| 13 January 2004 | Tuesday | 20 Ziqa'ad 1424 |
Test case for the state
Financing of terrorism
Parliamentary elections in Iran next month now appear unlikely to be genuine or peaceful after the Council of Guardians decided on Sunday to bar 85 reformist MPs from contesting polls. In fact, given the wave of anger unleashed by the decision, it will be a miracle if the elections are held at all.
The MPs staged a sit-in at the Majlis building and vowed to transform it into a "centre of resistance" against what they called "this illegal action." However, far more menacing for the very future of the revolution is the reaction among cabinet members and the provincial governors. Eight cabinet ministers have prepared letters of resignation, while the governors of 27 of Iran's 28 provinces have threatened to resign.
Their letter to President Mohammad Khatami was couched in angry tones and made it clear that the elections next month would not be possible unless the ban on the MPs was withdrawn. If the MPs remained disqualified, they said, "conditions for holding free and fair elections in which rights of both candidates and voters are respected will not be met."
The decision by the non-elected council and the reformists' reaction serve to highlight the deep polarization of Iranian society. Both the reformists and the conservatives are aware of the importance of the election next month. What has encouraged the conservatives to hope for an anti-reformist parliament was their sweeping victory in last year's municipal elections. Those elections were characterized by a low turn-out - estimated at 10 per cent.
This was the voters' way of showing lack of interest in an election where the rules of the game had been laid down by the orthodoxy. For the February parliamentary elections, the clerics' best hope is a low turn-out. This they hope to achieve by using the stringent vetting procedure they have at their disposal.
The Council of Guardians has 12 members, six of whom are ulema, the other six being civilian lawyers. Nominated directly or indirectly by Ayatollah Khamenei, the council has the power to block laws passed by parliament. They have used such powers to prevent progressive legislation. In their latest decision, the council has said the MPs have failed to show their commitment to Islam and respect for Ayatollah Khamenei. This clause is obviously open to the widest possible interpretation, and the council can disqualify any candidate it does not like. As the governors have said, this is "a political decision."
If the conservatives manage to control the next - seventh - Majlis, reforms would obviously be put on the back-burner. Even though President Khatami's term expires in 2005, he would be unable to push forward his reform agenda through a conservative Majlis. The pace of reforms has been slow, and the students, who took to the streets last year, may again start an agitation. This time they will have the support of powerful segments of Iran's establishment, including the governors.
The ensuing chaos could offset the gains made by the anti-monarchy revolution and erode the position which Iran has come to acquire since the proclamation of the republic. An Iran politically divided would also become more susceptible to western and Israeli intrigues.
Test case for the state
Shaista Almani, the unfortunate young woman who has been on the run for over two months because she entered into a marriage of choice, has been given a flat and promised a job in what appears to be an initiative by the deputy speaker of the Sindh assembly and a provincial minister. But does that answer the problem? The woman, a former school teacher, has appeared, disappeared, been refused shelter by her family, taken to police stations and sent to hospitals since her sad saga surfaced in October last year.
Her husband, under pressure from his tribe, has been forced to divorce her, and she is now reported to be in Karachi. It is said that a fine of Rs500,000 was slapped on her tribe, the Almani, by her husband's tribe, the Mahars, and has since been paid. Is that the end of the matter and are the two tribes, after having wrecked her marriage, now reconciled to letting the woman live as she pleases? Is she safe? It is difficult to answer these questions honestly, given the strangely reluctant way in which the provincial authorities and the police force initially moved in the matter. It was only at the stern directions of the Sindh High Court that the administration took any notice of the affair.
The first priority should be to ensure the safety of Shaista Almani and her former husband. The entire episode has once again revealed the power of the feudal and tribal system, and the helplessness or unwillingness of the state to confront the system. The issue of honour killings and dispensation of rough justice by jirgas has been fobbed off for far too long. Legislation to outlaw such primitive practices must be enacted immediately through consultations with legislators and tribal elders.
The state must shoulder its responsibility if it seriously wishes to move the country away from mediaeval customs and practices. In the Almani case, the government must either hold the leaders of the two tribes responsible, on pain of punishment, for the woman's safety or ensure that she can lead a life free from fear and harassment. This could turn out to be test case of the government's sincerity in liberating women from the bondage of oppressive customs that have no sanction in religion or law.
Financing of terrorism
The federal cabinet has approved amendments to the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 and increased punishments for financiers of terrorism. Under the new laws, jail terms will be doubled for any individual or entity involved in financing terrorism. What is significant is that all societies and institutions that have a potential to act as conduits for such financing shall be obliged to establish bank accounts and maintain information about their employees and clients failing which they will face fine and revocation of their licences.
This amendment comes shortly after the signing of the Additional Protocol to the Saarc Regional Convention on Combating Terrorism. The protocol specifically deals with the issue of financing. Funding terrorism through conduits has been taken up time and again but with varying degrees of success.
A study by the Pakistan Centre for Philanthropy disclosed that five years ago, Pakistanis donated a sum of over Rs 70 billion towards various causes. A large portion of that money was believed to have gone to religious organizations. The trend of giving money to religious organizations, for building mosques or running madrassas, has not changed in the past few years.
Some of this money has found its way into promoting terrorist activities. The government undoubtedly needs to check this at the earliest, but what has also to be understood is that not all contributions to religious and charitable organizations end up in the wrong hands. Some organizations provide services that act as a social safety net. Curtailing the work of these organizations will only add to human suffering. The challenge is to punish the wrong doers and let the others function unhindered.