| July 24, 2003 | Thursday | Jumadi-ul-Awwal 23, 1424 |
To send a letter to the Editor
Click here
Steel scam
‘By invitation only’
A tale of two assemblies
Rating for TV programmes
‘Mockery’ of Constitution
Why blame them
Wars on Iraq
CPSC performance
I SHOULD like to recall here the singular contribution Mohtarama Fatima Jinnah made to democracy and parliamentary system of government in keeping with the ideals of the Quaid. It was on July 21, 1964, that the five opposition parties of Pakistan, i.e. Council Muslim League, Jamaat-i-Islami, Awami League, National Awami Party and Nizam-i-Islam, met at the residence of Khwaja Nazimuddin and formed an alliance named the Combined Opposition Parties (COP).
Only July 24, 1964, the COP announced its decision to field a joint candidate in the general election and adopted a manifesto that provided for a democratic constitution, parliamentary system, provincial autonomy, reining in the president by slashing his powers, freedom of the judiciary and lifting of the ban on political parties. It was on August 19, 1964, that the Convention Muslim League of President Ayub Khan, of which Mr Z. A. Bhutto was the general secretary, nominated President Ayub Khan as its candidate for the office of president, for which the actual voting took place through ‘basic democrats’ numbering 80,000 in both wings of Pakistan.
The opposition parties had been working quietly to persuade the Madar-i-Millat to contest the presidential election. My late father, Syed Abdul Hafiz, was among those who called on Mohtarama Fatima Jinnah with the other opposition leaders to seek her agreement for the nomination. Mohtarama Fatima Jinnah accepted the COP request and announced her candidature on September 17, 1964, and the next day addressed a huge public meeting at Karachi’s Nishtar Park announcing that she had adopted the election manifesto of the Combined Opposition Parties as her manifesto. That event caused jubilation among all the democratic forces in Pakistan but the bureaucrats and cronies of Ayub Khan were totally dismayed by the turn of events. There then followed a period of campaigning and public meetings, including one at the National Stadium in Karachi where Madar-i-Millat outshone Ayub Khan and the public, which included many thousands commandeered by the bureaucracy and the military in favour of Ayub, in a loud voice thundered its approval and applause for what Madar-i-Millat said.
There followed an election campaign where the crowds, specially in Karachi, Lahore, Peshawar and Dhaka, were vocal in their support for Madar-i-Millat. The elections were held on January 2, 1965 through the electoral college of 80,000 basicn democrats. The results announced by the Pakistan Election Commission, within hours of casting of the votes were ‘doctored’, as is the general impression upto this day. Ayub Khan received 49,647 votes while Madar-i-Millat received 28,343 votes.
In the West Pakistan province Ayub Khan got 28,927 votes compared to 10,263 votes for Madar-i-Millat. In East Pakistan Ayub Khan won 20,720 votes while Madar-i-Millat polled 18,080 votes. It is the belief of most people that the election was manipulated and that the Madar-i-Millat Mohtarama Fatima Jinnah had actually won more votes than Ayub Khan. However, that is now history.
But, the fact remains that Mohtarama Fatima Jinnah adored by the nation as Madar-i-Millat stood up for democracy in the face of overwhelming odds. The nation remembers and adores her for that courage of conviction and the strength to stand up against a dictator at a time when most in the country feared Ayub Khan.
Madar-i-Millat lost the presidential election through the manipulation of the establishment of the day but her legacy has survived and the torch of freedom she lit with her frail but dedicated hands keeps shining in Pakistan today.
MAHMUDUL AZIZ
Karachi
MR ARDESHIR Cowasjee has used his two Sunday columns July 13 and 20 to discuss an irregularity in Pakistan Steel but wound up with a remedy suggested in two lines. The two “men of eminence” to whom he has sent the “inside story” of the bid scam perhaps would do no more than to pass it on to the chairman of the P.S. Quite naturally he is not going to indict himself. A bang, thus, would end in a whimper.
The minister for production may indeed have intervened. Whatever the reason for Mr Liaquat Jatoi’s intervention, it is nothing new; all ministers do — some more frequently than others, some give way to reason, others do not. The deciding authority however remains the chief executive. He cannot escape its consequences if he chooses to act contrary to the law or propriety on the persuasion of the minister.
Lt-Col (R) Afzal Khan had even less reason to come under the minister’s pressure for, as Ardeshir also notes at length, everyone around knows that he is Gen Musharraf’s “course mate”. That in fact could be the reason for his holding the post he does, for, perhaps, no other general manager has ever made to the chairman and chief executive of the Steel Mill. Those who came from the army were all generals.
The board of directors can protect a chief executive from the ministerial or other political interference only if it is headed by an independent chairman who is also somewhat familiar with the trade. Surprisingly, almost every chief executive also wants to be the chairman for he doesn’t want an outsider to set the agenda of the board. He wants the board to know only what he chooses to tell it.
Maybe the two directors to whom Mr Ardeshir now trusts to look into the scam were not even aware of it and now would rely on the chairman-chief executive to enlighten them about it.
It suits the ministers not to have an independent and assertive board. A minister would rather deal, and direct, his employee who owes his job and tenure to him. The chief executives and ministers thus collude to keep things to themselves and later, when the party is over, blame each other before the courts and tribunals. That act is even now being played about the doings of the PS, PIA and many other organizations in the previous regime. It is destined to be played time and again.
The common practice worldwide is not to combine the office of CE and chairman in one person. The same arrangement was introduced here in the oil and gas companies when Mr Usman Amin was the petroleum minister. It is still continuing.
The government, corporate managers and pro bono publicos like Ardeshir could benefit by that experience. It should be an improvement unless the post of chairman itself is made political by horse-trading or is otherwise downgraded by inevitable intervention of the “agencies”.
KUNWAR IDRIS
Karachi
I COULDN’T believe my eyes when I read in a Lahore English weekly of July 4 about a performance to “by invitation only” audience in Lahore, and earlier in Karachi and Islamabad. The performance was sponsored by an organization funded by American actress Jane Fonda.
Four actresses, all Muslim Pakistanis, recounted the stories of their sexual past. It was claimed that by allowing the performance and participating in the performance the Pakistani women were leading the way for women in other Muslim and Third World countries. What a distinction!
The harsh treatment of women by the Taliban was roundly and deservedly condemned the world over, including Pakistan. But going to the other extreme, such as the performance in Islamabad, the capital of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and in the Data Nagri in Lahore, the mind boggles!
How could the federal government and the provincial government of Punjab allow this to happen! What direction, what signals are we passing to the world: to be acknowledged and accepted as a “liberal Muslim nation”, we are prepared to jettison our Islamic values and our eastern culture, modesty and haya; that our wives, sisters and daughters are being ‘liberated’ to speak, on stage, of sex and their sexual behaviour and experiences to their husbands, fathers and brothers.
What is the next logical step? Live sexual acts on stage, gradually extending the participation and pleasure from “invitation only” elite (sic) to the general public! Participation in and encouragement of such things speak volumes of the moral bankruptcy of the so-called elite, a contagious moral turpitude that eventually spreads to all parts of society.
The problem with the pseudo-liberal segment of our society is that to prove and impress their western colleagues with their ‘liberalism’, they act more liberal than the westerners. However, it is the duty of every respectable citizen, as well as the media, who values the sanctity of family, the sacredness of his religious boundaries and the dignity of his/her eastern culture to denounce the moral degradation of these ‘arbiters’ of our moral values.
MOHSIN AZIZ
Peshawar
THE issue relating to Gen Pervez Musharraf being the president as well as army chief at the same time is clouding the political atmosphere in Pakistan. The general found the soil of the most powerful and the most democratic country of the world the most suitable to explain his position.
Arguing his case for keeping the double mantle, he said that democracy meant the view of the majority and since the assembly of Punjab, and the National Assembly have asked him with majority to keep his uniform as long as he wished, he is following a democratic decision and needs no more authentications.
This pronouncement by the supreme leader of Pakistan reminds one of another assembly which was the first and the only one to pass a resolution for the creation of Pakistan. It was the Sindh Assembly. Within the last four months the Sindh Assembly has passed two unanimous resolutions asking the central government to stop the construction of Greater Thal Canal, terming it an anti-Sindh project, the last one at almost the same time when the Punjab Assembly passed a resolution in favour of the uniform.
Does not it sounds strange that while Gen Musharraf shows with pride at international forums the majority resolution of the Punjab Assembly as more than sufficient for continuing his unique position of being both the civilian and military chiefs at the same time, he does not find even worth considering the unanimous resolutions of the Sindh Assembly against the construction of greater Thal Canal.
Not only this but the president himself inaugurated the construction of this most controversial project without the certification of Irsa and before any approval of the ECNEC and in the absence of feasibility report. Also the Sindh Assembly (thrice), the NWFP Assembly (twice) and the Balochistan Assembly (once) have passed unanimous resolutions for scrapping the Kalabagh Dam project but the same is still on the top priority list of Wapda.
ABDUL KHALIQUE JUNEJO
Karachi
IT is a healthy sign that these days our electronic media is experiencing unprecedented freedom from state dictation. But such freedom comes with responsibility for those who exercise it.
Recent months have seen an increase in more explicit depiction of romantic relationships, use of strong language and mature themes in various programmes that range from talk shows to serials and telefilms. As time passes, it seems boldness on the part of the showbiz people will also increase. However, I am yet to encounter any warning sign or advice for viewer’s discretion preceding or during the broadcast of such programmes.
I believe it is the right of a viewer to be informed about the maturity of a programme’s contents if he/she wishes to protect his/her children from premature exposure or to avoid embarrassing moments while watching TV with family.
(Reader’s discretion is advised from here on!) Words like randi and mujra (Umrao Jan Ada), ‘porn’ and ‘Triple X’ (World ka Centre) were mentioned and are examples of strong language. Similarly, there were some passionate scenes in Umrao Jan Ada and characters were shown urinating in World ka Center. It should not take more than common sense to realize that the above-mentioned contents would cause discomfort to most Pakistani families while watching TV together.
The responsibility lies with the ‘makers’, the pre-viewers and ‘broadcasters’ to rate programmes and, accordingly, advise the viewers. Unregulated use of this ‘freedom of expression’ may give the other extreme a better pretext to backlash and damage even its more positive aspects. Speaking of freedom. Is Perma listening?
ENGR M. ZAFAR IQBAL
Karachi
EVERY well-wisher of Pakistan will agree with the contents of a thought-provoking article by Mr Ayaz Amir published in your issue of May 23.
As Gen Pervez Musharraf has mentioned in his speeches, time and again, that he believes in unity of command, it becomes patently clear that democracy has no place on is agenda. His concept of the unity of command gains strength when a bunch of faithful is always available at his disposal for endorsement of whatever is presented before them.
The growing concern among the civilian intelligentsia regarding “more elaborate and expanded corporate structure of the army” has touched its peak. From reclaiming land of the Arabian sea, building separate housing schemes, shopping centres, cattle farms, universities and colleges, this structure extends to the formation of separate banks, leasing companies and corporations.
In the past, economists divided a society into haves and have- nots. But new definition broadens this by including armed, ex-armed personnel and the civilians. Obviously, the latter remains always under-privileged and feeble in all respects. This is beyond one’s comprehension what benefit the armed men would be getting by alienating themselves from the civilians whose sacrifices and tax spending make them able to lead a splendid pre-and-post-retirement life.
The greatest lesson man has learnt is that it has learnt no lesson. The same applies to us. The army should learn from its repetitive mistakes of assuming power and its superiors should be reminded of their oath, which they take to protect the Constitution, not the individuals.
RASHID MASOOD ALAM
Karachi
THIS is with reference to a story by Mr Hasan Abidi in your newspaper (July 12).
The meeting to remember the departed soul started more than 100 minutes late and for no obvious reason. Many people, including journalists and reporters, left after a long wait. The head of the literary committee was present at the Karachi Press Club but he did not bother to come even at his announced schedule.
It was strange to see some guests receiving the host. It was unfair and unprecedented. I was amazed to hear a learned speaker admitting the fact that ‘he had no idea who Mr Abdullah Malik was’.
It is unfair to blame the journalists for not taking interest in literature and in their own profession. I find many journalists attending literary meetings of Karachi Gymkhana and the Arts Council.
YUSUF KHAN
Karachi
THE US invaded Iraq in 1991 to re-establish monarchy in Kuwait. It again invaded the same country this year for democracy in the Arab world. The lesson for the Arab is: fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
Z. A. KAZMI
Karachi
THIS refers to various letters which you have been publishing frequently regarding the College of Physicians & Surgeons Pakistan (CPSP) in your newspaper for quite some time.
To quote a few examples, I would like to mention in particular the letters by Prof Manzar Saleem, Dr Noman I. Alvi, Prof Suleman Ahmed Khan and Prof M. A. Noorani published on June 11, 18 and 19 and July 16, respectively. Such letters have created a wrong impression about the CPSP and diluted its international reputation which it has acquired over the years as an institution of international repute. A clarification on behalf of the CPSP was already published in your newspaper on 23 June, 2003, to keep the record straight accordingly for information of general public at large.
Here, I would like to again reiterate the fact that the CPSP, established in 1962, has so far produced 10,714 specialists in various disciplines of medical sciences, which constitute 80 per cent of the total medical specialists manpower registered with Pakistan Medical & Dental Council (PMDC) in the country. The CPSP today enjoys international recognition for its qualifications in several countries, including the UK, Ireland, Australia, South Africa, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the UAE, Sudan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.
On account of high standard of the CPSP qualification and transparency of its examination system, the Joint Committee of Higher Medical Training (JCHMT) of England, which represents all the Royal Colleges of the UK, recognizes the fellowship of the CPSP at par with the MRCP. This recognition facilitates the FCPS-qualified doctors to register themselves as specialist with the General Medical Council (GMC) of the UK.
The Saudi Council for Health Specialities (SCHS) also recognizes the FCPS at par with the MRCP and FRCS awarded by the Royal Colleges of the UK for the purposes of appointment as consultants in Saudi Arabia. Such global recognition reflects a trust and confidence reposed in the CPSP and its high standard of postgraduate medical education and training by international institutions of distinguished and accredited agencies of world repute.
The CPSP is endeavouring its best for promoting the cause of advancement of postgraduate medical education in the country. Every possible effort is being made on the part of the CPSP to raise the level of recognition and appreciation nationally and internationally for Pakistan and the CPSP fellows and medical community at large.
At present, in collaboration with Pakistani foreign missions abroad, we are trying to seek recognition for our qualifications in various countries of the world, ranging from North America to Far East. Our untiring efforts are on the way for delivering quality postgraduate medical education and provision of state-of-the-art learning facilities at the doorsteps of medical students throughout the country.
The CPSP has already established 13 regional centres in the country and three abroad in Kathmandu (Nepal), Jeddah and Riyadh (Saudi Arabia). We are also conducting our Fellowship Part-I (FCPS-I) examinations in Nepal and Saudi Arabia. We are on the verge of obtaining recognition in Canada, Malaysia, South Africa, Kuwait and the UAE.
The authorities concerned in these countries have already agreed in principle to accord recognition to our qualification in their respective countries. We are confident that by the end of this year formal recognition will be materialized in several potential countries such as Canada, South Africa the UAE, Kuwait, Malaysia, etc. This will open new vistas of job opportunities as specialist for Pakistani doctors abroad.
MUHAMMAD IMTIAZ ALI
Senior Executive Officer, CPSP,
Karachi
This correspondence is now closed. —Ed.
You can also send letters to the Editor
Just send your message to the following address:
Make sure you include your full name, postal address, e-mail address, and in the case of Pakistan your day-time telephone number.