| May 2, 2002 | Thursday | Safar 18, 1423 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
UN mission scuttled
Suspicious deaths
EVEN though exact figures were not available while these lines were being written, President Pervez Musharraf had all but wrapped up Tuesday’s referendum by an overwhelming majority. What was in doubt was the margin of his victory. A low turn-out was recorded throughout the country, though there is a wide gap between government and opposition claims with regard to the percentage of people voting. The boycott by the Muttahida further made the turn-out look even thinner in the nation’s biggest city, though mercifully the day passed without any untoward incident. Nevertheless, the referendum is behind us, and for all practical purposes President Musharraf has secured a five-year term for himself. He, thus, becomes Pakistan’s third serving army chief to claim to be an elected head of state — a clear violation of the Constitution.
The effects of Tuesday’s referendum will cast their shadow across Pakistan’s political landscape for quite some time. The task before President Musharraf now is to prove by his actions that his victory would tend to strengthen democracy and lead Pakistan towards political stability and economic growth. With so many powers already in his hands, and more to be acquired through the proposed constitutional amendments, there is a danger that, instead of checks and balances, we may have a situation in which the president will have all the powers for himself. In such a scenario there is no guarantee that the interests of civil society will be upheld, since the National Security Council, too, will be heavily dominated by the military. There is, thus, the possibility that the elected civilian leadership, instead of being responsive to the people’s urges, may succumb to pressures from the military, which may tend to see a given issue in a different light.
Given the controversial nature of the referendum, it is of vital importance that controversy should not surround the general election due in October. It should be fair and free, and all political parties and personalities not debarred by the law should be allowed to take part in it. The entire exercise should not only be free from the remotest suspicion of manipulation; it should appear to be so.
No constitutional scheme is inherently unworkable; nor is the world’s best constitution necessarily a guarantee of political serenity. Ultimately, what matters is the sincerity or otherwise of those who are called upon to run a constitutional scheme. During the last more than half a century, Pakistani politicians, including those in uniform, have tried several such schemes and failed. The Constitutions of 1956 and 1962 failed because those who were supposed to uphold them sabotaged them. The same has been true of the 1973 Constitution, except that it has not been abrogated. Amendments made by Ziaul Haq were repudiated by his protege, Nawaz Sharif, but that did not stand him in good stead; it was his evil deeds that proved his undoing. Under the scheme that is to come about as a result of the amendments sought by President Musharraf, the big issue again will be whether those charged with the task of making a success of it will be able to come up to the people’s trust. Let us hope both the victor in Tuesday’s referendum and the politicians who will come to the fore after the October election will try to work the new scheme, whatever its merits and demerits, instead of adopting confrontational policies that could undo the system and throw the country once again into the kind of crisis it has been its misfortune to live with.
AFTER Israel’s emphatic “no” to the United Nations fact-finding mission’s visit to Jenin, it is now almost certain that the UN secretary general will call off the investigation altogether. This exposes Israel’s culpability beyond a shadow of doubt. What would have been the point in sending a toothless mission that Israel demanded should investigate the matter only as far as it vindicated its position? These restrictions meant that the mission would not be allowed to question Israeli soldiers — who carried out the massacre at Jenin — and, thus, recommend a trial of those found guilty of war crimes. Bound by its charter, the UN cannot force an investigating mission on a country unwilling to cooperate with it. It is now clear that the Jewish state simply has more to hide than to reveal what transpired in Jenin and elsewhere in Palestine in March and April.
Israel’s total disregard for the world opinion is ominous and shocking by turns. Every time it commits an act of barbarity, it raises the stakes for Washington, obliging the latter to stand guard over the rubble of its dirty deeds. This time round it seems the White House itself counselled Tel Aviv on how best to throw dirt in the eyes of the UN and wriggle out of its commitments to the world body. The fact-finding mission itself was Washington’s brainchild, designed to dissipate anger in Arab capitals, and to avoid any public embarrassment during the Saudi crown prince’s visit. Then behind the closed doors, Washington struck a deal with Ariel Sharon that entailed the release of Yassir Arafat after he agreed to a trial of Palestinian militants in the occupied territories under the American and British judges. That accomplished, Tel Aviv was signalled to say no to the UN mission with impunity. It is because of this kind of appeasement of Tel Aviv on the part of Washington that the Arabs have ceased to trust it as an honest broker.
IT is disturbing to note that the police in the twin cities of Rawalpindi-Islamabad are quick to close files on cases, specially those involving deaths of women, by simply classifying them as suicides. This is done without thoroughly investigating the cases. Since the beginning of this year, at least eight women classified as suicide victims are known to have died in suspicious circumstances: three were found burnt, another three were said to have hanged themselves, one died from gas suffocation, and another was electrocuted. A closer examination revealed that there was more to their deaths than met the eye. It now emerges that the electrocuted woman had feared for her life, and had earlier approached the police to protect her from her husband. In the case of a woman found hanged, it was obvious that she did not die from hanging because she was discovered with her feet touching the ground.
It is the job of police investigators to diligently pursue such cases, follow up on every possible lead and find out the real cause of death. Because the police seem unable or unwilling to do the needful, some of the victims’ families have had to seek help from other sources. In one case, it was only through the dogged efforts of her parents that the suicide case of their daughter, who was found hanged, was finally turned into a murder case against her husband through the intervention of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench. Before this, they had to approach the Punjab governor to register an FIR for murder and then the corps commander of Rawalpindi to get the case transferred to another police station. If the police had done their job properly and investigated the case as they are supposed to, a great deal of torment and time could have been saved. Given the much-publicized reform and restructuring of the police, with emphasis on the investigation wing, the public has a right to expect much more from the force in terms of professionalism and efficiency.