Ramanisblog

Tag: Zardari

  • Are sections of Pakistani media destabilising democracy?

    The ideal that journalists are impartial is followed in the breach.True, there are some who are above partisan reporting.Again it is not the journalists alone to take the blame;publishers are equally responsible .In fact proprietors dictate editorial and news policy,
    The premise that Indian news papers are impartial is a myth.Only difference from other countries is that the Fourth Estate is more subtle.For instance a popular National News Channel, which also has a very good market share is so parochial and slanted in reporting that it would even attack the ruling paty at the centre, but send a comment about Sonia Gandhi,it will be promptly removed.So much for Free Media in India.(This is not to say that there are no impartial press in India).
    This issue apart, the presumption that Zardari government is not corrupt and the press is out to embarrass the Govt. is so blatantly untrue even from the eyes of Indians, that it is laughable..
    At times Pakistani Media seems to go overboard,anchor and participants for they have ir is the only forum to discuss, to give vent to their feelings and views.
    The flip flap of Zardari on Indian planes intruding into Pak air space;Gilani’s faux paus on Kasab’s nativity and you can go on.You can not take the blame from them and pin it on the media.
    Taliban is true,terrorism is true,corruption is true, Geo TV attack is true,gagging the press is true,double talk on Kashmir is true,same double talk on Us true,economic mess is true, Pakistan as a country is in danger of sliding into anarchy is true.
    When the media reports it,it becomes untrue!?
    Where is democracy in Pakistan to destabilize it?
    Story:

    Bilal Qureshi has contributed this piece for PTH. We do not necessarily agree with all the contents of this article but the issue is important enough to be debated. (RR – ed PTH)

    Journalism 101, that is, the very first lesson of journalism is impartiality. In other words, journalists, at least in civilized societies don’t take any position on issues. And editors make sure that personal opinion don’t seep into the work that the journalists are assigned. This is common practice, and even in India, if you read the papers or watch their talk shows, it is impossible to associate journalists with any particular political party. So, in this light, it is utterly nauseating to see media in Pakistan, both electronic and print (especially Urdu media) engage in efforts to destabilize a democratically elected government. Especially, a channel backed up a by large paper is maliciously attacking everything that the government does day after day in print, and night after night on television.

    This must be stopped.

    No, this level of journalistic activism can never be defended or worse, tolerated. Zardari did the right thing when he spoke clearly and aggressively against the conspiracy theorists when he addressed a rally in Karachi.

    Now, the government must come out swinging against the types of immoral, unethical, and extremely biased anchors that we see in Pakistan today.

    I am not suggesting censorship, and neither am I asking the government to exert pressure on any media group with one exception. And we all know that particular channel responsible for spreading, fear and hatred and I want the government to confront the lies that this particular channel is presenting as facts.

    Media, as I understand is not the answer for everything. Yes, no doubt that the media can play a very constructive role in helping societies progress and move in the right direction. However, it is with great regret that I note that the media in Pakistan, as I have observed during my extended stay in Pakistan, has become a mouth piece for those who were decisively rejected by the electorate in the last election. Worse yet, the media in Pakistan has become an apologist and an unofficial spokesmen for the Taliban. Therefore, in this extremely poisonous political environment, it is the duty of the government to strike back hard, demand explanation for the derogatory remarks and corruptions charges casually thrown around by these so-called journalists, both in print and on television.

    Today, the elected government, a government that is full of people who fought not one, but two dictators, a government full of people who rejected of the offers of signing confessions and in return moving to plush ‘exiles’ in foreign countries. Today, this government is made to look like a corrupt and incompetent government, thanks to the right wing pro Taliban anchors and ‘experts and analysts’. This is simply unacceptable, period. So, on behalf of progressive, objective and non-conspiracy theorists, I ask the government to fight back, and fight back really hard, fight for your political life. Otherwise, the constant drip drip of corruption is going to stick and the people in Pakistan are going to buy into this notion that the government is actually corrupt and incompetent. I ask the government in Pakistan to take on the militant and pro Taliban right wing anti democracy, anti progress and hateful people who are trying to destroy the country by presenting the horrible Taliban as heroic fighters, which they certainly are not. And there are plenty of people in the media across Pakistan who can be persuaded to join the government in this effort to root out useless talking heads from the television. But first, the government has to aggressively hit back.

    Mr. Gilllani, are you ready to save the future of Pakistan? Are you ready to stop kissing up to Nawaz Sharif and take a bold stand to defend your party, your president and your people? Are you?
    http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2009/11/29/are-sections-of-pakistani-media-destabilising-democracy/#comment-21909

  • Extracting Political Decisions from the Judiciary in Pakistan

    Couple of points.It is naive to believe that there is’Change’ in Pakistan.What change?Army and ISI are calling the shots with no accountability.Elected representatives(?) have been forced or allow themselves to be forced to rubber stamp a predetermined deal involving two corrupt and exiled politicians.The only change is the perception that there is an illusion of change.The only change is the guilty and corrupt are allowed to rule the mute and simple people of Pakistan with out their consent.
    Secondly,the statement that there can be a transition through ‘negotiated terms’, a very polite way of expressing wheeling and dealing.Is this the way to run a democracy?
    Thirdly, the obsession with foreign approval or censure.You run your country as your people want it.When you are undecided, foreign powers interfere;you accept their help ;now there is nothing as free lunch;you have to accept their terms because of your unwillingness or inability to govern yourself.;suddenly you wake up and find you are under foreign dictates when it is too late.
    Either people in general and intelligentsia in particular should decide the course of action to restore real democracy.Where are the lawyers who have forced Musharaff to climb down?Run out of steam?Take the action to its logical conclusion of restoring real democracy,sans deals and foreign interference.
    If allowed to drift, there seems to be no other option excepting revolution with inevitable bloodshed.Also history has many examples of dictatorship passing into democracy with blood shed,French Revolution being the prime example.(the difference was it was from Dictatorial Monarchs)
    Story:

    By Ahmed Nadeem Gahla

    A study of transformation from military dictatorship to democracy around the world would reveal that there are two possible ways. Either it is achieved through a popular revolution or by negotiations between political forces and dictators.

    The former invariably demolishes the entire system and mostly involves bloodshed putting a new system in place while the later allows the change to happen within the prevailing system based upon certain negotiated terms.

    These terms might not necessarily meet the international laws and judicial norms as it is always a middle path.

    The return of democracy in Pakistan after a long period of military dictatorship is a unique example of such ‘negotiated change’. The terms reached with the help of international power brokers and guarantors ensured withdrawal of politically motivated cases, return of exiled leadership and shedding of uniform by Parvez Musharraf in return for re-election. After assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the international and domestic pressure became so immense that Parvez Musharraf not only have to accept the condition of fair elections but also have to negotiate for an exit in return for protection from prosecution for unconstitutional actions. A civilian dictator might not get such a deal.

    Another option available to political forces at that time was to over through dictatorship by a popular revolution. Let us not forgets that the world community would not allow a nuclear armed nation to reach the point of bloody revolution. Especially, when there are more chances of falling in to a civil war hijacked by religious extremists than overthrowing a dictator. Without a negotiated change, how popular a movement might, it is not possible to remove a military backed dictator without bloodshed. We have witnessed the return of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif from exile, who came back in violation of deal reached on guarantees of our ‘friends’ in Middle East and was sent back by next flight. Despite the promises of a million people’s reception by right wing parties, not a dozen were able to break the security arrangements and show up at airport to receive their leader. Even after Nawaz Sharif was forcibly deported to Saudi Arabia, establishment successfully countered public reaction avoiding any law and order situation. Obviously, possibilities of overthrowing dictator’s thorough protests are not that bright.

    Unable to fight the powerful military establishment which has far more guns and tanks on their disposal, negotiating was the only option available to Benazir Bhutto. Much debated and controversial National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) promulgated by former dictator Parvez Musharraf paved way for return of Benazir Bhutto and later for Mian Nawaz Sharif, without the fear of being arrested or deported. The cases withdrawn against Benazir Bhutto and her husband Asif Ali Zardari under NRO were registered during regime of former prime minister Mian Nawaz Sharif and remained unproved during lengthy trial and detention of Asif Ali Zardari for eleven years. Both Mian Nawaz Sharif and Saif ur Rehman, the former head of National Accountability Bureau appointed by him have repeatedly confessed that these cases were false and cooked on pressure of establishment which wanted to malign the name of Benazir Bhutto and her family. How big price it is to move towards a democratic process by withdrawing these fabricated cases?

    This fact alone leaves no space for political leadership to avoid its responsibility of revoking these politically motivated cases through parliamentary legislation. Mr Sharif and MQM should have taken a bolder stand in parliament while they have repeatedly expressed in public that these cases are false. However, the political leadership is trying to avoid their responsibility to please the establishment, thus pushing the matter of NRO to superior judiciary to decide. Superior courts around the world avoid interfering in to political matters despite having jurisdiction over such issues under the ‘political question doctrine.’ The purpose of this self imposed restriction is to distinguish the role of judiciary from those of the legislature and the executive. Political questions include the ratification of constitutional amendments, conduct of foreign policy and administrative actions of governments. However there is no ridged rule and a court might choose to go ahead in case the ‘demands for a fair trial and criminal justice outweighed the political question doctrine’ as ruled by a US Federal Court in case of President Richards Nixon.

    The exception set in Richard Nixon case is widely referred to and abused to neutralize the political rivals in dictatorships and developing democracies where establishments use superior judiciary as a tool to further their own agendas.

    The superior judiciary in Pakistan has been a victim of this power game by dictators and political leadership on cost of its integrity and reputation. Judiciary has lost a lot in terms of legitimacy of its decisions while playing power game, from the death sentence of ZA Bhutto being the worst and unrecoverable stigma on its face to providing cover to unconstitutional takeover of Parvez Musharraf. The same superior judiciary in offices today miserably failed to dispense justice to Asif Ali Zardari in eleven long years and convicted Mian Nawaz Sharif under establishment’s pressure. With restoration of Chief Justice and sacked judges through a popular movement, the judiciary has won its independence but its impartiality is still to be tested. Should judiciary once again be dragged to deliver political decisions while political leadership lacks the courage to take bold stand on its publically confessed mistakes of past?

    It might not be out of context to mention that first Prime Minister of Pakistan from Sindh was assassinated in Punjab and those in establishment involved in cover up of his murder were blessed with huge estates. ZA Bhutto, the second Prime Minister from same province, was assassinated through a judicial verdict. The third and fourth Prime Ministers Muhammad Khan Junejo and Benazir Bhutto respectively, were unconstitutionally sacked and could not get justice from superior judiciary. Once again the superior judiciary is being dragged in to power game to remove President Zardari from the office for which he has been elected with overwhelming majority from four Provincial Assemblies, the National Assembly and the Senate. The plan to extract a political decision on technical grounds to remove an elected President is not going to strengthen the institution of judiciary or democracy. Especially when the necessary link of ‘demands for a fair trial and criminal justice outweighed the political question doctrine’ as set in Richard Nixon’s case is missing in NRO after confessions of Mr. Sharif and Saif ur Rehman. Will court call Mr Sharif and record his statement while deciding the NRO, and if not, what would be the legitimacy of such decision?

    Apart from the outcome of political circus to be staged in superior judiciary, those advising President Zardari to face courts have to realize the fact that he was in continuous imprisonment for eleven years.

    His detention is longer than the period of life imprisonment in Pakistan. Even if convicted in cases against him the sentence would have been lesser than imprisonment already undergone by Mr Zardari.

    Although according to the judgments of superior judiciary under section 497 of CRPC, any person who is under detention for more than two years and whose trial is not concluded would become entitled to bail. The very same relief of bail was not extended to President Zardari for eleven long years by the superior judiciary. Under the Criminal Laws of Pakistan, if prosecution fails to bring sufficient evidence against accused for a reasonably long period of time, the accused has a right to request the court to drop charges. Mr Zardari’s applications before superior courts for that relief also failed to earn him justice in eleven year. Should not people have reservations that Mr. Zardari will get justice this time from judiciary while even today most of the judges in chair are the same who were unable to dispense justice to him in past?

    Even after restoration of Judges, several questions are being raised about its performance even by leadership of the lawyer’s movement. While Mr. Sharif and Altaf Hussain has advised President Zardari to face the courts, both leaders are reluctant to welcome the decision in Roedad Khan’s petition for ISI’s money politics and a judicial enquiry in to 12th May’s massacre respectively. There is a prescribed process for removal of elected President in constitution, if political leadership thinks that Mr. Zardari is either ineligible or unfit for the job, it should resort to constitutional remedy through impeachment motion. Once again, dragging judiciary in to power game would be an unpleasant and undesired burden for institution which still has to go through the test of impartiality and establish its lost credibility. While all other institutions have been deteriorated to core during long dictatorships, the only hope left for people is institution of judiciary, restored after long and tough struggle.

    If political leadership once again falls in to establishment’s trap to extract political decision from court, the scars on national unity and institutional integrity might be deeper than we do afford as a nation state.
    http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2009/11/28/extracting-political-decisions-from-the-judiciary-in-pakistan/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+teahouse+(Pak+Tea+House)

  • Pakistan’s conspiracy theories stifle debate.

    Cent percent true.Admission of past mistakes calls for guts and statesmanship, which is absent among leaders ,if any , in Pakistan.
    Major problem in Pakistan seems to be that its people are apathetic about their country, excepting during Cricket matches against India.They project to the world a people who seem to be oblivious to the problems of Militancy, Terrorism, suicide bombings,Political skulduggery,corruption, nepotism, back door entry of people to the highest office, a military which, in its passion to hate India is more a divided house than taking care of its borders, short sighted policy of engaging India with Jingoism , when in reality it can not match India in terms of progress,poverty,illiteracy,Fundamentalism and a bankrupt Country living on the doles of US(thus hawking national Honor).
    Where are elite and educated?
    Where are people who think for the country?
    Story:

    Courtesy BBC: Guest columnist Ahmed Rashid on how the real problems facing Pakistan are being sidelined by a surge of conspiracy theories

    Switch on any of the dozens of satellite news channels now available in Pakistan.

    You will be bombarded with talk show hosts who are mostly obsessed with demonising the elected government, trying to convince viewers of global conspiracies against Pakistan led by India and the United States or insisting that the recent campaign of suicide bomb blasts around the country is being orchestrated by foreigners rather than local militants.

    Viewers may well ask where is the passionate debate about the real issues that people face – the crumbling economy, joblessness, the rising cost of living, crime and the lack of investment in health and education or settling the long-running insurgency in Balochistan province.

    “ The principle obsession is when and how President Asif Ali Zardari will be replaced or sacked ”

    The answer is nowhere.

    One notable channel which also owns newspapers has taken it upon itself to topple the elected government and appears to hardly ever air democratic views.

    Another insists that it will never air anything that is sympathetic to India, while all of them bring on pundits – often retired hardline diplomats, bureaucrats or retired Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) officers who sport Taliban-style beards and give viewers loud, angry crash courses in anti-Westernism and anti-Indianism, thereby reinforcing views already held by many.

    Collapse of confidence

    Pakistan is going through a multi-dimensional series of crises and a collapse of public confidence in the state.

    Suicide bombers strike almost daily and the economic meltdown just seems to get worse.

    But this is rarely apparent in the media, bar a handful of liberal commentators who try and give a more balanced and intellectual understanding by pulling all the problems together.

    The explosion in TV channels in Urdu, English and regional languages has bought to the fore large numbers of largely untrained, semi-educated and unworldly TV talk show hosts and journalists who deem it necessary to win viewership at a time of an acute advertising crunch, by being more outrageous and sensational than the next channel.

    On any given issue the public barely learns anything new nor is it presented with all sides of the argument.

    Every talk show host seems to have his own agenda and their guests reflect that agenda rather than offer alternative policies.

    Recently one senior retired army officer claimed that Hakimullah Mehsud – the leader of the Pakistani Taliban which is fighting the army in South Waziristan and has killed hundreds in daily suicide bombings in the past five weeks – has been whisked to safety in a US helicopter to the American-run Bagram airbase in Afghanistan.

    In other words the Pakistani Taliban are American stooges, even as the same pundits admit that US-fired drone missiles are targeting the Pakistani Taliban in Waziristan.

    These are just the kind of blatantly contradictory and nut-case conspiracy theories that get enormous traction on TV channels and in the media – especially when voiced by such senior former officials.

    The explosion in civil society and pro-democracy movements that bought the former military regime of President Pervez Musharraf to its knees over two years has become divided, dissipated and confused about its aims and intentions.

    Even when such activists do appear on TV their voices are drowned out by the conspiracy theorists who insist that every one of Pakistan’s ills are there because of interference by the US, India, Israel and Afghanistan.

    The army has not helped by constantly insisting that the vicious Pakistani Taliban campaign to topple the state and install an Islamic emirate is not a local campaign waged by the dozens of extremist groups, some of whom were trained by the military in the 1990s, but the result of foreign conspiracies.

    Economic crisis

    Such statements by the military hardly do justice to the hundreds of young soldiers who are laying down their lives to fight the Taliban extremists.

    Nor has the elected government of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) tried to alter the balance, as it is mired in ineffective governance and widespread corruption while failing to tackle the economic recession, that is admittedly partly beyond its control.

    Moreover the PPP has no talking pundits, sympathetic talk show hosts or a half decent media management campaign that can attempt to refute the lies and innuendo that much of the media is now spewing out.

    At present the principle obsession is when and how President Asif Ali Zardari will be replaced or sacked, although there is no apparent constitutional course available to get rid of him except for a military coup, which is unlikely.

    The campaign waged by some politicians and parts of the media – with underlying pressure from the army – is all about trying to build public opinion to make Mr Zardari’s tenure untenable.

    Nobody discusses the failure of the education system that is now turning out hundreds of suicide bombers, rather than doctors and engineers.

    Or the collapsing and corrupt national health system that forces the poorest to seek expensive private medical treatment, or the explosion in crime or suicides by failed farmers and workers who have lost their jobs.

    Pakistan cannot tackle its real problems unless the country’s leaders – military and civilian – first admit that much of the present crisis is a result of long-standing mistakes, the lack of democracy, the failure to strengthen civic institutions and the lack of investment in public services like education, even as there continues to be a massive investment in nuclear weapons and the military.

    Pakistan’s crisis must be first acknowledged by officialdom and the media before solutions can be found.

    The alternative is a continuation of the present paralysis where people are left confused, demoralised and angry.

    Ahmed Rashid is the author of the best-selling book Taliban and, most recently, of Descent into Chaos: How the war against Islamic extremism is being lost in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia.
    http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/pakistans-conspiracy-theories-stifle-debate/

  • Pakistan ‘push into Taliban area’

    Couple of points.
    1.What exactly is the stand of the Army?
    Barring some non descript spokesman,no senior Army officer, including Gen.Kayani does not seem to have uttered a word.
    2.Where does ISI stand on this issue?
    3.Why no statement from the highly visible PM or Zardari,Nawaz Sharief on this issue?
    4.Where does Saudi Arabia stand on this issue.?
    5.The civilian people,especially lawyers who made a hue and cry about the sacking of Chudhury are abnormally quiet.Why?
    In my view answers to these questions shall decide who will run Pakistan.
    Story.
    ‘The Pakistani army has said it has pushed deeper into South Waziristan as it battles to wrestle control of the region from the Taliban and al-Qaeda.’
    BBC-19 Oct 2009
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8313699.stm

    From-Syed Shoaib Hasan, BBC News, Dera Ismail Khan

    At the moment, the situation is a stalemate as the army tries to use ground troops backed by heavy weapons and air power to push back the Taliban.
    The militants have entrenched themselves in fortified positions in the areas where the military is marching in. But they are likely to resort to traditional guerrilla tactics once the army is firmly inside territory controlled by the Mehsud tribe.

    This is the heartland of the resistance, and it is here that the fate of the campaign will be decided.

  • Democracy in Pakistan?

    Making Democracy work in Pakistan is an impossible dream.Two wars are waged in Pakistan on the civilian front;one between Zardari and Nawaz Sharief,both tainted;another between Civilian establishment and military led by Kayani,surreptitiously backed by Musharaff.
    Who will win? -no one knows.
    Another war is one we know;the one perpetrated by ISI, terrorists, who are waiting in the wings to gobble up Pakistan.Under the circumstances, Pakistan qualifies the definition of a failed state and deserves to be treated as such and any negotiations you have with them will be of no relevance as there is no central authority.