“WE shape our cities, they shape our lives.” This was once said, long ago, by that man of great perspicacity, Winston Spencer Churchill. There can be no dispute to this.

This swiftly burgeoning orphan of the republican storm has not had a qualified town planner since Ahmed Ali died in 1973. Since then Karachi has expanded, devoid of any system of planning. The last incompetent who headed the building control for three long years, a retired brigadier, who last year was unceremoniously sacked, did such inestimable damage to this city, together with his sidekick (since jailed, hospitalized and bailed out) that the new chief controller, try as he may, will find it impossible to undo.

We have allowed Karachi to be shaped as it is, and we are now paying the price by the manner in which Karachi is shaping our lives. Many of those who email in response to my columns chastise me for the constant criticism levelled at all facets of Karachi’s shape and berate me for not offering solutions.

Solutions there are — but they are all long-term as the damage inflicted is so immense. As goes the old saying, it is far easier to destroy than to build, and Karachi suffers (as do most of the cities of Pakistan) from massive destructive assaults by the various city administrations, central and provincial governments. The first thing that would have to be done is to sack at least 90 per cent of the city administration — ranging from nazim down to peon, the federal and provincial governments, and the legislators who never legislate other than to their own advantage.

Having said this, once they are sacked how do we replace them? Where is the qualified, honest manpower with a will to work and to serve? We do have capable men who can deal with the problem, but they sit on the sidelines, largely ignored and unheeded. They can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Foreign consultants, foreign technocrats and technicians, town planners and city builders would have to be called in. Can they be paid? And would they come?

So it would seem that for the moment, and certainly not in my lifetime, and most probably in the lifetimes of the present generations, there is little that can be achieved to halt or even to stem the on-going misshaping of the cities of Pakistan. We have allowed our bed to be laid for us and now we must lie on it and all we few can do, it seems, as most are reluctant to act, let alone raise their voices, is to continue to protest.

Many have responded, present and past Karachiites, to last week’s column on the battering our beaches receive at the hands of the administrators of this city, with particular reference to the ridiculous shoulder-high wall built by the city government along the Clifton beach, shutting out any sighting of the sea, and with much anger to the so-called fountain that spouts up seawater five days a week — a ‘gift’ to the misshapen city of Karachi from the federal minister for ports and shipping.

Now, Karachi Port Trust announced in the press last week that it was organizing ‘cruises’ for the entertainment-starved citizens of Karachi to sail out into the sunset and view the ‘fountain’ from up close. How much the ‘cruise’ costs was not revealed, but it is half price for children from six to 12 years of age.

Babar Ghauri, minister for ports and shipping, may well have been enamoured of the Jeddah jet d’eau, or, rather, realized that such an useless innovation in a poor Third World country that cannot provide potable water to some 40 per cent of its 160 million, may prove lucrative for a few lucky entrepreneurs, but has he any clue as to the strict rules that apply to the coastal areas of Jeddah? No. Because if he had, he would not be pushing the Karachi Port Trust to further devastate our beaches by its planned huge and hideous Port Trust Complex.

In Jeddah, commercial development or property development is not allowed on the 400-metre coastal strip (some 1,320 feet from the high tide line). The public must have access to and an open view of to the sea (city government please note). The zoning law is applicable to some 160 kilometres of coastline within the Jeddah municipal limits. Elsewhere along the 3,800 kilometres of Saudi coastline the limit is 300 metres (1,000 feet). Would someone kindly enlighten Minister Ghauri so that he may rethink before he causes further environmental damage?

Since India is our yardstick for most aspects of our lives, let us see how our large and mighty neighbour deals with its huge coastline.

The legal regime of coastal management came into force in the form of the 1991 Coastal Zone Regulation (CRZ) Notification under the Environment (Protection) Act 1986. The CRZ consists of coastal stretches of seas, bays, estuaries, creeks, rivers and backwaters which are influenced by tidal action. It extends on the beach up to 500 metres from the high tide line (HTL) and includes the land between the low tide land (LTL) and the HTL. Within the CRZ, setting up of new industries or expansion of existing industries, handling of hazardous wastes, discharge of untreated wastes and effluents, dumping of municipal wastes as landfill or otherwise, land reclamation (except for the purpose of construction of ports, harbours, jetties, wharves, quays, bridges and sea links), and mining of sand, rocks and sub-strata materials is forbidden. CRZ specifically lays down that reclamation for commercial purposes such as shopping and housing complexes, hotels and entertainment activities shall not be permissible.

Separate guidelines for construction of beach tourist resorts/hotels in CRZ-III are given : a no development zone (NDZ) for 200 metres from the HTL and within the area between the HTL and LTL is defined. With the prior approval of the ministry of environment and forests, two-storey structures can be built in this NDZ.

Do we have anything similar? Do we have any legislation that compares? No. Why? The answer is simple — because such laws would not be to the liking of those who have a say in our scheme of things.

Seashore legislation is nothing new — it has been around for 1,466 years, and in developed, democratic (normally civilized) lands it is applied, and applied with strictness.

In 530 A.D., Emperor Justinian of Rome gathered together his top legal scholars and ordered them to put in writing all of the laws of the Empire. Thus, the “Institutes of Justinian,” the body of Roman civil law (from which our laws are supposedly descended), were written. Tucked away in these numerous volumes covering every aspect of Roman life and commerce, was the provision : “By the law of nature these things are common to all mankind; the air, running water, the sea, and consequently the shores of the sea.” No one was forbidden to approach the seashore.

Over the next millennium Rome fell, and the western European countries rose. But the civil law of Rome, the Institutes, formed the basis of law for many European countries. The law of England (from which most of our laws directly descend) adopted much from Roman civil law, recognizing the public nature of tidelands and waters, and giving them protection in the name of the king for the use of all English subjects.

As the kings of England granted charters to the colonies, the English law of public shore-lands came to America and other colonies. With the only true highways for commerce being the rivers, bays, and open ocean, nearly all commerce depended upon ships, wharves, and harbours. Free use of the shore-lands and waters was imperative, not only for commerce, but also for sustenance and survival.

We now move to the mighty USA, our mentor and benefactor. So important were the shore-lands to the American colonists that when the 13 colonies formed the Union and granted to the new federal government vast expanses of land known as the Northwest Territory, the 13 states kept the shore-lands under their control. As the next 37 states entered the Union, they did so on an ‘equal footing’ with the original 13, and they gained control over their shore-lands which were given protection, in the name of the state, for the use and enjoyment of the public, both living and future generations.

These rights of the public to the shore-lands and waters are known today as public trust rights, and the shore-lands and waters are known as public trust lands and waters. States hold these lands and waters, not as they ‘own’ upland for state parks or forests, but in trust for the benefit of the public. Hence the ‘Public Trust Doctrine,’ Emperor Justinian’s legacy, applies.

But it does not apply here, not in our Republic of Pakistan.