Helpful for Criminology's topics

Ending police brutality

It is a commonly accepted fact that torture is synonymous with policing in Pakistan. Despite its endemic status, perpetrators of torture face virtually no accountability and continue to operate in a climate of impunity. Whilst the Constitution guarantees protection from torture as a fundamental right, there currently exists no legislation criminalising torture and providing protective relief to its victims. In 2010 Pakistan ratified the United Nations Convention Against Torture, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment (UNCAT), under which the state is under an obligation to enact an effective law to implement the provisions of the Convention domestically. However four years later, while various drafts of the Anti Torture Bill have been pending in the assemblies for over a year, the current PML-N government managed to expeditiously enact the Protection of Pakistan Act that increases risk of torture by granting law enforcement agencies with unfettered powers of arrest or shoot at sight without a warrant. The government’s lack of political will in criminalising torture stems from a reluctance to reform the conduct of policing in Pakistan.


Pakistan’s police system has failed to break free from its colonial heritage. Designed as a repressive force to maintain law and order under British colonial rule, Pakistani police clings to old methods of threat and abuse to undertake crime investigation and law enforcement. Police officers receive little or no training and resources to undertake proper investigation and often face unreasonable pressure from their superiors to resolve cases quickly. Additionally, police are often diverted from their duties to act as “VIP” patrols for politicians. As a result, instead of gathering forensic evidence and witness accounts, torturing suspects and their families to extract information and confessions becomes the primary course of action. In fact, ‘police remand’ (the 15 day period that police is allowed to keep a person in custody with the permission of the Magistrate) is synonymous in popular vernacular as a license to torture suspects. Suspects are often taken to private torture cells operated by the police off official premises to avoid any unwanted scrutiny or accountability. Superiors and courts generally turn a blind eye to such abuse of power and only get involved, reluctantly, if a suspect dies or ends up in a hospital or if the case gets media attention.


Police officers who may join the force with a resolve to ‘protect and serve’, eventually, fall into abusive patterns to ensure their survival within the larger ‘thana culture’. Junior ranking officers who deal directly with criminal suspects, work in stressful conditions, often with a lack of proper equipment training and resources. In keeping with the colonial hierarchy between low ranking officers and superiors, senior officers are recruited directly into management positions. As a result, junior officers have no incentive of potential promotion and therefore commit acts of torture with no threat of accountability. Ironically, primary reliance on confessions through torture only makes for weak prosecution cases that are mostly thrown out of court and is responsible for Pakistan’s low conviction rate.


Individuals who are poor, and socially or politically marginalised are especially vulnerable to torture on account of their inability to bribe police officers or have connections with political or influential figures who can intervene on their behalf. Additionally, they are unlikely to pursue action against the police for fear of retaliation and unwillingness to go through yet another criminal trial. Women are also subjected to heinous acts of torture, specifically designed to take advantage of their vulnerable position in society. According to a report by the Justice Project Pakistan on the ‘Abuse of Women by The Faisalabad Police’, women are more likely to be subjected to sexual assault, cultural humiliation and forcibly witness torture of other people. Women are raped, forced to remove all their clothing and touched inappropriately by police in public, at home and in prison. Women are also less likely to report being tortured on account of facing social stigma and ostracism.


Article 12 of the UNCAT requires prompt and impartial investigation into complaints of torture by an independent body and not under the direction or influence of the police. Independent investigations are critical to reducing impunity surrounding police torture in Pakistan. In the absence of an independent mechanism to investigate allegations of torture against police officers, any criminal prosecution for torture essentially involves the police investigating itself. Even if such an investigation was carried out objectively, it would not enjoy the confidence and cooperation of the victim and his/her family. Additionally, in many cases the absence or intentional destruction of records by the police, including registration of arrest and detention or in some cases a post-mortem examination, allows the police to easily deny the account of the complainant. The newly constituted National Human Rights Commission holds powers of inquiry suo moto or into complaints of torture and may also undertake visits to jails and other places of detention. However, the Commission is only competent to publish an inquiry report and issue recommendations to the government based on its findings. Additionally, even three years after the enacting law came into place, it is unclear whether the Commission is functional or not.


An eradication of torture requires a deeper understanding into the larger system of impunity that has been perpetuating it since before the inception of Pakistan. The Government needs to publicly demonstrate an unequivocal resolve to hold perpetrators accountable. Enactment of legislation criminalising torture is only the first step. There needs to be an overhaul of the police structures and institutional culture including, improved training and equipment; opportunities for promotion and advancement for low-ranking officers; and a training curriculum focusing on forensic tools and human rights principles. Additionally, independent Police Complaint Authorities specifically tasked with monitoring police investigation and the well-being of criminal suspects can pierce through the impunity enjoyed by police abuse. A recounting of victim’s experiences and the provision of monetary compensation and retribution through a truth and reconciliation commission can also serve as a platform to collectively recognise and start anew from decades of human rights violations committed under our criminal justice system.

http://nation.com.pk/columns/10-Jul-...lice-brutality

Helpful for the Current Affairs-based topics of Islamic Studies

Rediscovering ideological moorings

The emergence of Pakistan as a state on ideological basis under the indomitable leadership of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah was indeed an epoch making event. He not only won independence for the Muslims of the sub-continent but also gave them the vision about the path Pakistan had to traverse as a state to earn its rightful place in the comity of nations. He epitomised his vision in a broadcast talk on Pakistan to the people of United States in February 1948 in these words: “The constitution of Pakistan has yet to be framed. I do not know what the ultimate shape of this constitution is going to be, but I am sure that it will be of a democratic type embodying the essential principles of Islam. Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. It has taught equality of men, justice and fair play to everybody. In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state, to be ruled by priests with divine mission. We have many non-Muslims, Hindus, Christians and Parsis but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizen and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan”.

His statement also provided the best exposition of the Ideology of Pakistan. He wanted Pakistan to be a democratic and progressive Islamic entity deriving inspiration from the essential principles of Islam as enshrined in the Quran, the only authentic source of Islamic teachings. But unfortunately that was never to be. The teachings of the Quran failed to find expression in the governance and education system of the country. This disconnect with the teachings of Quran is the root-cause of all the ills and challenges confronting the country, including terrorism, religious extremism and the curse of sectarianism eating into the national fiber. The anti-Islam forces taking advantage of the situation have been misinterpreting the teachings of the Holy Quran to mislead the people by exploiting their ignorance of the real spirit and message of Quran. They have developed dogmas which they are trying to enforce on the people through violence and the barrel of the gun which is not only posing existentialist threat to the integrity of the country but also creating irreversible fissures among different segments of the society.

The fight against terrorism and other fissiparous ideologies as preached by these groups could not be won only through military muscle. It also needs to be supplemented and neutralized through a counter-narrative based on the teachings of Quran and the essential principles of Islam. In this regard, It is really heartening to note that the government in recognition of this imperative has taken a very commendable step of launching Sautul Quran (Voice of Quran) Radio Channel through Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation. It was co-inaugurated on 14th of Ramadan by the Minister for Information Pervez Rashid and Minister for Planning and Development Professor Ahsan Iqbal, who was actually the brain behind the project. Initially this 16-hour daily programme of recitation of verses from the Holy Quran and their translation will be broadcast from six stations including all provincial capitals and two other cities. By the end of the current financial year 14 more stations will be added to the network. The audio streaming of the programme will also be available to Pakistani diaspora in the foreign countries.

The launching of the channel is a very significant event in the prevailing circumstances and the debilitating challenges facing the country. Surprisingly our media has not taken notice of the development the way it should have been. Media represents the society which makes it the fourth pillar of the state. It owes it to the society to make relentless efforts to strengthen ideological moorings of the state and to discourage propagation of philosophies inimical to and opposed to the teachings of the Quran. It needs to supplement the efforts of the government in this regard. Now that the government has taken a lead in re-establishing the connection between the people and Quran, it is also the duty of the media to contribute its bit to this national and religious duty.

Islam is a religion of peace and brother hood. It abhors bloodshed, discord, dissension and sedition within the state and society. It enjoins its followers to live in peace with each other and rejects division of Muslims in different sects. It forbids the taking up arms against the state by armed groups and declaration of Jihad by any entity other than the state. Suicide bombings and attacks on religious places of other sects and minorities vitiate against the teachings of Islam and Quran. These concepts need to be properly propagated among the masses strictly in accordance with the parameters and the contextual relevance. The society really needs to go back to the drawing board to rediscover its ideological moorings, and there is no better way to do it than re-learning the true spirit of Quran and its teachings. The comprehension of Islam and Quran the way it has been desired and prescribed by the creator of the Universe is the only answer to all the woes that we as a nation are afflicted with.

Islam, contrary to the perceptions of its detractors, is not an archaic philosophy out of sync with the modern realities of life. It is a complete code of life prescribed by God for its creatures and would remain relevant till the end of the world. Its basic principles provide a very strong foundation for the march into modernity and progressive thinking. The institution of ‘Ijtehad’ in Islam is an unmistakable catalyst to progressive transformation of the society while maintaining unbreakable connection with the basic principles of Islam. The media has a pivotal role in creating an awareness of Quranic teachings among the masses and in nullifying the propaganda of the external forces against Islam.

http://nation.com.pk/columns/10-Jul-...gical-moorings

__________________
"But screw your courage to the sticking place,
And we'll not fail." _Shakespeare, 'Macbeth')

Helpful for writing over topic 'Education in Pakistan"

Malala meets Nawaz Sharif

At the Oslo World Education Summit attended by the UN Secretary General and amongst others by Malala, Gordon Brown, Executive Director of UNICEF and Prime Minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif. Malala, Nobel Peace Laureate, urged the world leaders to cut “eight days of military spending”. That will “suffice to give all children access to 12 years of free education”.


Our Prime Minister also spoke and waxed eloquent saying that Pakistan was giving high priority to education and there are plans to raise spending in the sector to 4% of GDP.


This is exactly what he said almost two years ago when Gordon Brown, UN Secretary General’s Special Envoy on Education, visited Pakistan and assured UN funding for enrolling out-of-school children in primary schools. Then the Prime minister had promised that allocation for education would be raised to 4% of GDP with a caveat that it would be done by the year 2018—the last year of his government. Allocations remain around 2% with the actual spent amount rolling between 1.6 to 1.8 percent.


How is it that the worthy Prime Minister speaks eloquently about education only during events organized by UN and other international agencies or on such occasions as the International Literacy Day?!


Although the Punjab and KPK, especially the former, have considerably raised funds earmarked for education (more than 25% of the budget) allocations and efforts for improvement in the quality of teaching and learning remain inadequate and unsatisfactory.


The most neglected in Pakistan are the adult illiterates numbering about 60 million.


A full-fledged Literacy Department was setup in the Punjab with Executive Education Officers in each district. A few years back the post of the EDO Literacy was abolished and responsibility for literacy too, entrusted to EDOs Education who are already overburdened. Again the central as well as provincial governments have neglected its obligation to implement the EFA National Plan with the result that Pakistan has today the dubious distinction of one of the countries which will fail to attain 5 of the 6 goals set at Dakar in the year 2000 by the end of 2015.


Most of the world has marched ahead and in the September session of the United Nations new (and very ambitions) goals called SDGs (Sustained Development Goals) will be approved to be achieved by 2030.


What a shame that the world average literacy rate is nearing 86% while Pakistan is struggling to reach about 58%. It is disgraceful to learn of ghost schools and ghost teachers in thousands in the province of Sindh. It appears that most of the funds allocated in the budget for literacy in that province are eaten up by political and administrative functionaries. The number of adult literacy centres in Sindh and Balochistan is a fraction of the figure set in the National Plan of Action.


So Mr. Prime Minister, it is alright for you to talk about your government’s plan to step up the quality of education but could you on return hold, for a change, just one meeting to find out why one third of the population of the country cannot read and write and what this means for the society, economy and the polity. The fact of the matter is that most of our ruling elite is not interested in spreading literacy.


The prevalent feudal culture besides spawning others ills and evils, has generated an anti-literacy virus.


If one were to look at the website of the UNESCO Islamabad Office, one is surprised to see how lethargic it too has become to promote literacy in Pakistan. And this despite the Director General UNESCO issuing a special directive (Paris Communiqué 2012) to the country offices to make special efforts to goad the governments, to speed up the process of spreading literacy for the realization of the ‘Education For All’ goals and targets.
For the education of our ruling elite and to refresh the minds of the UNESCO Islamabad office-bearers, let me give below excerpts from the UNESCO document titled: Why Literacy Matters and the 2012 Paris Communiqué.


Excerpts from UNESCO’s statement on: Why Literacy Matters:
Literacy is a right. It is implicit in the right to education. It is recognised as a right, explicitly for both children and adults, in certain international conventions.The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognises the right to education, as do other binding international conventions. The rationale for recognizing literacy as a right is the set of benefits it confers on individuals, families, communities and nations. Indeed, it is widely reckoned that, in modern societies, ‘literacy skills are fundamental to informed decision-making, personal empowerment, active and passive participation in local and global social community’ (Stromquist, 2005, p. 12).


Effects of literacy on leisure time and privacy in Pakistan:
Once women in Pakistan are able to read and write in Urdu (the national language) and in English, the quality of their leisure time changes and they cre-ate a new norm of privacy, according to studies of two different rural communities.


Younger women create private time when they can read news, romantic fiction and women’s magazines, and write diaries. Reading and writing do not remain mere leisure activities but become means of creat- ing private space, freeing imagination, and engaging in reflection and emotional expression. Through leisure reading and writing, women begin to ques- tion, challenge, resist and renegotiate values and their own roles.
Excerpts from Paris Communiqué 2012:


Recognising that literacy is a right and an instrument for achieving equitable and inclusive societies, social justice and individual freedoms, and an accelerator of shared growth and sustainable development, we felt that this cornerstone of development needs further strengthening.


We encourage UNESCO to provide assistance in support of national efforts through existing and new initiatives and to facilitate mobilisation of further resources through innovative partnerships.

http://nation.com.pk/columns/11-Jul-...s-nawaz-sharif

__________________
"But screw your courage to the sticking place,
And we'll not fail." _Shakespeare, 'Macbeth')

Kashmir and Indian brutality

According to Amnesty International on July 1, 2015, “India has martyred one lakh (100,000) people in Kashmir. More than 8,000 disappeared (while) in the custody of army and state police. No one has returned so far.”


Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) has been in the news off and on since Indian soldiers invaded the valley in 1947, marking the beginning of an era of injustice, oppression and cruelty. ‘Millions killed’, ‘thousands disappeared’, and ‘hundreds tortured’ has become the recurrent mantra in headlines on both sides of the border as well as in international media; in fact such phrases have become something of a trademark feature in any accurate representation of Indian ruthlessness in IOK.


In what is part of the foundation stone of modern civil society - the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Article 3 categorically states, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”. Clearly the sorry state of affairs in IOK stands in clear violation of this declaration. Oppression, loss, fear, injustice and struggle are rampant in the region. In fact, it would not be inappropriate to say that the human rights crisis which exists in the valley has only intensified since the disputed elections of 1987, following which and the series of demonstrations and strikes against the Indian Government on the continued deprivation and grievances of the citizens of Kashmir, the Indian military unleashed a new wave of torture upon the citizens of the valley that has lasted from 1989 to date, and looks set to continue unabated indefinitely.


These violations of basic human rights were possible as the result of a very special law that passed through the Indian Parliament; the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) enacted by the Government of India in September 1990, which granted special powers to the Indian Armed Forces in Kashmir. The AFSPA has been criticised heavily since the start of its implementation, as its provisions entail permissions for Indian forces to kill, shoot or destroy any building in IOK on mere suspicion. This draconian law also allows a non-commissioned officer or an individual of equivalent rank to use force and exercise the power of arrest without warrant. Furthermore, under section 7, forces can even commit extrajudicial killings without the fear of prosecution.


AFSPA has continued to come under heavy criticism from international organisations such as the United Nations, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and other non-governmental organisations. Navanethem Pillay, the UN Commissioner for Human Rights in 2009 asked India to repeal the AFSPA, stating the law breached human rights standards.


2015 marks 25 years of the use of this draconian law; a law which essentially protects Indian forces from any consequences for their brutality and savagery against innocent, unarmed Kashmiris. To date, not a single member of the security forces has been put to trial in a civilian court for the human rights violations in IOK.


To paint a clearer picture of the extent of the atrocities; in 2011, India’s Jammu and Kashmir State Human Rights Commission released a report stating that a three-year investigation had uncovered 2,156 unidentified bodies in 38 sites in the region. These unmarked graves confirm allegations of just how big a role the Indian forces have played in the disappearance and extra-judicial killings of the Kashmiri people.
In 2010, a new generation of young Kashmiri protesters was forced to take to the streets after a local youth was illegally killed by security personnel. The unarmed, peaceful protesters faced the iron hand of Indian security forces, but Indian brutality failed, as it always has, to dampen the spirits of the youth who had nothing more than stones in their hands to fight off the modern, heavy, state of the art Indian military machinery.
Despite acknowledging Indian atrocities, unfortunately, the cries of the Kashmiri people and their peaceful struggle for freedom has not been able to garner any decisive movement by international bodies for the resolution of this dispute. Indians have tried, time and again, to sabotage the Kashmiri cause and struggle for freedom by attempting to link it with militancy and terrorism. It is only the continued resistance of the valiant people of Kashmir, who have not let such malicious agenda deter them from their quest for peace that has prevented heinous Indian designs from succeeding.
Indian deniability of its role in IOK becomes even more questionable given their reaction to the attempts of any independent body to look into the issue. Anyone who tries to expose the Indian atrocities in IOK, Indian officials instead of answering or denying the ‘allegations’, take extreme measures to either prevent access to the information and to Kashmir, or simply silence the query and remove the questioner from the equation altogether. The most recent example of this behaviour is the American researcher Christine Mehta, who was working for Amnesty International and got deported from India for investigating the alleged human rights abuses for Amnesty International.


Pakistan has always been a vocal moral supporter and sympathiser of the Kashmiri’s right to self-determination, often facing the brunt of malicious Indian retaliation and slanderous agenda, but never ceasing to raise its voice against the imperialistic behaviour in Kashmir.
The people of Pakistan have deep national, historical, religious and cultural bonds with the people of Kashmir. This affinity is often depicted in the supportive protest rallies for Indian Occupied Kashmir in Pakistan, and the reciprocal slogans of ‘Long Live Pakistan’ with the raised Pakistani flag under the shadows of Indian guns in IOK. Pakistan and Kashmir are one soul in two bodies.


It goes without saying that all roads to peace and prosperity in South Asia go through Kashmir. The shadows of oppression and deprivation have loomed for far too long in IOK, and it is high time that international bodies take notice of India’s draconian laws in the Kashmir valley, particularly as it tries to wear its mask of respectability to gain access to institutions whose basic charter premises it does not respect. A ‘rising and shining’ India, prospectively seeking membership of United Nations Security Council currently being in blatant violation of UNSC resolutions, must settle the Kashmir dispute in accordance with the UNSC resolutions.


If India truly wishes to reach great power status, it should seek an early resolution of the Kashmir dispute in accordance with the aspirations of the Kashmiri people; allow an independent investigation into the Human Rights violations and comply with its international multilateral responsibilities. Or else its feet would keep dragging in the South Asian region, because of its policy of retaining regional disputes. The right to self-determination belongs to the people of Kashmir, and it is one that they will get eventually - if not today then tomorrow.

http://nation.com.pk/columns/12-Jul-...dian-brutality

__________________
"But screw your courage to the sticking place,
And we'll not fail." _Shakespeare, 'Macbeth')

Helpful for Current Affairs, Pak Affairs, I.R

SCO comes of Age

President Vladimir Putin opened the 2015 Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit by announcing the acceptance of Pakistan and India as members. He said Belarus would obtain observer status, joining Afghanistan, Iran and Mongolia, while Azerbaijan, Armenia, Cambodia and Nepal would be welcomed as “dialogue partners.” The SCO leaders have expressed hope that Iran also would soon become a member, but first, Tehran needed to reach an international agreement on curbing its nuclear programme. “It is obvious that together we can more effectively resist crisis events in the world economy and finance, more easily overcome restrictions and barriers of various kinds,” Putin said while talking about plans to deepen economic and trade ties. SCO is building a “harmonious region” in keeping with the Shanghai Spirit that promotes mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality, consultation, respect for diverse civilisations and pursuit of common development. After the current tranche of expansion, this organisation is poised to play a constructive role in South Asia as well.


SCO’s Council of Heads of State approved Pakistan’s full membership on July 10. Pakistan will now have to fulfil certain statutory and legal requirements before the country formally becomes a full member. Pakistan has for long been trying to become an SCO member state. It believes its membership will enable it to diversify its foreign policy and enable it to play a more effective role in the stability of the region.
With the development of Gwadar Port, Pakistan can become an energy and trade corridor for SCO countries. Chinese assistance in developing connectivity infrastructure in Pakistan, developing Gwadar Port and Kashgar as special economic zone, upgrading KKH and linking Gwadar with Kashgar and Central Asia via KKH are in step with SCO‘s efforts to create trans-continental overland connectivity.


Since its inception in 2001, the SCO has become a regional force and has been gaining importance in Asian dynamics. SCO is a permanent inter-governmental organisation. Its main objectives are: strengthening mutual trust and good-neighbourliness among member countries; promoting effective cooperation in political, trade, economic, scientific, technological and cultural fields, as well as in education, energy, transport, tourism, environmental protection, joint promotion and maintenance of peace, security, and stability in the region; striving towards establishment of a democratic, just and rational new international political and economic order etc.


Over the years, the SCO has played a positive role in reducing tensions, settling border disputes, maintaining stability and developing cooperation between member states. Within the SCO framework, and as a result of the joint efforts of China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, a 3000 km border dispute along the Sino-former Soviet border has been resolved. It is rare that border disputes that have caused turbulence for several centuries are settled in a surprisingly short span of a few years.


SCO’s policies and programmes are in consonance with Pakistan‘s long-term objectives of promoting peace and stability in the region, containing and eradicating the menace of terrorism from the region and working with the members to build stronger and more productive relationship in the future.
Chinese vice FM Cheng Guoping said that India and Pakistan’s joining the SCO will play an important role in the SCO’s development. It will have a constructive role in pushing for the improvement of bilateral relations. Moreover, the current situation of the withdrawal of international forces from Afghanistan has added a new dimension to Pakistan-Central Asia ties, particularly in the context of difficult India-Pakistan relations. Cheng said: “As the influence of the SCO’s development has expanded, more and more countries in the region have brought up [request for] joining the SCO…India and Pakistan’s admission to the SCO will play an important role in the SCO’s development. It will play a constructive role in pushing for the improvement of their bilateral relations.”


China is playing an active role in bringing stability to Afghanistan. Alongside the US, China participated in the first ever declared direct contact between the Taliban and Afghan government, held in Murree, Pakistan. Chinese interest in Afghanistan also stems from an urge for stability of Western China, especially the Xinjiang region, which is intricately linked to the security and stability in Afghanistan. Now, an increasing number of political observers are looking towards SCO for its role in Afghanistan.


Two of its founding members — Russia and China — are permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. Now, with addition of Pakistan and India, SCO has four nuclear weapon capable states of Asia as its members. The forum is not an alliance directed against any other state or region. Over the last decade, its activities have expanded to include military cooperation, intelligence sharing, aimed at joint counterterrorism exercises. In recent years, the organisation has also been attending to economic issues, in particular concerning energy security which is a matter of great importance not only for its members but for the whole region. With remaining observer and dialogue nations gaining full member status in due course, the SCO might well evolve into an even more important player in world politics and go beyond its regional reach.


However, there are reservations as well. “Not sure whether the SCO will become clumsier or less efficient (after the two countries India and Pakistan join). The guiding principles of SCO say, it will be built on consensus. Like ASEAN+. If the differences between India and Pakistan are brought to the forum….see what happened to SAARC,” Hu Shisheng, director at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations and South Asia expert told Hindustan Times. “They cannot bring bilateral differences (to SCO). Otherwise, the group will become dysfunctional. The focus should [be on] adding value to the forum. Not the other way around. That is the genuine hope of the old members,” Hu added. Pakistan considers SCO as the most significant organisation in Eurasia that has the potential of bringing stability to South Asia sub-region as well.


Chinese officials have said that the entry of India and Pakistan in the SCO will help to fight terrorism in the region, stabilise Afghanistan and potentially even reduce Indo-Pak tensions. “India and Pakistan’s admission to the SCO will play an important role in the SCO’s development. It will play a constructive role in pushing for the improvement of their bilateral relations,” China’s vice-foreign minister Cheng Guoping said.
In Western countries SCO, is sometimes called Eastern NATO. This is far from the truth. While SCO countries have some military cooperation and a few joint military exercises have also been conducted, SCO has no standing army; it is certainly not like NATO, or even like the erstwhile ―Warsaw Pact.


It is interesting that the Shanghai Five mechanism was started with the purpose of reducing border tensions by cutting down troops, for which they had signed “Treaty on Deepening Military Trust in Border Regions”. It started as an organisation to meet security concerns, border tensions, border disputes, cross border smuggling, terrorism, extremism, separatism etc. Gradually it moved towards political issues, economic and cultural cooperation. Most other regional organisations including EEC, ASEAN, SAARC, ECO, started with the agenda of economic cooperation and some of these have gradually moved to political and security cooperation.


With its expansion programme, SCO is set to become an Asia focused organisation with global outreach. SCO has sufficient space to consolidate its performance in the areas of non-traditional security concerns facing the Asia continent. Climate change adaptation, disaster management, drug trafficking and disease mitigation are some of the areas where SCO has unchallenged turf. In the long term it could go on to set up an Asian parliament and a conflict resolution mechanism. Pakistan has indeed eased the moment by becoming a member of SCO.

http://nation.com.pk/columns/13-Jul-...o-comes-of-age

__________________
"But screw your courage to the sticking place,
And we'll not fail." _Shakespeare, 'Macbeth')

Our brand of disillusionment

My generation’s transition from unsullied school children to experienced adults has been marred by countless anecdotes of one aspect that has remained constant; the steady evolution of religious disillusionment through erosion of logic and reason. Each passing incident, slowly chips away at my hope of envisaging a tolerant and united Pakistan – at this point that reverie seems oxymoronic.

Let us take the collective uproar stemming from Pakistan with respect to the basic human rights of Muslims around the world, currently against the Rohingya Muslims of Myanmar. Such atrocities thousands of miles away sit so heavily on our hearts that our home-grown travesties are pushed deeper into the abyss of ignorance. My encounter with examples of the blatant de-humanisation of the Ahmediya community has primarily come in the form of sign boards spewing hate and negativity atop mosques and at the gates of graveyards. The utter intolerance of having to accept minute variations in manner of praying, fasting etc rooted in the Shia-Sunni conflict depicts how we are slaves to our ritualistic fervour. A perpetual sanctity blinds us into thinking only we are the true ordained ones touched by the hand of God. Such is our brand of disillusionment.

Many of us have been subjected to public sermons on the display of incorrect Islamic attire and etiquette by ‘concerned’ strangers. This over powering need to provide salvation prompts us to impose our versions (learned or taught) on the prescribed way of life. More often than not our ‘religious teachers’ believe in and preach corrective measures to bring the ‘misguided’ (with differing viewpoints) in line with the teachings as understood by them, such angst then has a trickle down effect. So self-righteous are we that we jump at the opportunity to further the word of God by dubbing opposing opinions as immoral. One need only log into Facebook and glance through messages dripping with disdain over the trending proverbial punching bag. You would be hard-pressed to find anyone providing a well-reasoned argument by engaging thoughtfully with a variety of Islamic religious texts, traditions and interpretations. We fear all that we fail to understand (for lack of trying) or that which makes us uncomfortable. Such is our brand of disillusionment.

We, as an Islamic nation, loathe disarray and uncertainty; the clear-cut doctrines issued by staunch ideologues appeal to our sensibilities relieving us from indulging in any form of internal dialogue. Such an austere measure of religious authenticity was hammered home when my almost eighty (80) year old grand mother was compelled by her colleagues from Quran class to adhere to the strict three month period (‘iddat’) to be home-bound upon the death of my grandfather. In essence, the logic was that an elderly woman, already habitually alone in an entire house suffering the depressive loss of her life-long companion, should remain shackled at home and not partake in any interactions with the tempting outside world, lest she antagonise God. Such is our brand of disillusionment.

Religion may well be the opium of the people, but come ‘Ramzan’ we all take the first substance on offer. For an entire month we see the dormant Muslims jolted awake to join the movement of strict adherence to God’s word as relayed through our ‘scholars’. Essential hygiene prescribed as one of the most basic tenets of Islamis chucked out the window for fear of breaking fast. Elderly people getting pummelled in the streets of Karachi for sneaking some form of solid or liquid intake during fasting hours– never mind their personal health, choices, religion etc. God forbid we stray even an inch by continuing to eat past or delay breaking fast from the ‘sehri’ and ‘Iftari’ timings as approved by evening television. Most importantly, “Dr.” Amir Liaquat Hussain, in all his fraudulent glory sings the tune of a true Muslim on TV by stimulating the innate characteristic of this nation to be handed things on a plate without individual effort. Alternatively, traffic rules are conveniently side-stepped and crass language remains abundant - defying all practice for patience. Lustful stares settling on unsuspecting women accompanied by perverse catcalls go unnoticed. Save for the re-kindled need to fall into prayer, all the fundamental fibres of our being such as lying, cheating, hurting, stealing, judging, gossiping, etc remain untouched. God forbid we think to improve on these fronts before solidifying our ceremonial rigidity. Such is our brand of disillusionment.

We live in animosity over rituals of religion and remain divided via sects rather than prosper in harmony under the pure essence of a prescribed way of life. In the midst of all such disillusionment, which we shamelessly continue to harbour and breed, yet another unsuspecting child will tighten its grip on that brand with a callous caress before wrapping it up in a cloth of intolerance, packing it away in a box of self-righteousness to be forever stowed away in its head – the space for no dialogue.

Us Pakistanis would do well to demolish the ‘dairh inch ki masjid’ which we have all constructed that sits perched high up on our shoulders, accompanying us in all our remedial endeavours spearheaded towards others instead of ourselves. We would do well to reconsider the emphasis placed on ritualistic trivialities and concentrate more on discernment of the word of God in letter and spirit. We would do well to re-examine the blurred lines between healthy debate and the aggressive imposition of one’s own brand of right and wrong. It is unfortunate that we possess intellect, free will, the ability to reason and comprehend, and yet, we still fail to recognise our own potential to be the quintessential version of ourselves. No matter how clichéd it may sound but ‘charity begins at home’. Let us take a good look at ourselves; idiosyncrasies aside, we must strive to be the embodiment of humanity. Let us finally begin to pave the cracks in the road to exemplary living; under one umbrella - Pakistan.

http://nation.com.pk/columns/17-Jul-...isillusionment

__________________
"But screw your courage to the sticking place,
And we'll not fail." _Shakespeare, 'Macbeth')

The Iran deal

Last week, a major diplomatic breakthrough was made possible after two years of hectic negotiations between Iran and P5 plus Germany, to broker a deal on Iran’s nuclear program. The standoff between Iran and the international community is more than a decade old when then the IAEA obtained evidence of Iran seeking nuclear capability and confronted Iran in 2003. The matter was referred to the United Nations Security Council and the United Nations, the EU and the United States placed stringent sanctions against Iran. The diplomatic option to break the logjam got a boost when the elections of 2013 in Iran brought President Rouhani to power. He fought the election on the agenda of renewed engagement with the West to bring an end to Iran’s isolation. The agreement reached in Vienna on July 14, is the culmination of efforts that resulted in the Lausanne framework in April 2015.
According to the deal, for 15 years, Iran will carry out enrichment only at the Natanz facility and will only enrich uranium up to 3.67 percent. The stockpile would not exceed 300kg of uranium hexafluoride or equivalent chemical forms. No heavy water will be produced or accumulated for 15 years and Tehran will seek to use reactor designs not requiring heavy water.

Further, Tehran pledges not to conduct research that could conduct development of a nuclear explosive device, as specified in a technical annex to the agreement. The Fordow facility is to be converted into an internationally supported technological center. Some of the centrifuges currently placed there would be allowed to continue spinning, but they would only produce stable isotopes and not enrich uranium.

Iran will also modify the Arak nuclear reactor with the help of the international community. It will be used for peaceful research and isotope production. It will not produce plutonium. Spent fuel will be shipped out of Iran for entire lifetime of the reactor.

The inspections regime is the strongest element of the deal. Inspectors from the IAEA will be monitoring the only two mines where Iran can get uranium ore, the fuel for a bomb, and the mills where it’s processed. They will keep tabs on every single centrifuge in the country, as well as the centrifuge factories, the machines that could be used to make a centrifuge, even on imports of technology that could be used to build a centrifuge.

The UN Security Council will lift its nuclear-related sanctions from Iran simultaneously with the IAEA-verified implementation of certain measure by Iran. The EU and the US will lift their sanctions, including on banking services, insurance, sale of aircraft parts, access to airports and a multitude of others, at the same moment. Proliferation-related sanctions will be lifted eight years after the adoption of the agreement or when the IAEA gives a go-ahead.

Critics of the deal, based in the US and the Mideast, have denounced it as an agreement that allows Iran to take a ‘patient approach to its nuclear program’. They further lambaste the concessions part of the deal, as the most vulnerable point, which will be used by Iran to further arm its affiliate armed groups waging proxy wars in the region. Prime Minister Netanyahu has, in an interview, described it as a ‘very bad deal’, which poses the most grave security threat to Israel. But a dispassionate analysis reveals weaknesses in the skeptics’ arguments.

Iran has agreed to give up 14000 of its present 20,000 centrifuges and also accepted to abandon 97 per cent of its enriched uranium. Arms control experts view the deal as a tool to effectively limit Iran’s capacity to produce a nuclear weapon. The nuclear watchdog is to monitor uranium stockpiles and centrifuges in Iran, including with modern surveillance measures like online enrichment measurement and electronic seals. A commission made up of a range of IAEA members would be set up to judge whether the inspectors’ access requests are justified. Experts also reject the possibility of completely clearing the traces of uranium in 24-day request processing period and hence the destruction of evidence.

The apprehensions regarding increased interference of Iran in Middle Eastern politics are also exaggerated. Notwithstanding Iran has vowed to continue supporting its allies, including Hamas and Hezbullah, a major chunk of money generated from sanctions relief will be funneled into the domestic economy that is presently facing serious difficulties. A scholar has put it as “Iranian meddling across the region will get worse in the wake of an Iran deal — but it was going to get worse anyway.”

A couple of days ago, the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayotullah Khamenei, also came out on in support of deal, which has mollified concerns about the approval of deal by Supreme National Security Council. After expressing his unequivocal support for the deal, Khamenei, in his speech, on the occasion of closing of the month of Ramzan, also reiterated that the deal would not alter the dynamics of overall hostile relationship with the US and they will remain ‘adversaries’. He also said that slogans of ‘Death unto America’ and ‘Death unto Israel’ would continue to be heard in Iranian streets. But this rhetoric need not be taken seriously as the Supreme Leader intended to calm down domestic hardliners who considered the nuclear deal as abject surrender before the West. In America, the agreement has been submitted before the US Congress for its review and ratification in 60-day period. Despite all the reservations raised by Republicans, the deal can be termed as the best possible compromise or, as Obama put it, the best available alternative to war.
http://nation.com.pk/columns/21-Jul-2015/the-iran-deal

__________________
"But screw your courage to the sticking place,
And we'll not fail." _Shakespeare, 'Macbeth')

Iran Deal: The political implications

The long debated and awaited nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers, including US and EU was signed in Vienna on July 14. For obvious reasons it was widely reported, discussed and analyzed in the global media and political circles around the world. But how would it impact Iran herself and the region around her is the most relevant aspect of the emerging situation to be pondered over by the neighbouring countries.


Political leadership on both sides needed strong will to bridge the political and ideological gap that had existed between them for the last so many decades. Just a few years ago such a development would have been unthinkable. For the Iranian Ayatollahs, talking to the “Great Satan” (US), whose physical and ideological defeat was the ultimate goal of the Islamic Republic, was an anathema. After brainwashing generations of Iranians to achieve this goal, taking a U turn on it must not have been easy. Similar difficulties must have been faced by the US ruling establishment in reaching out to Iran, part of the “axis of evil”.


But apart from subjective energy at work there were some objective factors emerging in the recent years that enabled both sides to overcome their traditional aversion towards each other. Theocracy of the Islamic Republic, still remains in full control in Iran, but the system was shaken to its core by the Green movement against the blatantly rigged presidential elections in 2009. The extreme repressive measures of the regime for decimating the opposing movement in terms of imprisoning, torturing and executing political opponents have considerably undermined the mass support base of the regime. Pain generated by the stringent financial and economic sanctions of the western powers that was reinforced by the isolationist policies of President Ahmadinejad was becoming unbearable by every passing day. The cumulative effect of these processes was increasing pressure on the Islamic Republic to adopt tangible measures for bringing sanctions and international isolation to an end. A promise to achieve this was an important promise in the election manifesto of reformist President Hassan Rouhani during the last presidential elections. Common Iranians welcomed the deal not just because it will provide them some relief by leading the lifting of sanctions but also in the hope that Iranian theocracy will lose the pretext for brutal repression in the name of “protecting the Islamic Republic”.


For the western powers, the dynamics of the ME politics have changed as the old settlement in the region is collapsing after western military intervention in Iraq and Libya and the subsequent fall out of Arab Spring. Extremist sectarian and other radical forces are threatening to tear apart existing states. Iran has emerged as an important factor to block the dramatic advance of forces like IS, although some circles accuse her of not only encouraging the sectarian divide but also nurturing expansionist designs. Israel and KSA are the staunch opponents of the Iran nuclear deal for their own reasons. Both are scared of the changing balance of forces and the consequences of a possible second wave of the Arab Spring. KSA and other Sheikdoms feel particularly threatened not only by the large scale uprise to overthrow the despotic and parasitical regimes in the region but also the exposure of Wahhabism and Salfism as the main sources of religious extremism and terrorism the world over. People around the world have found out the flow of Arab petrodollars behind the propagation of the aforementioned ideologies attracting universal abhorrence. KSA regards Iran to be a threat for its very existence and would not hesitate to forge alliance with any one against her.


However it would be naive to presume two things. One that the Islamic Republic will go for “ perestroika “ (reconstruction) or “glasnost” (openness) , strategies adopted by Mikhail Gorbachev in the last days of the erstwhile Soviet Union. The Ayatollahs would do their utmost to maintain their grip on political power. It is particularly so as none of the stalwarts from the reformists (not even Sayed Muhammad Khatamy) have challenged the existence of the theocratic system. So far there is no mainstream political force in the field championing an alternative to the present system. Two, that Iran will soon team up with US led western powers in shaping the new settlement in the ME. The prolonged process of lifting the sanctions is not tantamount to normalizing of relations between the two sides. President Obama has clearly ruled that out. Even the Iranian side will proceed cautiously. They may over time, come to follow the Chinese model for promoting economic relations while maintaining political differences with the west. A comparatively moderate Iran focused on socio-economic development will definitely compete with Turkey for regional influence. It is not something new. In the 16th century, Persia had adopted Shi’ia Islam as state religion to distinguish herself from Sunni dominated Ottoman Empire. Turkey has already started cultivating the neighbouring Arab states to prepare for the future regional realignment.


Pak-Iran economic relationship will flourish after the lifting of the western sanctions which is in the interest of both the countries. Pakistan’s decision to refrain from militarily joining the conflict in Yemen has opened bright prospects for Pak-Iran relations. There is a lot of potential for scaling up relations between the two countries, as there is not any significant outstanding issue between them. But Pakistan will have to demonstrate zero tolerance for the sectarian terrorists using her soil against Iran. That could be the only point of concern for Iran.


Be that as it may, Iran may proceed to implement its full potential as a national state after rejoining the international mainstream. Paras or Persia has been a state entity in different forms for the last 2500 years. It became Faras under Arabs and renamed itself Iran in mid 1930s. Henry Kissinger in his recent book “World Order” writes about Persia’s capacity to retain its distinct identity throughout the historical upheavals like China.

“Submerged in waves of conquest by Alexander the Great, the early Islamic Armies and later Mongols, shocks that all but erased the historical memory and political autonomy of other people, Persia retained its confidence in its cultural superiority. It bowed to its conquerors as a temporary concession but retained its independence through its worldview, charting “great interior spaces” in poetry and mysticism and revering its connection with the heroic ancient rulers recounted in its epic “Book of Kings”.

http://nation.com.pk/columns/18-Jul-...l-implications

__________________
"But screw your courage to the sticking place,
And we'll not fail." _Shakespeare, 'Macbeth')

Unrealism and incompetence at Ufa

Must read for Indo-Pak ties, recent developments, Ufa Summit

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need
not fear the result of a hundred battles.”
–Sun Tzu, “The Art of War” ”

The lop-sided Pakistan-India joint statement issued at Ufa, which tilts heavily in favour of India, is the outcome of unrealism on the part of the Pakistani side compounded by incompetence. It reflects inadequate understanding by the Pakistani leadership of the Indian strategic goals in the region, the chauvinistic character of the Modi-led Indian government, and the challenges that they pose to Pakistan’s security. As the famous Chinese scholar, Sun Tzu, pointed out, “If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

What are India’s strategic goals in South Asia? The answer to this question has been conclusively provided by the Indian policy makers and writers. The foremost Indian strategic goal is to establish its hegemony in South Asia so that it is able to exercise veto power over what happens in the region. Indian security analyst C. Raja Mohan unequivocally stated in an article in the Foreign Affairs issue of July-August, 2006 that “India’s grand strategy divides the world into three concentric circles. In the first, which encompasses the immediate neighbourhood, India has sought primacy and a veto over actions of outside powers.”

Foreign scholars and observers have taken note of Indian hegemonic designs. Zbigniew Brzezinski in his recent book “Strategic Vision—-America and the Crisis of Global Power” mentions, “Indian strategists speak openly of a greater India exercising a dominant position in an area ranging from Iran to Thailand. India is also positioning itself to control the Indian Ocean militarily.” Indian hegemonic designs have also been acknowledged by Henry Kissinger in his latest book, “World Order”. He points out that on the pattern of the Monroe Doctrine which laid down a special role for the US in the Western Hemisphere, India is striving to carve out a special role for itself in the Indian Ocean region between the East Indies and the Horn of Africa. He stresses that “India in the region of its special strategic interests conducts its policy on the basis of its own definition of a South Asian order” obviously with India at its centre as the determining factor.

For the foreseeable future, New Delhi’s hegemonic designs in South Asia will remain a constant factor that Pakistan’s policy makers will have to contend with in the formulation of its India policy. Unfortunately, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his foreign policy team seem to believe that by appeasing India they would be able to persuade it to give up its hegemonic ambitions and deal with Pakistan on the basis of sovereign equality and mutual respect. This is likely to remain a pipe dream. In fact, as ample historical evidence shows, our current policy of appeasement of India will embolden it to raise its demands on Pakistan. This is precisely what has happened in Pakistan-India relations since Pervez Musharraf’s virtual capitulation, on the rebound from Agra, in the form of the Pakistan-India joint statement of 6 January, 2004.

While the Lahore Declaration of 21 February, 1999 had given the pride of place to Kashmir in the first operative clause, the Pakistan-India joint statement of 6 January, 2004 consigned the issue to the second last paragraph. The issue of terrorism instead was given much more prominence in that statement. Even worse, the wording of the fourth paragraph dealing with terrorism was such as to leave the impression that Pakistan in the past had permitted its territory to be used for terrorism contrary to its declared policy. Nevertheless, the joint statement contained the agreement of the two sides to commence the process of the composite dialogue in February, 2004.

The Pakistan-India joint statement of 10 July, 2015 issued at Ufa carries the process of Pakistan’s capitulation and compliance with India’s one-sided demands a step further without any corresponding concessions from the Indian side. While mentioning the willingness of the two countries to discuss all outstanding issues, the joint statement avoids any reference to Kashmir, obviously to take into account Indian sensitivities. Mumbai case trial is the only issue which is specifically mentioned in the statement. In line with India’s unwillingness to resume a structured bilateral dialogue to discuss all outstanding issues until its demands concerning the Mumbai terrorist attacks are met, there was no agreement to resume the bilateral dialogue. Even in the context of the issue of terrorism, while Mumbai was specifically mentioned, no reference was made to Pakistan’s officially made allegations regarding India’s involvement in terrorist activities in Balochistan, Karachi and FATA. There was a reference in the joint statement to the holding of the meeting of the National Security Advisers of the two countries in New Delhi but only to discuss terrorism. The joint statement in effect reflected India’s point of view on bilateral relations while Pakistan’s well known position on issues of special interest to it got short shrift.

There is no doubt that peace between Pakistan and India is a strategic imperative because of their de facto status as nuclear-weapon states and the urgent need in both countries to allocate most of their resources to the acceleration of economic progress and the eradication of grinding poverty. It is in their common interest to keep the door of dialogue and negotiations open to defuse tensions, adopt CBM’s, resolve outstanding disputes particularly Kashmir, and promote mutually beneficial cooperation in various fields. Contrary to what Nawaz Sharif’s foreign policy team appears to believe, resumption of the bilateral dialogue is not a favour to be granted by India to Pakistan. In fact, India’s decision to make it subject to its unilaterally decided conditions betrays its hegemonic mindset. By pandering to India’s unreasonable attitude at Ufa and neglecting its own reasonable position on such issues as Kashmir, Siachin and terrorism, the Pakistani side has merely whetted India’s appetite for more extremist demands in the future, thus, ironically vitiating the long-term prospects of Pakistan-India relations.

Pakistan faces an uphill task in dealing with India’s hegemonic designs in South Asia, its continued hostility towards Pakistan as reflected by its opposition to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, its intransigence in settling the Kashmir dispute in accordance with the relevant UN resolutions, and its support to acts of terrorism in different parts of Pakistan. The chauvinistic character of the Modi-led BJP government, Modi’s own militant background, and his anti-Pakistan bias as reflected in his recent speech at Dhaka aggravate the difficulties in managing Pakistan’s relations with India. What we need is a long-term strategy within the framework of which we should decide our policies concerning India in the short-term.

Our long-term India strategy must be based on a realistic assessment of both the limitations and the potential of our relations with India. We must realise that India because of its hegemonic designs and continued hostility towards Pakistan will continue to pose a serious threat to Pakistan’s security. Therefore, genuine friendship between the two countries would remain elusive in the foreseeable future. Still, for reasons given earlier, our diplomacy must focus on maintaining peace and tension-free relations with India in the best interest of the two countries. We must keep the door open for the unconditional resumption of the bilateral dialogue. Efforts to defuse tensions, undertake CBM’s, resolve outstanding disputes, and promote mutually beneficial cooperation should continue. Finally, while conducting our relations with India on the basis of sovereign equality and mutual respect, we should avoid both adventurism and provocations.

http://nation.com.pk/columns/22-Jul-...petence-at-ufa

__________________
"But screw your courage to the sticking place,
And we'll not fail." _Shakespeare, 'Macbeth')

Useful for Journalism and Mass Com.

Reportedly, the government and Pakistan Broadcasting Association (PBA) after a protracted process of consultations nudged by the Supreme Court order have finally agreed on a code of conduct for the electronic media, which will be soon notified after approval of the Prime Minister. According to special assistant to the Prime Minister on national affairs, Irfan Siddiqui, who headed the committee, two sides however still have some differences on the implementation mechanism of the code and the government and PEMRA would address reservations of PBA with an open heart during the follow up meetings to be held soon. Mr. Siddiqui observed that the code of conduct for electronic media was aimed at creating a balance between freedom of expression and responsibility.

The media undoubtedly is the most important pillar of the state and there is almost a worldwide consensus on freedom of expression as an essential ingredient for protecting human liberties and development of the state as a vibrant entity. However freedom of expression does not mean unbridled liberty or a license to act like loose cannons. The exercise of the freedom of expression is contingent upon adherence to the recognized social and professional ethics. In other words freedom with responsibility is the name of the game.

The Social Responsibility Theory propounded by Hutchison in mid-twentieth century which is regarded as the Magna Carte of modern journalism, recognized the imperative of a pluralistic media cognizant of and sensitive to the ethical and cultural norms of the societyacting to disseminate nothing but truth to the masses. This theory also considered interventions by the government to discourage indiscretions and erratic behavior by the media, as a legitimate and justified action.

The introduction of the private sector in the field of electronic media and the accompanying freedom of expression is probably the best thing that has ever happened in this land of the pure. While it is heartening to see the media enjoying its freedom and guarding it zealously, it is equally disappointing to see the absence of the component of responsibility. There is a discernible propensity among the electronic channels to scandalize things, resort to blackmailing, rumour mongering, intrusion in the private lives of individuals, glorifying crimes and immoral acts, defiance of social and cultural sensitivities and dabbling in issues which are universally considered to be beyond the domain of the media glare. Issues like security, maligning judiciary and security institutions and promoting fissiparous tendencies like sectarianism which are detrimental to the national cohesion and solidarity; all in disregard to the internationally recognized professional ethics.

The agreement on the code of conduct by the electronic media is indeed a very positive and healthy development in regards to promoting healthy journalism in the country and the resolve of the government and the concerned media bodies to work together for this indispensable national cause. Reportedly it has been agreed that no content will go on air which is against Islamic values, ideology of Pakistan and the founding father and calls for taking up arms against the state or its integrity, security and its defence or is derogatory to any religion, sect or community. The TV channels will also not broadcast anything that is purported to malign judiciary and armed forces, tends to violate copy rights or property rights, glamorizes or justifies violence, crime, terrorism or constitutes black-mail and intimidation to a person. Further the messages of the banned organizations will not go on air. Unnecessary details and footage of gory scenes, bloodshed or dead bodies shall not be aired. In the talk shows no false, distorted or misleading information would be passed on to the public and intrusion into the private lives of individuals would be avoided. Live programmes will ensure an effective delaying mechanism and the identity of victims of rape, sexual abuse, terrorism and kidnapping will not be made public. Similarly identities of the security personnel involved in operations will not be made public. TV channels would avoid airing ads for alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, illegal drugs or narcotics, lotteries, black magic, quackery or superstition. To implement the code the managements of all the TV channels will establish an in-house committee under intimation of PEMRA.

As is evident, the code of ethics is quite comprehensive and takes care of all the cultural, religious and moral values of the society while ensuring freedom of expression and a discernible shift to a self-regulatory mechanism which is prevalent in most of the developed countries. The government and the PBA both deserve appreciation for bringing this about, particularly the government for its unswerving commitment to freedom of expression.
Now that a consensus has been arrived on the code of conduct for the electronic media, I am of the firm view that there is also an urgent need to establish training institutes for the journalists of the electronic media, especially the anchor persons, where they are made abreast of the media ethics and relevant laws as well as professional techniques and practices. These institutions can either be established by the government or by the collaborative efforts of the electronic channels themselves with adequate support of the government

Frankly speaking It is quite an ordeal to watch the current affair programmes and talk shows, hosted by some uncouth and non-professional anchor persons——barring a few honourable exceptions—- yelling at the top of their shrilling voices at the panelists, trying to rub in their own partisan perceptions and getting involved in a debate with them instead of listening to their views on the questions put to them. Being aggressive in approach is well and good but descending into an insulting mode is absolutely non-professional and detestable. They also lack the ability of a professional moderator to control the flow of the arguments as is evident from their nod to the shouting matches among the participants, presenting a spectacle of the shindigs rather than serious forums to discuss national issues; so repulsive to the eyes and jarring to the ears. A professional anchor person and host of such shows would always thoroughly brief the participants about the etiquettes of the discussion before coming on air and also curb his own inclinations to join the melee . Most of the anchor persons are inductees from the print media and are not well conversant with the professional culture of the electronic media and the art of conducting panel discussions or talk shows. Some even have not worked as journalists at all before landing into the arena. That probably is the reason that these shows look more like entertainment stuff than the forums for informative and educative debates. Proper professional training of the journalists working in the electronic channels, therefore, is absolutely necessary to achieve the growth of healthy journalism in the country and strict adherence to the agreed code of conduct..

http://nation.com.pk/columns/24-Jul-...r-ethical-code

__________________
"But screw your courage to the sticking place,
And we'll not fail." _Shakespeare, 'Macbeth')