By Darwaish
As expected, the Military Government of Pakistan has finally lost its patience and the live coverage of CJ’s bar addresses and live talk shows have been banned from today.
This means there is every chance that we won’t be able to see Live with Talat Hussain or Hamid Mir’s Capital Talk and possibly Dr. Shahid Masood’s Mere Mutabiq for sometime at least. Some of the less dangerous programmes like Aaj Kamran Khan Ke Saath may survive in my view. Meanwhile, in related news, Karachi journalists are now recieving threatening letters with bullets in them.
Our beloved Information Minister Mr. Ghalat Biyani held a press conference today and warned media. He said that government is talking to TV channels and either they trying to convince them to impose a self-censorship which is basically say nothing against Pakistan Army and national security institutions and No Live Coverage of CJ. We will find out exactly what happens in next few days and how far owners of electronic media channels can resist. Those of you following CJ’s Abotabad District Bar visit today must have noticed a sudden change in electronic media coverage, a partial blackout. We are only seeing repetition of recorded clips on all the channels. PEMRA has issued strict orders to all channels NOT to broadcast CJ’s speech today. ARY ‘s transmission has already been banned in Islamabad and Rawalpindi since yesterday mainly because of anti army slogans during Ayaz Amir’s show in Islamabad last week. Talat Hussain also hinted last night that there is a possibility that viewers won’t see him on Aaj TV in coming weeks.
Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists has vowed to challenge this move in highest courts and a petition will be filed on Monday. This step was expected after yesterday’s Corps Commanders Conference which apparently taken strict notice of an organized campaign against National Security Institutions by a minority. Lahore High Court Bar has slammed this move by government. According to Daily Times:
The LHCBA on Friday denounced the government for taking steps to ban the live coverage of the lawyers’ movement. LHCBA representatives said in a joint statement that Information and Broadcasting minister Muhammad Ali Durrani’s statement about changing the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority rules were against the independence of the media. LHCBA president Ahsen Bhoon said a free media was essential for the development of a country. He said, “The military government wants to use the media for its ulterior motives.� He said the lawyers’ movement would continue till the end of the military government. LHCBA secretary Sarfaraz Cheema condemned the Sindh chief minister for allegedly accusing the lawyers for taking foreign grants for the movement against the government.
This whole thing has been triggered after heated speeches and slogans against Pakistan Army during last week’s seminar in Supreme Court Auditorium. Personally, I think some of the speeches and slogans were not at all appropriate and should have been avoided. One can argue about the role of military in politics since 1954 and the corruption that exists at the highest levels. But we should not blame the entire institution that includes ordinary army jawans and junior officers who have nothing to do with politics and who perform their duties in extremely tough conditions so that we can feel secure from internal and external threats.
Its the junior officers and soldiers who die for us in the battle fields and they deserve highest regard. Having said that, it should be clear to our respected generals that since top military leadership is ruling this country (there is hardly a civilian institution that is not headed by a Brigadier Saab these days) and involved in all kinds of politics (who can deny the ugly role of ISI in politics?) therefore they should also learn to take criticism like politicians do.
The days of Muqadas Gaye treatment are over. A conclusion should be made whether Pakistan is supposed to be a social welfare state for people of Pakistan or a National Security State for an institution. And what is this National Security anyways? Have we ever defined it? Once a question was put by a PPP MNA in national assembly asking if army officers declare their assets annually and file their returns like average Pakistani and they got official answer that this question cannot be answered since it is a National Security issue.
While all this is happening, its ironic that parliament and elected members are nowhere to be seen in any major decision making. Chaudhary Shujaat came up with an immature remark that all the lawyers who are talking against military should be shot (goli maar deni chahiye).
Is he not provoking violence?
I hope that common sense prevails before things get out of hands and Pakistan Army gets out of politics and they get back to their real duties. The last thing any sensible person wants is an increase in hatred against the military in ordinary people and possibly a violent clash.
One shouldn’t forget the example of what happened in Argentina and that will be disastrous and a great tragedy for people of Pakistan.
No we didnt deliberately or otherwise overlook it Mr Tarar
Omar Q:
great editorial. imo, another question that the Musharraf dictatorship must answer is who is behind the assassination of Hammad Raza. I wonder if you deliberately excluded that or if you just overlooked it?
[quote]Lets first clean ourselves before throwing stones in glass houses.[/quote]
Old excuse for the failure in providing basic rights to its citizens. Its just a technique of ruling class to continue their luxury life style.
45 years ago the per capita income of South Korea was USD 2.00 less than Pakistans. Two for nearly a quarter century South Korea was ruled by a MILITARY regime and see where they are now. Today South Koreas per capita income is approx. USD 12000.00 and us Pakistanis USD 850.00,thats almost 15 times more than us. Till we Pakistanis do not get ourselves educated, be tolerent, disciplined and improve upon our social behaviour we do not deserve freedom and democracy the way we expect it. Singapore even today does not allow their citizen to chew chewing gums, eat betel nut leaf or tobacco in public, spit on roads and in public places, construct a residential property without the police department’s verification, impose heavy fines for breaking traffic rules, banned racial or religious hatredness against any class etc. Now compare us Pakistanis with them. My question, do we deserve the freedom and democracy? We first need to improve upon ourselves before expecting or talking against our Government.
Lets first clean ourselves before throwing stones in glass houses.
Editorial, The News, June 3, 2007
Censorship and the judicial crisis
The only way forward out of the current crisis emanating from the suspension of the Chief Justice of Pakistan is for the government to withdraw its reference. If it cannot bring itself to do that then it needs to engage in a dialogue with the opposition, and President Musharraf needs to choose either the army chief post or stand for re-election as a civilian candidate. The way forward is not by imposing censorship on the print and electronic media, which seems to be the new government’s tactic for now. Not only are the threats and warnings to the media that it must fall in line and keep the ‘national interest’ paramount going to not work in this day and age, they will be thoroughly counter-productive and only exacerbate an already tense situation. The reason for the clampdown on the print and electronic media clearly has to do with the thinking in the circles that matter in this country that the whole crisis has been blown out of proportion by the media and hence it will be deflated once the media, especially the TV channels, are brought under the censorship leash.
But the questions that need to be asked of the government are the following: Who was it that made the Chief Justice of Pakistan non-functional? What was the manner in which this action against him was taken and a presidential reference filed? Even if the charge that he was fond of extra protocol or that he asked for favours for his son is true then isn’t that also the case with many senior state functionaries? Furthermore, who carried out the attack on the office of Geo TV and this newspaper in Islamabad? Who threatened a journalist of this newspaper on a Voice of America radio show and then proceeded to deny it, only to eat his words when a recording of the show’s transcript was aired on Geo TV? What was the motive for the arrest and continued incarceration of former Mirpurkhas DIG, Saleemullah Khan, and for putting him in a prison where his life, as claimed by him, could have come under threat? And if the affidavit of the chief justice is to be believed, who confronted him on March 9 at the president’s camp office and tried to impress on him to quit his post? Who stood by and idly watched as over 40 people lost their lives in Karachi on May 12, did nothing as the offices of a TV channel came under attack by armed men for several hours on May 12 and then proceeded to hold a ‘National Unity’ rally the same evening in Islamabad, where PTV showed participants doing the bhangra and having a generally fun time? Who prevented the chief justice from leaving the premises of Karachi’s airport? Who made uncharitable remarks against judges of the Sindh High Court after the court took suo motu notice of the tragic events of May 12? Who cancelled the book launch of Ayesha Siddiqa’s Military Inc, in the process ensuring that it becomes a best-seller? Who prevented Imran Khan from entering Sindh and confined him to Lahore for three days (also in the process making him a hero to some)? Who included the names of 12 prominent journalists on a list calling them enemies of the people and placed bullets in envelopes in the cars of three of the 12?
There are many more questions but these are some of the more pressing ones that come to mind. Surely, it wasn’t the print or the electronic media that did all these things. As has been pointed out several times in the recent past – and not just by this newspaper but by pretty much the whole print and electronic media – the media is a mirror and reflects reality. If it takes sides or begins to show a one-sided version of events as they unfold then it should be held accountable and that will be reflected via the erosion of its credibility (a la PTV). Also, if for the sake of argument, it is accepted that the media is presenting an unbalanced anti-government version then what about coverage in the international media and what of perception on the street against the government’s policies and actions, especially post-March 9?
By pursuing such a policy, the president risks alienating (a whole lot of them have already been alienated after March 9 and then May 12) those who still see him as someone who can take on the extremists and deliver the country on a progressive and liberal path. Of course, many of these people will now be questioning the glaring dichotomy in the government’s readiness to take on the media but unwillingness to take on extremist vigilantes such as those in Lal Masjid and Jamia Hafsa, who continue to hold parts of the federal capital hostage (and as of June 1 tried to create a law and order situation at PIMS). Censoring the media will make an already bad situation worse and is advice that the government should do without. It is bad for its image domestically as well as overseas but more importantly, it will not bring any kind of advantage to its side.
For instance, it is quite unlikely that the number of people turning out to receive the chief justice will dwindle in the coming weeks merely because the TV channels are not carrying the rallies and demonstrations live, just like the ban on Military Inc’s launch only served to increase its demand among readers. Also, in this day and age there are several ways to counter this live ban (one assumes that those behind the censorship policy are not aware of the fact that blogs have come of age in Pakistan as have websites like YouTube as so on, where such raw footage can be shown). Those who hold the reins of power need to ask themselves what it is that has brought things to this pass. Does the fact that the president of the country also happens to be army chief have something to do with the criticism that is being laid at that institution’s doorstep? Of course politicians have themselves to blame by covertly and sometimes overtly courting the army and asking it to step in but that doesn’t absolve the latter of blame in outreaching its mandate. Surely, if the president of the country were a civilian, or if the corporate and business interests of the military’s various welfare foundations not so expansive, the armed forces would have been spared much of the criticism. In the current situation regarding the action taken against the Chief Justice of Pakistan, it is only to be expected that people will ask whether the president’s being also army chief played a decisive role in the unfolding of events.
The only way forward is to treat the cause of the crisis, not the symptoms (which is being done by what seems to be the beginning of a media clampdown). Such actions, may in the eyes of some, seem as if the government is trying to show to the country and the world at large that it is in charge, but it ends up giving the opposite impression – i.e., that it is now panicking. The government would be advised to either withdraw the reference or come to some sort of compromise with the opposition parties on the president taking a final decision on presenting himself as a civilian candidate.