| January 26, 2002 | Saturday | Ziqa’ad 11, 1422 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
SIUT: welcome expansion
Death of a key witness
ONE must welcome President Musharraf’s reiteration of his pledge that the general election will be held in October as promised. Speaking at the Pakistan Human Development Conference, he also promised to “fine-tune” democracy and to introduce “checks and balances” in the system of governance. He correctly observed that Pakistan had its own problems and that systems at work in other countries may not necessarily suit Pakistan. While nobody would quarrel with this observation, one cannot but recall the outcome of similar fine-tuning or restructuring efforts by other military leaders in the past. Invariably, the generals who made promises about giving the nation a new political system lacked sincerity and talked of “systems” — one ‘best suited to the genius of the people’ or one ‘more in tune with our beliefs and values’ — to prolong their rule. As constitutional and political developments between 1958-69 and 1977-88 show, such promises neither “fine-tuned” democracy nor did they lead to the evolution of a system suited to Pakistani conditions.
Let us face it: ultimately, it is democracy that “fine-tunes” itself over a period of time. This objective is achieved through a free and unhindered inter-play of democratic forces. This never happened in Pakistan. Instead, those who talked of a new system relied on extra-constitutional methods or on arbitrary amendments to the Constitution to manipulate the political process. The results in both cases were disastrous: when Ayub resigned, the country had no parliament or constitution; when Zia died in the plane crash, there were no federal or provincial assemblies, though a constitution, mutilated beyond recognition, did survive. Zia also gave himself the power to sack an elected government and to dissolve the assembly. While he himself could use this device (58-2b) only once, his successors misused this article three times to dismiss elected governments for reasons that had nothing to do with the good of the nation. This government’s device to “check” what is often called prime ministerial despotism is likely to be the National Security Council. As in Turkey, this council may ensure the military’s supremacy over civilian governments. While it may succeed in reining in an elected government by breathing down its neck, it is doubtful if in the long run a military-dominated NSC will lead to the emergence of democracy as the world understands it.
Ultimately, what system suits this nation and how it will evolve according to conditions peculiar to this country will depend on the people of Pakistan. Leaders have repeatedly failed this nation, not the people — their country or the system. As the results of the five party-based general elections show, the people have always rejected extremism and voted for moderate parties. In fact, extremist parties have invariably been election losers. Clearly, it is the people who have kept them in check by rejecting extremism. For the future, too, it is the people who are the only guarantee of a stable and balanced political system. Contrived constitutional devices may sustain a system suited to the generals, but sooner than later such a system will collapse, as it has in the past, taking the nation back to square one.
It is time we stopped trifling or tinkering with democracy. What this country needs is democracy pure and simple. Which means unstained sovereignty for the people. In practical terms, this boils down to periodic elections and elected assemblies which alone will have the power to legislate and to amend the Constitution if the requirements of the time so demand.
IN THE stagnation that characterizes the social sector in Pakistan today, the steady expansion of some institutions of excellence comes as a breath of fresh air. One of these is the Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation which launched its centre for post-graduate studies and school of medical technology on Thursday. The Institute, which has grown phenomenally from an eight-bed urology unit in the Civil Hospital in 1972 to a 300-bed medical complex today, is something the people of Karachi can rightly be proud of. It completed its thousandth transplant in December and is providing treatment for kidney diseases with state-of-the-art technology free of cost to the needy: last year alone 240,000 patients received treatment.
How has the SIUT succeeded where others have failed? A lot of credit, of course, goes to the man at the top, Dr Adibul Hasan Rizvi, who can make the impossible happen. Dr Rizvi’s dedication and commitment have proved to be a great asset to the SIUT. It has also benefited from his philosophy and leadership which one hopes will be replicated to revive the government health institutions in Pakistan. Dr Rizvi believes that the poor have a right to free treatment when they are ill. It is this motto underlying the working of the Institute that has made it possible for it to give such good care to its patients and also sustain its growth. SIUT has forged a triangular partnership between the government, the community and the medical profession. While the first two generate the needed funds, a team of 400-plus professionals provide the care the ailing need. Since SIUT sets great store by its human resources — the two new facilities are designed to train doctors and technologists — it can demand, and obtains, dedicated service from them.
THE killing of a key witness to the notorious Sabra and Chatila massacres of 1982 represents a terrible setback for those seeking to prosecute Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for his role in the gruesome tragedy. The Beirut bomb blast on Thursday that killed Elie Hobeika, a controversial former leader of the pro-Israeli Maronite Christian forces, has eliminated a man who could shed a great deal of light on the massacre. Over a thousand innocent Palestinian men, women and children were mowed down at the camps by Maronite forces, who indulged in a terrible orgy of murder, pillage and rape. Although an unknown Syrian group has claimed responsibility, the Lebanese have blamed the Israelis for the blast, claiming that it was in Israel’s interest to eliminate Hobeika. Interestingly, just days before his death, Hobeika had met a delegation of Belgian politicians and revealed that he was willing to testify against Sharon, who was defence minister at the tim