pkpatriotic
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2008
- Messages
- 2,317
- Reaction score
- 0
Democracy is the best form of accountability
That's life
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Ayesha Tammy Haq
All around the mulberry bush
The monkey chased the weasel;
That's the way the money goes
Pop! goes the weasel.
This is part of a rhyme from my childhood that fits the current political situation, the rhyme itself is well known with a catchy tune but its origin and meaning are obscure. Obscure or not it popped in to my head from the deep recesses of my brain as I was trying to understand what our politicians are really up to. Here you have our politicians going around and around in circles. It's the weasel's ability to pop out like a jack in the box that makes a monkey out of the monkey, or does it. Or are they just role playing and, in doing so, trying, if not to fool us, to confuse us? Or worse, create a situation so bad that we will have no choice but to say forget everything, the rule of law, the constitution, an independent judiciary, cheap fuel, governance, food at affordable prices, education, health, security and all else that is the right of a citizen, just stop the advancing suicide bomber. Surely if our constitutionally guaranteed rights were enforceable and the state took care of its citizens there would be desperate young men and women, with no hope or future available to enlist to do this dreadful deed. Or is all this far too simplistic. Because the world is spinning and someone will always be unhappy, and there will always be someone to prey on that unhappiness and take advantage of it so there will always be violence, death and destruction.
So as we go around and around the bush, our heads spin, the weasel keeps popping up, our heads spin more, we need to stop, think, ask and get answers. There are several questions that need answering: do the PPP and PML-N believe in the democratic process? Do periods of military rule stymie the democratic process? Are institutions destroyed during such periods? Are these periods of military rule legitimate? And should they be legitimised? Do strong and independent institutions strengthen democracies? Do elected governments come with a mandate and are they answerable to the electorate? Should a democratically elected government honour the commitments it makes to the nation? Should a democratically elected government be afraid of an independent judiciary? Should the government be at liberty to require that a judge, in our case the Chief Justice of Pakistan, resign simply because he refused to bow before a military dictator and is now seen to be an independent judge? Why is the PPP government so afraid of an independent judge? Why has the country been held hostage to this fear?
The PPP and PML-N come on television everyday saying the same thing over and over again. Reiterating that they want to restore the judges but they just can't work out how. It is disturbing to hear the PPP leaders go on ad nauseam about a constitutional package, how the only way out is a constitutional amendment which would require a two-thirds vote of both houses of parliament. And when these poor parliamentarians have managed to convince themselves of what they are saying and their words roll off the tongue with ease they are stopped mid sentence and find themselves in the horrible position of having to convince themselves and the nation that the way forward is a fresh notification and oath. If this weren't so serious it would be funny. Coping with all that doublespeak is not easy and when Mr Farooq Naek dumped the constitutional package and opted for fresh oaths, the PPP spokeswomen found themselves up a creek without a paddle. Not briefed and unaware of the law, they were for once lost for words. Fortunately for them this didn't work and the PPP announced that all the judges would be reinstated immediately after General Musharraf resigned.
Unfortunately the drafter of that document forgot to explain to Mr Zardari and his party the meaning of the word immediately. So for their benefit I would like to take this opportunity to enlighten them. Immediately is an adverb and it means: one, at once, instantly, and two, without any intervening time or space.
General Musharraf resigned on Monday, August 18 at around 3 in the afternoon. Parliament was in session that evening. Immediately meant that the judges should have been restored that evening.
This was followed with Mr Sharif saying that Mr Zardari subscribed to a minus one formula. We are back to the fear factor Mr Zardari did not want the independent Chief Justice back in court. Mr Naek came out to deny that his party co-chairperson had ever said there should be a minus one formula. And then to put the icing on the cake Fauzia Wahab, a PPP MNA on a reserved seat has been on television demanding that the Chief Justice resolve this issue by resigning. There are a few issues that arise here. One, Ms Wahab is quite obviously not shooting off her mouth and is undoubtedly articulating yet another ridiculous plan following in the wake of the constitutional package and the fresh oaths. Two, it is doomed to failure as it not only admits that Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry is the Chief Justice of Pakistan it also admits the fear of the PPP leadership.
The new government has been in place for five months and has done little else than give the nation deadline after deadline. It has done nothing but take us around and around the mulberry bush. Our heads are spinning and we are looking for answers to all the questions we have asked. The government for its part has become adept at stalling the issue and the PML-N together with the other coalition partners have been complicit in letting this happen time after time. Surely its time we moved away from the politics of old, politics of revenge and of fear and concentrated our efforts on the politics of accountability, of building and developing institutions, of everyone being subject to rather than above the law. Let us find a president who is impartial and has integrity and is not tainted with financial malfeasance. And more importantly, let us find a president who is a democrat, who would never invite the army in, who would never use Article 58(2)(b) and who would keep the two coalition parties together for the next four and a half years so that the people can make their choices rather than have them made for them as has happened through the 1990s.
We have a brave and fearless judge and we have a party co-chair who fears his reinstatement. Pakistan is in a bad place and needs clear, fearless and capable leadership to take it forward. It needs strong institutions. It needs to lay a solid foundation on which the state can be built. It needs a democrat for a president. Who, if anyone, should resign? Or is it possible that we may be fortunate enough to see a coming of age where fear is lost in the comfort of strong and protective state structures which are the hallmark of a true democracy.
The writer is a corporate lawyer, host of a weekly talk show on satellite television and a freelance columnist.
That's life
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Ayesha Tammy Haq
All around the mulberry bush
The monkey chased the weasel;
That's the way the money goes
Pop! goes the weasel.
This is part of a rhyme from my childhood that fits the current political situation, the rhyme itself is well known with a catchy tune but its origin and meaning are obscure. Obscure or not it popped in to my head from the deep recesses of my brain as I was trying to understand what our politicians are really up to. Here you have our politicians going around and around in circles. It's the weasel's ability to pop out like a jack in the box that makes a monkey out of the monkey, or does it. Or are they just role playing and, in doing so, trying, if not to fool us, to confuse us? Or worse, create a situation so bad that we will have no choice but to say forget everything, the rule of law, the constitution, an independent judiciary, cheap fuel, governance, food at affordable prices, education, health, security and all else that is the right of a citizen, just stop the advancing suicide bomber. Surely if our constitutionally guaranteed rights were enforceable and the state took care of its citizens there would be desperate young men and women, with no hope or future available to enlist to do this dreadful deed. Or is all this far too simplistic. Because the world is spinning and someone will always be unhappy, and there will always be someone to prey on that unhappiness and take advantage of it so there will always be violence, death and destruction.
So as we go around and around the bush, our heads spin, the weasel keeps popping up, our heads spin more, we need to stop, think, ask and get answers. There are several questions that need answering: do the PPP and PML-N believe in the democratic process? Do periods of military rule stymie the democratic process? Are institutions destroyed during such periods? Are these periods of military rule legitimate? And should they be legitimised? Do strong and independent institutions strengthen democracies? Do elected governments come with a mandate and are they answerable to the electorate? Should a democratically elected government honour the commitments it makes to the nation? Should a democratically elected government be afraid of an independent judiciary? Should the government be at liberty to require that a judge, in our case the Chief Justice of Pakistan, resign simply because he refused to bow before a military dictator and is now seen to be an independent judge? Why is the PPP government so afraid of an independent judge? Why has the country been held hostage to this fear?
The PPP and PML-N come on television everyday saying the same thing over and over again. Reiterating that they want to restore the judges but they just can't work out how. It is disturbing to hear the PPP leaders go on ad nauseam about a constitutional package, how the only way out is a constitutional amendment which would require a two-thirds vote of both houses of parliament. And when these poor parliamentarians have managed to convince themselves of what they are saying and their words roll off the tongue with ease they are stopped mid sentence and find themselves in the horrible position of having to convince themselves and the nation that the way forward is a fresh notification and oath. If this weren't so serious it would be funny. Coping with all that doublespeak is not easy and when Mr Farooq Naek dumped the constitutional package and opted for fresh oaths, the PPP spokeswomen found themselves up a creek without a paddle. Not briefed and unaware of the law, they were for once lost for words. Fortunately for them this didn't work and the PPP announced that all the judges would be reinstated immediately after General Musharraf resigned.
Unfortunately the drafter of that document forgot to explain to Mr Zardari and his party the meaning of the word immediately. So for their benefit I would like to take this opportunity to enlighten them. Immediately is an adverb and it means: one, at once, instantly, and two, without any intervening time or space.
General Musharraf resigned on Monday, August 18 at around 3 in the afternoon. Parliament was in session that evening. Immediately meant that the judges should have been restored that evening.
This was followed with Mr Sharif saying that Mr Zardari subscribed to a minus one formula. We are back to the fear factor Mr Zardari did not want the independent Chief Justice back in court. Mr Naek came out to deny that his party co-chairperson had ever said there should be a minus one formula. And then to put the icing on the cake Fauzia Wahab, a PPP MNA on a reserved seat has been on television demanding that the Chief Justice resolve this issue by resigning. There are a few issues that arise here. One, Ms Wahab is quite obviously not shooting off her mouth and is undoubtedly articulating yet another ridiculous plan following in the wake of the constitutional package and the fresh oaths. Two, it is doomed to failure as it not only admits that Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry is the Chief Justice of Pakistan it also admits the fear of the PPP leadership.
The new government has been in place for five months and has done little else than give the nation deadline after deadline. It has done nothing but take us around and around the mulberry bush. Our heads are spinning and we are looking for answers to all the questions we have asked. The government for its part has become adept at stalling the issue and the PML-N together with the other coalition partners have been complicit in letting this happen time after time. Surely its time we moved away from the politics of old, politics of revenge and of fear and concentrated our efforts on the politics of accountability, of building and developing institutions, of everyone being subject to rather than above the law. Let us find a president who is impartial and has integrity and is not tainted with financial malfeasance. And more importantly, let us find a president who is a democrat, who would never invite the army in, who would never use Article 58(2)(b) and who would keep the two coalition parties together for the next four and a half years so that the people can make their choices rather than have them made for them as has happened through the 1990s.
We have a brave and fearless judge and we have a party co-chair who fears his reinstatement. Pakistan is in a bad place and needs clear, fearless and capable leadership to take it forward. It needs strong institutions. It needs to lay a solid foundation on which the state can be built. It needs a democrat for a president. Who, if anyone, should resign? Or is it possible that we may be fortunate enough to see a coming of age where fear is lost in the comfort of strong and protective state structures which are the hallmark of a true democracy.
The writer is a corporate lawyer, host of a weekly talk show on satellite television and a freelance columnist.
