DHA case: Which country’s army operates housing schemes?, asks CJP

[RIP Pak LAW]

Good question
open another thread for Knowing the reason

No we will discuss that here since topic starter needs to look into his own house first before pointing others.

 

[Hellfire]

Isn't dha run by pension fund?

Isn't return on investment from corpus of the Insurance for Armed Forces Personnel included?

That would make a good financial sense and a formidable corpus to ensure subsidized housing for personnel at minimal profit and no loss basis and free for the kin of the martyr!

We have the same being in form of AGIF and AWHO & AFNHB

 

[RIP Pak LAW]

Why are Indian courts silent on this massive Rafael scam when French politicians themselves took Modi name in the name with reliance?

 

[AfrazulMandal]

Isn't dha run by pension fund?

You should know. You were in the Air Force.

 

[Kompromat]

I like the CJP but if DHA/FJF wasn't there the state would have to pay billions every year in veteran welfare.

Isn't return on investment from corpus of the Insurance for Armed Forces Personnel included?

That would make a good financial sense and a formidable corpus to ensure subsidized housing for personnel at minimal profit and no loss basis and free for the kin of the martyr!

We have the same being in form of AGIF and AWHO & AFNHB

 

[American Pakistani]

Well, is there any law or does constitution ban Army to involve in commercial ventures? If no then CJP question is nonsense. Why do we have to do what other countries does? Army is the only corruption free institution and performance always exceed expectations. Plus due to assholic politicians Army has to get involved in ventures to generate money in order to keep up with external and internal threats.

 

[Hellfire]

I like the CJP but if DHA/FJF wasn't there the state would have to pay billions every year in veteran welfare.

Oh, I totally agree about the need for a nodal agency for housing. A service personnel spends half the life away in remote locations and hardly has time to find a dwelling, and what he finds, sometimes has issues of unscrupulous people harassing his family.

I was trying to understand how do you finance the projects. We have AGIF which is the contributory insurance scheme provided centrally for the Armed Forces Personnel. A pretty good deal. That has a corpus from which, we have funds for looking after martyrs and rehabilitation financing. Also, some fund is utilized to finance the activities of our own AWHO & AFNHB (something akin to your DHA) which operates on the minimal profit no loss basis for ex-servicemen and of course for widows and martyrs as per policy, allocation of the Dwelling unit

 

[kris]

No we will discuss that here since topic starter needs to look into his own house first before pointing others.

What does it has to do with the topic. Is Pakistan judiciary and civil systems work on comparison to others? Don't you have any order?

 

[airmarshal]

Which country's army wins medals over fake encounters? (Hint : Indian Army)

Which country's army never do a surgical strike but keeps claiming it did a surgical strike!!?

If Pakistan Army did not develop housing for its officers, active and retired, they would have been like other Pakistanis without decent housing to think of.

Army develops its housing authorities on lands procured from government. It then develops the land with better facilities and plans. Also, if buying and selling of property in army built housing, there is ZERO corruption. So people who properties or land in army housing estates prefer to buy it there. Hence the areas developed by army are always the premium addresses in every city.

Lets says you buy a plot in Karachi Development Authority scheme. You would not know how many times that plot has been sold. So you might end in legal battle and never build your home. This is will never happen Defense Housing Authority. You buy the plot or property and you are the sole owner.

 

[GHALIB]

So that you have more info on the subject....

How Pakistan's Military Monopolised State Resources For Personal Use
The 2017 edition of Ayesha Siddiqa's 'Military Inc.: Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy' discusses how military capital being used for personal benefits is now a permanent feature in Pakistan.

In 2007, Ayesha Siddiqa touched a raw nerve by publishing Military Inc.: Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy. Then Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf branded her a traitor, blocked the book launch, threatened to try her for treason and hounded her out of the country. Her crime was documenting the Pakistani military’s business involvement (“Milbus”) at the cost of the public economy. The 2017 edition of Military Inc. adds details from the post-Musharraf era and concludes that Milbus has become a permanent feature now. There is also widespread public and media acceptance of Milbus through the Pakistan military’s successful efforts in brushing up its image as the most trustworthy security guardian even under civilian rule. According to her, “In post 2007 Pakistan, military power is more intensely entrenched”

What is “Milibus”?

Siddiqa defines Milbus as military capital used for the personal benefit of the military fraternity. Over a period of time a segment of civilians has also benefited. These funds are neither recorded nor are they part of the defence budget. These activities are controlled by retired or serving military officers or under their patronage. Milbus evades regular accountability procedures for “the gratification of military personnel and their cronies”.

Milbus activities and dividends are justified as quid pro quo for their security work to the state. They are also justified as welfare measures provided to the armed forces. However “the rewards are limited to the officer cadre rather than being evenly distributed among the rank and file”. Even a noted columnist like Khaled Ahmad, who disagrees with much of the Pakistani military’s stance, told her that Pakistan should pay the price “for what we believe in. There is a paradox triggered by our nationalism which allows the military to monopolize the state’s resources.”

The military’s involvement in politics results in Milbus, which in turn generates military interest to remain in power or to control the government. In fact, it perpetuates “the military’s political predatory style”. It serves as a tool for the military to gain “institutional and personal economic influence”, thereby preventing any possibility of pushing them back to the barracks to allow democratic institutions to flourish. The military’s expertise in “violence management” gives a special character and influence to the Milbus economy. This is evident in countries in Latin America, Pakistan, Indonesia or Turkey.

The military’s predatory style makes its capital “concealed, not recorded as part of the budget, and entails unexplained and questionable transfer of resources from the public to the private sector, especially to individuals or groups of people connected with the armed forces”. Financial autonomy gives the military a sense of superiority over “incompetent civilians”. Milbus activities are not revealed to the public on “national security” grounds.

External factors also helped Milbus thrive. The US considered the military in many of its client states as “instruments of domestic stability and as partners that were depended upon for achieving US security objectives”. In such countries, the military justifies their encroachment into the economy for guarding national security. The elite in such countries either turns a blind eye to military’s economic interests or tries to join them as “cronies” to derive commercial advantage. International businesses also build corporate partnerships with military-operated business groups, as they dominate the government and can deliver.

Ayesha Siddiqa
Military Inc.: Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy
Penguin Random House, 2017

Milbus creates monopolies resulting in market distortions by giving military officers and “cronies” unfair advantages in winning contracts and also by permitting a hidden flow of funds from the public to the private sector. “Such redistributive processes encourage both authoritarianism and clientship”. However this rapacious behaviour also creates tensions to the detriment of the dispossessed.

Pakistan case studies

Although no public data were available, the author tried to do case studies of four welfare foundations: the Fauji Foundation, Army Welfare Trust, Shaheen Foundation and Bahria Foundation. These are subsidiaries of defence establishments with diverse business activities like private security firms, corporate enterprises like banks, insurance companies, radio and television channels, fertiliser companies, cement and cereal businesses, bakeries, farms and schools.

Their activities are not at all transparent. Out of 96 projects run by these foundations, only nine are listed with the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan. In 2005, the Pakistan defence ministry rejected their parliament’s call to enquire into the “under-sale” of a sugar mill by Fauji Foundation.

Milbus grew stealthily in Pakistan from 1953-54 onwards, with the military’s creeping influence. But it was only after the third martial law in 1977 that its shape was seen in public. Martial law was first proclaimed in 1958, political instability contributed to its rise. Since 1947, Pakistan was ruled directly by the military for 17 years (1956-62, 1969-71, 1977-85 and 1999-2002). It had an elected government under a military president for 15 years (1962-69, 1985-88, and 2002-07). For ten years (1988-99), it had an elected government with a civilian president but under influence of the troika. For 21 years it was under the supremacy of “non-parliamentary forces” under a formal parliamentary rule (1947-59 & 2007-16). Civilian rule was only for six years (1971-77). This shows why Pakistan has struggled to entrench democratic accountability compared to India, which had unbroken parliamentary rule from 1947, except 21 months of Emergency under a civilian ruler with no role for the military.

The author laments that the civilian elite also had an active role to play in propelling the military to prominence, as they used it as a political force multiplier without realising that “the military would gain wings of its own”. She blames Pakistan’s initial civilian leadership for this, since the military was allowed to initiate a major operation (against India) without civilian control, which propelled the army into significance. She quotes Brigadier (retired) A.R. Siddiqui, a noted Pakistani author, who had said that the use of tribals to take control of Kashmir was the first reason for turning Pakistan into a military-dominated state. A strengthened military under General Zia ul-Haq asserted its supremacy by introducing Article 58(2)(b), which empowered the president to dismiss elected governments.

Post-Musharraf situation

In her 2017 edition, the author adds that the military have now shown clever resilience to the new wave of democratic transformation under foreign pressure. However in that process it has also become stronger. The army felt that it would be better to allow a civilian government to run the day-to-day affairs, take responsibility for policies made by the generals and face the international community. In that way, “a military led government was replaced by a military led governance system in which the Army GHQ controlled strategic affairs”. This is also because the military’s “core constituency” of mid-ranking officials was upset with Musharraf’s needless excesses like humiliating Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry. The author quotes Hein Kiessling, who told her a sensational story about how Musharraf’s resignation was forcibly extracted by Army Chief Ashfaq Kayani who kept him “under a brief, forced detention”. She says that this was never reported publicly. (I had reviewed Hein Kiessling’s book on the ISI, Faith, Unity, Discipline

Ayesha Siddiqa. Credit: Wikimedia Commons

The army is careful to avoid the kind coup attempt that took place in Turkey due to general discontent among the officer cadre which was brewing under Musharraf’s rule. Musharraf’s pro-India stance on Kashmir was resented by middle-level officers who firmly believe that “opposing India is not just a policy but is the country’s and the military’s raison d’etre”. She quotes Riaz Khokhar that Musharraf’s three-star generals did not support him on his Kashmir policy. The author hints that the lawyers’ agitation was contrived by the military to ease Musharraf out of power.


By 2016, the Milbus in Pakistan “seemed unstoppable” since the army was perceived as the only credible national institution for guarding national security, fighting terrorism and intervening domestically to be a “counterweight to the corrupt, unaccountable and inefficient image of the political class”. This has boosted the army’s media image. This was also because “all political, religious and ethnic parties have over the years developed a dependency on the military”.

Now, let discuss this subject in details.

Military incorporated....ha ha ha ...

No we will discuss that here since topic starter needs to look into his own house first before pointing others.

Good question.

 

[VCheng]

“I ask you, the army and everyone else this: Which country’s army operates housing schemes?”

Q: Which country’s army operates housing schemes?

A: Pakistan's does. And will.

Now let's all move along, nothing to see here, folks.

 

[GHALIB]

Q: Which country’s army operates housing schemes?

A: Pakistan's does. And will.

Now let's all move along, nothing to see here, folks.

No choice except move along .

 

[Lincoln]

Raw and army is doing it's job , not building housing projects to be sold later for profit.

You are in for a huge disappointment. Your Indian Army operates and runs numerous golf courses and clubs, and it's increasing, although denied a stake in land and housing schemes. Look it up. : )

No choice except move along .

Malaysian army also runs housing schemes. So does Sri Lankan Army, so does Bangladesh Army, Indian Army also attempted same. Enjoy.

 

[Hellfire]

You are in for a huge disappointment. Your Indian Army operates and runs numerous golf courses and clubs, and it's increasing, although denied a stake in land and housing schemes. Look it up

Factually incorrect claims by you.

1. Golf courses and Clubs are on defence land held under DEO. The Golf courses remain on land earmarked for training and training is held there, irrespective of whatever be the state of maintenance. Even Delhi's Army Golf Course, for example, is training land of Rajputana Rifles Regimental Center.

2. Clubs include civilian clubs where due to merging of civil population in adjoining areas of Cantonment, civillians pre-dominate by taking Defence Land on lease and some memberships are extended to Defence Personnel who are 'Mess Members' eg Secunderabad Club in Secunderabad Cantonment.

3. Land is being given by Defence Forces for infrastructure building, and not curtailing it, by taking it over.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...efence-land-proposed/articleshow/57786104.cms

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...part-by-srdp-flyover/articleshow/59839251.cms

 

[Tps43]

Q: Which country’s army operates housing schemes?

A: Pakistan's does. And will.

Now let's all move along, nothing to see here, folks.

Malaysia as well