Date: Thursday, October 6th, 2016.
The revival of Parliament
Parliament, that most august of bodies at the apex of our democratic life, has been slowly fading in importance and relevance to the political life of the nation. The machinery of governance has increasingly been transferred to an extra-parliamentary set of processes that are at the behest of the ruling party, do their business mostly out of the public eye, and have little by way of transparency or accountability. Robust parliamentary debate within a House filled with all parties’ elected representatives is a thing of the past, ancient history, and the House is rarely full. To be sure the peripheral functions of the House in the form of parliamentary committees continue and are generally accepted to be mostly hard working, but the public playing out of the political drama now happens behind the arras.
The joint session of parliament on October 5 was called by the prime minister and is a welcome return to best custom and practice. The national security of the state has come under sustained threat after the assassination of Burhan Wani, since when relations with India have spiralled steadily downwards. The PM told the House that it was for the international community and the United Nations to give the Kashmiris their right to self-determination and free them from what he described as “Indian tyranny” in the occupied valley. It is now 70 years since they lost their freedoms and wrongs need to be righted.
The session was symbolic in that today there is a need to display national unity that transcends party politics and that very unity needed to be publicly displayed rather than within a closed-door meeting. The need to build a united front, at least in terms of national security, is vital. Political differences will remain but on security at least there can and should be common cause. Underlying differences are forever going to remain as long as multi-party politics is the chosen form of governance, and those who wish ill to Pakistan will be both quick and keen to exploit any splits in the ranks.
That said, and laudable as the convening of the joint session is, the PML-N needs to address some fundamental issues that have arisen since the last general election, not the least of these being an apparent unwillingness to listen to any other party or individual who may disagree with them. The transfer of debate out of the public domain is symptomatic of that. The general public only knows what was discussed in the all-parties meeting on October 3 by the post-meeting statements of those in attendance. A record may be available to those with internet access but hardly represents the epitome of transparency. Opposition parties have further cause for grievance over the matter of foreign policy and its development, of which there is a notable absence of public debate.
To conclude, there was an unfortunate absence in parliament — the Pakistan-Tehreek-e-Insaf(PTI) led by Imran Khan. The party absented itself on the grounds that it would be endorsing the legitimacy of the PM if it attended, which the PTI claims he has lost as he has not accounted adequately in the PTI eyes for the revelations of the Panama Papers. In current parlance, the PTI has got the optics of their decision to opt out very wrong. Whilst it may reflect the internal priorities of the party and individual political interests, this cannot be allowed to trump the overarching issue of a collective stance on national security.
Parliament is in need of revival, of re-energising, and bringing back to the forefront of the national political narrative. It needs restoring as the workshop of democratic process, where the nuts and bolts of governance are forged on the anvil of debate, where differences are tackled with pragmatism and the needs of the state are paramount. This joint session was both timely and an opportunity to re-boot the House. We hope and trust it will not be an opportunity lost.
Ban on Indian content
In a move said to have been prompted by a similar decision in India, the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) announced on October 4 that Pakistani TV channels are no longer to make Indian content a part of their transmissions.
Previously, Pakistani channels were allowed to give 6% airtime to Indian content in a 24-hour transmission cycle. Given the popularity of Indian films, music and television shows, Pakistani channels utilised this permitted airtime to its fullest extent. However, in light of the hate campaign against Pakistani artists and media content in India, this decision by Pemra has been largely supported by the viewing public. It is in large part a retaliatory gesture which could have been avoided had the Indian government and media not chosen to drag Pakistani artists in the mud or blocked Pakistani content. This petty gesture did nothing but build up further acrimonious feelings on both sides.
The conflict between Pakistan and India is largely confined to a certain area and incidents, which due to unnecessary hype, vindictive gestures and comments have ballooned far beyond the initial cause. During the past several weeks, social media, mainstream press and famous individuals have taken it upon themselves to target Pakistani artists working in India. Despite their previous popularity or perhaps because of it, they were dragged into a fight which they are not answerable for either in their personal or professional capacity.
This tendency of handling conflicts emotionally and ignoring hard evidence in favour of jingoistic rhetoric has landed the South Asian region in trouble several times in the past. It has led to the building up of false historical narratives, prompted discrimination against minorities in both Pakistan and India and caused wars to erupt. Journalistic exactitude is given up to indulge in conspiracy theories while ordinary civilians and businesses, including the entertainment industry, are targeted unnecessarily. While Pemra’s decision to respond in kind to India’s banning of Pakistani content is correct, in future the people of both countries should consider the merits of a more measured and appropriate response when regional tensions flare up.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 6th, 2016.