Adil Najam
UPDATE: The picture on the left, published in Daily Times, comes with the caption:
“Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri, PML-Q President Shujaat Hussain and MNAs react to an announcement by the Election Commissioner (unseen), at Parliament on Saturday. President Pervez Musharraf won a landslide victory in the election but the official results will be declared after the Supreme Court verdict on his eligibility.“
Maybe our readers can suggest what some of the people here are thinking as they clap. Suggestively, some, you will note, are making too much of an effort to clap, and others too little! The picture is also a good compliment to an earlier one we had posted here.
ORIGINAL POST: It is neither a surprise nor really news that Gen. Musharraf just got himself elected. It was always clear that he would get himself elected by hook or crook; eventually it took a bit of both. The way it had to be done is sad - pathetic really - and no one has come out of this mess looking good. Gen. Musharraf got the votes he needed, but neither he nor anyone else is a winner.
Gen. Musharraf lost whatever little credibility he might have had as someone interested in Pakistan’s development or people’s aspirations. He also lost the ability to make the claim that he was any different or any less p
ower-hungry than his political predecessors. He is now, clearly, one of them and has lost the one thing that had given him a support base. Benazir Bhutto lost the principles her party and father might once have stood for. PML(Q) had little to loose and yet lost big, they may even loose the government. Nawaz Sharif had already lost out some weeks ago. Maulana Fazlur Rehman had already lost all credibility but now they can’t even pretend to have any left. The Supreme Court lost at least some of the public goodwill they had gained as an institution with last minute shenanigans. America lost too because instead of backing one bad bet (Musharraf) they are now backing two (Musharraf + Benazir Bhutto).
But the biggest loser here may be the people of Pakistan who - once again - lost big time. But, then, I guess we are used to it.
Frankly, there is little need or point in commenting on the sham elections today. This was not a news event, this was a scripted stage drama. The real question remains what will happen next. There, it seems, that all of the losers - including Gen. Musharraf - may be confronted with some unexpected turn of events. There, one continues to hope, the people of Pakistan may yet emerge as winners eventually. Whenever ‘eventually’ comes!
Viqar Minai:
Anyway, answers to your questions:
1) While I don’t think every Pakistani is enjoying what I am enjoying (note that this is a physical impossibility :-)), I believe more Pakistanis are doing better now than they ever have before. Both as an absolute number AND as a percentage. I believe this will continue to improve if Musharraf stays on. Yes, I also believe that people in Karachi, Hyderabad and Peshawar are benefiting. I have spent a lot of time doing work in Karachi so I can speak to that directly.
2) That is a pointless rhetorical question and the answer is please look it up on a map and feel free to share your findings with the rest of the class.
3) My answer implies many things, but not all are the thrust of my argument. My answer also implies that I was alive when I typed, but that is neither here nor there. The main thrust of my post is that what is MOST important is the economic betterment of Pakistan. If the Chaudhrys are a necessary evil that results in the economic betterment of Pakistan and the betterment of our people, then so be it. I don’t want an uncompromising government that thinks it is “100% moral/100% true” and the end result for the people is misery. The Taliban were one government that was like that. I doubt you want to live in a country run by that sort of self-aggrandizing, holier than thou clique. Practicality is required in the affairs of men, and that is fine by me.
4) I am an ordinary citizen of Pakistan. The message this sends to an ordinary citizen of Pakistan is the following, “Don’t get caught up in political naraybaazi. Reject fake black coat valas. Don’t break khirkis. If Musharraf stays and an orderly transition happens, then the economy will improve as it has in the past and we will all be the better for it”.
Baree khushee huee aap say mil kay. Slamalaikum!
Social Mistri,
You have not answered my questions:
Is what you are enjoying in Lahore also being experienced by the common man in most other other cities in Pakistan, like Peshawar, Nawabshah, Larkana, Jacobadbad, Quetta, Hyderabad, even Karachi?
Does Pakistan consist only of Lahore, Faisalabad, Sialkot, and Pindi/Islamabad ?
Does your reasoning not imply that a huge amount of good can be done through all kinds of questionable means?
What message does this thinking send to the ordinary citizens of Pakistan?
Social Mistri,
The benefits you are highlighting are there definitely. But they are not because of Musharraf’s policies per se. They are because of dictatorship. Dictatorship has ensured stability which has resulted in this.
However, its not like Musharraf had started from scratch. A lot of spade work had already been done by earlier governments: poor as those governments may be in terms of reserves and funds, they kick started Gwadar, Motorway, underpasses and roads, privatization and liberalization of financial sector etc.
It was our U-turn in Afghanistan that brought in this development otherwise first two years of Mush are there where nothing moved.
By clinging to power by striking a deal with BB (the most corrupt of them all) and exonerating BB( like it was Mush’s money. the money belonged to people of Pakistan) and terrorists of MQM; you are living in la la land if you believe this stability is going to last. Why should I earn my income honestly? I should become an MQM extortionist or PPP jiala and then NRO will make all my ill gotten wealth white. Mush has ensured he is interested in nothing but elongating his rule.
By weakening the courts, taking extra judicial and extra constitutional steps, and striking deals with corrupt politicians he has not only struck an axe to his own legs but also weakened the foundations of Pakistan.
By the way, only those societies and economies are strong where there is JUSTICE. As long as the rulers of this country keep making judiciary weak, the stability is not going to last. By your wise crack remarks in Urdu, its obvious that you just attained puberty. Soon you will see the long term damage Mush’s policies have inflicted on the judiciary, on the civic institutions, on the population and on the future of this country.
If you are interested, read about French Revolution. You would be amazed at the similarities in Pakistan and that day France.
It can be agreed that it is not morals. Not legality.It is money.
The Washington Post on Sunday ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2007/10/06/AR2007100600240_2.html ) carries this:”Musharraf’s party threw a victory celebration in the capital Saturday night. About 1,500 people initially showed up, but after consuming all the available food within minutes, the crowd was soon down to just 300. Some of those in attendance said they had been paid 700 rupees apiece, or about $12, to stay and cheer their president’s victory.”
The NRO was needed by the person clapping in the middle as well as BB(read the comment: http://paktribune.com/speakout/comments.php?id=190 901&t=1&a=t )
There is no mention of Justice Falak Sher’s opinion (Musharraf not qualified to contest poll: Justice Falak
SAJID ZIA
LAHORE - Mr Justice Falak Sher as a member of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court which decided the dual office case on September 28 last, has declared General Pervez Musharraf not qualified to contest the upcoming presidential election for the reason, he is hit by Article 63 of the Constitution, read conjunctively with Article 41(2), for holding an office of profit in the service of Pakistan.
The learned judge who was on the majority side in the six to three verdict which dismissed the JI, PTI and others petitions on the ground of maintainability, has also held the President to Hold Another Office Act VII, of 2004, ultra vires the Constitution.
Justice Falak Sher while giving his opinion on the question of ‘maintainability’ and ‘eligibility’ through a separate note for the reason that case was also heard on merit has said that within the meaning of 41(2), a person aspiring to contest presidential election must have qualifications under Article 62 and at the same time be free from disqualifications provided under 63 of the Constitution. The learned Judge sent his opinion through this note from Lahore Registry to Islamabad on Wednesday.
Dilating upon the eligibility of General Pervez Musharraf to contest the presidential election, the learned judge said that same qualification and disqualification provisions would apply to him as to a member of the Assembly otherwise it would be an absolute absurdity to perceive that a person eclipsed by disqualifications is qualified to contest the election.
He did not agree with the argument presented at the bar by the respondent side that Article 62 is a self-contained provision, spelling out both qualifications and disqualifications of a Presidential candidate and held, that expression ‘qualified to be’ used in Article 41(2) makes Article 62 and 63 intertwined and interdependent thus aught to be read conjunctively. The contrary review would be paradoxical viz, despite visitation of the disqualifications that a member of the Assembly is to be disqualified but a presidential candidate remains immune from the same, he added.
The judge said the observations made in Qazi Hussain Ahmad case (year-2002) and Pakistan Lawyers Forum case (year-2005) were only passing in nature for the reason that relevant provisions and their scope were not dilated upon, as well as viewpoint expressed in Pir Sabir Ali case (year-1995) was not examined while hearing them.
Concluding that Article 63 of the Constitution is attracted with full vigour to a presidential candidate, he said, in view of Article 63(1)(d)(k), General Pervez Musharraf presently, for being in the service of Pakistan as Chief of the Army Staff and being a member of the Armed Force of Pakistan is ineligible to contest the election of the presidential office for he has not passed two years after retirement therefore, he is also hit by Article 43(1), 243 and 260 of the Constitution which debarred a person from the contest if he is holding an office of profit. The judge said that the Constitution ought to be read as an organic whole and mere pre-fixation of a ‘non-obstante’ clause could not be construed so widely as to eradicate even the specific provisions catering grundnorm of the Constitutional fabric.
As to immunity from challenging the election under Article 239(5) of the Constitution, he said it was incorporated through an amendment by General Ziaul Haq’s regime and the same could not travel beyond the fundamental structure of the Constitution. He said Article 243 of the Constitution envisaging control and command of the Armed Forces by the Federal Government which also include Chief of the Army Staff and it would be highly paradoxical that with the revival of the Constitution, COAS despite being subordinate to the Federal Government enjoys supra command of the same.
As to the President to Hold Another Office Act 2004, Justice Falak Sher said it seems to be overriding the Constitution status of the Armed Forces as defined in Article 260 of the Constitution and for it, remedy lies in amending the Constitution which cannot be achieved through a subordinate legislation. Furthermore, the president, as head of the state, has to also perform certain political functions that would be incongruous with the oath of the Army Chief as member of the Armed Forces set forth in the Third Schedule under Article 244.
The learned judges is of a considered opinion that General Pervez Musharraf is not qualified to contest the ensuing presidential election.
On the maintainability of the petitions, the judge said the petitions carry a question of public importance for assailing eligibility of the COAS to contest the presidential election thus falling in the ambience of enforcement of fundamental rights which highlight the situation when a person has been treated discriminatory in terms of Article 25 of the Constitution. The petitioners have questioned General Pervez Musharraf’s right to candidature without being in the run of the election.
The judge among other cases, referred to Benazir Bhutto case of 1988, Federation of Pakistan versus Muhammad Saifullah case, 1989 Muhammdad Nawaz Sharif 1998, decided also on the plain of Article 17 and held, these cases spelt out enforcement of fundamental right while the present ones in substance object to the candidature of a serving COAS which by no stretch of imagination could envisage enforcement of petitioners’ fundamental right without being contemporary contender in the race; especially when some of them had been instrumental in furnishing a foothold to the regime, conferring blanket umbrella through validation of 17th Amendment and Article 277-AA. Reasons whereof are not beyond comprehension in the light of the fact that they had the right and opportunity to pull out the carpet underneath the pedestal of power by repealing it in the event of being averse to the same.
Thus it renders the petitions not maintainable with a right to the petitioners to avail themselves of appropriate remedies. ), a twenty page document in most of the press. Even Western journalists ignored it. Why? Can any one provide this whole document?
The most expensive election campaign is still going on. It is to celebrate the 8 years (in the high tech age he has gone Binary) and all TV and press is full of advertisements ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2007/10/0 71006_expence_president_nj.shtml ).
So it is Money.
And students cannot get water without money. I showed this picture to a Minister and he said,”Why don’t they use bottles?”
There was a time in France, when the Queen said,”Why don’t they eat cake?” Are we nearing that phase?
SIALKOT - Sep 26: The students of Post-Graduate College for Women have to wait for their turn to get water.—Dawn
[Complete News] Go to Dawn pictures.
I have put another article “How General defeated CJ” on my blog. Please read.
pejamistri.wordpress.com
Viqar bhai, revolution mein saaro’n ka baira gharak ho ga. If you want a revolution in Pakistan, please see the short cinematic preview by looking for youtube videos on what happened in Lahore (mall road) when the danish cartoon incident happened. There is mindless and pointless violence that leads to no benefit for no one. Kyou’n ghareebo’n ko sheh detay hein.
Also, both Viqar saab and PatExpat bhaijan belittle the personal account I shared with them as if I am the only one who got a home loan in the last 5 years, who is working at a company that’s doing well, who is benefitting from the economic progress in the country. If NO ONE OTHER THAN ME IS BENEFITING FROM THESE THINGS, then where are the 10s of thousands of new cars coming from? Deewan Farooq ki income statement dekhain pichlay saal ki. Look at the ramp up in production. Are the super duper elite buying Santros? Who is buying 100,000 sub 1.5 ton ACs in Pakistan every year? PML-Q parliamentarians only? The Chaudhry family only? I don’t like the Chaudhries either, but package deal is a package deal. Musharraf is worth it. Look at how quickly new buildings are being occupied by SMALL BUSINESSES. Go visit the new Auriga center that was finished hardly a year ago. It is almost all occupied now with small shops. What isn’t occupied has been sold already.
Thora sa balance laien apnay criticism mein. I am not saying everything is perfect, but I am fedup of people being extremely negative, sitting abroad and watching TV, comfortably getting news from websites and then talking about what true democracy is and how there should be a revolution and blah blah. Saieen aap chahtay kya hein? Overnight the mess that we’ve been in for 5,000 years (YES, 5,000 years!!!), should suddenly go away? Itna to Allah mian kay nabi bhi nahien kar paatay. Instant fix hour kithay ja kay labbo, Rab aithay naien denda instant fix.
Since the day Pakistan has been created, people have been complaining how there are no viable white collar jobs for any graduate… so why study? only to get frustrated? Well, here I am a graduate with a good job. I am not alone. There are tens of thousands out there like me just employed in the IT industry, hundreds thousands more in the Telecom sector. These numbers were close to ZERO prior to the the Musharraf government. Please don’t belittle the facts that I have to share with you. You may want a Ganja Paapi Amir-ul-momineen type “democrat”, sanoo’n saadi naukri tay saada genrail ee changa!
It’s a long road to freedom,
D A7
A winding steep and high,
D
But if you walk in love
G
With the wind on your wing,
D
And cover the earth
G
With the songs you sing
D G D
The miles fly by
D G D
I walked one morning by the sea,
G A7 D
And all the waves reached out to me,
G A7 D
I took their tears, then let them be.
I walked one morning at the dawn,
When bits of night still lingered on,
I sought my star, but it was gone.
I walked one morning with a friend,
And prayed the day would never end,
The years have flown, so why pretend.
I walked one morning with my King,
And all my winters turned to spring,
YET EVERY MOMENT HELD ITS STING
Social Mistri,
On the face of it, your reasoning sounds quite persuasive. I do have two questions, though.
What you are enjoying in Lahore, in spite of not being Musharraf’s bhateeja, is that also being experienced by the common man in most other other cities in Pakistan? Say, Peshawar, Nawabshah, Larkana, Jacobadbad, Quetta, even Karachi? Or, do you beleive that Lahore, Faisalabad, Sialkot, and Pindi/Islamabad represent the entirety of Pakistan?
Also, does your reasoning not imply that a huge amount of good can be - in fact should be - done through all kinds of questionable means? What message does it send to the ordinary citizens of Pakistan who don’t make in a month what you can make in an hour?
Please don’t say to us:”trust me “you” do not want a revolution”. Say instead: :”trust me “I” do not want a revolution”.
Sleep well …