Panama Leaks: a compilation of bizarre political arguments

A survey of narratives from the ruling party

The Panama case is being fought tooth-and-nail simultaneously in the legal as well as the political arena. Members of the ruling party have been asserting that the first family is innocent of corruption and money-laundering, whereas the opposition is convinced that the contrary is true. While lawyers have been busy defending the first family in court, government representatives have been striving to explain (away) the leaks on political and social forums. In what follows, I list some of the more brilliantly bizarre narratives for the benefit of the coming generations. I have decided to do it while they are still fresh in memory because I fear that if not collected in one place now, the historian may not be able to gather all these gems, and one or two could easily be lost in the sands of time, which would be a tragedy. As much as it is tempting to talk about Qatari letters and the like, no reference to the legal aspects will be made since the case is sub-judice.

First, I present the original political narrative using all the impartiality at my disposal (in italics). This is followed by my own comments, and here I claim no impartiality whatever. Most of the arguments have been presented by the first family or its loyalists among party members, while one or two can be sourced back to their enthusiastic supporters.

Old charges. There’s nothing new in the charges. The accused have repeatedly been investigated for these crimes and were always found above board. In fact, they have suffered a lot in the form of exile and loss of assets.The pardon agreements suggest a story different from the all-clear one.Exiles, on the other hand, are without doubt harsh, but it is conceivable that the luxuries of the Saudi palaces and the rapid growth of the business empire would have gone a little way towards making life somewhat bearable.

The only JIT that matters is that of the people. Other variants: Parliament is supreme; Continuation of the system is crucial; Democracy is in danger; Only voters have the right to take away what they have given. NS is still the most popular leader, his party the most popular party, his family the most popular family, etc. This is a recurring theme with the party. Hamza Shahbaz, talking to school-children some months ago, had famously advanced pretty much the same political theory: that corruption ‘happens’, and that much should be accepted; and it’s up to the voters to punish (or otherwise) politicians for their corruption.  The party-popularity claims could be true or false (or partly true), but what is not clear is their relevance to the Leaks.

Others have been named too. The first family is not the only one; hundreds of others have also been implicated by the Panama paper leaks. They must be investigated as well. Indeed, they must. The fact that they are not being investigated by the sitting government is a little perplexing. This is perhaps in the interest of continuity of the system and deepening of democratic roots in the country.

Accountability must start from Aug 1947. Selective justice is not acceptable. Pakistan has been plundered from the very beginning. The only legitimate way to prosecute the looters is to start from 1947 and then move chronologically forward till we reach 80s and 90s and into the new millennium. Then nobody will have legitimate grounds to cry selective-justice. Indeed, nobody will have those grounds because the suspects will all be safely in the ground by the time their turns come.

To stall progress and discourage business enterprise/resourcefulness.Pakistan is all set to become one of the top economies of the world by 2030, and the sole purpose of this hoopla is to stall that progress. Also, people going after the PM’s progeny are jealous of the latter’s success, and if this tradition is established then nobody in future would dare excel in business and entrepreneurship. Well, it is safe to say that not many success stories like theirs are likely to be replicated anyway.

People doing the investigation must be investigated first. Investigators need to be clean themselves before they embark upon the process of investigating other people’s alleged crimes. This is only fair. The investigators must be investigated first, but only after their investigators (in turn) have been thoroughly investigated, and so on ad infinitum. Anything less, and the principles of justice will obviously not have been adhered to.

Imran Khan wants to be PM. Other variants: Imran Khan’s own finances are not clean; Imran Khan has other serious moral flaws; Imran Khan’s children are not in Pakistan, etc. Apparently, this is supposed to convince you if nothing else does, for it supposedly turns the whole situation on its head. It is especially designed to be effective if you are not accustomed to using your own head.