| July 13, 2006 | Thursday | Jumadi-ul-Sani 16, 1427 |
To send a letter to the Editor
Click here
Repeal of Hudood Ordinance
PIA Fokker crash
Privatisation
Fighting extremism through development
Re-naming NWFP
Wapda’s brutalities
How much more can Pakistan do?
Mumbai blasts
New stamps
Fazl’s claim
WHILE addressing the 28th anniversary of APMSO, MQM chief Altaf Hussain has demanded that Pakistan should have another constitution or large-scale changes be made to the 1973 Constitution. The rationale given by him is the substantial transformation on the international scene in the wake of 9/11 and its undue impact on our domestic political and social affairs.
He also mentioned turbulent developments in Balochistan and Wazirstan. His idea echoes the well-known saying of former US president Thomas Jefferson: “Constitution should be revised every 25 years or so to enable new generations that have come of age to subscribe to it.”
President Jefferson’s words contain unprecedented cogency and wisdom. We all know that change is inevitable. So far no power in the world has been able to resist the change or even succeed in impeding the process of change. Most of the countries appeared on world map in the later half of the 20th century, specially in the decolonisation process.
Their constitutions were framed soon after their establishment, in accordance with the things and circumstance prevalent at that time. The cycle of change continued to rotate, and it was accelerated by advancement in science and technology to such an extent that world displays a scene thoroughly different from that of the 1950s, or the 1960s, or even the 1970s. The period of 50 or so years is sufficient to produce two generations.
In this era of globalisation the new generation is governed by the laws formulated several decades ago, and people have to accord their lives with old rules, thus the conflict is bound to rise. Thomas Jefferson said this about 200 years ago, but now we can see that his words were well justified. But the practical translation of such ideas is possible only in the West, the feasibility of their application is alien to the countries like ours. That is why the Quaid-i-Azam once said: “I do not oppose the western form of democracy, but it does not suit the subcontinent.”
In its less than 59-year-old history Pakistan has experimented three constitutions. The first constitution was framed in 1956 with will and whims of the rulers of the time. It did not last long and succumbed to the clash of interests among succeeding tsars within six years. Another constitution was introduced in 1962 by the monarch in uniform. This constitution continued to serve its makers as long as they were in power, but soon after their disappearance from their political scene, it collapsed headlong.
In 1973, another constitution-making attempt was made. Can anybody tell me how many amendments have been made to the 1973 Constitution? Amendment after amendment: a nasty joke with the Constitution which is supposed to be bible determining how the government is to be run. Every ruler who came to power altered its such clauses that were converse to his vested interests and made certain amendments suiting his choice.
President Musharraf went beyond the extent of giving LFO, a mini constitution, for self-perpetuation. The Constitution has been amended so many times that it looks a quite new one than its original text. There appears no space left in the national document to make more alterations. Mr Altaf Hussain suggested that representatives from federating units should be invited to formulate a constitution with unanimity, consent and consultation.
What kind of consent is he talking about? Has federation ever given heed to the say of federating units? How can a nation, which is wrangling over the NFC award and water distribution, show unanimity and consent on a mammoth issue of devising a constitution?
Here is another question: will those representatives be the representatives of public and the provinces which they come from or representing the ruler of the time? Current parliament is full of ‘yes men’, and lacks dare and courage to force the power-retainer to end operations in Balochistan and Waziristan, despite widespread public agitations.
Even if massive changes are made to the 73 Constitution, as opined by Mr Hussain, is there any guarantee that those amendments will settle the constitutional crisis? The way things are going in Pakistan, and decisions are made bypassing the wishes and rights of the people, it will be a suicide to show way to the current rulers to introduce a new constitution for the country.
ASLAM PERVAIZ ABRO
Shikapur
PRESIDENT Gen Musharraf’s directive to the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) to draft an amendment to the Hudood Ordinance with consensus of all schools of thought, and compatibility with the Islamic law and values is a half-hearted move. Nevertheless, it is welcome in spite of its shortcomings.
The president chose only to amend rather than revoke this most unlawful law, thrust by one man on a nation of 150 million people. The cursed part of this so-called law is that it hurts and humiliates the weaker sex. The ordinance is unconstitutional and illegitimate; it should have ceased to exist with the exit of Ziaul Haq.
The ordinance should have been repealed at once. But the nation has to commit to the present rulers as much as it had to submit to Ziaul Haq.
The Hudood Ordinance is now being made over to the CII to draft an amendment to it, taking “along all the schools of thought” of the religion. There has to be a consensus on the amendment and it has to be compatible with Islamic law and values. The issues involved are serious as well as difficult.
If it were possible to arrive at a common consent on important issues of the religion, then there would really not be so many sects existing today in Islam.
The hatred, the killings and the fanatical behaviour of members of one sect toward the other is demonstrative of our intolerance to differing ideas and thoughts.
There was recently a discussion on a local TV channel about this miserable ordinance, involving people from different walks of life.
Some mullahs, participating in the discourse, categorically stated that they would not let any amendments be made to the ordinance as they considered an effort in this direction to be a conspiracy against Islam.
Therefore, it is evident that there could be no consensus of thought between several divergent religious factions we have today in society.
The CII has not, in any case, been an efficacious organisation ever since its inception. It has been its constitutional function to examine, on its own account, all controversial laws and suggest remedial measures.
The council may be questioned as to why it completely ignored this much talked-about, despotic, and actionable ordinance which has caused suffering to thousands of women and did not take it up for examination yet.
The council can scarcely claim credit for anything except perhaps for its reports on trifling matters like observing Friday as a public holiday, kite flying, Valentine’s day, smoking and advertisements.
The country’s religious-political parties have always maintained a tragic silence on degradation of women in whatever form it was imposed, as a naked march through a bazaar, acid thrown on the face, honour killing, a case of rape or a grandiose event of gang-rape on the order of a jirga.
The correct action would have been to repeal the Hudood Ordinance forthwith and let the matter go to where it belongs, i.e. parliament, the body whose function it is to make laws. The CII may advise parliament if the latter so desired and later examine the proposed laws after these have been formulated.
S. ABRAR HUSSAIN
Lahore
THE crash of a Fokker F-27 plane near Multan on Monday just 10 minutes after takeoff is shocking, but expected in view of the age of the plane.
A few years ago the Fokker company expressed its inability to provide spare parts for F-27 planes. It is entirely possible that the PIA is maintaining the planes with parts scavenged from another grounded FF-27.
PIA should now replace these antique flying machines with new short-haul aircraft.
In the meanwhile, the families of the deceased must be compensated according to the IATA statutes as the onus of the crash rests entirely upon the shoulders of PIA, which is adamant on operating post-World War II planes which have been phased out by all the airlines.
RAFI ADAMJEE
Karachi
FOR the death of 45 people on board a Fokker F27 that crashed on Monday I believe part of the blame must be given to PIA for operating the F27 aircraft.
Leading airlines of the world have stopped using the Fokker aircraft for operations, yet PIA defies logic by operating this aircraft whose manufacturing company shut down production in 1996.
This aircraft should have been grounded many years back because making a machine work beyond its capacity is asking too much of it. Why PIA persisted in using the aircraft is beyond me.
JUNAID ABBASI
Rawalpindi
DR Akhtar Hasan Khan’s deposition (Dawn, July 1) is brilliant and exposes the government’s deliberate tactics to sell national assets at dubious prices. Dr Khan needs to be complimented for having raised the curtain on this important subject. After Ziaul Haq had trampled and torn to pieces all institutions, it is indeed a ray of some hope in the dark clouds hovering our dear country in the the Supreme Court’s decision in the PSM case.
Dr Khan has raised several important issues which the prime minister needs to inform the nation. The exact and precise usage of funds received from privatisation, there is a legal requirement in terms of the Privatisation Ordinance as to how the funds are to be used. If this has not been done, then those responsible have to explain and then face the law.
In any civilised and alive country such serious default should call for the downfall of the government of the day and chopping of many heads on the ‘guillotine’. But, alas in Pakistan our functionaries have shed all clothings and are willing to stick to their positions even if it is at the cost of the country.
Despair and despondency have taken over national priorities and greed and graft knows no bounds. The people have been subjected to such a position that there is no differentiation between right and wrong and good and evil.
Let us hope and pray that this one bold decision of the Supreme Court shall be a forerunner for setting the course of the nation in the right direction. We love our country and wish it to be a leading light in the affairs of the world. This can happen only if real democracy is ushered. Can this be done? We pray Allah grant the sagacity to all responsible for the affair of the country to think and ponder to make Pakistan strong and stable and allow the introduction of a true democratic system. A system not funnelled through the agencies.
MAHER ALAVI
Karachi
WHAT is extremism? It is traced in societies primitive and underdeveloped, and socialisation takes place under the influence of norms based on religious and ethnic code of conduct. The interest groups identify change against the spirit of religion and culture that guarantees their objectives. That is why mullahs are against marathon and tribal lords like Bugti turn down, in the name of traditions and customs, every effort for the change.
Hopefully, we are looking for a change. The change should not be less than the enlightened moderation as, in words of Gen Musharraf, “the only way to enlightened moderation is to shun religious extremism”. The man who believes in strategy still has to find out how extremism can be minimised. The idea of enlightened moderation seems catchy in the perspective of the Ummah. If analysed within our perspective, it is short of character. As extremism is an attitude or mindset, therefore, the attitude can be repaired or improved by considering the possible determinants responsible for extreme tendencies. This is where we have to put our energies for repairing the mindsets.
First, we have to identify the target, which no doubt is to shun extremism that helps us to promote our soft image internationally. The fault line is when we identify extremism as religious extremism only ignoring other facets equally responsible for the malaise. These are cultural, educational, economic conditions, governance, democracy, the level of development and human rights that develop or distort attitudes and mindsets.
Second, whatever may be the reasons for extremism, we never take it as an attitude. We simply politicise it and when it becomes meaningless in power politics, it becomes a non-issue.
Lacking determination in our struggle for a tolerant society, neither state nor society has worked out a strategy to minimise the role of religion in politics. At one time, the religious political leadership becomes an ally to the state and, at others, it is the state that keeps them in a position where they can exploit the situations in their favour.
If it is really an issue and if we have to live in the comity of nations as a tolerant and liberal society, then it is easy to make a choice. Even today we are unable to realise the fact that tolerant society and soft image are our basic requirements for investment and friendly ties with other nations. We find ourselves at ease by simply taking it as a demand of the outside world. With this frame of mind, we confess that we are at ease with extremism, it is only the requirement of the international community and we are determined to oblige it. This is our fault line and it must be repaired if we want to avoid our romance with extremism in future.
As democracy is key to the corridors of the developed world, it should be decided once for all that religion has no role in politics. But it is ignored and today we are paying its price. There is a need for understanding what religion is meant to man. The focus of religion is always the individual life. It does not expect from society to reform itself without reforming the individual. It is the character of the individual that enhances the prospects of welfare society.
The states formulate laws out of conditions in society. This is how the values of the religion penetrate in individual life, society and state. It is the direct relation of man with religion that is mandatory for understanding religion. The majority of Muslims does not seek direct guidance from the sources. The result is that they rely on mullahs who, unfortunately, come from the deprived section of society and in their struggle for power politicise religion and divide co-religionists.
We are called extremists. To change the perception, we have to take steps to convince the world that we are a part of it. If enlightened moderation is our priority, then image-building should be the top priority of the government. Let us keep aside toleration for the time being. Today, the real threat is the extremism we keep with us all the time. To root out extremism from society and individuals, we should work for socio-political and economic development, as also counter the threats posed by extremists in the way to enlightenment and moderation. Pakistan first should be our top priority.
SOHAIL KHALID
Toba Tek Singh
MANY people are suggesting that the NWFP should be re-named as Khyber. Some of them claim that this will honour the conquest of Khyber by Hazrat Ali. I have no objection to the NWFP being named as Khyber. But I do object to imaginative fictional stories being taught to our people as history. There is no historical basis of Hazrat Ali travelling as far as the NWFP. The battle of Khyber was fought in Saudi Arabia, during the life of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him), when Muslim conquests could not reach the NWFP by any stretch of imagination.
About 100 miles from Madina on the route to Syria was an important settlement of the Jews called the Khyber. Khyber literally means a fort, and the place was so named because it consisted of a series of forts. After their expulsion from Madina, most of the Jews of Banu Qainuqa and Banu Nadir took refuge in Khyber. They were seeking an alliance with the Quraish. The Holy Prophet led a Muslim force to Khyber.
KHALID A.
London
WE all know that electricity has become the fifth element of life. There are daily news reports about power outages, fluctuations and tripping while the people were suffering from the heat. This is happening all around the country.
Everyone knows that Wapda’s staff carried out shutdowns for minimum of eight hours a day in the winter season for the purpose of maintenance of electric cables and transformers but the reality is totally different. This is the ‘desi’ method devised by Wapda engineers for reducing line losses. .
Only some persons know of this procedure for increasing or decreasing line losses. Line losses are caused by the theft of electricity, fluctuations and tripping of electricity and poor maintenance of Wapda’s electricity cables. Instead of paying attention to these problems, the engineers adopt methods such as loadshedding, power outages and overbilling to reduce the line losses for the prestige of their divisions. These unfair tactics do nothing to lessen the problems of the people.
M. SAEED PIRACHA
Sargodha
APROPOS of the article ‘How much more can Pakistan do?’ by Eric S. Margolis (Dawn, July 6), why is it that a Canadian journalist found the time to say things about Pakistan that Pakistani columnists should have been shouting from the rooftops for the past four years or more?
I for one would like to express my profound appreciation and gratitude to him. He sets a fine example for us all when it comes to speaking the truth with candour. Let us hope some of it will rub off on his counterparts in Pakistan.
ARSLAN KHAN
Brampton, Canada
WE Pakistanis fully condemn the bomb blasts in Mumbai. I would strongly request the Indian government to carry out an impartial inquiry into this tragic incident, and not to blame its “traditional rival”, since it will mar the ongoing peace process; or any particular religious section which might give rise to communal riots within India.
ZARTASHA KHIZAR VIRK
Lahore
It seems like we are a confused nation. On my recent exit from Pakistan I realised that even though I was exiting from Karachi’s Jinnah International Airport, my passport was stamped with a rubber-stamp that read ’Quaid-e-Azam International Airport’.
Has the Civil Aviation Authority forgotten that the name of the airport is Jinnah Terminal as per their website (www.karachiairport.com), or are they simply too lazy or too cheap to buy new stamps?
HAMIDAH HEMANI
New York, USA
ACCORDING to a news item, Maulana Fazlur Rehman has claimed that the 17th Amendment has blocked the imposition of martial law forever. He is right there because it permanently made real democracy subservient to the army through the NSC.
DR GHAYUR AYUB
London
You can also send letters to the Editor
Just send your message to the following address: letters@dawn.com
Make sure you include your full name, postal address, e-mail address, and in the case of Pakistan your day-time telephone number.