September 7, 2003

Pakistan has adopted the hard path to national security. This unidimensional approach does not bring India anywhere closer to agreeing to our demands

THE first and foremost need of the people is security of life and property. It is the foremost responsibility of the State to provide a secure environment to its people. Our judicial system often seems more diligent in prosecuting crimes committed by the poor than crimes against them. The police and judiciary are unresponsive and, at worst, aggressive abusers of judicial rights. The poor often view police as unresponsive, corrupt and brutal.

Internal security is a provincial subject, and yet Pakistan, inclusive of the four provinces, spends Rs38 billion on law and order in a year (2002-03). Law and order has now become the responsibility of the elected Nazims, who do not have any control whatsoever on the instruments of law, not even the police. Rangers and other law-enforcement agencies are under nobody to begin with. They are law unto themselves.

But we spend much more on external security, although our security is predicated on deterrence. Ahmed Farooqi, in his book, Rethinking the National Security of Pakistan, has calculated MPI (Military Personnel Intensity) at 3.3 times per head of population compared to India. Pakistan’s military expenditure intensity (MEI), i.e. military expenditure per dollar of GDP is almost double at 1.8 times. More alarming is the trend itself over the last 56 years, that has seen nothing but an incessant increase in military expenditure. About 30 years back, when East Pakistan was forced out of the federation by the ambitious generals’ refusal to respect the democratic mandate of the majority population in the 1970 elections, our MPI was only 1.4 times that of India, and MEI was roughly 1.

Defence expenditure during the current year is Rs146 billion, an increase of 11 per cent over the previous year. The actual expenditure, as usual, is higher by 15pc. Quite a bit of the defence expenditure is concealed, not from the enemy who, perhaps, knows, but from its own people and particularly their representatives whenever they are allowed to hold court. The actual expenditure on defence, including defence production division, airport security, maritime security, civil armed forces, Pakistan Coast Guards, Rangers and Frontier Constabulary, runs to more than Rs186 billion. This figure includes military pension of Rs29 billion — six times the civilian component of pensions — transferred last year to the civil budget so as to reduce defence expenditure.

Development expenditure on defence and the related outfits also runs into several billions. The Atomic Energy Commission, Narcotics Division, educational institutions in Cantonment areas and garrisons embedded with civil outfits also take a huge chunk. Large dollops of grants given to the Army Welfare Trust and numerous other haemorrhaging extensions of the military, besides numerous concessions, rebates and allotment of land, etc, at throwaway prices also eat up enormous amounts of money. Even the subsidies to KESC and Wapda are an indirect expenditure on defence because they are given primarily to sustain and reward the failure of the military seconded to these organizations. Failure to privatize them is primarily on account of their reluctance to let go.

Pakistan has adopted the hard path to national security. This one-dimensional approach holds an ominous potential for our security, without bringing India anywhere closer to agreeing to our demand, i.e. to hand over Kashmir on a platter. It was not, until recently, even prepared to open talks. This has, on the other hand, raised alarm bells in the West which regards us as possessors of weapons of mass destruction.

Having failed to provide security, particularly internal, each successive government has left the people to fend for themselves. Private security agencies have mushroomed as a result. People need means of livelihood over and above basic human rights such as education, health and infrastructure. In the absence of peace, the realization of a meaningful life becomes a dream. People are already groaning under grinding poverty and total lawlessness. About 34 per cent of the population is poor. According to the 2002 report of the Mahbubul Haq Human Development Centre, one-thirds of the population of Pakistan do not have access to adequate food to maintain nutrition. Around eight million children were malnourished in 1998.

Law and order is bad not only because the police and other law-enforcement agencies have failed to check crime, but also because of the unfortunate fact that the police themselves are instruments of crime. More people die in police custody than in desperation by committing suicide.

In Gujranwala alone, according to an anonymous DMG Officer, 78 people died at the hands of the police. And the police has been amply rewarded for its wayward ways by being given more powers. The IG Police or DIGs transfer police officers working under a Nazim without reference to the latter. Surprisingly, the divisional setup abolished in all the departments continues to be retained in the case of the police.

The Police Act 1861 which, by comparison, looks more democratic, has been replaced by Ordinance 2000, which appears to have been promulgated, but faces serious teething problems. Pick up any newspaper and you will find a number of cases of police highhandedness, particularly of wrongful confinement of citizens. The previous mandatory requirement of surprise checks of police stations by magistrates has been done away with fatal consequences. Unless one has the means or the resources to be able to go to the High Court, the prisoner cannot hope to gain freedom. If he dies in police custody, you may not be able to prove it because his imprisonment was without record.

The courts are another matter. They, too, are part of the society and have the same strength and weaknesses. The most agonizing part of the judicial process is long adjournments, which weigh heavily on the litigants. The writ of Habeas Corpus has lost much of its meaning. In one case of an important leader of PML (N), the Prosecutor General had the gall to announce before the Supreme Court hearing his bail application that they had dumped him somewhere and forgotten about him. The real pity is that the Supreme Court heard it and did not take notice or start contempt proceedings against the Prosecutor General. It did not even allow bail to the prisoner.

Lack of respect for the Constitution by the military is no secret. But what is more depressing is the endorsement of unconstitutional methods by the higher judiciary. Unfortunately, it is the quality of judges rather than the laws that makes the difference. Since merit is sacrificed with abandon while selecting judges for High Courts, the results are not surprising. The character of the judges is far more crucial to their performance than their competence. You get what you deserve. It is not autonomy that the judges clamour for. It is their independence, which comes from the strength of their moral fibre and convictions that can make crucial difference. Obviously, no government wants to challenge the judges and therefore they go for the supine quality that suits them. This policy has ensured complete failure of governance.

Prosecution also happens to be under the police. The quality of prosecution, like the rest of the public services, is quite unsatisfactory. Investigation generally relies on confession extracted through torture by employing barbaric means. One shudders to think of the number of innocent people sent for trial, many of whom may spend a number of years under incarceration or end up being hanged.

Things have been on the decline since we gained independence. It is fashionable as well as convenient to find an alibi for failure, specially after the humiliating defeat in 1971. Respect for law or the rules have long since been abandoned. How could a nation that suffers violation of constitutions with regular frequency have respect for ordinary laws? According to the Human Development Report 2002 issued by the UNDP, Pakistan is in the company of 18 other countries that experienced armed interventions in the 1990s. Except Myanmar, all are in Africa. It is in the unflattering company of Gambia, Haiti, Rwanda, etc.

Civil institutions that include political parties, intellectuals, press and parliament are weak and have continued to be made weaker. They do not have the strength to confront the military. Even an oblique criticism of the military requires enormous courage and entails serious consequences. A recent case is of the PML (N) MPA of Punjab, Rana Sanaullah, who was brutally beaten up. His eyebrows, head and moustache were shaved. His only crime was to read some portion from the Hamood-ur-Rehman Commission Report. He is Deputy Leader of Opposition.

Coming to the present, a civilian face has been superimposed on the military government which seized power in 1999. The kind of elections and the massive rigging that accompanied them would put Bhutto to shame for his alleged rigging of 1977 elections. The performance of the present ‘civilian’ government found reflection in a recent press report. It went on to say that a dozen top-level posts in BS-22 are vacant and there seems no urgency to fill them. They have now been filled after a few months’ delay. Some key federal institutions are without their regular administrative heads. If these posts are redundant, they might as well be abolished.

Civil servants appointed in utter disregard of merit indulge merrily in corrupt practices. The problem has been compounded by expansion of the government into a business. Contrary to the common belief, the share of public enterprises, which was 12pc of GDP in 1978, grew to more than 14pc by 1985, and must have grown higher by now. To head public enterprises, the choice falls on retired or retiring military officers. Fauji Foundation is emerging as the largest assets’ owner in the country, and has gone on a binge to acquire public assets such as banks, fertilizers and cement plants, and even PSO through privatization.

Poverty and illiteracy go hand in hand and are almost synonymous. Stabilization of the economy has replaced the poverty alleviation programmes as a policy. Similarly, education in the private sector is being adopted as a policy instrument in the face of abject failure of policy. If you look at the budget, the Government of Pakistan and the four provinces spend barely one per cent of the GNP on education. The government has allocated a paltry amount of Rs7 billion (less than one per cent) in a budget of Rs742 billion The four provincial governments spend 18.6pc or Rs59.6 billion on education out of a combined budget of Rs320 billion. Punjab spends the most, 27pc of its budget, followed by Sindh (21pc), NWFP (13.5pc) and Balochistan (only 2pc).

The goal of better governance is consistent with education. Education is the most important factor, which distinguishes the poor from the non-poor. A total of 27pc literates head poor households as against 52pc, headed by illiterates.

Within education, priorities are skewed. The World Bank, etc, have mandated unhealthy focus at primary-level education without planning for mobility beyond. This has put the government on the dangerous path of exclusion of vulnerable segments of society. The pyramid illustrates an internally inefficient and flawed system of provision, devaluing the most important human resource. The responsibility of the state to reach out where private sector is not interested remains paramount. Over 75pc of the people use government education as the only affordable option.

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)