| 21 January 2005 | Friday | 10 Zilhaj 1425 |
What ails the NFC?
Pinochet's indictment
Who governs the state and how?
Islam is not a system of rituals but a way of life free from excesses of asceticism and epicureanism. It believes in a balanced life. Balance (Mizan) is its key-note. It also believes in a principled life. Islam covers all the human activities and controls them.
Its main emphasis is on human welfare and normalization of human relationships. Its prayers, its laws, its rituals, its festivals all aim at securing the well-being of man in this world and in the Hereafter as well.
The groups of various faiths observe the rites, ceremonies and festivals that are based on the fundamental principles and the main objectives from which they derive their meaning and significance. It may be a mythology, a faith or an ideology. Festivals are common to all communities - civilized, semi civilized, advanced or developing.
Re joicings and merry-making are its keynotes, which are also natural to all humans. They appeal to sensation and animal instinct. But Islam gives it a touch of sobriety and seriousness without curbing the natural instinct.
Islam redefines enjoyment as an activity which, on the one hand accounts for its identification with the will of Allah and the well-being of the destitutes and the down-trodden of the society, on the other.
Islam always induces its believers to ameliorate the lot of those deprived of the amenities of life and to achieve this end Islam reorientated and systematized even the objects of pleasure.
The best pleasure for the believer comes from the realization that he has earned Allah's pleasure through prayers or through benevolent acts recommended by Allah and His Prophet (SAW).
The pleasure of Eidul Azha comes from the satisfaction in establishing the spiritual, moral and social order of Islam. Consequently the pleasure of Eid is not a licence but a symbol of gratitude to Allah Who gave us strength, stamina and the will to establish the system of sacrifice in its true spirit.
Let it be noted that on occasions of prayers, festivals and re joicings or sorrow, the believers are advised to pray and do good deeds which may ameliorate the status of the downtrodden and solve their problems.
Islam emphasises on its followers the need to look after the neighbour and be ready to help him. The Haj is a unique prayer. It is highly paying both individually and collectively in various walks of life.
Since various prayers have their own significance, benefits and good for the believers, let us examine its effects on human life, culture and civilization to benefit from it.
We know that Haj emphatically symbolizes the sacrifice which Hazrat Ibrahim offered on the call of Allah and Allah was so pleased with this act of him - his sincere sacrifice and total surrender to the will of Allah - that He declared it as the most significant religious occasion for all the believers. Allah describes this act of sacrifice in these words:
Tell them 'My service and sacrifice, my life and my death are all for Allah, the creator and Lord of all the worlds (Al-Quran). If we wish to remain faithful to Allah and His apostle, we shall have to imbibe the spirit of Ibrahim's sincere sacrifice.
Haj offers an opportunity for the Muslims living in different parts of the world to gather at one place. It, in fact offers a congregational ground what the Muslims of the world can meet, discuss and decide they ought to do to face the threats and challenges facing them.
It is a pity that this most important aspect has been ignored. On this day let us pray: "Oh Allah: weld our hearts together and reform our souls thus enabling us to face the awesome challenges of today. The occasion is a source of moral and spiritual reconstruction of the Ummah.
What ails the NFC?
Mr Abdul Karim Lodhi, the unofficial nominee to the National Finance Commission (NFC) of the federal government appointed to represent the Sindh government, has done the only honourable thing under the circumstances. He has resigned his membership, fully conscious of the fact that the federal government will not shed any tears nor be shaken up from its imperturbable somnolence.
This was an effort on the part of Mr Lodhi only to highlight to the people the dilemma in which the NFC has been placed. A majority of the thinking people would perhaps say "yes", Mr Lodhi did the right thing. But, there are some detractors.
I met one who also happens to be an honourable member of the NFC and who has not resigned but who would like to be acknowledged for the courage of his conviction. He thought that Mr Lodhi's was a wrong decision because he could have served the interest of Sindh better by working from within.
Each member has a veto and the award could not emerge without total unanimity. This veto has not as yet translated into a fair and equitable distribution of resources, and may be not in the foreseeable future.
That is because the NFC has been reduced to a talking shop, that too only when the federal government in its benign benevolence considers to call it to session. Stalemate has continued to stalk the proceedings of the NFC for about three years of 'democratic dispensation'.
The NFC appointed by the military government that came into being on account of 'counter coup' had also wasted a couple of years in this sterile exercise. As the status quo suits the federal government perfectly it does not mind its moribund continuation. In the meanwhile, this will keep some columnists busy.
Mr Lodhi has succinctly underscored the situation, in his statement that he gave out to the members of the press. He particularly mentioned the federal government, which is in breach of Article 160 of the Constitution.
He also rued the fact that grants-in-aid and borrowing powers of the governments were not included in the mandate of the NFC. Well, whatever has been included has not been distributed so far.
It will not be out of place to point out that with the military a constitution has no meaning. If the chief of the army staff assumes the reigns of office because there was a counter coup and also feels fully vindicated, then there is "something wrong with the state of Denmark."
The Council of Common Interests (CCI) is the most important safeguard provided under the Constitution governing the relationship between the provinces and the federal government. It has been out of existence for the last six years. But, who bothers?
Mr Lodhi has rightly referred to Riba which the federal government charges the provinces for loans lent to them. These charges are usurious and in the process the federal government makes money by borrowing cheap and lending dearly.
It is surprising that although the chief of army staff abhorred the idea of Riba, he has yet to convince his own ministry of finance to share his views on the subject.
In an earlier piece I had made some comments on the composition of the NFC. One of them related to an honourable member whose domicile from Balochistan was supposed to be a well-guarded secret.
To my surprise, this honourable member admitted to me that he never belonged to that province and the reason for his nomination from that province is the fact that all previous provincial nominees had failed to acquit themselves well of their responsibilities either for want of competence or spine.
One is happy that the barren province found one compatriot who fits the bill to be able to represent her effectively. It is a different matter, that for the last three years it has got nothing in the bargain. A province, which cannot field its own domicile for the NFC, deserves no better.
A third member from yet another province, known for being voluble, had this to say in defence of the paralysis plaguing the NFC. It at least provides a forum for discussion. To which I say, if talking proves to be a substitute for action, then good luck to the NFC and its honourable members.
Mr Lodhi has referred to the government of India and their NFC. He has said that the Indian government or its ministry of finance has nothing to do with the NFC, and it is neither located in, nor has any official acceptance from the government on it.
Here one is worried about things more important than NFC. India has democracy, which has become the envy of 150 million people inhabiting this unfortunate part of the sub-continent.
Sindh has become a pariah of the federation, which has been confirmed by the chief of the army staff, in one of his latest statements where he has threatened the subversive elements who oppose mega projects like Kalabagh.
People in Sindh, except in urban areas, to the last man are opposed to the project and any talk of proceeding with that project only tends to undermine their faith in the federation or its viability.
Sindh is also groaning under the burden of Thal Canal for which there is no water under the 1991 Accord. Obviously, Sindh feels water for this canal which would serve the most powerful people in the country, will be stolen from the weaker people most of whom live in Sindh.
Then there is the question of the water accord itself. In spite of explicit provision as to the sharing of water in a crisis, the federal minister's decision of 1994 is being followed in violation of the accord and to the consternation of Sindh.
The province of Sindh is firmly embedded in the federation, but when a political contraption quite out of sync with the popular mandate has been foisted on the Sindhis in the form of a provincial government, one should not be unprepared for some nasty surprises. Lest it may be said in future that it was the NFC that proved to be the Achilles' heel of the federation.
It is in the interest of the federation that the grievances of all the provinces, particularly of smaller ones are seriously addressed. Instead of hurling veiled threats at the Sindhis, serious thought should be given to allow them a sense of participation in the politics.
I used to joke a long time back that the federal government is increasing its expenditure exponentially and there may come a time when it might take over local octroi tax.
It appeared funny because it was a hilarious remark. But federal government was dead serious and it did the unthinkable. It has added octroi to its pool of resources.
Now instead of paying the local council through the respective provinces its due share in octroi, depending on the source where it was generated, it has made the income a part of divisible pool thereby depriving the local councils of their fragile financial basis. So much for the devolution this government eulogized as the jewel in the crown of its achievements.
The question is who should now replace Mr Lodhi? There is a large number of former secretaries of Sindh domicile waiting in the wings. One of them eminently qualified retired after holding some constitutional office for five years. He has great facility both with facts and emotion of the province. Why not him?
Pinochet's indictment
September 11, 1973, is forever etched in the minds of Chileans and freedom-loving people around the world as a day of infamy. But victims of General Augusto Pinochet are finally getting justice after 31 years of waiting.
On December 13, 2004 the former military dictator was indicted by Judge Juan Guzman for human rights abuses during his 17-year rule. Now 89, Pinochet was stripped of immunity by the Supreme Court and judged fit to stand trial.
The indictment specifies Pinochet's role in the disappearance of nine opposition activists and the killing of one of them. The Chilean congress also unanimously passed a bill granting compensation to 28,000 former political prisoners who were victims of torture under the Pinochet dictatorship.
Pinochet unleashed one of the most brutal dictatorships in modern history when he overthrew Chile's popularly elected President Salvador Allende in a US sanctioned military coup.
The US quickly embraced him as one of its most loyal friends in the war on communism. Thousands were murdered, detained or disappeared; most were tortured in 1,131 detention centres all over Chile.
Chile is still trying to free itself from the stranglehold of the Pinochet era when constitutional amendments gave draconian supremacy to the armed forces over civil institutions. A National Security Council superseded civilian authority, anointing itself "guarantor of institutionality."
General Pinochet performed a lead role in Operation Condor - a conspiracy by six South American regimes in the 1970s to kill left-wing opponents. Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay conspired to assassinate each other's political opponents. Scores were hunted down, kidnapped, tortured and murdered.
"The Disappeared" became a Latin American expression signifying political activists kidnapped and never found. In Chile alone they number close to 1,000. It is now believed that 500 of the disappeared were tied to steel rails and dumped into the sea from army helicopters.
The Spanish magistrate Judge Balthazar Garzon fired the first shot across the bow in 1998, when on behalf of a Spanish victim he filed an arrest warrant for Pinochet in Britain.
The UK was forced to detain Pinochet for 15 months. Then deemed unfit to stand trial he returned to Chile. Margaret Thatcher, his most fervent fan, could do little to help the general.
Judge Garzon also set his sight on Henry Kissinger who is widely believed to have blessed the coup against Allende and subsequently Operation Condor. Thanks to Garzon, Mr Kissinger is now one of many officials around the world needing special travel advisories by lawyers.
With a Pinochet trial impending, it remains to be seen how far Chile's jurisdiction will extend. However, much more light is likely to be shed on the fundamental role of the US in bolstering repressive regimes and thwarting democracy throughout Latin America during the Cold War.
Few nations have voluntarily dared to embark on a truth and reconciliation journey. South Asia warrants at least three significant investigations for war crimes committed by dictatorships and democracies alike:
Pakistan, for the Pakistan Army's war crimes in East Pakistan; India, for the Indian armed forces' war crimes in Kashmir - with the involvement of Pakistan in perpetuating the suffering of Kashmiri civilians, and Sri Lanka, for the Sri Lankan armed forces' war crimes against the Tamil population in the North Eastern provinces - with the overt military support of both India and Pakistan in that bloody civil war which has claimed upwards of 60,000 lives.
The tipping point for Sri Lanka happened in July 1983 when murderous Sinhalese mobs hunted down and killed at least 3,000 Tamils and forced 150,000 to become homeless refugees. The lynch mobs were spurred on by powerful politicians and even radio announcers, reminiscent of the Rwanda massacres.
The 1983 pogrom fuelled a nascent Tamil insurgency finally giving unrivalled legitimacy to the LTTE, now one of the most virulent, autocratic and deadly rebel movements.
Twenty years later, with a multitude of suicide bombings and assassinations of detractors, it is difficult to discern who has more blood on their hands, the LTTE or the Sri Lankan Army.
But what is unambiguous is that in the '80s and '90s the Sri Lankan state unleashed a scorched earth operation, killing, maiming and terrorizing thousands of unarmed Tamil civilians in the north eastern part of that country.
In 1986 at the behest of Sri Lanka's government, the Indian army occupied the north eastern provinces and fought the LTTE. The Indian army committed atrocious human rights violations against Tamil civilians, including countless rapes. A future Sri Lankan war crimes tribunal could summon Indian commanding officers who served in this failed campaign.
For their future generations, Sri Lankans like the Chileans will need to truthfully reconcile with their tragic past if the wounds are to be healed and a just and lasting peace is to hold.
And war crimes and human rights atonements are pre-requisites if South Asia is to make any meaningful progress toward an enlightened, peaceful and prosperous region. The world awaits further news from Chile of potentially historical and far reaching human rights precedents.
Who governs the state and how?
Governance is all about decision making. Who should have control over the people and the resources within a state and how should that control be exercised? Who is entitled to exercise the ultimate ownership rights and decision-making powers over the life and property of the people within the boundaries of a state? In short, who owns the state?
Europe found answers to these questions after a series of debilitating and traumatic events as it emerged from the medieval into the industrial age. The Cromwellian revolution (1649) and 'the constitutional monarchy', the American revolution (1776) and 'no taxation without representation' and, above all, the French Revolution (1789) and the 'Declaration of the Inalienable Rights of Man and Citizen' finally put an end to the old medieval claims by kings, conquerors and pretenders of divine rights who used to claim their ownership of state and all its resources and their right of unencumbered governance over it.
These tectonic events put an end to the medieval concept of governance and finally established the fact that the state is owned by its citizens; that people - and not just the rulers only - have rights to economic and political opportunities in the state, and these rights have to be protected through the rule of law from encroachments by the high and mighty.
Once the fundamental issue of ownership of the state was settled, Europe moved out of medievalism - its 'dark ages'. It undertook reforms for empowerment of the people in the economic and political life of their countries, demolished special interests and privileges and opened opportunities for all.
It is these reforms that unlocked the energies, skills, resources, dreams and ambitions of the vast multitudes which became the driving force behind both - the Industrial Revolution and democratic governance.
The universal appeal of these principles of governance went beyond Britain, France and America and became the litmus test for the legitimacy of a government everywhere. They also became the rallying cry of all anti-colonial movements.
Henceforth, the legitimacy of governance everywhere in the world would be judged against the rules of governance and even those who would work to circumvent and sabotage them, would be obliged to pay homage to these principles.
But for the Islamic fraternity, shorn of its earlier quest for learning and the value of scholarship and closing its doors to its Renaissance, there were no internal reforms in governance of the Muslim countries.
Their old autocratic, medieval governance continued till Muslim countries so governed were overwhelmed by the much smaller but newly industrializing states of Europe and were controlled or colonized by them.
Why the governments of the Muslim states were oblivious to the need for reforms to re-energize themselves and halt the decline of their economic and political power has more to do with their internal governance system than with any external factors.
Most Islamic and western scholars are agreed that the sudden and steep decline of the mighty Ottoman Empire was on account of their haphazard mode of governance, frequent bloodbaths resorted to by all kinds of claimants to the throne, and senile successions that often prevailed during the greater part of the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries.
The Mughals in India after Aurangzeb similarly dissolved in the spree of killings, imprisonments of various claimants to the throne, internecine intrigues, and the consequent chaos and anarchy.
It was the people-powered and industrializing states of Europe that came to conquer and control the much larger and richer medieval autocracies of the Ottomans and Mughal India. The historical origins of industrial revolution and democracy are common.
Both are branches of the same ideological tree and emerged around the same time in consequence of the tectonic events that opened economic and political opportunities to vast multitudes of people hitherto excluded and denied for centuries.
There are also striking similarities between the rules devised to promote industrialization of the economy and democratization of the polity. The economic and business opportunities were opened beyond the cloistered groups of ruling families and friends, through their corporatization - the creation of joint stock companies with thousands of shareholders.
This harnessed the energies, skills and resources of the vast multitudes of people necessary to meet all kinds of new avenues opened by the Industrial Revolution.
The management of the corporation is appointed by the owners/shareholders as their agent to conduct the affairs of the corporation for the benefit of the owners/ shareholders. To ensure that the management acts according to the mandate of the owners, the shareholders elect a board of directors to oversee its working.
The same rules were laid down for democratic governance. All previous rights of the kings, conquerors and claimants of divine rights to rule over people were abolished. The citizens were accepted as the owners of the state and the government; even when headed by kings and queens, were treated as the agents of the people working according to the mandate periodically given by the people.
Like the board of directors in a corporation, a parliament is elected by the citizens to oversee the working of government and ensure that the resources of the state are utilized in accordance with the priorities laid down by the citizens' representatives.
The strength of both - democracy and industrial capitalism - is derived from their ability to tap the energy, skills and resources of the vast multitudes of the people and harness these for achieving economic and political objectives.
Whatever our soothsayers may say, the continuing economic, political and technological prowess of the US, Europe and Japan lies in their ability to tap the reservoirs of the creative energies of their people for collective progress and betterment.
For over two hundred years as the medieval governance of the Muslim countries succumbed to the powers of industrializing Europe and colonialism the governance issues were monopolized by the colonials while the people of the colonies were left to look after the village and municipal affairs.
On independence, many Muslim countries merely reverted to the medieval governance they had known before their colonization as if the industrial revolution and its accompanying reforms in democratic governance were ignored or bypassed.
In some cases, the reversion to the medieval system in the modern age brought unsavoury consequences. While medieval governance was autocratic it was not totalitarian, simply because the state lacked the capabilities to control many aspects of the lives of their people spread over the far-flung areas.
The modern technology, however, had enormously enhanced the capabilities of the state apparatus. Wherever in the Muslim world, the medieval governance was put in charge of the modern state apparatus; it effectively closed all avenues for empowerment of the people and retarded their progress to both economic prosperity and self-governance of their countries.
Pretty soon, this medieval governance now in control of the modern state apparatus, easily enlisted the support and cooperation of a whole crop of spin doctors, happy to label this unelected, authoritarian governance as Islamic, and denying the people their legitimate rights as owners of the state to exercise control over the policies and resources of the state and hold governments accountable for their lapses and failures.
Even the medieval modes of governance were extended into the modern industrial age. The ruler was still what the courtiers in medieval darbars called, zill-i-illahi (the shadow of God on earth) and not an agent of the people, elected by and accountable to them for his policies and actions.
If the rulers of any country are the shadow of God or their assumption of power is under some divine writ, why should such rulers and their governments care about ordinary mortals who inhabit their country, empower them, protect their human rights and allow them participation and influence in governance? If they have been divinely ordained to rule, why should they hold themselves accountable to ordinary people for the exercise of their powers? Some trickle-down may come to people out of charity and kind-heartedness but not as a matter of right unless their fundamental position as owners of the state is recognized and respected.
Without the reforms in governance which empower people through economic and political institutions and protect their rights with the rule of law, most of the Muslim world will continue to suffer low levels of human development, irrespective of the riches and resources of their countries.
The powerful lobbies in the United States are already arguing that many rulers in the Muslim world are incapable of carrying out internal reforms in their system of governance.
But imposition of any 'reforms' from outside would create many more and lasting problems. The responsibility of turning the tide lies squarely on all elements of the Muslim world and not on any outside forces. Islam is not the problem of the Ummah. Governance is.
E-mail: smshah@alum.mit.edu.