Archive for the 'Guest Post' Category

The Post Mortem: Never Say Die

Understanding Pakistan Project Team October 7th, 2007

Guest Post: By Ayaz Amir

Published in Dawn.com (October 5, 2007) 

“Be patient now, my soul; thou hast endured much worse than this.” –– Odysseus

UNTIL now I never truly grasped the meaning of the Lawrence College motto, ‘Never give in’. When the sky is bright and the heavens are smiling these words mean nothing. They mean something when one is down and out, flattened by circumstances, the last shreds of hope leaving one’s heart.

Then to be able to hold up one’s head and look into the distance with firm eyes is the true test of manliness (or womanliness for that matter). Our circumstances are not promising. Indeed, the entire nation seems depressed. Abandoned to fools and knaves, sold to the United States and therefore not our own masters.

But other countries have undergone much worse. If Vietnam be too distant a memory, there are countries in Africa which have suffered genocide. Afghanistan next door has been destroyed by decades of strife and war. In Iraq hundreds of thousands have died since the American invasion. Millions have been uprooted from their homes. Truly, few hells are worse than those paved with American good intentions.

The Yanks mean well by us too. God help us. About the next army chief, Gen Kiani, it is being said that the Yanks are quite happy to work with him. What a certificate of commendation. Our problem, or at least one of our problems, is the Yank connection. And here we are putting new buckles on it and giving it a fresh coat of paint.

Anyway, what if the high hopes of this just-gone-by summer of discontent appear to have been dashed to the ground? What if the corridors of power remain packed with the same self-serving circus performers? What if the changes armchair revolutionists dreamed of have not come to pass? Progress has still been made and anyone who says we are where we were has not got the measure of things.

The citadels of power stand shaken by the events of this spring and summer. The army has felt the heat too, some of its confidence ebbing away. Is the chastening of authority, never before challenged in this manner, a small achievement?

Continue Reading »

The Post Mortem: The Failing Experiment

Understanding Pakistan Project Team October 7th, 2007

Guest Post By: Ardreshar Cowasjee

Published in DAWN, Oct. 7, 2007

SOME 59-odd years ago, Mussalman leader Abul Kalam Azad, a genuine true maulana, a profoundly educated man, who habitually and openly imbibed of that God-given fine malt drink and made no bones about it, was heard to murmur one balmy evening, `Ummmm, but we must not forget that India is a country whereas Pakistan is an experiment.’

It is truly amazing, and we must thank the Almighty and also founder-maker Mohammad Ali Jinnah, that despite the best efforts of all who have ruled over the past 60 tumultuous years, the experiment, though a failure, still exists in some sort of retarded embryonic form.

President General Pervez Musharraf, whilst discoursing last week before an audience assembled to hear him elaborate on Erra how successfully (truly) Pakistan dealt with the 2005 earthquake, sent out a message to the members of Pakistan’s civil society who tend to criticise and to moan and groan about the country’s lot, that they should not be pessimists, that they should not despair and not spread despondency. As exhorted friend Pundit Ayaz Amir wrote in this space last Friday — `Never say die.’

We must at least congratulate ourselves that we are better than many other lands of our ilk — we at least do not eat each other, we may kill and maim but we stop there. Our president merely tried to humiliate his Chief Justice and has ended up ruing the day. In some countries in the Third World chief justices are often last seen or heard of when the president or king is having his breakfast. After that, they simply disappear.

Much praise must be rendered to Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry who very correctly has desisted from presiding over the benches adjudging the petitions involving the president and his legitimacy to stand for re-election. And more praise to him for having his priorities right — he is worried about the fate of the `disappeared’, the missing citizens of Pakistan casually picked up and either hidden away or killed by our fearsome `agencies’. More power to his elbow!

Continue Reading »

Presidential Elections Special: Not Motivated by Politics

Understanding Pakistan Project Team October 2nd, 2007

Guest Post By: Advocate Muneer A. Malik

[Editor’s Note: This article was written by Mr. Muneer A. Malik in the heydays of the Presidential Reference against CJP. Its context, therefore, is different from the current Presidential Elections. However, given the fact that the Lawyers’ Movement has now extended to the Presidential Election, some of the arguments here are worth revisiting, especially, that there is nothing political or–depending upon how you see it–everything political about this movement. Mr. Malik basically argues, and rightly so, that the country’s politics and the fate of its Constitution are too precious to be left for others to decide and that everyone of us “has a dog in this fight”…]
THE reference against the Chief Justice has placed government spokesmen in a tricky spot. Early on, they realised that a direct attack against the Chief Justice would be imprudent. It would contradict their stated position that the president had simply put certain material about the Chief Justice before the Supreme Judicial Council for assessment and determination, and that the government was entirely neutral in the matter. How then would the government go on the offensive?

It was Information Minister Muhammad Ali Durrani, that fearless defender of downtrodden dictatorships, who arrived at an ingenious solution. Why not target the lawyers instead? After all, the whole fuss had been created by the bar associations (albeit fuelled by the media). If the legal community could somehow be discredited, the media would lose interest and the opposition parties would get distracted by other issues.

Unfortunately, the resultant government-generated propaganda aimed at discrediting the legal community has been blindly adopted by some in the ostensibly independent media. Even reputed columnists of this paper have chosen to attack the acts of the protesting advocates rather than the cause of these protests.

While devoting all its energy to the single-minded defence of the Chief Justice, the legal community neglected to explain its own actions to the public and left itself open to attack. This article aims at remedying that failure.

The first charge against the bar associations is that they have unduly politicised an issue that should, more properly, be a subject of pure constitutional and judicial debate. Let there be no doubt on this score; our struggle is political to the core.Our struggle is about the independence of the judiciary and the preservation of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. These are not arcane legal issues to be dryly debated in closed courtrooms. They are issues that affect the lives of every single Pakistani.

Continue Reading »

Presidential Elections Special: Prospects of a Free and Fair Elections - PILDAT

Understanding Pakistan Project Team October 2nd, 2007

Guest Post By: Pakistan Institute of Legislative Democracy and Transparency (PILDAT)

Starting with this first issue, PILDAT will circulate a weekly, and if required, more frequent Election Monitor to update the Citizens of Pakistan, Media and International Community about the Presidential and General Elections in Pakistan. The Issue 1 of the Election Monitor is devoted to assessing the prospects of the upcoming Presidential Election as a free and fair exercise. This issue of Election Monitor tries to explore the answer to the crucial question. What are the prospects for this crucial Presidential election to be free and fair? Following are some of the indicators which may shed some light on what kind of Presidential Election one may expect on October 6, 2007.

Generally Presidential Election is not of critical importance in a Parliamentary Democracy – the system Pakistan espouses at least on paper. But given the special nature of the current political context and the explicit association of the incumbent President / Chief of Army Staff to the current ruling coalition, the upcoming Presidential election holds the key to the coming General Election. The outcome of the Presidential Election will, to a large measure, determine the result of the General Election – which can be held latest by February 2008. The election of Gen. Pervez Musharraf for a new 5-year term as President will send a clear message to the general electorate that in a patronage-based society like Pakistan, only a pro-Musharraf parliamentarian will have any chance to serve his/her electors while others in the opposition will not be able to ensure development, jobs, protection from state high-handedness, etc., for their constituents. That explains the unique significance of this Presidential Election in Pakistan which is scheduled for October 6, 2007 and this also explains why there were persistent suggestions to hold General Election ahead of Presidential Election.

[With that, here are some of the reasons why the upcoming Presidential Elections may or may not be “free and fair” as is necessary for a genuine transition from military to civilian rule…]

1.  Media is Generally Free and Vibrant: Both electronic and print media are generally free, vibrant and, at times, extremely critical of the Government. Despite reports that the Government resorts to behind-the-scene strong-arm tactics to pressurise owners, publishers, editors and reporters, the political debate in the media is generally open and apparently unrestrained.

Continue Reading »

Wardi Special: The Presidential Election - An Appraisal

Understanding Pakistan Project Team September 23rd, 2007

Guest Post By: Justice (Retd.) Wajihuddin Ahmad

MUCH has been said and more is likely to be said about the implications and connotations of the constitutional provisions germane to the forthcoming presidential election. The purpose here is to highlight cognate aspects here.

The official version on the subject is simple. They say that, in accordance with Article 41(7) of the Constitution, the presidential term, upon relinquishment of the office of the chief executive by the present incumbent, began on November 16, 2002, and would end on November 15, 2007. Article 41(7), as substituted by the Legal Framework Order, 2002 (LFO), with its proviso inserted by the Constitution (Seventeenth Amendment) act, is as reproduced below:

“(7) The Chief Executive of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan

(a) shall relinquish the office of Chief Executive on such day as he may determine in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan of 12th May, 2000; and

(b) having received the democratic mandate to serve the nation as President of Pakistan for a period of five years shall, on relinquishing the office of the Chief Executive, notwithstanding anything contained in this Article or Article 43 or any other provision of the Constitution or any other law for the time being in force, assume the office of President of Pakistan forthwith and shall hold office for a term of five years under the Constitution, and Article 44 and other provisions of the Constitution shall apply accordingly:

Provided that Paragraph (d) of clause (1) of Article 63 shall become operative on and from the 31st day of December, 2003.”

These being the parameters of the current presidential term, the proponents of the official point of view rely on Article 41(4) of the Constitution to suggest that the ensuing presidential election having been postulated by the Constitution to be held not earlier than 60 days but not later than 30 days before the expiration of the term of the president in office, must take place within the narrow corridor of September 15, 2007, and October 15, 2007. Article 41(4) of the Constitution (continuing unchanged since the inception of the Constitution in 1973) is this:

“(4)Election to the office of President shall be held not earlier than sixty days and not later than thirty days before the expiration of the term of the President in office:

Provided that, if the election cannot be held within the period aforesaid because the National Assembly is dissolved, it shall be held within thirty days of the general election to the Assembly.”

Continue Reading »

Wardi Special: Ineligibility of the Incumbent

Understanding Pakistan Project Team September 23rd, 2007

Guest Post By: Salman Akram Raja

THE question of General Musharraf’s eligibility or otherwise for re-election as president in uniform will depend critically on the interpretation of Article 43 of the Constitution that is ultimately adopted by the Supreme Court. Article 43 states that “the president shall not hold any office of profit in the service of Pakistan.” It is settled law that candidates for election must be free from conditions that render them ineligible on the date of filing of nomination papers.

Can Article 43 be read as imposing a pre-election ineligibility condition or does it apply only after a person has been elected as president, requiring him to relinquish an office of profit held by him at the time of his election? In answering these questions, the overall scheme of the Constitution must be considered.

Article 41(2) states that a person shall not be qualified for election as president unless he is qualified to be elected as member of the National Assembly. Qualifications for election as member of the National Assembly are given in Article 62 while applicable disqualifications are listed in Article 63. For a person to be elected as member of the National Assembly he must fulfil the qualifications of Article 62 and be free of the disqualifications of Article 63.

On this basis it can be reasonably argued that a person may not be elected president unless he is both qualified in terms of Article 62 and not disqualified in terms of Article 63. Article 63(1)(d), if read with Article 41(2), disqualifies any person from being elected the president of the country if “he holds an office of profit in the service of Pakistan other than an office declared by law not to disqualify its holder.”

Since Article 63(1)(d) would, if applicable to the president’s election, disqualify a person holding an office of profit from being a candidate the possibility of a person becoming president-elect while holding such an office would stand obviated.If this interpretation is accepted then pre-election candidature requirements stand entirely determined by Articles 62 and 63 while the role of Article 43 in the constitutional scheme is narrowed down to a specification of post-election restrictions applicable to the office of the president.

This, however, is not the interpretation accepted by the superior courts of Pakistan.

Continue Reading »

1965 Indo-Pak War - A General’s Perspective

Understanding Pakistan Project Team September 16th, 2007

Guest Post By: Brig (Retd.) Shaukat Qadir 

Part 1: Operation Gibraltar: Battle that never was

pk15-shaukatqadir.jpgUnfortunately most of our history, particularly that relating to the conduct of military operations, remains shrouded in mystery, since none of the actual details is made public. Consequently, even those like myself who possess some knowledge of the actual events need to piece these together with educated speculations to fill in the gaps. Today, 40 years after this war, the true story remains untold.

Within the military an effort has been made to detail and analyse the actual events, but even these efforts might not be the whole truth, nor have they been made public. Therefore, those who choose to read this version with skepticism might be more sensible than those who consider this an accurate version, but I will attempt to relate the events as I am aware of them. If these read like a comedy of errors, I can only suggest that occasionally truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

Early the same year Pakistan army had successfully defended itself against the Indian attempted incursion in the Rann of Kutch, but that chapter was closed since the dispute had been referred for arbitration. Why therefore should Pakistan embark on a venture that might lead to war remains an unanswered question to date, particularly when we were aware that such a venture in which we were considered the aggressor would result in the severance of aid from the US, which ultimately happened?

It is a matter of historical record that Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, then foreign minister, convinced Ayub Khan, the president, that the Indian response to our incursions in Kashmir would not be across the international boundary and would be confined to Kashmir.

He must have offered powerful diplomatic arguments as forcefully and articulately as he could, but despite that I find it difficult to comprehend how Ayub accepted such an argument which was militarily untenable and, while Ayub could be accused of many things, he was far from being militarily unwise.

Continue Reading »

National Geographic: Struggle for the Soul of Pakistan

Understanding Pakistan Project Team August 29th, 2007

Guest Post By: Don Belt (Published in National Geographic http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0709/pakistan/pakistan.html)
 
pk13-ft_hdr.jpgIf there is an address, an exact location for the rift tearing Pakistan apart, and possibly the world, it is a spot 17 miles (28 kilometers) west of Islamabad called the Margalla Pass. Here, at a limestone cliff in the middle of Pakistan, the mountainous west meets the Indus River Valley, and two ancient, and very different, civilizations collide. To the southeast, unfurled to the horizon, lie the fertile lowlands of the Indian subcontinent, realm of peasant farmers on steamy plots of land, bright with colors and the splash of serendipitous gods. To the west and north stretch the harsh, windswept mountains of Central Asia, land of herders and raiders on horseback, where man fears one God and takes no prisoners.

(Figure: This is the title graphic of the National Geographic Story linked to above)

This is also where two conflicting forms of Islam meet: the relatively relaxed and tolerant Islam of India, versus the rigid fundamentalism of the Afghan frontier. Beneath the surface of Pakistan, these opposing forces grind against each other like two vast geologic plates, rattling teacups from Lahore to London, Karachi to New York. The clash between moderates and extremists in Pakistan today reflects this rift, and can be seen as a microcosm for a larger struggle among Muslims everywhere. So when the earth trembles in Pakistan, the world pays attention.

Travel 8,000 miles (13,000 kilometers) across this troubled country, as I did recently, and it becomes obvious that, 60 years after its founding, Pakistan still occupies unsettled ground. Traumatized by multiple wars with India, a parade of military strongmen (including the current president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf), and infighting among ethnic groups—Punjabi, Sindhi, Baluchi, Pashtun—Pakistan’s 165 million people have never fully united as one nation, despite being 97 percent Muslim. To hold the country together, successive governments have spent billions on the military, creating a pampered and self-serving monolith of mostly Punjabi generals while neglecting the basic needs of the people, for justice, health, education, security, and hope. Lately, these grievances have spilled onto the streets, as lawyers and other opponents challenge Pakistan’s military government and demand a return to civilian, democratic rule. Meanwhile, six years after 9/11, the forces of Islamic radicalism are gaining strength and challenging Pakistan’s moderate majority for the soul of the country.

It’s not just the surging homegrown Taliban, which in one two-week period this year scorched and bloodied the streets of half a dozen cities with suicide bombs. Or the al Qaeda fighters who prowl the western mountains of Waziristan, butchering anyone suspected of being an American spy. Just as chilling are the “night letters” posted on public buildings, warning that all girls, upon threat of death, must wear head-to-toe burkas and stop attending school. Or, in a rising tide of intimidation, the murders of teachers and doctors and human rights workers accused of “crimes against Islam.” But perhaps the most telling evidence of all was my encounter with a 22-year-old woman named Umme Ayman, who seemed all too eager to die.

Continue Reading »

Next »