June 8, 2003

The day will be remembered for igniting fires of hell over an issue that need not have occupied half of Lahore’s security or the over-dramatized performance of the MPAs

IT looked more like a fortress, ready to take on an invading army, than an institution of legislation. The Punjab Assembly was up in arms against the freebooters, politically defined as the members of the provincial assembly. A heavy police contingent, encircling the assembly, had initially meant to ensure an uneventful session of the Punjab Assembly. Instead they were used to control a major combat zone.

May 26 will be remembered for raking fires of hell over an issue which need not have occupied half of the city’s security or the over-dramatized performance of the MPAs. Real issues like poverty, education, health, law and order and unemployment were muffled under the opposition’s howls of decrying the LFO and the unfair disbursement of the MPAs development funds.

The four day drama unfolded, rather abruptly on the first day of the assembly’s session.

The leader of the opposition, Qasim Zia of the PPP (Parliamentarians) stood up to protest against the government’s withholding of the opposition’s development funds. He complained that the treasury had already released Rs5 million (the amount allocated for a full fiscal year to each provincial assembly’s member) to the members of the ruling party, but had not done the same for the opposition. The speaker, Mr Afzal Sahi’s unresponsiveness to discuss the matter in the house prompted Rana Sanaulla of the PML (N) and deputy leader of the opposition, to second Qasim Zia’s contention. Either it was Mr Sahi’s short-sightedness of the political consequences or plain weariness of the opposition’s demand which made him overlook the rules of procedure. He sat behind the dais, not willing to listen to the opposition. That was enough to raise Cain!

Through an imprudent act of authoritarianism, the speaker inadvertently upstaged the opposition, putting the entire government in a tenuous position and spinning the rumour mills about a possible dissolution of the assemblies. “I’d say the government demonstrated political immaturity in handling the chaos. There was really no need for highhandedness. All we achieved was to put the spotlight on the opposition as victims of a government determined to stamp out resistance,” said a not-to-be-quoted member of the PML (Q).

Abuses were exchanged, bodies were pushed around, leaving little room for democracy to enter the assembly hall. The graduation criterion set for candidates contesting the elections had failed to drill nominal civility in them.

Coming quickly to the defence of the speaker’s action, Shehla Rathore and Sadia Humayun of the PML (Q) lashed out at the opposition’s brash conduct. Accusing the PML (N) and the PPP (Parliamentarians) of orchestrating the entire fiasco, she asserted that they had been given the cue from Dubai and Jeddah.

“The LFO is not a provincial matter, it’s for the federal government to decide,” said Ms Rathore in English to justify her claim to a Bachelors degree.

Surely the treasury benches were on the defensive, but not entirely on the right side of the battleground. According to eyewitnesses, Ms Rathore was one of the ringleaders of the cats’ fight fought on the side of the ‘battle royale’.

However, the accusations have not ended. Political observers of the fiasco blame both the opposition and the treasury for making way for realpolitik and undermining the ethical essence of governance. The shinny car, which was impounded and barricaded by the police, was given to Qasim Zia by the government. As leader of the opposition and part of the privileges’ package, he had demanded a brand new vehicle. It fails to invoke logic why a parliamentarian of an economically frail province should be presented with a luxury vehicle costing over one million rupees.

Qasim Zia was livid at the accusation and denied any such demand made by him. “I wasn’t given a new or an old car! They were not giving me any,” explained Qasim Zia. Obviously they did!

It is fine for these politicians to follow the ‘I am right, you are wrong’ policy, but not at the cost of the people who pay for their in-session and out of session idiosyncrasies. Not that a high cost of maintaining legislators has ever been any government’s problem. Ironically enough, one of the first ordinances amended by the Punjab government was the Privileges Act, increasing the legislator’s privileges.

Going by a rough estimate, in a house of 371, each MPA costs Rs22,875/- per month off session. When the house is in session each one gets an honorarium of Rs2450/- per day, which is in addition to their salary. A broad approximation shows that it costs almost Rs1,000,000/- per day, excluding the salary of the assembly’s huge secretariat to hold a session. And if that is not enough of a disincentive to the brawling MPAs to use the session for significant legislation and debate, then perhaps a look at the province’s level of poverty should knock some sympathy into them.

The adult literacy rate in the Punjab is around 40 per cent, while it is less than 26 per cent for the women. In a report compiled by a World Bank economist, William Easterly, the province spends around $1.50 per capita on health, only half of the children are immunized and 27 per cent of pregnant women receive pre-natal care. In the three years since the publication of the report, the condition of the province has not mounted to a satisfactory level. And if the coming sessions are going to follow the patterns of the past, we are surely in for a more disturbing report.

Looking for her pound of flesh

EMBESAAT Khan is evidently a very controversial MPA. That is why, perhaps, whenever she gets up to speak, men, as well as women, stare unblinkingly at her. More than the stares that perforate her, she is held in deprecation for becoming a turncoat. The tactics used to unnerve her confidence are manifested in many ways. For instance, the microphone is sometimes turned off when she gets up to speak. And if that fails, her voice is often booed in a barrel of howls. “They stare at me because I’m vocal because of the way I look and most of all because of what I say. They even stare at me for keeping my hair loose!” exclaims Embesaat Khan.

Considered a turncoat for leaving the PPP and joining its forward bloc, the PPP Patriots, Embesaat enlists her reasons for apostasy. “After working for the PPP for 12 years, I realized that I was never going to be made an important part of the party. The PPP is run by a fascist leader. Your worth lies in not who you are, but which social setup you represent. Had I been a Leghari, a Bugti or from some other influential family, the PPP would not have ignored me for so long,” riles Ms Khan.

She got a chance to demand her pound of flesh. A call from the defence minister, Rao Sikandar Iqbal, made her feel that she was an individual of some import. She went straight for high stakes and demanded to be inducted as a minister in the government.

“Yes, that’s true. Why should I have settled for anything less? I was assured that in the second phase of induction I’d be made a minister.”

Disclosing the gory details of the PPP’s political infrastructure, Embesaat lashes out at Benazir Bhutto for demanding democracy for Pakistan, but keeping it firmly out of her own party. “Before I left the PPP, I remember how Qasim Zia debriefed us to disrupt the inaugural session of the Punjab Assembly. We were given instructions to walk out of the hall.” Embesaat accuses the PPP of forming a secret alliance with members of the Jamaat-i-Islami.

“The Jamaat element is there in the PPP. That’s why I knew that I had no chance in the party. Everybody knows that in his college days Qasim Zia was in the Jamaat. I don’t understand why he is making such a big show about the LFO when the MMA are discussing it with the government,” reasons Embesaat.

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)