Sheikh Rashid, the man and his politics

SHEIKH Muhammad Rashid spent his life in Left politics. Once Mr Zulfikar Ali Bhutto asked him whether he was a communist. He replied that he was not qualified enough to be one. I understood that he meant that he considered a communist to be a highly motivated, devoted and competent person.

He joined Mr Bhutto in 1967. I was present at that meeting which took place at the house of a famous journalist. At that meeting Sheikh Rashid insisted that Mr Bhutto should include the programme of land reforms in his manifesto. Mr Bhutto offered some interim solution, saying that though he agreed with Sheikh Sahib, the words ‘land reforms’ should not be used.

Accordingly, in the foundation papers of the PPP, the farmers were promised many rights. However, after taking over, Mr Bhutto did announce land reforms which came as a surprise to the party. Sheikh Rashid was happy but he thought the reforms did not get far enough.

Sheikh Rashid’s greatest contribution to Pakistan was the implementation of these reforms after being appointed chairman of the Land Commission. The commission was given suo motu powers which Sheikh Rashid used extensively, as much as he could. Of course, there were some landlords whose files never reached him. I know at least one case which was recalled by Mr Bhutto.

Sheikh Rashid was vehemently against landlords. He did not want any landlord at all in the party and very few of them were given tickets by him in the Punjab in which he was president of the party. But he continued to cooperate with Mr Bhutto to the very last irrespective of the induction of big landed families in the national and provincial assemblies in 1977.

Sheikh Rashid is responsible for taking over millions of acres of land from landlords and transferring their ownership to farmers who tilled it. He is very fondly remembered by farmers in Dir, Chitral, Mansehra, Dera Ghazi Khan and districts of Sindh where he gave land transfer orders with great relish.

In a newspaper, he was accused of accepting a bribe for agreeing to let landlords keep their lands. Sheikh Rashid promptly sued the accuser and the paper. The lower court awarded several million rupees in compensation to him. The high court enhanced the compensation. It is unfortunate that when the case was taken to the Supreme Court, the learned court, while accepting that the allegation against Sheikh Rashid was wrong, did not compensate the poor old man.

The second landmark contribution related to the generic scheme of medications he introduced in Pakistan when he was health minister. It was an advanced social concept. It made it mandatory that all medicines be sold by their generic names which meant a great reduction in their prices. Unfortunately, the powerful lobby of the multinational pharmaceutical manufacturers convinced Mr Bhutto to repeal that law. It’s an irony that the generic scheme is now the law in the United States where a patient has a choice to buy his medication under generic or brand names.

Sheikh Rashid was either loved or hated intensively. Poor party workers loved him; industrialists, waderas hated him. He was a man of a very strong will and of steel nerves. In his last years, he was a disappointed as well as a contented man.

He was disappointed because many of his poor workers whom he loved and relied upon became rank opportunists and made fortunes for themselves. He was also disappointed that after Benazir Bhutto, the PPP leadership robbed him of his due place in the party. He was the senior vice-chairman of the party and deserved to become chairman. This office was denied to him. Benazir did not treat him kindly. I once asked him why was he continuing with Benazir Bhutto when the party was making a mockery of its foundation documents and its election manifesto. He replied: “Dr Sahib, you do not know that is not all. She insults me so much in the meetings that you cannot imagine. In the last elections, Sheikh Rashid was not considered even fit to be given a party ticket.

He was, in the end, a disappointed man because of the way he was treated by the party and contented because he expected no better in view of the class character of those who were unjust to him.

An appalling erosion of trust, values at KU

In retrospect if one looks at the week gone by, perhaps only the naive would have imagined that the Karachi University management crisis would be over.

In other words, only the naive would have expected that the situation would improve. Instead what has obviously happened is that the crisis has further deepened. The trouble had spread from the campus to the local colleges, as we know.

Let us concede that this is not the first time in the history of Karachi University that there is a confrontation like this, between the Vice Chancellor, and students and teachers. One is reminded of the 60s when some of us were students at the campus and there was such a situation.

But there was a difference, in tone, in temper and in values. There was anger even then, but there was no violence. There were no rangers at that time.

Of course, things have changed everywhere now, and so they have at the campus. There was no concept of the rangers; and to summon the police at the campus was itself a big question. Society, or rather the mood of Karachi is now reflected in the security umbrella that the campus now has, and which it cannot do without, it appears.

In the change that one has in mind here, it is pertinent to mention that at this point in time, for some years now, the institution of students union has remained non-existent. Banned as such. Student parties do exist, but they have other means to keep themselves alive, operational.

The contrast between yesterday and today is enormous — and thoughts go out to the kind of future that lies ahead: the future of Karachi University’s prestige and image on a long-term basis. In an alarming content where the quality of education is steadily declining, there is a general worry and anxiety, in the context of Karachi University’s lingering crisis, with a bitter-violent confrontation between the vice chancellor and his team on one side, and all the others at the campus on the others, the students, the teachers and the non-teaching staff.

Even the city colleges appear to have opposed all that the vice chancellor has been doing; and has done “illegally? And he does not seek to leave, or resign, make a graceful exit. But then as someone says that “we are not a society given to dignified exist.”

From a report in this newspaper on Sept 12, it is apparent that the Sindh governor has moved to set VC’s acts right”. When spelt out, it means that the VC has been “asked to withdraw his orders with reference to a senior professor of the university, as well as termination of the services of other employees. It was observed in a letter written by the Principal Secretary to the governor that “all legal formalities have not been fulfilled”. There are other details in this context which seem to indicate that the vice chancellor in his sweeping actions did not take the relevant rules and regulations into account.

However, well meaning his intentions may have been the fact is that it has not been received well, and he has not been able to inspire the trust, the confidence and the respect of all those whom he wishes to manage to lead, to govern. And that to me is the root cause of the problem. It is sad, but it is true. It has to be conceded that the VC has failed so far (and I admit it is a strong word) to lead the campus world in the direction of education and its higher values.

Compounding the situation and aggravating, it has been the campus incident where teachers and students were baton-charged and dealt in a manner that was unbecoming to say the least. Classes were boycotted, and a campaign and restlessness was born. In this, the teachers, when offered an opportunity to meet the Vice Chancellor showed their obstinacy and refused. The chance to talk and negotiate the issue was rejected and that made matters worse. Here the teachers disappointed.

From the look of things, the situation appears grim, and so depressing. There is a demand for a change in the VC and there are voices suggesting or demanding that the new man should come from the ranks of the teachers on the campus.

If there is an erosion of authority and trust, there is an erosion in values, too. How can the noble goals of education, and the cause of learning be served if all components of the process are at war; taking bitter sides — militant and irreconcilable. There is nothing in today’s world which is said to be irreversible, and given the kind of problems and threats that this city, and this society face, there is no reason why the Karachi University crisis cannot be resolved in its entirety. Indeed that is the need of the hour, and not just the university but the larger canvass of education has challenges ahead. Let us not get dwarfed by short-term and short-sighted policies and vision.

Whatever the outcome of the efforts being made to solve the issue, what has to be ensured is that the prestige of the university, the image of my alma mater, are kept in mind, and supreme.

Karachi is a leader and trendsetter for the country in so many ways. That Karachi University is one such platform in stating the obvious. So let the decision of the Karachi University reflect a maturity and a wisdom that seek to settle matters on a long-term basis; settle the issue with “heart and soul”, as one retired teacher said to me, holding back the tears in his voice.