| April 22, 2008 | Tuesday | Rabi-us-Sani 15, 1429 |
To send a letter to the Editor
Click here
Repealing FCR
Pakistan’s ‘rich list’
National interest first
Renaming the NWFP
Judges’ retirement
New PTCL local rates
Messy democracy
Hot and cold
Education militarised
An anomalous situation
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
LOCAL Fata Taliban dubbed as militants are, in fact, sons of the soil, and not enemies of Pakistan, and are descendants of those volunteer tribesmen who spearheaded the Kashmir liberation war in 1948 at the cost of their lives.
A cursory look at the map of Pakistan and Kashmir should give a fair idea of colossal contribution of these great mujahideen whose sacrifices and achievements are no longer remembered except that of a phony ‘Mujahid-i-Awal’ when he or his party is in power.
The Fata Taliban were dubbed as mujahideen and fully exploited to fight US proxy war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan while our rulers, mullahs and their family members flourished with US dollars as evident for some ministers, MPs and MPAs during 2002-2007 period. After the war, the mujahideen who survived the war were ignored and left to live in abject poverty, worsened by a corrupt government machinery with dreaded FCR powers. After 9/11, these mujahideen were dubbed as terrorists to implement the US agenda in return for fabulous gains to our rulers as claimed by the Taliban.
Similarly, the Baloch, termed as militants are also living in abject poverty while Sui gas worth several trillion of rupees has been utilised elsewhere for over 50 years. A fraction of this money could make their life worth living.
Such multiple injustices meted to our own people has led them to desperation with a violent reaction as expected of the brave people, unlike those of Cholistan who reportedly died in silence in the absence of water while the Planning Commission was squandering with impunity the foreign bank loan, for drought prevention, in Islamabad.
Peace negotiation with the so-called militants is highly imprudent as it amounts to acceptance of existence of an organised hostile force strong enough to dictate peace terms binding on the government.
As such, the appropriate approach is to treat them as sons of the soil, to redress their genuine grievances, and persuade them to achieve their objectives through a political system acceptable to tribesmen.
For this, it is imperative to appoint rulers and people with public welfare in mind, to replace those who launched two luxury projects worth Rs5.7 billion (escalation in due course) in F-9 Park for a select rich class of Islamabad, and announced Rs2 billion only with a big fanfare at Kohlu for development of the entire Marri-Bugti area.
RAJA M. AFZAL KHAN
Gujar Khan
DAWN’s front-page report (March 30) comments that the writer of the prime minister’s speech in the National Assembly, after winning the unanimous vote of confidence, had no idea of the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR) which governs Fata. It seems that the writer has not done his homework properly. (Or did the PM make extempore speech?)
A question mark hangs over the executive order to abolish this British era’s 1901 ‘regulation’ which has not been replaced by another one. I would like to add two comments of my own.
At the time of Pakistan’s establishment, when the founder of the country was still alive, my father S. S. Hussain Naqvi, a Pakistan movement activist and close associate of Karachi’s chief commissioner Abu Talib Naqvi, used to say that when we are creating a country, we need laws, rules, regulations and acts, which would be cumbersome to enact in a short time.
But he would say we can have all those laws promulgated by the British government in India convert into Pakistani laws by replacing the original date by a subsequent date to Aug 14, 1947. All you needed was a single executive order by Governor-General M. A. Jinnah. All other legal formalities could have been taken care of by the National Assembly and the cabinet afterwards. But that was not to be.
As of now, when the FCR is no more, the prime minister can ask the Frontier’s newly-formed government to pass another regulation under any other name with today’s date and have it approved by the National Assembly. Or better still, absorb Fata and tribal belt into the federation, extend all Pakistani laws to all corners of geographical entities – with the consent of all political forces in tribal areas, minus the terrorists.
At present, Prime Minister Gilani’s position is like that of a worried general whose troops have attacked a wrong place and opened a new front to add to his miseries. It happens. This may be the first mistake of an allout assault at the mounting problems. He is best advised to go slow – and think before leaping.
M.K. NAQVI
Karachi
AN in-depth and extensive research is said to have been done by a Pakistani UK national in formulating “Pakistan’s Rich List of 2008,” which excludes prominent feudal landlords but includes politician-turned businessmen, businessmen-turned-politicians or even businessmen-cum-politicians. This is reliable information as many sources have been tapped to get the relevant data.
The number-one on the list is Mian Mohammad Mansha Yaha, a businessman, worth $2.5 billion, a prominent person, who owns the Muslim Commercial Bank.
The ‘poorest’ in the list is worth about a quarter of a billion dollars and ranks 43rd.
However, there are two significant personalities, one being a politician worth $1.8 billion and the other being a businessman-cum-politician worth $1.4 billion, who are playing an important role in the new political scenario of Pakistan. They have in their political agenda several national issues, one of which is alleviating poverty in the country. One way to effectively deal with this matter is for these honoured politicians to open up their hearts and sacrifice a fraction of their wealth for this purpose.
The combined wealth of our said politicians amount to $3.2 billion which may be reduced by 25 per cent to allow for an overestimate, i.e. it may be assumed to be $2.4 billion. If they decide to donate for poverty alleviation, an amount equal to zakat (2.5 per cent), then an amount of $60 million will be available to establish a trust or a foundation for this purpose. This will lead to, one, a validation of their political declarations and, two, a signal for the others on the rich list to similarly donate in the trust or foundation.
A. RAHIM
Karachi
IN his rejoinder, ‘National interest first’ (April 17), to my letter of April 15, Aftab S. Alam has tried to defend President Pervez Musharraf’s recent claims that had been questioned by me. He then asks whether national interest supersedes the personal interests of individuals like Dr A.Q. Khan and Nawaz Sharif. I would like to ask him:
a. Was it in Pakistan’s national interest or for the president’s benefit that the CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry was first pressured to resign by the president and his colleagues and when the top judge refused, he and his family were put under house arrest, the children weren’t allowed to go to schools; one had to take a final examination at home through the British Council’s help and another, a special child, was denied medical care?
b. Was the firing of nearly two-thirds of the nation’s superior judiciary – something unheard of even in banana republics – in Pakistan’s interest or that of the incumbent?
c. Was the ill-advised and dangerous statement that if Pervez Musharraf resigned, the militants would grab the power and the nukes, as also the subsequent damage-control exercise, in national interest?
d. Some three years back, Mr Musharraf had been trying very hard to send Pakistani troops to Iraq to bail out the Americans. Was it in our interest or that of Bush’s ‘tight buddy’ who wanted to oblige the US president by shoving our poor soldiers into those killing fields?
It is easy to pontificate while sitting in the US but extremely difficult to face an autocrat’s baton 8-10 hours of loadshedding or risk getting burnt alive/shot dead by those who don’t like you, while fighting for people’s rights, including the ones who are living abroad but may return some day.
QAMAR
Karachi
THIS is apropos of Murad Khan Kasi’s letter, ‘Naming the NWFP’ (March 21), in which he criticised the 10 names suggested by Khalid Chaudhry both on grammatical and strategic bases. Murad Kasi was just and right in doing so. I strongly agree with Mr Kasi’s arguments.
Being a Pathan and supporter of Mr Kasi’s letter, I want to mention some facts which are correctly data-based. Pakistan is a country, inhabiting multi-ethnic groups.
Among these, Pakhtoons are the largest ethnic group after the Punjabis, comprising 15 per cent of Pakistan’s population.
The total Pakhtoons residing in Pakistan are 28 million. Quetta and Peshawar are Pakistani cities with a significant number of Pakhtoons.
The following are the numbers of Pakhtoons residing in different parts of the country:
*NWFP 14,586,000
*Balochistan 2,293,000
*Punjab 1,929,000
*Sindh 1,052,000
*Azad Kashmir 157,000
*Islamabad 15,000
From the above-mentioned data, it is clear that the Pakhtoons outnumber all ethnic groups other than Punjabis in the country.
The province of the NWFP whose population, according to 1998 census, is 17,737,591 and amongst them 14,586,000 are Pakhtoons that outnumber all other ethnic groups residing in the NWFP.
We always proclaim that ‘majority is authority’ and also the number of Pakhtoons residing in the NWFP come up to this established axiom of ours.
Then why are Pakhtoons denied their right to name the NWFP as Pakhtoonkhwa, Afghania etc.?
It is unjust and unwise to treat the Pakhtoons in such a manner.
I, therefore, request the highups to ponder over the names chosen by the Pakhtoons of the NWFP.
This will put an end to the ethnic clashes and will greatly help to bring about cohesion and national integration.
And this will also be in the common usefulness of the Pakhtoons, Pakistan and the world at large.
MUHAMMAD ASLAM KHAN
Lahore
THIS is with reference to the news item appearing in a section of the press that the government is considering a new law by which the tenure of the chief justice of the Supreme Court will be fixed to three years.
At present, a judge retires when he reaches the age of 65 years. In America, no judge of the Supreme Court retires. This is being done so that the government gets rid of Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry. Otherwise he might haunt them till 2013.
Such intentions on the part of the government are mala fide and against the Murree Declaration and the will of the people who have given a mandate for this cause as well.
It is an irony that decisions are made to suit a certain class of people alone to cover their misdeeds. If Pakistan has a person like Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry in the legislature, executive, judiciary and other institutions as well, then we can change the destiny of this nation. Institutions are strengthened only if the person governing them is strong and upright. As Iqbal has rightly said:
Afraad ke haathon main hai aqwaam ki taqdeer
Har fard hai millat ke muqaddar ka sitara
No one has raised a question regarding his calibre as a judge. It is experience that is needed to reach such a level of excellence. On the one hand, the government is trying to cut short the tenure of CJ and, on the other hand, there is a re-employment policy. The justification given is to re-employ a person with experience. Isn’t there a contradiction?
There is a violation of the fundamental right. The personality of the CJ should not create doubt on the pretext that several political parties, persons, organisations have backed the movement. We are a living nation and it is the right of every person to raise a voice when they see that injustice is being done.
I can only hope and pray that the government should restore the judiciary as it existed on Nov 2, 2007.
DR ATTIYA MARUF
Lahore
ONE couldn’t agree more with Khan A. Shamshad’s letter (April 11) slamming the PTCL’s decision to cut down the duration of local calls to two minutes from five, which would now cost Rs2 for every two minutes, between the hours of 8am to 9pm.
In addition, the rate during the remaining nightly hours would also go up because the call would be charged at every four minutes instead of five. One would have thought that the PTCL would have given some relief to its customers by reducing the rates on weekly and other holidays as also at night time, but it has come out with a sharp knife to extract some more of our hard-earned money, whose buying power is decreasing all the time. The Pakistan Telecommunication Authority is urged to intervene.
A. ALEEM
Karachi
THIS is in response to Obaidur Rahman Khan’s letter, ‘Democracy is a messy thing’ (April 14). While there is no universally accepted definition of democracy, it is generally understood to mean: competitive elections, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, rule of law, majority rule, minority rights, and civilian control of military.
It certainly does not mean anyone should be roughed up as Dr Sher Afgan or Arbab Rahim was. In civilised societies there are courts of law to address grievances and the ballot-box to remove politicians from power. Violence cannot be justified under any form of government.
When people take the law into their own hands, there are other words to describe it, such as ‘anarchy’ and ‘lawlessness’, not democracy. It is appalling to read that Mr Khan sees no wrong in physical violence against political figures even if it is potentially fatal.
Secondly, Mr Khan is deluding himself in believing, “We now live in a country where the will of the people is stronger and more forceful ….”
MIR ALI
Unites States
THIS is apropos of the news item about Fata (April 14). President George W. Bush has blown hot and cold in the same breath. He praised Pakistan for getting hold of ‘number three’ in Al Qaeda. At the same time he has expressed that for future attacks of the US the planning area would be Fata.
As before, the President has totally forgotten that the most dangerous area where the planning for the destruction of international peace is done is the CIA headquarters, not very far from his Oval office. Perhaps some day a more powerful country would demand of the US to hand over George Tenet and Michael Hayden to them for their crime against peace, humanity and threaten use of force. I pray that the present generation of American people should also realise what crimes have been committed in the name of democracy and ‘war on terror’.
With the above news has come another news that our government has demanded UN probe into Benazir Bhutto’s murder. The government may take any action it deems fit to find out the competence and efficiency of its own intelligence, security, medical and judicial services. But a far greater trauma which affected almost all in the world are the events of 9/11. It is not surprising that none of the Muslim countries have demanded such an investigation, though they are more affected.
Even the permanent members of the Security Council like France, Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China have not also thought of such a probe. I wonder whether any member of our parliament or the Senate would like to include this point when they make a request to the UN.
KHALID HASSAN MAHMOOD
Karachi
This is with reference to Badar Jatoi’s letter, ‘Education militarised’ (March 31), wherein he has very rightly pointed out that the appointment of military personnel as heads of higher seats of learning such as universities and training institutions like National School of Public Policy has caused irreparable damage to the environment of scholarship due to garrison ‘discipline’.
I would, however, like to point out that it was during the ‘63 National Management Course held at the Pakistan Administrative Staff College, now NSPP, where not two but one officer, namely Abid Saeed, an outstanding police officer, then sitting deputy inspector-general of police, Lahore, had a severe cardiac attack.
The attack was so serious that he died while still in the lecture room. In addition, two secretary-level officers had similar cardiac attacks and were fortunately saved by immediate first-aid and their removal to the hospital in time.
SHAFIQUE ANSARI
Dubai, UAE
EVERY society can be unjust and cruel but it can also have just laws though it may not be able to dispense them justly. Pakistan seems to be the only country where you have everything but justice.
And those responsible for doing justice know that too. Ever heard of human jungle? Pakistan is that jungle; and following the jungle law – the stronger devour the weak.
In 1998 the writer of these lines took an early retirement from Bank Alfalah Ltd (formerly BCCI) – a bank having Pakistani staff and its head office in Karachi – which does not allow pension or medical facility to its retired employees. When thousands of employees of the backbone of the economy – banks and financial institutions – were being chucked out to sustain their economy (or on the IMF/WB recommendation), I too became a victim.
My bank had introduced a ‘Self Severance Scheme’ through which the employees, if opted for it, would severe their own employment against a meagre benefit. I opted for it, unfortunately. When the terminal benefits and dues were being calculated, the income tax was excised on those funds which were to be used in future.
It was the bank’s mistake. It is wrong to deduct income tax on the money meant for future use. The Sindh High Court has ruled that such income tax is illegal.
Some employees of banks and financial institutions had filed suit in the Lahore High Court and Sindh High Court for the recovery of such tax. The Lahore High Court had decided that such tax deductions were against the law and against common sense; the amounts so deducted should be refunded to the employees.
Some employees got their money back but many were still deprived of their right, myself being one of them. Realising that its case was weak, the CBR got a ‘stay order’ from the Supreme Court to stop refunds. The SC later decided finally in 2006 that the retirement dues and benefits were taxable.
Now an anomalous situation arose. The high courts had ruled that retirement dues are not taxable. Even the CBR itself admits in its Taxation Form 2007 that terminal benefits are not taxed. The question is how could the Supreme Court declare these funds to be taxable? Logic says that either the CBR’s declaration is wrong or there is some weakness in the SC decision.
MKN
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.
