Back in parliament
THE PTI and its leader, Imran Khan, may not have treated parliament with the respect it deserves, but parliament did the right thing in allowing Mr Khan and his fellow PTI MNAs to once again take their rightful seats in the National Assembly yesterday. On Monday, the PTI may not have been made to feel especially welcome — the MQM and JUI-F predictably claimed the PTI MNAs stood resigned while sections of the PML-N jeered the party for reversing course — but that appeared to be largely about grandstanding and political theatrics. Few, if any, parties in parliament can genuinely prefer that the PTI remain outside the National Assembly. For one, that would reflect poorly on the completeness, and hence, legitimacy of the National Assembly given that the PTI won the second-largest number of votes nationally in the May 2013 election. For another, the PTI’s purpose in boycotting, and at some stage trying to quit, the National Assembly was to bring down parliament — an inherently destabilising situation for any legislature.
Truly, the return of the PTI is a case of better late than never — and credit for this move must go to two sides. First, from the Speaker of the National Assembly to the principal parties in government and opposition, there was an early consensus that the PTI should not be allowed to quit parliament in an attempt to boost its anti-government street protests. Had the PML-N reacted petulantly or the PPP, for example, sought to create mischief, Speaker Ayaz Sadiq could have come under a great deal of pressure to accept the PTI resignations. That would have triggered a spate of by-elections while the PTI was in the midst of its street agitation — a scenario that surely was best avoided. Second, credit must, belatedly, go to the PTI. Critics may contend that the PTI has only returned to the National Assembly after it had become apparent that the government was not going to fall and the party was unable to trigger mid-term elections. That may well be the case, but the PTI has also had to swallow a great deal of ego — no small thing given much of what has been on display over the past years. It appears to have internalised some of the principles of democracy that it seemingly failed to grasp earlier. Anytime a mainstream political party embraces the democratic system and sets aside its ego, it should be welcomed as self-enhancing.
There remains though a problem: the seeming lack of interest in electoral reforms on all sides. The PTI’s quest to expose what it claimed were widespread instances of electoral fraud in May 2013 was, from a non-partisan, democratic perspective, as much about improving the electoral system as it was about establishing the legitimacy or otherwise of the PML-N’s win. Worryingly, with the possibility of mid-term polls having receded, no party seems focused on electoral reforms any longer.
Mullah Omar’s biography
STATESMEN, public figures and politicians the world over pen biographies that are quickly snapped up by people who would like to get a deeper insight into their lives. Now, it seems that even the leaders of militant outfits have caught on to this trend. On Sunday, the Afghan Taliban published online the biography of their supreme leader Mullah Omar to mark his 19th year as the head of the militia that once governed Afghanistan. The Taliban supremo is indeed an enigma; only grainy photographs exist of him and exact details about the man are difficult to verify. So apart from hard-core followers, many ordinary people may also want to find out more about the reclusive militant commander. Reports indicate the publication contains interesting details about Mullah Omar’s tastes in weaponry, as well as the observation that he is not without a sense of humour. The biography may well have been published to stem the tide of defections to the self-styled Islamic State. While the world of Islamist militancy is indeed a murky one, we have seen radical movements make increasing use of the internet and social media for propaganda purposes.
Before he was killed, Osama bin Laden’s fiery exhortations to ‘jihad’ were often uploaded by Al Qaeda as a propaganda tool. The IS, meanwhile, has a considerable web presence. While Mullah Omar’s online biography may be limited to reassuring his Afghan acolytes, the IS is an expansionist concern and uses the internet to recruit followers and brag about its battlefield ‘exploits’. Hence, the use of cyberspace by hard-core Islamists cannot be ignored. That is why the state must keep an eye on cyber-jihadis to ensure they are not abusing the internet to forward the aims of extremist groups. Seeing blood-soaked battlefield videos or listening to fiery sermons can radicalise young minds. Keeping the implications of this in mind, the misuse of cyberspace by dangerous extremist groups should be checked, without the exercise affecting the right of freedom of speech of those who do not promote violence.
GM seeds
AN amendment to the Seed Act of 1976, working its way through the legislative process, could have far-reaching consequences for Pakistan’s agriculture. The amendment will essentially open the door to genetically modified seeds, particularly in cotton which is the country’s largest crop. It does this by providing legal cover for intellectual property rights in seeds. It is important that the legislation be enacted because Pakistan’s per acre yield in cotton has been stagnant for many years now, while India and other countries that have embraced BT cotton, have doubled their yields over a decade. Pakistan’s cotton crop still enjoys higher yields per acre than India, but lags far behind countries like Egypt and Mexico. Stagnant yields in food and cotton will strain the country’s food self-sufficiency as well as industrial growth. Further improvements in yields can only come from opening the door to genetically modified varieties, which is a technological innovation akin to the green revolution. But prospects for the passage of the amendment have been dimmed by a loud chorus of protests. Successive governments have struggled with this amendment, which has been in the works since 2007, and was last brought before the National Assembly in 2010.
Of the arguments that the protesting farmer associations are advancing, there is one that is very potent and should receive high-level consideration. That argument points towards the disruptive impact that the new legislation, particularly its stress on intellectual property rights, will have on the farmers’ right to conserve, sell and exchange seeds amongst themselves. Many of our small farmers rely on informal exchanges of seeds at sowing time, and opening the door to large private-sector seed companies must not be allowed to shut down these local markets or inhibit their operation. Pakistan needs to avail itself of the benefits of new seed technologies to keep pace with domestic growing requirements as well as the output of its main competitors. But it is also important that the new markets that need to be created to make use of these benefits do not shut down existing ones on which the small farmers have become very dependent. Any disruptive impact that the amendment to the Seed Act can have on livelihoods of small farmers needs to be debated in the Senate as well, and institutional reforms should accompany the new legislation to ensure customary practices are not harmed in the course of ushering in the new technology.
Published in Dawn, April 7th, 2015
http://www.dawn.com/newspaper/editorial