| 10 March 2004 | Wednesday | 18 Muharram 1425 |
Rising cement prices
Sale of kidneys
With the signing of the interim constitution by all members of the Governing Council, a major hurdle is said to have been removed in the way of the return of sovereignty to Iraq.
The victory for the occupation authorities lies in winning over hard-line Shia leaders to their scheme and getting the council's Shia members to sign the document.
With the transfer of power to a caretaker government due for July 1, Paul Bremer, America's pro-consul in Iraq, will cease to be the country's ruler. By any standards, the interim constitution is an improvement over the previous scheme because it does away with the nomination process.
Under the plan announced last November, caucuses consisting of nominated persons in all of Iraq's 18 provinces were to choose a transitional assembly. This assembly was to pick a government by June this year.
Thus the entire process was non-electoral. Later, a council to be elected by the people of Iraq was to draft a constitution by the end of 2005. Under the new constitutional scheme, direct elections will be held for a transitional assembly "if possible" by the end of this year.
It is this assembly that will draft a permanent constitution. This way there is a two-way improvement on the old scheme - first, there will be an elected constituent assembly instead of a nominated one, and, second, the date of election has been advanced to the end of this year.
While this part of the scheme can be welcomed, the date given for the drafting of the final constitution is still far away - August 2005. A vote on the final document is even farther - the end of next year.
With Iraq in a flux and suicide-bombings and other acts of violence taking place virtually daily, one wonders whether things will work out according to the provisions of the interim constitution. The new law guarantees freedom of speech and assembly and makes Islam a source of legislation, while guaranteeing full freedom to other religious minorities.
Nevertheless, certain features of the 64-clause interim document are intriguing. Looking at it from the point of view Iraq's organic unity, the interim constitution gives Kurdistan the right to "retain" its federal status. "Retaining" federal status appears jarring, because Baathist Iraq was a unitary state.
No doubt, in the wake of the first Gulf war, Kurdish areas had become virtually autonomous. But this part of the new scheme would be viewed with suspicion by two of Iraq's neighbours, Iran and Turkey, both of which have large Kurdish populations in border regions.
Kurdish militias are well-armed, they have differences among themselves, and they have a record of waging armed struggle. Thus, the "retention" of federal status by Kurdistan could cause trouble in the future and encourage secessionist tendencies. This could involve Turkey and possibly Iran in Iraq's affairs more deeply and provide the Kurds with a virtual veto.
This provision has been incorporated not so much out of concern for the Kurds, long suppressed, but to divide the people and permit US domination.
Like the old scheme, this document does not tell us when Iraq's occupation will end. The caretaker government will start running the country from July 1, but American and British forces will continue to stay on. Last November, President George Bush remarked that American troops will stay on in Iraq until the country is "free and peaceful."
This is a highly vague stipulation and looks like making the military occupation open-ended. This part of the scheme needs to be sorted out, for without a full withdrawal of American-led forces, real sovereignty for the Iraqi people will be a mirage.
Rising cement prices
The rise in cement prices reported on Tuesday goes against the assurance given last month by the All-Pakistan Cement Manufacturers' Association that prices would remain stable in the near future.
The APCMA assurance had come in reply to growing public criticism over the rise in prices despite the concessions given to the industry by the government. APCMA had said that it would ensure price stability but not a cut in prices, as this would be possible only if production rose.
What we have seen, however, is that despite an increase in cement production, prices have not come down. In the last budget, the government had made a 25 per cent reduction in Central Excise Duty on cement.
In spite of this concession, there was a rise in prices. In the second half of 2003, cement prices increased by over 35 per cent, as a bag selling for Rs160 before the budget sold for Rs220. Today, it costs Rs240.
Cement is an important input for the housing and construction industry, and an increase in its cost has wider impact. In the absence of a rise in other inputs, one wonders why cement prices alone should shoot up.
One explanation given in the market is that it is a cartel of cement producers that is hiking prices to maximize profits. A threat by the finance minister to allow the import of cement is no long-term solution, as imported cement, after payment of duties, will be only marginally cheaper.
The government needs to show its teeth to the cement producers, whose appetite for profit seems to be growing. A precedence has to be set whereby the finance minister establishes that he means business; otherwise the rise in cement prices may encourage producers in other sectors to follow suit which would be a disaster for the construction industry.
Sale of kidneys
The case registered by the Gujranwala police against six people allegedly involved in the kidney trade has highlighted an issue that few lawmakers take note of, let alone discuss.
In this particular instance, the suspects had kidnapped a man and taken him to Lahore where one of his kidneys was removed and sold for a substantial sum. The suspects stand accused of luring other victims to Lahore with the promise of providing them with jobs and then having them operated on and selling their kidneys to certain hospitals in the city.
However, it has been observed that the removal of kidneys and their sale are, for the most part, a voluntary procedure involving little coercion. At the root of this growing trade is grinding poverty, backward social traditions and the awareness that it is possible for a donor to survive on one kidney.
This trend has been especially strong among landless peasants, who are victims of poverty. Post-operative care for most of these donors is poor, and it is difficult for many to resume their work with the same vigour as before.
Unfortunately, the sale of kidneys is fast growing into a lucrative commercial venture for several parties. Besides the donor, there are also middlemen and the unscrupulous in the medical community who are involved.
Unless the government acts with determination, the sale of kidneys could assume the alarming proportions it has in neighbouring India, where documents are often forged to conform to a law that prohibits the sale of kidneys while stipulating that donors must have close family or similar ties of attachment to the recipient.
While the issue is linked to poverty, for which there are no quick solutions, lawmakers would do well to study the possibility of coming up with legal safeguards against this kind of sale and lay down a procedure for kidney donations to ensure against charity turning into trade.