23.06.2013 Death of an MPA — and its aftermath
The murder of Sajid Qureshi, a member of the Sindh provincial assembly, from the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, must be condemned in the strongest terms; and the party has seen three of its provincial legislators now gunned down in cold blood in recent years. Mr Qureshi was shot dead along with his son in the North Nazimabad area in Karachi on June 21 by unknown assailants, while driving home from Friday prayers. Immediately after the tragedy, the city was thrown into a state of fear with shutters down and tents draped over businesses in anticipation of the imminent bullet sprays. And indeed, Karachi saw at least 16 deaths by the morning of June 22. A city of around 20 million people, and the powerhouse of Pakistan’s economy, shut down within a matter of minutes simply because of fear and uncertainty. Fuel stations closed and public transport went off the road, leaving hundreds of thousands of commuters stranded. Vehicles were torched, forcing many people to stay at home indoors, further reducing economic and commercial activity. Exams were also postponed, disrupting students’ schedules and progress.
This frequent paralysis of Pakistan’s largest city, which is often shut down for many days in a calendar year, indicates the need for a viable, long-term solution. Every day Karachi is on strike, it costs Pakistan around ten billion rupees — which is certainly not healthy for the country’s economy. Furthermore, daily-wage workers lose out on their earnings, possibly forcing some of them into severe financial difficulty. There needs to be a realisation of this connection and an understanding that the shutdowns are detrimental for everyone.
Victims fall to targeted killings daily and one can read the total body count across the city from the previous night, every morning in the metropolitan sections of newspapers. Gun violence has almost become synonymous with Karachi’s name. Some consider the city a jungle with everyone left to fend for him or herself. The law and order situation must be improved and the political parties need to play their part. We quickly need an end in sight to save our citizens from further bloodshed and violence and to save our economy from further harm.
A welcome ruling by the SC
Judicial interference in administrative affairs is something we ordinarily view with suspicion. In the case of nullifying the government’s decision to overturn the one per cent increase in the general sales tax (GST) rate, we feel that the arguments made by the Supreme Court hold merit. The manner in which the increase was announced was troubling. The statutory rate of sales tax — as it exists in the General Sales Tax Act of 2010 — is 17 per cent for most items that are subject to taxation. However, through an administrative measure known as a statutory regulatory order (SRO), the previous administration had reduced it to 16 per cent in a populist bid to win votes. The current administration argues that, since the decrease was an administrative measure, the increase back to the original rate can also be done through an administrative measure.
The Court, however, disagrees, saying that at a time when parliament is debating the budget, the government is obliged to put this measure before the legislature for discussion. We applaud the Court’s recognition of the supremacy of parliament. However, there is another issue, which we hope the Court will also look into. SROs are an exceedingly corrosive and corruption-inducing feature of our tax system, and one that bypasses legislative authority by placing the power to set tax rates in the hands of senior officials at the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR). Taxation rates should only be set by parliament. Perhaps, in its ruling on the GST, the Court could also have declared SROs unconstitutional.
In our view, the very notion of democracy depends on the government collecting and distributing services and making decisions about those two acts through the consent of the governed. Only elected representatives should have the power to set tax rates in a transparent manner. In unkinder times, the British executed their king and abolished the monarchy itself for levying taxes on the people without parliament’s consent. Those at the FBR should consider themselves lucky that such a drastic measure is not on the cards.