The entire parliament needs to be taken to the cleaners
The walls of the parliament have been witness to many a spoken word that delve deep into the criminal psyche dominating the mindset of the people seated there. From the blatant confessional cry that “we are with you out of compulsion” to a discourse suggesting a dialogue with the military, the speeches of the parliamentarians from across divides have created more intangibles than helping in sorting the burgeoning mess out. The underlying insinuation in practically all speeches was about a ‘script writer’ as being behind the agitation resulting in the siege that the capital in particular and the entire country in general are currently writhing under.
The decision of the political parties to stand behind the false edifice of democracy represented in the person of a corrupt prime minister is a testament to the deep-sunk tentacles of hypocrisy impacting all echelons of a dysfunctional and self-serving coterie of political elite. The fact that a group of disparate individuals can actually gather under the same roof represents an unworthy common denominator: that they are the beneficiaries of a system that is grossly manipulated to reap illicit dividends of their presence in a decrepit parliament.
Through decades, Pakistan’s politics have been manipulated by a chosen few not by the dint of their capability and commitment, but owing to the chance of their birth. During General Ayub’s times, they were supposed to comprise twenty-two families which, by now, may have expanded to about a couple of hundred. Among them, these people control a predominant percentage of the country’s wealth. Worse still, they are not willing to part with it, no matter what! That is why they are so inimical to the prospect of change because, more than anyone else, it will weaken their financial hold on the state exchequer and, consequently, their political power.
Through decades, Pakistan’s politics have been manipulated by a chosen few not by the dint of their capability and commitment, but owing to the chance of their birth. During General Ayub’s times, they were supposed to comprise twenty-two families which, by now, may have expanded to about a couple of hundred. Among them, these people control a predominant percentage of the country’s wealth. Worse still, they are not willing to part with it, no matter what! That is why they are so inimical to the prospect of change because, more than anyone else, it will weaken their financial hold on the state exchequer and, consequently, their political power.
If one were to dispassionately analyse the failings of the system, the paramount question would not relate to the prime minister’s resignation owing to a rigged election. It would be about his being there in the first place: how did he, and scores of others like him, manage to dodge the system and have their candidature papers accepted by the Election Commission? I have record in my custody showing an outstanding amount of Rs3,846 million against the prime minister in wilful loan default case as reported by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) in the matter of the Hudaibya Paper Mills. The covering note number 3-5/COD/NAB HQ/2013/Election of April 1, 2013 sent to the Election Commission of Pakistan states that “a reference number 11/2001 of wilful loan default case is pending with Accountability Court Number 1V, Rawalpindi. The High Court has granted the stay and quashment petition filed by the individual (Nawaz Sharif) is still pending”. Yet, the candidate was cleared by the ECP to participate in the election! This is not the only outstanding case of wilful default of loans against the prime minister and his close family members. There are others, too. The reported default against his person is in excess of Rs8,000 million.
The question here is not as much that of eligibility or ineligibility as it is of a mindset that refuses to submit before law and its requirements. It believes in unquestioned transcendence over constraints imposed by the constitution or other applicable laws in the country in matters regarding how individuals can and should regulate their interactions with the state. Look at what happened at the Karachi airport the other day when a sitting senator and a member of the national assembly were forced to offload by angry travellers because they came over two hours late. This is a common practice when passengers are forced to wait for the VVIPs. But there is a change. Back in olden times, when irate passengers would try to protest, they would be persuaded by fellow passengers to keep quiet as it would not help. That has changed.
The question that arises is how could the prime minister so unabashedly and so unashamedly proclaim innocence of default before the courts had adjudicated in the matters? And how was he accepted as a candidate to compete in the elections when there were specific constitutional provisions debarring his eligibility? Furthermore, even if he were cleared in the numerous default cases pending against him by the courts, according to the constitution that he keeps parroting about ad nauseam, he would remain ineligible for competing in the elections. So, the allegations of a possible complicity between various institutions of the state and some individuals begin to make sense, after all!
The question here is not as much that of eligibility or ineligibility as it is of a mindset that refuses to submit before law and its requirements. It believes in unquestioned transcendence over constraints imposed by the constitution or other applicable laws in the country in matters regarding how individuals can and should regulate their interactions with the state. Look at what happened at the Karachi airport the other day when a sitting senator and a member of the national assembly were forced to offload by angry travellers because they came over two hours late. This is a common practice when passengers are forced to wait for the VVIPs. But there is a change. Back in olden times, when irate passengers would try to protest, they would be persuaded by fellow passengers to keep quiet as it would not help. That has changed. In the case of the two legislators, passengers made sure that they were not allowed to travel. What followed in shape of the explanations by the two legislators, even threats hurled at those who engineered their ouster from the plane is absolutely shameful. That shows their utter lack of conformity to the most fundamental parameters of decency and their deep-set arrogance and disrespect for law. This is hard to go away anytime soon, but things are going to get increasingly uncomfortable for this evil band of transgressors.
One good that has accrued because of the ongoing sit-ins in Islamabad is with regard to the emergence of a clear differentiation and understanding of how things stand today and what are the principal ailments that plague the country? There is also a deep appreciation of the ways this malaise can be tackled which divides the society between an extremely small privileged class that prospers exclusively by its indulgence in corruption and a large underprivileged community that survives in irremediable bondage of the exploiters. This is a grossly inequitable distribution and would be unsustainable in any just and fair society. It has survived here primarily because of the economic vulnerability of the poor and the weak segments of the society who do not have the will and the resources to put up a challenge.
Over time, democracy in Pakistan has become synonymous with the election of criminals of a vast variety to the parliament who quickly move on to deprive the country of its wealth and legitimacy. After they have done their bit, they pass on the mantle to their next generation to continue indulging in the nefarious trade. This is how we have landed with the likes of the Sharifs, Zardaris, Chaudhrys, Fazalur Rehmans, Altaf Hussains and a host of equally degenerate actors who provide protection to the loot of their colleagues through parliamentary resolutions. They are able to do so because they are in a majority in the house and they work by sharing the illicit bounty with other claimants. The current avowed solidarity among the political forces standing behind the incumbent prime minister reflects a small measure of the commonality of stakes among the ruling elite of the country and the compulsion why they are forced to stick together to hide their culpability.
We have suffered this culture for over six decades. Must we continue to suffer it in the future also? Do we have to put up with this band of criminals just because they get elected to the assemblies by manipulating a flawed electoral system and operate by misusing the fair name of democracy and constitutionalism? What law dictates that we have to put up with criminals and allow them to deprive the country of its prospect of liveability? What law demands of us to look the other way when our future and that of our coming generations is being compromised?
One good that has accrued because of the ongoing sit-ins in Islamabad is with regard to the emergence of a clear differentiation and understanding of how things stand today and what are the principal ailments that plague the country? There is also a deep appreciation of the ways this malaise can be tackled which divides the society between an extremely small privileged class that prospers exclusively by its indulgence in corruption and a large underprivileged community that survives in irremediable bondage of the exploiters. This is a grossly inequitable distribution and would be unsustainable in any just and fair society. It has survived here primarily because of the economic vulnerability of the poor and the weak segments of the society who do not have the will and the resources to put up a challenge.
It would have been ideal if the envisaged changes could be piloted through the parliament. But that has effectively become the abode of criminals and gangsters who would refuse to be party to any change likely to adversely impact their prospects of continuing the loot spree. Under such circumstances, and with such untenable determinants, what are the possible options before those who desire the change? Two: either survive in bondage of the few privileged and pass on the germs of servility to their next generations, or hit the roads and claim what is rightfully theirs and what should belong to them. The legal base has gradually eroded at the hands of the corrupt. It is the moral base that has assumed dominant relevance and it is by this yardstick that things are likely to happen in the future.
With the sensitisation of the educated and the middle-class community, there is burgeoning hope that things would begin to change! This hope is primarily reflected in the new-found determination of the people not to allow this aberration to linger any further. This is not going to be easy as the tentacles of the rich and the privileged are deeply dug and they also have a number of partners-in-crime occupying seats of power in the country encompassing all the pillars of the state, going all the way up to the prime minister’s palatial mansion.
It would have been ideal if the envisaged changes could be piloted through the parliament. But that has effectively become the abode of criminals and gangsters who would refuse to be party to any change likely to adversely impact their prospects of continuing the loot spree. Under such circumstances, and with such untenable determinants, what are the possible options before those who desire the change? Two: either survive in bondage of the few privileged and pass on the germs of servility to their next generations, or hit the roads and claim what is rightfully theirs and what should belong to them. The legal base has gradually eroded at the hands of the corrupt. It is the moral base that has assumed dominant relevance and it is by this yardstick that things are likely to happen in the future.
I raise a toast to all people who show courage to demand their right and who have the will to fight. What is not given to you by way of your right can only be taken by way of force. Your strength is your unity. It will transcend the obstacles. It’ll triumph.