Nasim Ahmed

The PML-N has presented its election manifesto 2013, outlining its program of socio-economic development for the country. We cannot call it a vision as manifestoes are a statement of intent by a party to do things in the next five years, if voted to power.

Seen from this perspective, the PML-N manifesto has a wide sweep, specially focusing on the major issues facing the nation. For instance, the manifesto pledges to end load-shedding in three years, enhance minimum wages to Rs. 15,000 per month, create one million jobs for the youth, hold local government polls within six months of the general elections and create separate provinces of Hazara, Janoobi Punjab and Bahawalpur. All these are hot problems of the day.

The PML-N has put first things first. The health of the economy is the key that opens all doors. Putting due emphasis on economic growth and stability, the manifesto promises that the annual average rate of GDP growth would be increased from 3 per cent to over 6 per cent in the next five years. Similarly, the rate of industrial growth would be raised from 3 to 8 per cent per annum and the investment-GDP ratio from 12 to 20 per cent. The manifesto also pledges to bring down the budget deficit to 4 per cent of GDP and increase the Tax-GDP ratio from 9 to 15 per cent by 2018.The informal economy will be brought into the tax net and special measures will be adopted to reduce tax evasion and lower the number of federal and provincial taxes. To strengthen the economy, all major export sectors would be made sales tax free and a specialised Export Import Bank (EXIM) would be set up. The manifesto also promises to promote the local software industry to generate annual exports of at least $10 billion by 2020.

It will be a great achievement if these figures can be actualized as without speeding up the pace of economic growth, expenditure cannot be increased for the welfare of the masses. The manifesto also promises to reduce the country's dependence on foreign loans and assistance, revamp state enterprises now eating up Rs. 400 billion annually, decrease tax rates, ensure lower interest rates and make Pakistan emerge as one of the top ten economies of the world. To this end, agriculture would be turned into a fully viable economic industry, high priority will be given to development of livestock and fisheries sectors, and additional land will be reclaimed and irrigated for allotment to landless haris and tenant farmers.

On the issue of chronic energy shortages, the PML-N manifesto says that short-and medium-term measures would be initiated to end loadshedding in three years, mobilize fresh investment of $20 billion to generate 10,000-MW of electricity in the next five years and permanently eliminate circular debt. High priority would be given to import gas through pipelines, intensify oil and gas exploration, develop Thar coalfields by setting up at least 5,000-MW of new coal fired power plants under the IPP mode in Sind and develop alternative sources of energy.

Health and education, two important sectors from the common voters point of view, have received their due share of attention in the manifesto. The total expenditure on education will be increase from 2 to 4 per cent of GDP by 2018 to ensure 100 per cent enrolment of boys and girls by 2020 in line with the requirements of Article 25-A of the Constitution. The overall literacy level will be raised from 54 percent to 80 per cent in the shortest possible time.
Science laboratories and computer labs will be established in all government secondary schools and there will be a girl's high school in every union council. A National Education Emergency will be declared to eradicate illiteracy on war footing, and a vision 2025 for Pakistan's education shall be formulated to transform the country to be among world's best.

Similarly, expenditure on health will be increased from one percent of GDP to 2 percent by 2018.

Medical Insurance Cards will be issued to every family for basic health care at subsidized rates as part of a comprehensive national health insurance service. Other targets are 100 per cent vaccination of children, 50 per cent reduction in maternal and infant mortality and 10 per cent reduction in the rate of population growth.

Rising unemployment is a major challenge facing the country's youth. According to the PML-N manifesto, a specially designed employment program will be launched to generate three million new jobs in the public and private sectors, including one million each in the IT and SME sectors. The minimum wages of workers is to be gradually enhanced to Rs. 15,000 per month. Simultaneously, a dynamic National Youth Policy will be implemented through a skill development program to create one million positions for apprenticeships. Self-employment loans would be extended, services of youth will be utilised in national literacy programs and young persons will be involved in governance at local level through special seats reserved for them in union and district councils.

On the issue of new provinces, an independent commission is to be set up as part of the PML-N's plan to create Hazara, South Punjab and Bahawalpur provinces. The people of FATA would be asked whether they would live in KP or prefer an independent province. The PML-N will also form an autonomous National Accountability Commission, adopt a zero tolerance policy for corruption, ruthlessly stamp out the evil and ensure across the board accountability of all holders of public offices to set an example for the future.
As per the PML-N manifesto, a strong defence is imperative for the country and it would be made invincible by equipping the forces with the most modern weapon systems and technologies to maintain the balance of power in the region. However, as explained by the party spokesman, it is the considered policy of the PML-N that Parliament has the constitutional right to discuss and pass the entire budget, including the defence budget.

Housing, a priority need for everyone, has found a special mention in the manifesto. A housing scheme of 1,000 clusters of 500 houses each for low income families in different parts of the country is one of the initiatives to be promoted in this sector. The PML-N would strive to eventually provide a house to each Pakistani family through public-private partnership.

Manifestoes are always good to read because they are full of flowery promises and heart-warming pledges. But their real test comes much later. An election manifesto is ultimately to be judged in the light of a party's past record. It is from this perspective that the PML-N's manifesto will be analysed and commented upon.

http://www.weeklycuttingedge.com/national02.htm

By:Hashim bin Rashid

The first consensus interim setup must deliver only its mandate

May 11 has been announced as the date of the next General Election. With 52 days to go, there is no sign of a caretaker prime minister popping out as an eight-member parliamentary committee went into a huddle on Wednesday.

The deadlock is on two questions: who becomes caretaker prime minister? And, when does the Punjab Assembly dissolve?

The earlier the answers are provided the better – but surely the answers should have been provided at least three weeks ago.

But as the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz’s (PML-N) Chaudhry Nisar Ali and the Pakistan Peoples Party’s (PPP) Qamar Zaman Kaira have traded diplomatic blows at the centre stage, the more substantive questions about the caretaker setup have yet to come to the front.

The names under consideration are: Hafeez Sheikh, Ishrat Hussain and Justice (retd) Mir Hazar Khan Khoso from the PPP; and Justice (retd) Nasir Aslam Zahid, Justice (retd) Shakirullah Jan and nationalist leader Rasool Bux Palijo from the PML-N. Mentioned amongst possible wildcards have been: Asma Jehangir and Senators Raza Rabbani and Ishaq Dar. And then there is the self-nomination put forward by Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain of the Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q).

There is surely something to be said about each of those nominated. But let us stick to painting in broad strokes. Two of the nominations (Hafeez Sheikh and Ishrat Hussain) are ex-World Bank technocrats – and for a while it appeared that the bets were on Ishrat Hussain taking the coveted post. Ishrat, a former State Bank governor, was both lobbying and being lobbied and still appears as one of the “less-polarising” options on the table.

But installing a caretaker prime minister of the technocrat mould shall be nothing if not a bad joke by politicians on themselves. As a key part of creating what is now widely understood as the fudged economic bubble in the Musharraf dictatorship – and pushing the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) and World Bank’s agenda of pursuing neoliberal economic policies in Pakistan – Hussain was hand in glove with Hafeez Sheikh in creating the grounds for the weak economic foundations the current PPP-led government inherited.

The irony is that it is the PPP that has nominated both Hussain and Sheikh, at a time when the chattering classes and business interests appear to be clamouring from a longer technocratic rule to apparently “remedy the economy”. It is the PPP that has suffered from the economic effects of so-called technocratic fudging with the economy: an agreement with the IMF was signed before Benazir Bhutto’s first term in 1988, another agreement with the IMF was signed by the caretaker PM in 1992 before Benazir’s second term; and it inherited the Shaukat – alias shortkut – Aziz economic mess when it took the reins in 2008.

Technocrats are failures because they pursue IFI-driven agendas and have an exit plan for themselves before they come in. Neither Ishrat Hussain nor Hafeez Sheikh bode well for the confidence of politicians in themselves if either is chosen. Policies are a task for public vote – the tendency to reduce it to the domain of experts needs to be challenged – but this is a subject for a separate article. For now, it must be remembered that caretaker governments do not possess ‘magic pills’. Their task is merely to facilitate a handover. With an over $1.5 billion loan repayment to the IMF scheduled during the caretaker period and the IMF signaling it wants more talks, the choice of a technocrat as prime minister would only serve to indicate that politicians are abdicating responsibility from themselves and looking to play another blame game.

And then there is something to be said about the fact that retired judges are considered the ‘safe choice’ to head interim setups. Two former judges have already been appointed caretaker chief ministers in two provinces to reach a consensus: Justice (retd) Tariq Parvez in the Khyber Pakthunkhwa and Justice (retd) Zahid Qurban Alvi in Sindh. It seems to have shocked no one – except for Asma Jehangir – that former judges are being considered ‘politically neutral’, efficient administrators. Again politicians appear to have more trust in outside institutions than amongst themselves – one of the critical reasons why the discourse of corruption appears to still be solely focused on politicians – and not the civil and military establishment which has shared power for much longer. The question to be asked is that why task judges, whose task was to interpret law, with creating an even playing field for politics?

The names of two Senators Ishaq Dar and Raza Rabbani, both respected in their own way, have more forte for the post – but either is expected to raise alarm to all other political parties. It is similar with the nomination of Rasul Bux Palejo, who is still respected, but his son continues to play an increasingly active role in Sindh’s politics. Asma Jehangir, a candidate with both strong merits and demerits, has withdrawn herself from the reckoning.

Strange happenings continue to be reported: on the eve of the announcement of the caretaker chief minister for Sindh, a key government official was meeting a British diplomat to ‘discuss the caretaker setup’. Ministers of the Balochistan government resigned to join the opposition a day before dissolution of the assembly and the Muttahida Quami Movement (MQM) became part of the opposition in Sindh a month earlier. Political checkers continues to be played, but as with anyone who has played the game knows that checkers is a game that requires much sacrifice. Here it appears politicians are ceding roles they should have taken up themselves to technocrats and judges of questionable merit. The consequences of doing so shall come to the fore soon enough.

But there is another debate to be had about the caretaker setup. If the task is create an even and fair playing field for all political parties, then the Election Commission of Pakistan has yet to fulfill what it has been tasked with. The Supreme Court’s judgment on a petition by the former Workers Party Pakistan has yet to be implemented. Issued on June 12, 2012, the ECP has had enough time to suggest relevant changes in election procedure; including compulsory voting, adding a ‘none of the above’ vote, implementing stricter campaign budgets, but the judgment has yet to come into force. Would an unimplemented SC judgment not raise questions about the credibility of the elections and leave them open to contestation post-event?

Somehow a task as serious as implementing a caretaker setup and an even playing ground for free-and-fair elections have been reduced to a rat race. Essential aspects are delayed as Pakistan attempts to select its first consensus caretaker government. To be fair to them, the existing political parties have not had to deal with such a situation before. There are serious electoral parties, including the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf and Jamaat-i-Islami, sitting outside parliament, and wildcard groups such as Tahirul Qadri’s Pakistan Awami Tehreek, looking to pounce at any misstep.

Each day’s delay in announcing respective caretaker setups creates more fears. It is imperative that a political solution is found at the earliest to this political problem. Technocratic selections, most certainly, will represent a bad omen, rather than a good one, as people are gearing up to vote within their respective constituencies.

The writer is the general secretary (Lahore) of the Awami Workers Party. He is a journalist and a researcher. Contact: hashimbrashid@gmail.com

http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2013...f-care-taking/

By: Azam Khalil | March 22, 2013 . 3

“There was a wise man
in the East whose constant prayer was that he might
see today with the eyes
of tomorrow.”
– Alfred Mercier

The failure to reach a consensus on a name for the caretaker Prime Minister means that the political leadership has lost round one of what is going to be a very challenging time ahead for Pakistan, politicians and people.

Nevertheless, failure should not be an option, though it would not only dent the credibility of the politicians, but also lead to the perception that they still have not matured to amicably decide on critical issues facing the country.
It is, however, expected that better sense will prevail and the matter will be resolved by the parliamentary committee. But if it also fails and the issue is further referred to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), there is no guarantee that the name suggested by it for the caretaker PM will be acceptable to all parties.

Pakistan, needless to say, has travelled a long way to promote and strengthen democracy. It is good that for the first time an elected government has managed to complete its constitutional tenure. A framework for transition to the next elected government has also been put in place and if constitutional provisions are followed and respected, the foundation for a vibrant democratic dispensation would indeed be laid down.

Moreover, it seems that other ingredients of the system - an independent judiciary, a free media and a vocal civil society - have already come of age, which means that the chances for democracy to take root have increased manifold.

While these are the positives that can be seen over the horizon, it is also a fact that the caretaker setup and those who are voted into power will face tremendous challenges. The most important challenge that will be faced by the interim government will be economic. Lawlessness and terrorism will also have to be tackled. They will not only require urgent attention, but also remedial measures.

As far as the economic outlook is concerned, perhaps, the country will require a bailout package from the international donor agencies, who will without doubt attach strings to it, further crippling the everyday lives of the common man. So it is necessary that economic issues are tackled in an economic way and politics is not allowed to play any role in it.

Another challenge would be the growing energy crisis for which short and long-term practical steps would be required.

One hopes that besides respecting the people’s will, urgent reforms that are required in the economic arena would find enough political support allowing them to become useful tools to overcome the present economic weakness.
Currently, the ground realities strongly suggest that no single party will be in a position to form a government on its own. Keeping this in view, the political parties and their leaders must show some flexibility; and instead of indulging in brinkmanship, they should follow the path of consensus and reconciliation.
The politicians must understand that the entire nation’s salvation depends on compromise and not confrontation: if a consensus is not achieved on serious issues confronting the country, then the people’s faith - that is already low as far as the politicians are concerned - may evaporate altogether creating further mess in the country.

As a final word, it is expected that the caretaker setup, entrusted with the responsibility to govern, will not only create conducive conditions for free, fair and impartial elections, but also play a productive role to meet the challenges facing the country and help alleviate the sufferings of the poor.

The writer has been associated with various newspapers as editor and columnist. At present, he hosts a political programme on Pakistan Television. Email: zarnatta@hotmail.com

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...allenges-ahead

By: M A Niazi | March 22, 2013 . 2

The fumbling over the names of the caretaker Prime Minister and Chief Ministers was not predicted, though it could have been. Apart from the very real desire of the incumbents to have their own nominees selected, there was the very important factor that this was the first time. As the example of the infamous Article 58 (2)(b) showed, it took time, and a number of presidential dissolutions, before there was an encrusting of the bare bones of the constitutional provision with the kind of precedent, judicial mainly, that made the dissolution circumscribed by constitutional convention.

Article 58 (2)(b) became a self-fulfilling prophecy, with not only all Presidents elected in its currency using it, but one President actually used it twice. It was used against political opponents as well as partners, to the extent that Farooq Leghari, who was elected to the presidency because he was a PPP loyalist, used it to sack the very same PPP government that elected him.
Similarly, the provisions which provided that the elections would be conducted by a caretaker government was bound to be followed, even it provided for a parliamentary committee if the leaders of the house and leaders of the opposition failed to agree on a caretaker head of government and that the decision would be made by the Election Commission if the committee failed to agree, was just asking to be used.

The PPP has a paradoxical position. It is the party which has claimed that even the elections it has won were rigged against it, not to speak of the ones it lost. That makes it most likely to claim that the current polls were rigged against it. That makes it disinclined to accept as neutral any caretaker government, for such an acceptance would mean accepting a loss.

One reason is that politicians have an avenue left open in case they remain obdurate. The principle advantage of obduracy is that politicians want the option of claiming that their defeat in the elections was caused by an unfair caretaker government, not through any fault of their own.

The very provision of a caretaker government shows that there is some attempt to prevent this claim being made. In other countries with parliamentary system, the norm is for the sitting government to remain in office. Until the 19th century, the British governments that had lost the election actually used to remain until a formal vote of no-confidence was passed, but the done thing is for a defeated PM to resign, and advise that the head of the opposing party be invited to form the government.

Whatever the system, whoever the caretakers, the legitimacy of a democratic government depends on everyone accepting that the elections were legitimate. Indeed, one of the most important functions of a losing party is the acceptance of the result, which implies both an acceptance of the legitimacy of the elections themselves and of the government that has been produced.

At the same time, there is a certain degree of uncertainty about what caretakers can do. In the pre-1977 era, when elections were carried out by government officials, there was a lot a Prime Minister could do, in terms of posting out officials who did not cooperate. The Chief Minister could do much the same, and since both they and the Prime Minister were fighting for their continuance in power, they could do anything.

Apart from the prohibition of the caretaker ministers or their relatives contesting, there has been the empowerment of the Election Commission. As it prohibits any transfers it sees as means to influence the elections, and as the powers over officials’ future careers lies in the hands of those who are not yet elected, major incentives to allow, or even carry out, the standard (and cruder) methods of rigging, which involve ballot stuffing, voter impersonation and booth capturing.

One of the main functions a federal caretaker government fulfils, is providing the legal framework governing the election, by the use of the power of promulgating ordinances. However, as this may be reviewed by the Supreme Court, which has shown that it relies on the constitution, even this power remains in doubt.

As the provincial government actually posts the federal employees it has been assigned, but its own employees, usually at the lower echelons of the general administration, the police and the revenue department, its caretakers are also of great importance. Some would argue that they are, probably, of more importance than the federal government. The importance of the provinces was shown in these elections, and it was perhaps not a defined idea among the federal legislators who drafted the caretaker provision, that the provinces would play such an important role.

One thing giving them so much importance was the insistence, which still continues, that the election to both national and provincial legislatures be held on the same day - May 11 in this case. While this is an idea that has much to recommend it, not least the ground of administrative convenience, there is nothing in the constitution mandating it. India tried to follow this, but went for different election dates, because of the multiplicity of federal units. With four, Pakistan can continue to follow one date. However, there has to be coordination between the federal and provincial governments to get the timing right.

Another interesting development was the stand-off between the PPP and the PML-N. Whereas one controlled the federal government while forming the opposition in the largest province, the other was in a mirror-image position. As a result, the negotiations about the caretaker head of one government had a material effect on the negotiations about the other.

Another phenomenon was to be noted in Sindh and Balochistan, where parties which had remained in government for almost the full five years, suddenly went into the opposition, thereby making the agreement between the leaders of the house and opposition one between people, who had until recently been Cabinet colleagues. That no one likes being in the opposition is a truism of electoral politics, which means that Pakistani politicians try to avoid it. The governments see, thereby, an opportunity to have the consultation as with someone friendly, rather than a diehard opponent (not that any can be found).

One of the most interesting things that has happened in this whole process is that the process has opened up. No longer is the caretaker head of government someone whose track record may well be unknown. It was quickly noted that both the treasury and opposition had nominated ‘IMF’ candidates in Dr Ishrat Hussain and Dr Abdul Hafeez Sheikh. However, one of the problems of an open nomination process, the embarrassment of unsuccessful candidates, remained. Not just dropped candidates, but even those not nominated, were named, and not everyone had the excuse of wanting to contest the polls.

Even as the PML-N chief, Mian Nawaz Sharif, said that the caretakers in Sindh and Balochistan were not acceptable, the country is heading inexorably to the polls, both national and provincial. Whatever the results of the polls, the hope of the Pakistani people is that they will lead to a government which do better at solving its problems than those whose tenure has expired.

The writer is a veteran journalist and founding member as well as executive editor of TheNation. Email: maniazi@nation.com.pk

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...the-caretakers

By: Momin Iftikhar | March 23, 2013 . 3

The passing of Pakistan Resolution on March 23, 1940, at the Minto Park Lahore, for its impact and importance, remains a watershed in the struggle of Muslims in the subcontinent for a separate homeland. In terms of timings, it was most fortuitous - not a day too early.

By 1934, the All India Muslim League, having remained in the background for much of the twenties, was coming into its own as a dynamic platform for Muslims’ political struggle under the leadership of Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah. But the contours of the struggle were still evolving.

Till 1937, the League had continued to throw its weight behind the concept of “separate electorates” and was hard at work to find constitutional common grounds with the Indian National Congress to secure the constitutional rights of Muslims within a unified India. But thanks to the intransigence of Congress’ Hindu leadership, the dream of the Hindu-Muslim unity was withering fast.
It was in the March of 1940, a mere seven years before the dawn of independence, that the Quaid, for the first time from a podium in Lahore, demanded a separate homeland for the Indian Muslims; staking his claim on the basis of a separate nationhood.

The Pakistan Resolution was moved by the Bengal Chief Minister, A.K. Fazlul Haq, and seconded by Chaudhry Khaliquzzaman and others. Outlining the concept of Muslim nationhood in India, it stated: “No constitutional plan would be workable in this country or acceptable to Muslims, unless it is designed on the following basic principle, namely that geographically contiguous units are demarcated into regions that should be so constituted, with such territorial adjustments as may be necessary, that the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in majority, as in the north-western and eastern zones of India, should be grouped to constitute independent states in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign.”

Jinnah’s address on the occasion crystallised the raison d'être of the yet to be born state: “The Hindus and Muslims belong....…to two different civilisations which are based on conflicting ideas and conceptions…....To yoke such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state.” A long and difficult struggle lay ahead for the realisation of the dream, but the goal was now defined and the clarion call for creating a homeland for the Muslims in India finally sounded.

While the majority of Muslims rejoiced at the concept of a separate homeland constituting the Muslim majority areas, Hindu leaders firmly rejected the idea. Calling it “vivisection of Mother India”, Gandhi equated the partition of the subcontinent to a “moral wrong” and a “sin” to which he would never be a party. The Quaid, when challenged by Gandhi on articulation of the Two Nation Theory, clearly outlined his concept of Pakistan by defining the inequalities of Hindu-Muslim equation. He said: “We are a nation with our own distinctive culture and civilisation, language and literature, names and nomenclature, sense of values and proportion, legal laws and moral codes, customs and calendars, history and traditions, aptitudes and ambitions: in short, we have our own distinctive outlook on life and of life. By all canons of international law, we are a nation.”

It is instructive to note here that the goal set by the Founding Fathers was a fair and just society striving to conform to the highest Islamic principles, yet there were no underpinnings for a theocratic state. Pakistan was to be a homeland of Muslims of India, in areas where they were in numerical preponderance to enable them to preserve their distinctive culture and ethos from the inevitable Hindu resurgence that had already begun to take shape.
The Muslims of India had voluntary come together as a state. They were the proud holders of the Muslim ethos and didn’t need to be indoctrinated by the state or religious institutions to make them into what they already were. The Quaid was aware of the pitfall of the tussle that lay ahead in defining the rules for the interplay between religion and state.

He forcefully drove home this point during the inaugural address to the Constituent Assembly. “We are starting with the fundamental principle that we are all citizens of one state. We should keep that in front of us as our ideal. And you shall find that that in the course of time Hindus will cease to be Hindus and Muslims shall cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense because that is the personal faith of the individual, but in the political sense as the citizens of one nation,” he declared.

The impact of the passage of Lahore Resolution on the struggle for Pakistan was stunning in its far-reaching ramifications. Only two months before the adoption of the Resolution, Jinnah had spoken of a constitution for India that recognised that there were “in India two nations.......both must ‘share’ the governance of their common motherland.”

March 23, 1940, changed all that. The Quaid now made it obvious that the concept of separate representation was not enough; that the 1935 federal provisions would have to be scrapped; that the notion of the Congress of a Constituent Assembly, where “brother Gandhi has three votes and I [Jinnah] have only one”, was unacceptable; and that all further arrangements now had to be reconsidered de novo, on the basis that Muslims were a nation, repudiating once and for all their minority status.

He also used the platform at Lahore to demolish the Congress pretensions that it represented the whole of India, including some 95 million Muslims in the subcontinent. He now stood tall as the sole spokesman for the Muslim community of India; much to the chagrin of the Nehru-Gandhi duo, who had entrenched reluctance in accepting legitimacy of the Muslim League as an equal political entity. Nehru could no longer claim with impunity that there were only two parties; the British and the Congress, who could settle the question of independence of the subcontinent.

The conclave of March 23 unequivocally established Muslim League, under the Quaid’s leadership, as a force to reckon with in the affairs of undivided India. A bitter struggle lay ahead for him as well as the Muslim community, but Jinnah on this fateful day had resolutely set the course for the destination: Pakistan. A grateful nation cannot thank God enough for the gift of Quaid and Pakistan.

The writer is a freelance columnist.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...ft-of-pakistan

By: Samson Simon Sharaf | March 23, 2013 . 3

The Shakespearean Ides of March is historically related to patrimonial coups and cantankerous deceits. In Pakistan’s short and checkered history, March is perennially of political significance that revitalises the medieval European drama.

Come 2013; pending general elections, indecisive political establishment and a caretaker government that has no time to be forewarned, bear semblance to the tradition of overriding self-interests at the cost of the state. As Pakistan celebrates its 73 years of Lahore Resolution and 57 years of its first constitution, it is opportune to peep into the past with objectivism and contemplate why the ‘Pakistan that was envisaged’ by its Founding Fathers is not the ‘Pakistan that is’?

On March 23, 1956, Pakistan adopted its first constitution transforming itself from a Dominion under the British Empire to Islamic Republic of Pakistan. It was a 234 Article compromise document that took shape in fits and starts after the adoption of the Objective Resolution that displaced the League’s Creed of Lahore Resolution. The document was a still born effort at providing a federal system based on the principles of parity between East and West Pakistan on the model of the British Parliament. In contradiction to federalism, the constitution comprised a single chamber paving way for the centre to take unilateral action in emergencies, curtailing provincial autonomy and denying devolution. It also declared that no law could be passed against the spirit of The Holy Quran and Sunnah and alienated Pakistanis on the basis of religion. Both Bengali and Urdu were declared national languages. In commemoration, March 23 was declared a national holiday called the Republic Day. On October 7, 1958, President Mirza staged a coup, abrogated the constitution and imposed martial law. On October 27, General Ayub Khan deposed Mirza and assumed the presidency. Though the constitution barely lasted over two years, it opened enough fissures in Pakistan’s politic and federal body that ultimately cost the division of Pakistan in 1971. It also resulted in the rise of sub-nationalist movements. The issues of the federation, including FATA and Balochistan, despite three constitutions and scores of amendments, have yet to be resolved.

In sharp contrast to the Lahore Resolution passed by All India Muslim League from March 23-24, 1940, the 1956 constitution was a conspicuous disconnect that successive governments in Pakistan failed to address. Seen in the context of this argument, what Sheikh Mujib had demanded was a logical reiteration of the Lahore Resolution. As history proves, Pakistan had to pay a heavy cost for assigning the Lahore Resolution to history. Had this Muslim League creed become a preamble to the constitution, Pakistan’s evolution would have taken a different and synergetic course. Distorted attempts by Ayub to revive it in the folds of the Two Nation Theory are seen by critics as distorting and not correcting history.

In terms of the national holiday, the Republic Day during Ayub’s government was first changed to ‘Pakistan and Republic Day’ to its present name as ‘Pakistan Resolution Day’. In reality, March 23 is a grim reminder of how a military dictator subverted the dates of a democratic and constitutional process to eclipse his unconstitutional act of abrogating a constitution. Why Ayub resorted to such a measure is also a manifestation of the growing tensions with the East Pakistan led political establishment under Prime Minister Huseyn Shaheed Suharwardy, who favoured relations with China and USSR in contrast to the growing military relations between Pakistan Army and the US for a bulwark against communism.

Within the above context, it is important that every Pakistani views the abrogation of Pakistan’s first constitution as an attempt by the military to preserve its corporatism and plunge Pakistan into unending constitutional and political crises. Having become interventionist, the proverbial military on a horseback continues to patrol our society. For whatever little it was worth, had the 1956 constitution been given a chance, it could have morphed into an effective document of federalism ensuring the integrity of Pakistan and its institutions. Alas, for the opportunist it was prudent to board the containment bandwagon with complete disregard to the fallouts on psycho-social fabric of Pakistani society.

The true historical context of the Lahore Resolution and constitutionalism in Pakistan is hidden from the people due to the deliberate historical distortions introduced by centres of power. Deficient of political logic, these successive regimes resorted to paying lip service to religion as hedge to elitist interests, thereby creating fault lines and dissections in the politic body. Consequently, the question to define the Lahore Resolution warrants incisive analysis.

According to K.K. Aziz, there were 88 variations of the partition of India before Dr Mohammad Iqbal gave an idea of a Muslim state at his Allahabad address of 1930. Most historians and events thereof indicate that Iqbal and other leaders of All India Muslim League envisioned a Muslim province within the British Empire and, therefore, within the Indian Union. In 1933, Qauid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah dismissed Chaudhry Rehmat Ali’s idea of “Pakistan: Our Fatherland”. After the elections of 1937, faced with Nehru’s intransience and mocking, Jinnah realised the inevitability of diverting his movement to the Muslim majority areas and with it, the importance of regional politicians.

The original draft of the Lahore Resolution was prepared by Punjab’s Unionist Chief Minister Sikandar Hayat, who later withdrew on the pretext that he did not wish Punjab to be divided. After a series of modifications under Shaheed Liaquat Ali Khan, the final draft was presented before the League convention by Bengali Leaguers, A.K. Fazlul Haq and seconded by Chaudhry Khaliquzzaman. It is important to note that the resolution made no mention of religion, had a vague demand of state(s) and talked of Muslim majority areas. This meant that the League’s real constituents, the Muslims in Hindu majority areas were being ignored in favour of Muslim majority areas. It appears that the League at that point was envisioning autonomy and not partition.
On March 24, 1940, the resolution was adopted. The Hindu press cynically called it Pakistan Resolution. The Sindh Assembly was the first British Indian legislature to pass the resolution in favour of Pakistan. G.M. Syed, an influential Sindhi activist, revolutionary and Sufi presented it. On April 15, 1941, the Lahore Resolution was incorporated as a creed in the constitution of the All India Muslim League. Post-1946, the movement for Pakistan intensified resulting in its creation in 1947.

Post-1947, a cardinal piece of League’s legal and constitutional history was assigned to history. Had the politicians of Pakistan continued to adhere to this creed after the death of Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Pakistan’s history could have been different.

Once we as Pakistanis pledge ourselves to the vision of Jinnah’s Pakistan, we are bound by our integrity to revisit the Lahore Resolution as the first step to reclaiming it.

The writer is a retired army officer, current affairs host
on television and political economist.
Email and Twitter: samson.sharaf@gmail.com

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...-2013/march-23

March 23, 2013 . 2

There can be little more appropriate occasion to consider the state of the country than the 73rd anniversary of the passage, at Minto Park in Lahore (now renamed Iqbal Park) by the All-India Muslim League, of the resolution ultimately known to history as the Pakistan Resolution. The Resolution, calling for the establishment of a separate homeland for the Muslim, is considered the beginning of the Pakistan Movement. As such, the anniversary is commemorated in the new country as Pakistan Day. It was also marked as Republic Day, for in 1956, Pakistan became a republic on this day, shedding the last vestiges of British rule this way. Though there is now a new constitution (that of 1973), and the Pakistan of today is only half of that which came into being, it is still a republic, and a parliamentary democracy about to go to the polls. It is thus a time when it is not just appropriate, but even urgent, that the citizens of the country should see whether it has measured up to the vision of the Founding Fathers. They had seen a democratic, Islamic welfare state. Though Allama Iqbal had died the year before the resolution was passed in the city where he passed his adult life, his vision of the new country, which he had visualized during his 1932 Allahabad address was carried in the session in the person of the Quaid-e-Azam, who had come back to the Subcontinent from the UK on the Allama’s request, so as to lead the Pakistan Movement to its logical conclusion.

The prevalent ills Pakistan suffers from such as inflation, the energy shortage which has translated into the destruction of the economy, the declining law and order which has afflicted the whole country, but Quetta and Karachi in particular, are indicators that the government has abandoned the vision of the Founding Fathers. The occasion makes it imperative that the nation make the right choice, and choose a government on May 11 that will steer it out of these shoals and take it toward the destination that is anxiously awaited. This anniversary provides another reminder that the vision of the Founding Fathers is not merely a historical fact, but is of pressing relevance even today, because that vision encapsulates, as it did then, the aspirations of the people of Pakistan. It is thus time to abandon any experiments by newcomers who tried to put the nation on a wrong track, one in which failure is guaranteed. It is only by following the original vision of the Founding Fathers that the nation can return to the right track, that of prosperity and justice. The method which the passage of the resolution represented, that of political means, shows that the coming election is not just about choosing a new government, but about putting the country on the right track.

The country that was called into being so many decades ago, needs to be put back on the track contemplated by the Lahore session when it passed the resolution that is being celebrated today. A point of significance about this is that it is also the 73rd anniversary of the Nawa-i-Waqt Group, with the first issue of Nawa-i-Waqt, then brought out as a fortnightly, appearing on March 23rd, so as to coincide with the Lahore session of the All-India Muslim League. As the coeval, not just of Pakistan, but also of the Pakistan Movement, the group has grown with the nation, and gone from strength to strength, transforming from a fortnightly to a daily with editions from other major cities, as well as other publications, including this newspaper, a children’s monthly and a family weekly, as well as a TV news channel. The group has always been a voice for the promotion of the ideals of the Founding Fathers, the ideals on which the country has been built. This gives this anniversary a special meaning not just to the country as a whole, but to the group of which this newspaper is a constituent, in particular.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...3/pakistan-day

March 22, 2013 . 0

With the President’s announcement of the date for general elections (May 11), the entire country that is already in the grip of election fever is eagerly looking forward to the first ever transition from one civilian governing setup to another in the hope that the next lot would be more attuned to addressing the daunting, multiple challenges facing it. Soon after the announcement, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) also came out with a detailed schedule about the filing and scrutiny of nomination papers, taking the process of polling a step further. There are firm indications that elections to the provincial assemblies would also be held the same day; all the provincial assemblies already stand dissolved, and the ECP has vowed to follow the same schedule that has the support of most politicians in the country. For the issues that yet need to be settled before the nation could go to the poll, like the selection of caretaker Prime Minister and Chief Ministers of Punjab and Balochistan, there exist constitutional means to resolve them. After the two main parties in the country, the ruling PPP and the opposition PML-N, had failed to agree to a candidate for Prime Ministership, the matter was referred to the parliamentary committee constituted for the purpose. It is left just with one day to decide, failing which the choice would rest with the ECP. The committee has already considered two names, Justice (r) Mir Hazar Khan Khosa and Rasul Bux Palejo and could agree to neither of them, leaving Justice (r) Nasir Aslam Zahid and Dr Ishrat Hussain in the field.

Meanwhile, PML-N President Mian Nawaz Sharif has expressed serious reservations over the candidate for the caretaker Chief Ministership that has been chosen for Sindh. He fears that, like Sindh where parties, he alleges, have colluded to pick up the candidate of their own liking, Balochistan is in the process of witnessing the same behind-the-scene ‘dirty’ play. While drawing the ECP and judiciary’s attention to these manoeuvrings, Mian Nawaz has warned that this would subvert the dream of free, fair and transparent elections. He has even alluded that the matter would be taken up with the Supreme Court.

For all these preparations, there remains the lurking fear of terrorism and violence in the minds of the people that anti-democratic forces could launch to frustrate the people’s aspirations. The TTP’s reported warning has reinforced the fear. The ECP plans to set up 80,000 polling stations to be located far and wide across the country. No doubt, the prevailing situation, particularly in sensitive areas like FATA, KPK, Balochistan and Karachi poses a formidable challenge for the law enforcement agencies and the army which would be assisting them to ensure a peaceful balloting. Hopefully, they would bring their best to the fore and be able to see the nation through the process as peacefully as possible.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...-for-elections

March 23, 2013 . 1

With terrorist incidents in parts of KPK and FATA occurring every day, not to talk of Karachi and Balochistan, there is real fear that the coming general elections, at least in these sensitive areas, would be marred by militant violence. On the heels of an attack on a mosque, killing four, in Peshawar came a massive bomb blast at Jalozai Refugee Camp where 17 internally displaced persons, who had lined up to get their daily ration of food, lay dead including a lady of an NGO helping in its distribution; the condition of four is critical; and nearly 40 others have been injured. The next day two other places were hit. And the TTP has warned that it would step up attacks during elections and the public against attending rallies of certain political parties. While violence has visibly come down in Balochistan, we hope that the caretaker government, unencumbered with political affiliation, would take adequate steps both in Balochistan and Karachi to make it possible for the polls to be free from deadly disturbances.

As for FATA, particularly Tirah Valley from where the militant bands of the TTP and other militant groups fan out to unleash their deadly onslaught in KPK and elsewhere in the country, the armed forces have, for some time past, been actively engaged in rooting out their strongholds. It is not a challenge of ordinary dimensions; for Tirah Valley spreads over 600 to 700 miles, is surrounded by tall mountains on all sides and is dotted with caves. It is too hazardous for the ground forces to attempt the clearing of the cave-sanctuaries of terrorists, who comprising different nationalities have been converging on the ‘safe’ spot when driven out from other areas. Another hurdles to getting rid of the plague is that Tirah situated in Kurran and Khyber agencies, lies close to the Pak-Afghan border, providing an easy access to militants from across the Durand Line and, thus serving as reinforcement and keeping their destructive game alive. Therefore, fighter jets and shelling by the ground forces, which have surrounded the hotspots, are being used to take them out or scare them away from the valley. We hope that the military campaign takes particular care to ensure the safety of innocent population; for killing innocent tribesmen would expose the armed forces to the same charge of swelling the ranks of terrorists as levelled against the drones. The safety of civilians would create a suitable climate for the lasting peace to take hold in tribal areas as well as in the rest of Pakistan.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...fear-of-terror

By:Aziz-ud-Din Ahmad Thursday, 21 Mar 2013

The interim administration should be provided no excuse to extend its tenure

The caretaker set up which should be in place in less than a week’s time will not have smooth sailing. It needs to focus on its role which is to help host fair elections. But in its capacity as a provisional government, the caretaker government will have to take a number of decisions crucial for the smooth conduct of the elections.

The need for a caretaker set up arose on account of a lack of trust between the government and the opposition, in addition to doubts about the neutrality of important institutions. In developed democracies, existing governments conduct elections because the integrity of institutions remains unquestionable. As a cynical Tahirul Qadri quipped a few days back caretaker setups exist only in Rwanda, Kosovo, Nepal and Poland. Pakistan needs caretakers as the institutions have yet to establish their impartiality.

The caretaker set up will be required to help the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) in the conduct of elections. It will have to ensure that the demands of the ECP are efficiently fulfilled. To start with, it will have to ensure that the bureaucracy acts neutrally both at the federal and provincial level. Administrative and police officials supposed to have been appointed by the previous administration for political reasons will have to be replaced with those considered to be non-partisan. A lot of transfers will therefore have to be undertaken soon after take over. Administrative measures of the sort would be watched keenly by the parties participating in elections. The measures taken should inspire confidence in the integrity of the caretaker set up.

The caretakers will have to deal with the law and order issue too. The TTP has once again declared the elections to be repugnant to the teachings of Islam and warned the voters that they would be taking part in the exercise at their own risk. The militant network has made it known that it would specifically target the election activities of the PPP, ANP and MQM. The least that the threat would do is to demoralize many voters. In the worst scenario, it could cause voting to be postponed in several constituencies. The threat would have to be dealt with by the caretakers. The voting in the rest of the country however should go on uninterrupted.

Through its offer for talks with the government, the TTP in fact wanted to drive a wedge between the military and the government, on one hand, and between the various political parties, on the other. After the army left politicians to take a decision about the offer on their own, the TTP failed to isolate the military. The terrorist network however succeeded in creating a division amongst political parties as the PML-N, JI and JUI-F refused to condemn the TTP threat. This was an act of gross opportunism.

The new government would be stronger with a mandate supported by a heavy voter turn out. A low turn out however would reduce its prestige. This would be by some as an indicator of a reduction of enthusiasm for the democratic system. This would be used by the terrorists to claim that most people in the country do not support “western democracy”.

Preserving peace however is primarily the duty of law enforcement bodies. A lack of zeal on their part would lead many to conclude that the off stage players do not want a big voter turn out because it would strengthen democracy.

The economy is currently in bad shape. Pakistan has reached a critical situation vis a vis the balance of payments situation. The PPP government has been on a spending spree for five years. So was the Punjab government under the PML-N. So far, remittances from Pakistanis working overseas amounting to about $1bn a month have helped keep Pakistan afloat though by a thin margin. Finances are presently in a precarious position. While the Governor State Bank believes there is no cause for worry, Asian Development Bank’s country director Werner Liepach told Reuters in an interview early this month that Pakistan would need up to $9 billion from the IMF to shield the economy. Further that the country has enough hard currency to cover only about two months of imports. In other words, before the elections are over the country might be desperately in need of money.

Those who support Dr Ishrat Hussain as caretaker Prime Minister argue that only an economist with a vast experience of interaction with international monetary organisations can cope with the challenge the pre- election set up is going to face.

What needs to be emphasized is that it is not the job of the caretakers to make any contract having long term impact on the country’s economy unless with the consent of the major parties taking part in elections.

The caretaker set was conceived as an arrangement not having a tilt for any of the political contenders. Partisan elements being introduced into the set up as happened in Sindh would make the neutrality of the caretakers questionable. A similar attempt made by the party in Balochistan was foiled by the timely intervention of the Balochistan High Court.

The caretakers must not take major legislative decisions. They have to act as neutral occupants of administrative positions till the voters decide who should best fill them.

One expects the caretakers to shun certain activities. They must not be seen indulging in political witch-hunting in any form. Accountability of the politicians is beyond their purview. The new set-up must stay focused on holding elections in a free and fair manner and hand over the power to the winning party or coalition within the agreed time framework.

There are a number of cases where judgments of the Supreme Court are yet to be implemented. These include the NICL scam, Hajj corruption scandal, Pakistan Steel Mills case and re-employment of retired officers. One hopes that the Supreme Court would wait for a few more weeks till the new government takes over instead of pushing the caretakers. This would ensure that the caretaker setup concentrates on their work. The interim administration should be provided no excuse to extend its tenure. Any attempt to prolong the stay would be detrimental for democracy and lead to social unrest.

The writer is a political analyst and a former academic.

http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2013...he-caretakers/