantly defend against such challenges; the political forces must not create circumstances that unleash panic, fear and instability and leave the door open for interventions. As things stand, what many call judicial activism or interventionism is the actions of a frustrated court trying to fill in the vacuum created by a government that doesn’t seem to care about doing the right thing, at the right time. The fact of the matter is that in a democracy, no single institution can dictate the contract between state and society. As the CJ reminded us, Pakistan’s constitutional arrangement also imagines all organs of the state working in tandem, in a spirit of complementarity. All must set their own houses in order and do what the law demands of them. For the executive, this is governance. For the judiciary, it is securing the fundamental rights of the people and fixing Pakistan’s damaged judicial system. For the army, it is protecting the country’s frontiers and leaving politics well alone. So far, it seems that the government has all but reneged on its duty to the social and political contract.
RIP CNG
Sunday, July 15, 2012
There has been a curiously muted response to the announcement of the imminent death of the CNG industry. The government’s Adviser on Petroleum and Natural Resources Dr Asim Hussain informed the Senate on Friday that the policy of developing a CNG market was wrong from the outset and would be phased out over the next two years. It will be recalled that the ban on the import of CNG kits was lifted in March this year after protests by Japan, Italy and Argentina, but it would seem that the entire CNG industry is ultimately doomed to extinction. This is going to hurt a lot of people. The countries that lodged a protest are home to companies that have all made huge capital and infrastructure investments. They stand to lose everything and the message this decision is going to give to potential future investors is entirely negative.
There were bright hopes for CNG. The government encouraged the growth of the industry on the basis that CNG was an environment-friendly fuel. Currently, there are about 3.1 million vehicles powered by CNG on our roads, and they consume about 7.7 percent of the entire natural gas produced in-country. Most vehicles are not using factory-fitted CNG kits and many are fitted with substandard kits that are smuggled in and, as was seen earlier this year in several cases causing fatality, are prone to explode. With about 50 percent of legal CNG kits manufactured locally this is going to see thousands of jobs disappear over the next two years. Those who invested in CNG filling stations will see their investments wither. Poorer people who use CNG because it is cheaper will find that they are not able to afford expensive petrol. It is possible that there can be a switchover to Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) but again there are cost and infrastructure implications. All in all, the entire CNG ‘experiment’ has been something of an unmitigated disaster. Given the relatively low consumption of CNG by vehicles one might wonder if killing off an entire sector is worth the trouble. The bigger question lies around the flawed planning that allowed this accident to happen in the first place – but we doubt there will ever be an answer.
Saving Syria
Sunday, July 15, 2012
Hot on the heels of a gruesome massacre in which more than 200 villagers were slain in Tremseh on Thursday, while dozens more were killed across the country, Syrians suffered yet another bloodstained day on Saturday as the regime forces fired from low-flying helicopters and a bombing at a state security headquarters killed at least six people. As these successive episodes of ever-escalating violence are reported daily, a let-up seems like a faraway dream. Reports of the Tremseh massacre came after the UN Security Council ambassadors held their first round of talks on resolutions on Syria, with Moscow repulsing calls for sanctions against the Assad regime. If confirmed, the massacre at Tremseh would rival the killing at Houla on May 25, when pro-Assad militia and government forces were accused of killing at least 108 people. In another worrying development reported in the western press, Syria has started moving some parts of its huge stockpile of chemical weapons out of storage, raising questions about whether the transfer is a precautionary measure given deteriorating security conditions across the country or something more ominous. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has lambasted the Syrian regime and asked the UN Security Council to immediately act to stop the violence. Even the US ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, said on Twitter that the killings “dramatically illustrate the need for binding measures on Syria” by the council. Indeed, one can only hope that the Tremseh killings add urgency to the deadlocked Security Council negotiations on a Syria resolution. The use of artillery, tanks and helicopters in Thursday’s massacre is already a violation of the Syrian government’s obligations and commitment to cease the use of heavy arms.
The US, Britain, France, Germany and Portugal have propositioned a resolution that would give Assad 10 days to stop the use of heavy weapons, as per the Annan plan, or face sanctions. Russia, on the other hand, has rejected any sanctions and instead put out its own resolution that renews the mandate of UNSMIS, which ends on July 20, for 90 days. China too opposes sanctions. The problem with Russia’s resolution, in fact its entire stance, is that it wants to refocus the UN mission on the search for a political solution. But the question is: between who and whom? Large-scale sectarian and tribal fissuring is taking place in Syria and if the Sunnis completely peel away from the regime, as they already are, Assad’s claim to stand for anyone other than his family and the Alawite elite minority will stand majorly diminished. The only way out of the crisis at this point is to put pressure on Russia and China to enforce the Annan six-point ceasefire plan which does not demand regime change but only a commitment to an “inclusive Syria-led political process to address the legitimate aspirations and concerns of the Syrian people.” The other options – a military intervention with or without UN support or simply doing nothing – may lead to fatal outcomes: an endless war with inconclusive results, and possibly even the division of Syria itself.