| July 7, 2002 | Sunday | Rabi-us-Sani 25,1423 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Lynching in Chak Jhumra
Obstructing relief efforts
THE Chief Election Commissioner has done well to decide to consult the political parties before finalizing a code of conduct for the coming general election. As the CEC told Dawn on Friday, he believed in “effective and meaningful” discussions with the political parties on this issue. Aug 5 is the deadline by which time he hopes he will have received suggestions from the political parties for ensuring a peaceful and orderly election campaign. However, to set the ball rolling, the CEC has released the 1997 code of conduct as a guideline. It could serve as the basis for the October election or could perhaps be modified and improved where necessary.
The 1997 code places curbs on many undesirable aspects of electioneering as conducted in Pakistan. These include the tendency to malign rival politicians and make allegations bordering on defamation and libel. The 1997 code did well to lay down that politicians should adopt a positive approach by appealing to voters by highlighting their own policies and programmes instead of picking holes in those of their opponents and denigrating rival politicians and calling them traitors or kafirs. Equally welcome were the restrictions on the misuse of loudspeakers. As the CEC put it so aptly, electioneering in South Asia is a “noisy” affair. The code, thus, does well to restrict the use of loudspeakers between 11am and 4pm and forbids the use of more than three mikes by a candidate within his constituency. An equally useful part of the code concerns the use of flags and the practice of wall chalkings. Often, flags are hoisted not only on party offices but also on homes, and this leads to neighbourhood tensions and violence. The code bans this practice as it does wall chalkings.
An important point of the code concerns meetings and rallies. Traditionally, public meetings have occupied an important place in Pakistan’s political ethos. In a country where the literacy rate is very low, public meetings have been the principal means by which political parties have mobilized the masses and conveyed their message. In fact, this practice is a continuation of South Asia’s anti-colonial struggle in which public meetings played a key role in awakening the masses. The code, therefore, places no ban on public meetings. What it does, however, is to ban the holding of meetings on main roads, or at crossroads and chowks so as to avoid blocking traffic. Many “tonga” parties, it is often seen, hold public meetings in bazaars and other public places to block traffic and give the impression that they are great crowd-pullers. This part of the code should, therefore, be retained, and there is no reason why anyone should object to it.
The code of conduct correctly bans “processions of buses, trucks or any other vehicles” or torch processions. In Pakistan, processions tend to be an elaborate but disruptive affair. Parties plan them meticulously, and they march through main roads and streets, thus completely blocking traffic for hours and upsetting normal life. As a rule, parties make the processions move at a snail’s pace so as to draw maximum crowds and get publicity in the media. Besides causing inconvenience to the people, processions block ambulances and other vehicles taking emergency medical cases to hospitals. The 1997 code of conduct did well to ban this mode of electioneering, and one hopes that it will be retained in the code to be formulated after consulting the political parties. The aim before the CEC and the political parties should be an election campaign that will be peaceful, orderly and free from vituperation and reviling.
THE stoning to death of one Zahid Shah accused of blasphemy in a Chak Jhumra village near Faisalabad on Friday is yet another instance of panchayat justice running its monstrous course in contemptuous disregard of the rule of law. It defies belief that the village preacher should have used the mosque loudspeaker to whip up mob frenzy against the victim, who was dragged out of his brother’s house and brutally stoned to death in the village street. Despite the commotion and excitement, the police arrived at the scene four hours later only to dismiss the summary execution as a spontaneous act of violence carried out by the villagers in a fit of anger — an explanation that is at once outrageous and insulting. Such criminal negligence and a complete lack of respect for human life on the part of the so-called custodians of the law are reprehensible and call for a thorough inquiry into the whole sordid episode.
The police also had the audacity to say that because the victim’s family did not file any complaint with them, no case could be registered and no arrests made. The victim’s family members, afraid for their own lives, locked themselves up inside the house while the lynching was going on outside. Indeed, under the circumstances, no one would have dared file an FIR. The victim had been released on bail in 1997 after spending three years in jail in a blasphemy case brought against him by the very same Pesh Imam who this time made a short work of him by setting angry mobs against him. This reminds one of several such instances in the past where angry mobs or individuals took the law in their own hands and killed the alleged blasphemers. This raises serious questions about the blasphemy law itself, which has shown itself open to abuse by misguided zealots. In any event, the state and its law enforcement arms must not be seen wanting in efforts to protect life and safety, as was the case in the brutal killing in Chak Jhumra. The preacher in question must be booked for his flagrant violation of the law and for incitement to murder.
SOME 32 international aid and relief agencies operating in the occupied Palestinian territories have confirmed that Israeli forces are hampering humanitarian efforts in the most affected West Bank and Gaza Strip towns and villages. Israel has imposed severe restrictions on the movement in and out of the occupied territories following the reoccupation of the Palestinian controlled areas on June 19. These agencies now say they can “no longer adequately fulfil their mandates” to provide relief and humanitarian assistance, as Israel routinely refuses to grant access to the civilian victims of the raging conflict.
International aid and relief workers also confirm that food and medical supplies are running critically low in most reoccupied areas, which, if not replenished, can lead to a disaster-like situation. Israel’s refusal to grant unhindered access to relief workers exposes Ariel Sharon in his true colours yet again. What is it other than a criminal plan aimed at systematic ghettoization of the Palestinian territories? Clearly, the harsh and cruel security measures adopted by Israel boil down to meting out collective punishment to the entire Palestinian population. These harsh measures may halt suicide bombings in Israel for some time, but they are least likely to win the Israelis any real security over the longer term. Oppression of this kind will only breed more hatred and anger among the persecuted Palestinian people.