| September 15, 2002 | Sunday | Rajab 7, 1423 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Hindutva’s rising tide
Musical brain wave
THE motions have been gone through and the formalities completed. As expected, Ms Benazir Bhutto’s appeal against her disqualification has been turned down by the election tribunal. Her lawyers have said they will go to the superior courts, but it is unclear whether the latter will be able to grant her any relief in view of the Legal Framework Order (LFO). The order has inserted a clause in article 63 of the Constitution pertaining to the disqualification of persons from seeking electoral office. The addition disqualifies also those who have been convicted or sentenced by a competent court as absconders. Ms Bhutto has a conviction against her on this account, which she has challenged along with the other provisions of the LFO. But for all practical purposes the PPP chairperson seems out of the race. The PML leader, Mr Nawaz Sharif, had withdrawn his nomination earlier this month following the rejection of Ms Bhutto’s papers, and so he too is not a candidate.
The election tribunal has also turned down the appeals of Mrs Kulsoom Nawaz and Mr Shahbaz Sharif, holding that their papers were not in order as they had not been properly attested and verified by Pakistani consular officials in Saudi Arabia. It would be stretching credulity quite a bit to believe that Pakistani diplomats would be cooperative towards the Sharif family, sent into exile by the present government. Mr Shahbaz Sharif was also accused of being a bank loan defaulter and of having violated article 63(I)g of the Constitution that forbids bringing the judiciary and the armed forces into ridicule, a sweeping provision that itself needs revision in view of the role of the military as an active political player. A number of other PPP and PML candidates, as well as candidates from other parties, have been barred on technical grounds. PPP (SB) leader Ghinwa Bhutto has been disqualified because she is deemed not to be a graduate, although she is probably far better educated than many graduates cleared as candidates.
The argument can be repeated that, knowing the law of the land, Ms Bhutto and the Sharif family would have been better advised to refrain from entering the contest. Their lieutenants would have been thrown on their own resources and would then have been in a better position to organize their parties for the electoral contest. On the other hand, it can be said that although they knew they would not be permitted to contest, by testing the system they have exposed its undemocratic and unfair aspects. The fact has also been brought into some prominence that candidates perceived to be favoured by the administration have been approved despite doubts cast on their credentials by their opponents. Some PML(Q) leaders, for instance, have been accused by the PTI chief, Imran Khan, of being loan defaulters, but they have responded to the criticism, not by disproving Mr Khan’s claims, but by levelling accusations of their own against the former cricketer.
It remains to be seen how the ouster of the big names in two of the country’s largest parties (and two of the most vocal critics of the present regime) will affect the fortunes of the PPP and the PML(N) or indeed influence the overall post-election scenario. Will it dishearten supporters and keep them away from the polling booths or will it bring out a sympathy vote for the two organizations? Will the parties decide to boycott the polls? We seem to be looking at a most confusing mosaic.
IN WHAT critics claim is a major blow to India’s secular credentials, the country’s Supreme Court has rejected a petition challenging the introduction of a school syllabus aimed at ‘Hinduizing’ the education system. The court rejected the public interest petition filed by social activists by arguing that the study of religions did not in itself contravene India’s secular constitution. Critics of the new curriculum, however, impute far more sinister motives to its introduction. They argue that the BJP-led government, dominated by Hindu nationalists and heavily influenced by extremist organizations such as the RSS, has long been pursuing an agenda that aims to rewrite history and distort facts in order to glorify Hinduism at the expense of other faiths. As the rejected petition argues, the curriculum designed by hand-picked government appointees “is skewed and has been carried out with an intent to present a very lopsided view of India’s history and culture”. The syllabus also recommends the compulsory teaching of Sanskrit and a number of ancient Indian texts on subjects including astrology.
The Supreme Court’s acceptance of this new syllabus has delighted Hindu nationalists who have long railed against the secular education system and demanded a curriculum that glorifies all things Hindu and Indian. If India is placed at the centre of the universe and projected as the fount of all knowledge and culture, it becomes possible to disparage ‘alien’ faiths such as Islam and Christianity. Many of India’s most distinguished academics have been increasingly alarmed by the efforts of Hindu obscurantists to insinuate their xenophobic agenda into the mainstream. To further this aim, the BJP had gradually packed many of the country’s key educational institutions and think tanks with loyalists. The Supreme Court’s stamp of approval on the new syllabus devised by such academics could now pave the way for a more narrow and communal view of history being taught to Indian children. The implications are all too grim in a country where Muslims and Christians are often pitiless victims of all manner of political and economic discrimination, mistreatment and persecution at the hands of Hindu nationalists.
SOME candidates in Haripur district in the NWFP have decided to employ well-known singers and musicians to kick-start their election campaigns. One candidate, whose election symbol is the bicycle, has invited a popular Punjabi pop singer partly because one of his best-selling songs has a reference to a bicycle. Apparently, the idea is to generate some kind of public interest by using the services of celebrities. This is something quite common in many countries, perhaps nowhere more so than in India where film stars are often given party tickets, nominated to the Rajya Sabha or even made ministers. In Pakistan, we have had a former movie actress contesting for an assembly seat in probably one of the country’s most conservative constituencies outside the tribal areas, but, alas, without success.
However, this time round, apart from putting up banners and maybe the occasional camp office, there is hardly any electioneering going on. Obviously, this has to do with the multiple restrictions the government has placed on the political parties and on electioneering itself, but part of this lack of enthusiasm may also have to do with increasing public apathy towards the electoral process. The fact that two of the country’s largest political parties have been effectively cornered by disqualifying their top leaders has also had a dampening effect on the fervour and zeal of campaigning. No wonder then that some candidates have thought up the novel idea of using musicians and singers to attract crowds. Notwithstanding the fact that this could violate the campaign spending limit, it is at least better than forcing voters to cast their ballots or ferrying them around in buses like herds of cattle on election day.