| August 30, 2007 | Thursday | Sha’aban 16, 1428 |
To send a letter to the Editor
Click here
The nation’s best interest?
Western media and Islam
Minister’s cigar
Is DHA accountable?
A storm in a teacup
PhDs galore
Petrol prices
60 years of freedom
School closure
Readers are requested to restrict their comments to a maximum of 400 words. We reserve the right to edit letters for reasons of clarity and space. Letters, including those by e-mail, should carry the complete postal address of the sender. The views expressed in these columns do not necessarily reflect the views of the newspaper.—Editor
THIS is apropos of Aileen Qaiser’s write-up, ‘Do we want kidneys from deceased or living donors?’ (Aug 27). It notes the growing lobby “which is challenging the organ sales taboo” and recommending ‘legalising payment’ to increase live donors. The writer also lists recent ‘developments’ that ‘favour’ the pro - organ sales lobby. I would like to update your readers about this important issue.
The writer mentions the most commonly used argument of those in favour of a ‘regulated market’ for human organs. In this view, as there is a lack of success in stemming the buying and selling of organs, the way forwards is to ‘regulate’ this practice instead of prohibiting it. This is surely an odd argument. If society believes that sex slavery and bonded labour are inherently unethical and exploitative in nature, would ‘regulating’ these practices transform them into moral and non - exploitative acts?
Ms Qaiser writes that the pro - sale lobby was ‘strengthened’ in October 2006 with passage of Saudi Arabian law allowing ‘$13,000 and other benefits’ for ‘unrelated organ donors’. This is incorrect. In November 2006, this Saudi proposal (not law) was discussed, and opposed, in a Middle East Society of Organ Transplantation workshop held in Kuwait under the auspices of WHO. Participants included representatives from Pakistan and all ME countries, including the director of the Saudi Centre of Organ Transplantation. After discussions, members reached a consensus, the ‘Kuwait Document’, opposing all forms of ‘commercialism and transplant tourism’ and “the placing of an arbitrary monetary assignment to an organ or tissue” as these reflect disrespect for human dignity.
The writer also quotes a report in The Economist hailing the “regulated system of compensation for living donors” in Iran as a “model humane move, better than the illicit trade.” This is an outdated article. Subsequent studies by Iranian physicians reveal significant physical and psychological repercussions for the kidney vendors, and the reappearance of middlemen. Ethical concerns about the Iran model have also been raised in international forums, including WHO. In July 2007, during the meeting of the Asian Task Force against Organ Trafficking, the Iranian representative admitted to ethical issues that need addressing.
Lastly, although Ms Qaiser’s article correctly identifies the need for a deceased donor programme in Pakistan, its title suggesting a choice between either deceased or living donors is misleading. It is well established that both are equally important components of any comprehensive transplantation programme to maximise public benefit. In my opinion, the report should have been titled “We require kidneys from deceased and living donors in Pakistan.”
DR FARHAT MOAZAM,
Professor and Chairperson,
Centre of Biomedical Ethics and Culture,
Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation
Karachi
AS we sit back and watch our once vaulted saviour sell our country in order to retain his slipping hold on power, one wonders how far he will go with this facade of fake patriotism. For me, his actions have nothing to do with the betterment of our republic, but to save himself.
We had such high hopes for the man in uniform, and his promise of saving us from our corrupt prime ministers. And now he is making deals with them to save him. Even that could have been tolerated, as we Pakistanis are bound to shrug our shoulders and say “what to do” but have we gone mad?
Ms Bhutto’s demand for “constitutional immunity... indemnifying all their actions during their governance” is tantamount to treason. One does not grant immunity to ‘alleged’ plunderers for the sake of political expediency. The law must prevail. One does not make such demands if they are innocent, otherwise one would not fear the law. This is not the Pakistan we want to build, and this deal will damage the nation for decades to come.
Is there no rational person in the government who truly has the nation’s best interest at heart? We are left to lament, “where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio, our nation turns its lonely eyes to you.”
AMMAR HAMDANI
London
CHIEF Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry is the logical choice for the post of president. He has the public’s support and integrity but it seems improbable because he has to take many important decisions for clearing the path of democracy. Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif both are tainted. An all party government is what Pakistan needs now, at least for a few years until terrorism is minimised. But that too seems improbable.
The best way is to conduct fair elections under a two-party setup under changed system. Only that will provide a stable government. This too seems improbable. The military won’t give up its power because it seems improbable.
Nobody can tell how the current crisis will end. Can the chief justice be nominated after the elections are over? This is our best hope.
SUMAN K. MISHR
Youngstown, Ohio, USA
BENAZIR Bhutto says there is only a week left for Gen Musharraf to conclude the deal based on her six-point agenda. Mercifully, her agenda is only one point less than the general’s agenda of seven points he had issued after overthrowing an elected government. So far, the general and the daughter of the east, darling of the West, have been playing ‘deal, deal’ with one another. While the general was not too serious, Ms Bhutto was.
The Supreme Court decision to allow the Sharif brothers to return to the country has completely changed the political scenario. The decision has upped the stakes for both Ms Bhutto and the general, throwing the latter into a spin. Although Ms Bhutto is shrewd in her own right, there is no harm in advising her. She must not provide any breathing space to the general; he is too desperate to conclude the deal with her. She must try extracting as much out of him as she can, for such a situation may not last long.
The Sharifs might throw a spanners in the works -- the pact that Ms Bhutto, the general and the US are clandestinely trying to cobble together. While the general makes military - style manoeuvres, Ms Bhutto makes deft political moves. She must get all her cases of money laundering quashed. And also ask the general to issue orders that nobody henceforth talks or writes about Surrey Palace, locket (worth 117,000 pounds only), etc. Believe me, he will agree to it. Eat your heart out, Judge Daniel Devaud of Swiss court.
MEHRAN LEGHARI
Lahore
WORDS cannot picture the chaos that has been unleashed throughout the world today. Bloodbath in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Lebanon and Palestine are all blamed on Islamic extremism.
Generally speaking, extremism is responsible for all the evils today. The incident of Lal Masjid in Islamabad can also be blamed on religious extremism but the question is, where did it come from?
Religious violence is on the rise since 9/11 as Americans believe that underground Islamic militants have declared a war against their country. Mind you that 9/11 is an event which is yet to be investigated by independent and neutral experts.
The events of 9/11 provoked America into invading Afghanistan and Iraq, which created hatred in the hearts of Muslims against their respective governments being supportive of the so - called war against terror.
The trend of arming religious schools with weapons started with fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan and the trend still exists which is a perfect example of poor governance by yet another US - supported military rule. There is not a single incident of such a nature throughout the history of Muslim rule in the subcontinent in the past. Muslims ruled the South Asian subcontinent peacefully for over 700 years before the British snatched their crown.
Another important factor that fuels anger against the present Pakistani government is the country’s support for injustice against Afghan people. The truth that we tend to ignore, because of overwhelming assault of the media, is that it is all the aftermath of Soviet and then western invasions of Afghanistan. Western governments armed Afghan people to fight the Soviets and after the destruction of he USSR, left them to kill each other.
There had to be a reaction if Americans were to go back and bomb them for the crime which they never knew about. The western media is so high - tech, yet so dim - witted to brand this weak Afghan resistance as Islamic terrorism.
The western media needs to be educated and needs to learn some manners as they know nothing about Islam and they talk about it in any way they want.
SHAKIL AHMED MUGHAL
Dubai, UAE
I WAS extremely disturbed to see Federal Minister Shaikh Rashid Ahmed holding a big cigar while giving an interview at a private TV channel studio in Islamabad the other day. On the one hand, the ministry of health is taking measures to educate the public on the dangers of active and passive smoking and, on the other hand, a minister is giving a message to the youth that smoking is an acceptable behaviour.
As a health professional, I can tell the minister that tobacco use whether in the form of cigarette or cigar is a major risk factor for not only lung cancer, heart attack but also 20 other serious diseases. Just the other day I examined seven patients in my clinic, all suffering from lung cancer caused by smoking.
Our leader should act as a role model by promoting healthy lifestyle to the public, in general, and to the youth, in particular.
Gone are the days when people used to feel proud holding a cigar and sitting in front of an ashtray.
Also, smoking inside a closed place like TV studio is a violation of Prohibition of Smoking Ordinance 2002 which was approved by the federal cabinet and signed by President Gen Pervez Musharraf.
PROF JAVAID A. KHAN
Aga Khan University
Karachi
KARACHI, the financial capital of Pakistan, has been turned into a city of polluted environment. The worst conditions prevail in the most expensive and highly taxed posh area under the monopoly of the DHA. It is a known fact that the DHA has huge funds all collected from the residents through taxes, membership fees, etc., still the authority is averse to resolving the problems.
There is mismanagement that has led to corruption, causing sufferings to the residents.
To add insult to the miseries of the residents, roads and streets have been dug in such a reckless manner that even the gas pipelines and meters have been damaged. On the one hand, the DHA is building parks to minimise pollution and, on the other hand, it is taking all measures to make the residential surroundings dirty. There is no provision of stormwater drains in the entire area, due to which the sewerage lines are chocked and the accumulated water swamped the homes of the area filling into the underground water tanks. What an inhuman living and at what costs?
Is there anyone above the DHA to seek an explanation for creating such filthy conditions?
SHAMIM QURESHI
Karachi
I WAS somewhat bemused by Jawed Naqvi’s ‘A few great parliaments and a few unelected MPs’ and found the title not only misleading but also not in line with the facts (Aug 27). In democracies, candidates are both directly and indirectly elected.
An indirectly elected MP of the Rajya Sabha is no less democratically elected than a directly elected member of the Lok Sabha. The former is elected by the members of the Lok Sabha who are in turn democratically elected by the people.
These elections have been constitutionally provided and according to the laws of the land. There is nothing brazen in a member of the Rajya Sabha becoming Prime Minister as it is constitutionally provided. There is nothing perfidious in a non - natural born citizen of India such as Sonia Gandhi not qualifying to be head of government in India. If such an exclusion is considered perfidious, then the same requirement in the US, where only a natural born citizen of the US can be head of the government, in this case, the president of the United States, would be as perfidious. And no one to my mind considers the latter requirement so.
The fact that Sonia Gandhi, an Italian-born Catholic, is the most powerful person in Indian democratic setup and a Sikh, representing a religion that is about two per cent of the Indian population, is probably the second most powerful person speaks volumes on the Indian electorate’s liberal approach to governance. Could Dawn readers claim a similar liberality of approach in their own country?
In fact, Dr Manmohan Singh is in addition to being constitutionally qualified to be prime minister of India, is eminently qualified because of his personal qualities of humility and perspicacity and his professional attainments in economics and policy to be the first minister of India.
In my view, he is more qualified than anyone at present in India. In fact looking at the venality of most of the directly elected representatives of the Indian Parliament, it is a good thing that Dr Singh was not elected to the lower house in the same manner as they.
If the constitution allows elected governments to finalise treaties in India, Mr Naqvi’s objections in this area should be addressed to people who can amend the constitution. I would like to underline the rather trite fact that the current state of the art dictates current government policy and such a situation is no less democratic than any the other. Mr Naqvi’s fulmination in the article against the way India handles its polity is, in my view, ‘a storm in a teacup’.
GIRDHAR GOPAL
Chappaqua, NY, USA
WHILE endorsing Prof Zahid Mahmood’s letter (Aug 20), I would like to point out the wrong analogy given by Samina Waqar in her letter (Aug 9) when she compares MBBS and LLB degrees with PhD, labelling all the three degrees as first degrees.
This point has not been taken up by Prof Mahmood and rightly so because LLB and MBBS degrees were not under discussion in his letter (Aug 5) but, in my view, it is an important point to refute as it falsifies facts. Ms Waqar’s plea that MBBS and LLB degrees are basic degrees like PhD is not tenable.
The first two degrees are basic degrees to enter the profession as MA/MSc degrees are basic for joining teaching at the university/college level; whereas PhD is a terminal degree like the degree of doctor of law and doctor of medicine/surgery, etc.
Moreover, she goes on to argue that a PhD degree is needed for a faculty in all subjects except for certain subjects such as law and fine arts. I do not know what is the long list included in her ‘etc’, but the argument is highly misplaced and illogical.
Ms Waqar is overanxious to defend the HEC, being more loyal than the king, but she gives a bad name to the HEC by taking recourse to irrational arguments, and spoils the HEC’s image.
ASEM NOOR
Karachi
A SUM of Rs20 billion to Rs25 billion is pocketed by vested interests in the head of transportation charges of oil products every year. In early 1965, the price of petrol at Karachi was Rs2.81 per gallon while in Lahore it was Rs3 per gallon.
The formula was to add the freight to the basic price to make it look that the maximum price was at the source of procurement at Landhi Kotal. Then there came a price formula under which Rawalpindi was made the benchmark for freight and the whole country was to pay the same price.
Now, according to the record of oil marketing companies, the maximum sale of petroleum products is at Peshawar? More than Karachi? The real position is that products are never transported to Peshawar or Quetta. These are sold in Karachi or suburb and shown on papers to have been sold in the north or west of Pakistan.
This can be checked from records of OMCs. The best way is to let the consumer pay the freight charges according to the distance from the refineries or port (in case of imported oil).
This will save the purchaser of oil products a hefty sum of Rs20 billion every year.
The above figures were confirmed by Senator Rukhsana Zuberi while talking to me in a live private TV channel debate.
INAYAT SHEIKH
Karachi
ACCORDING to a document available in the State Library of Bhopal, Mughal Emperor Babur left the following will to his son Humayun: ”My son, take note of the following: do not harbour religious prejudice in your heart. You should dispense justice while taking note of the people’s religious sensitivities, and rites. Avoid slaughtering cows in order that you could gain a place in the heart of natives. This will take you nearer to the people.
”Do not demolish or damage places of worship of any faith and dispense full justice to all to ensure peace in the country. Islam can better be preached by the sword of love and affection, rather than the sword of tyranny and persecution. Avoid the differences between the Shias and Sunnis. Look at the various characteristics of your people just as characteristics of various seasons.”
If a 16th century emperor could see the wisdom in this approach, why can’t our 20th century political and religious leaders do the same?
Happy 60 years of intolerance and corruption.
EMAD A. MIRAN
Toronto, Canada
THIS is with reference to the closure of schools on the occasion of Shab - i - Baraat. I fail to see how Shab-i-Baraat warrants the closure of schools, especially given the recent disruption of the school schedule due to the rains.
It is sad that we immediately close our schools at the slightest hint that it may be an inconvenience. Another example of this is schools closing down due to international cricket matches. I would have hoped that our education held a higher priority for us than this.
ALI HABIB
Karachi
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.