Aboard The Democracy Train

Seventy years ago today, Mohammad Ali Jinnah took to the floor of the Constituent Assembly as its first elected president and delivered the iconic lines, “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the state.”

He added: “We are starting in the days where there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one state.”

Seventy years later, Mr Jinnah’s founding vision and direction for the country have yet to be realised. Indeed, an argument can be made that this nation has drifted further than ever from the one that he had envisioned. The founding father had warned that the “first duty of a government is to maintain law and order, so that the life, property and religious beliefs of its subjects are fully protected by the state”, but society itself has fallen prey to extremism and an infrastructure of hate.

Most worryingly, Mr Jinnah’s vision of a secular, constitutional democratic state focused on the welfare and material good of its people has itself fallen victim to hate and distortion. The very word ‘secular’ is considered taboo by large sections of the polity. Democracy, too, is yet to be meaningfully accepted, with elected governments always vulnerable to undemocratic pressure and attack.

What would Mr Jinnah make of the sight of yet another ousted elected prime minister travelling down the fabled GT Road as political uncertainty and turmoil swirl across the political landscape again? Surely, as Mr Jinnah exhorted in his Aug 11 speech, some of the responsibility for the upheaval and drift from the country’s founding ideals lies with the political class too.

Bribery and corruption, black-marketing, nepotism and jobbery — all ills that Mr Jinnah identified as fundamental impediments to a democratic, fair and just society fall in the domain of civilian control. The failure to address fundamental social inequalities is nearly at par with the crimes against democracy the country has suffered. It may take several more decades before a Pakistan more in line with Mr Jinnah’s aspirations can be established.

Published in Dawn, August 11th, 2017

Pakistan’s ousted Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on Tuesday insisted that his removal from office did not mean his future in politics was over, as he plans to go head with a rally this week and fight a legal battle to reverse his disqualification.

“I don’t want reinstatement for myself. I am struggling to ensure the rule of law in Pakistan,” he said in a meeting with a select group of journalists in Islamabad.

Sharif said his legal experts will soon file a review petition against the July 28 Supreme Court order that ousted him from power for concealing assets — specifically, that his son’s Dubai-based company listed a monthly salary for him. Sharif has repeatedly said he never received any of that money.

He said that he was determined to travel the following day to his powerbase, the eastern of city of Lahore, despite a deadly bombing there Monday which killed one person and wounded 30 others.

“I am going to my home. Do I not have a right to go to my home?” asked Sharif.

According to Malik Mohammad, a spokesman in Punjab where Lahore is the provincial capital, security arrangements for Sharif’s rally have finalized.

Ahmed said police were still investigating who was behind the Monday bombing.

Sharif said he wanted to start a debate, in parliament and public, to discuss why no elected prime minister has complete their full term in Pakistan, which has been ruled by army generals for more than half of its 70-year history.

When asked whether the army had influenced the judiciary against him, Sharif said “let’s leave this question for later.”

Sharif has a history of rocky relations with the military, and he was cautious about commenting on the sensitive issue of civil-military relations. He insisted he was a victim of a conspiracy, but he avoided a direct answer when asked who conspired against him.

“You will know the answers to these questions soon,” he said.

Sharif’s removal plunged Pakistan into political turmoil but parliament in less than a week elected senior lawmaker Shahid Khaqan Abbasi as the country’s new prime minister. Sharif’s party initially wanted Abbasi to serve as an interim premier for 45 days until Sharif’s younger brother, Shahbaz Sharif, the chief minister of Punjab, secures a national assembly seat in a by-election.

On Tuesday, Sharif said his party won’t replace Abbasi with his brother, but that decision has yet to be finalized.

Sharif did not say who will now lead his ruling Pakistan Muslim League party as last month’s court decision also barred him from participating in politics.

He said he was first removed by a president in 1993, then military dictator Pervez Musharraf toppled his government in 1999 and “now the judiciary has sent me home.”

“Does Pakistan’s elected prime minister deserve to be removed in such an insulting manner?” he asked.
He reiterated that neither he and nor any of his family members were involved in corruption.

Sharif criticized the investigators in the probe against him and his family, saying “our worst opponents were part of the JIT (Joint Investigation Team)” which was appointed by the Supreme Court earlier this year.
Sharif insisted that a larger panel in the court should hear his review petition.

He vowed to launch a mass campaign to apprise his countrymen of the work he did to put the country “back on path of progress and prosperity.”

“God willing, I will remain active. I will keep guiding my party,” he said.

Meanwhile, in another challenge to the ruling Pakistan Muslim League party, firebrand opposition cleric Tahir-ul-Qadri returned home after mostly living abroad amid pending court-cases against him in Pakistan. He has vowed to get justice for eight of his supporters killed in anti-government rallies in 2014.

Qadri, the fiery cleric, said Tuesday that he will launch a new anti-government campaign and praised the Supreme Court for disqualifying Sharif.

Pakistan’s ousted Sharif vows to remain active in politics
“Nawaz Sharif lost power because of the curses of those who lost their dear ones” in the 2014 shootouts with police, the cleric said.
———
Associated Press Writer Zaheer Babar in Lahore, Pakistan, contributed to this story.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, a politician educated in the United States, was elected prime minister of Pakistan on Tuesday. Parliament held a special election to replace his predecessor and mentor, who was disqualified on corruption charges.

Here is what you need to know about Pakistan’s new leader.
A Staunch Loyalist

A steadfast ally of three-time Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Mr. Abbasi, 58, was named interim prime minister last week after the Supreme Court disqualified Mr. Sharif from office and he was forced to resign.

Mr. Abbasi has gone to prison for his political patron. He spent two years behind bars after a 1999 coup, in which Mr. Sharif was overthrown by Gen. Pervez Musharraf. Mr. Abbasi at the time was pressured by the military to testify against Mr. Sharif, but he refused and was jailed. He was later acquitted.

That loyalty to Mr. Sharif was later repaid with a high-profile cabinet position when the ousted leader returned to power in 2013. It is assumed that Mr. Abbasi is holding the office until Mr. Sharif’s brother Shehbaz Sharif, the chief minister of Punjab Province, wins a seat in Parliament in a coming by-election and can become prime minister.

A Long Career
Mr. Abbasi is a member of the governing party, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz. He has been elected to Parliament six times, losing an election only once.

After losing his first and only election in 2002, Mr. Abbasi founded Airblue Limited, a budget carrier. After being elected to Parliament in 2008, he was named commerce minister, and he was appointed minister of petroleum and natural resources in 2013. He held that position until last week, when Mr. Sharif’s cabinet was disbanded by the Supreme Court.

An American Education
Mr. Abbasi comes from a wealthy and well-connected political family. His father was a member of Parliament and a commodore in the Pakistani Air Force. His father-in-law was director general of the powerful military intelligence agency, the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence.

An electrical engineer by training, he received a bachelor’s degree from the University of California, Los Angeles, and a master’s from George Washington University in Washington.

People who know him, including businessmen who have dealt with him, say he is highly intelligent and has a sharp sense of humor. In addition to his holdings in Airblue, he is said to own property in his hometown, Muree, and a restaurant business, making him one of Parliament’s richest members, according to the local news media.

OUT of necessary respect for the Supreme Court and abundant caution in a matter where a hasty or premature assessment could trigger controversy, the initial response by sensible and responsible quarters to the Panama Papers judgement was to emphasise the need for immediate political and legal acceptance of the court’s orders.
Now that the short but final judgement has been analysed by the legal community, the political class and the citizenry in detail, the implications of it for politics in Pakistan need to be forthrightly addressed.

The consensus in expert and independent circles is twofold and clear: Nawaz Sharif has been stripped of the prime ministership on troublingly narrow legal grounds and the judgement has the undesirable potential to upend the democratic process in the country.

In the circumstances, Chief Justice Saqib Nisar ought to consider, following an appropriate petition, convening the full court to review the five-member bench’s final judgement in the Panama Papers case.

If the democratic project is to be sustained and strengthened, the rules of the system must be clear, fair and transparent. It had been hoped that the Supreme Court would deliver a well-argued and well-reasoned judgement that would create a desirable and easily implementable legal precedent. Instead, the one that now holds sway in the application of disqualification criteria for elected officials is staggeringly wide and could become the source of chaos in the parliamentary realm.

This newspaper called for Mr Sharif’s temporary resignation after the JIT report was submitted to the Supreme Court and has consistently argued that Mr Sharif and his family submit to accountability first in the Panama Papers matter. But Mr Sharif, both as a citizen and as the legitimately elected prime minister, had a justifiable expectation of fair and proportionate justice. That does not appear to be the case in the five-member bench’s final judgement and it has profound consequences for the future of the office of the prime minister and of parliament itself.

The Supreme Court itself can determine the scope of the review, but some of the questions that ought to be addressed are clear. Is, for example, the definition of receivables given in the judgement the only interpretation allowed under the law? What is the scope of Article 62(1)(f) and has it been properly determined by the bench? What constitutes a misdeclaration in a candidate’s nomination forms that can trigger disqualification?

Following Friday’s judgement it is not unreasonable to suggest that all parliamentarians face at least some uncertainty about their legitimate qualifications to hold public office. Whatever the legitimate concerns about many parliamentarians’ lack of financial disclosure, a situation in which one hundred per cent of elected representatives are vulnerable to disqualification is surely too destabilising a situation for a democratic order.

The full Supreme Court must urgently step in and provide some necessary clarity.

Published in Dawn, July 30th, 2017