President General Pervez Musharraf is aware of the fact that many, who should rightly be incarcerated but who for reasons of expediency and preservation have been exonerated, sit in his cabinet and his assemblies. How can these men possibly have any respect for law and order, being themselves transgressors? And how can they be expected to make any positive contribution to the lot of some 160 millions of a grossly overpopulated nation, largely illiterate, largely unemployed, with millions deprived of even potable water?
Karachi is in turmoil. This, of course, is nothing new. The province of Sindh has had a new chief minister foisted upon it, whose first declaration in an ugly advertisement inserted in the national press by his government declared that his "topmost priority is to maintain law and order." His second priority, according to an Urdu daily on June 18, was to arrange for his local Pir, Mumtaz Manghi, a resident of Karachi Central Prison, convicted of defrauding one of the country's banks, to be sprung from jail to perform Umra.
Another press report of June 19 tells us that Karachi's City Nazim, Naimatullah Khan, in a recent interview on the city's woes and the overall policies of the MQM, has declared that his "only purpose is to serve the city, as well as to earn credit for the next world." Not terribly reassuring.
Now, back to the SITE scam on which I last wrote in my June 6 column. The committee appointed to investigate presented on June 11 2004, to the chief secretary, Government of Sindh, its 'enquiry report' - Methodology/ Procedure of Allotment of 140 Industries Plots at SITE Super Highway Phase-1 & II. Authored by members Muhammad Riaz Khan, member (LU) BoR, Yahya Waliullah, secretary IT, and Mumtazur Rehman, secretary (GA), under the chairmanship of S. Anwar Haider, addl. chief secretary (Home), though the language is fluent bureaucratese, its findings are easy enough to understand, as can be judged from the following excerpts :
"[Mr Farrukh Saeed, a vice-president of the National Bank of Pakistan] has said in his statement that in the morning of 11.5.2004 [the balloting day] secretary, SITE [Saqib Soomro], had called him to give demonstration. [He] and his colleagues reached Civic Centre where from secretary, SITE, took them to the office of SESSI (Sindh Employees Social Security Institute) in Gulshan-e-Iqbal where they gave demonstration to secretary, SITE, and some others on the computer which was already available there in the office of some higher officer whom he did not know....." {Soomro denies this.)
"The committee has noticed that MD, SITE, kept himself aloof [Why did he shirk his responsibility?] and it was the secretary, SITE who was looking after the process of balloting at all levels, while he was not even a member of the internal committee constituted by the MD, SITE. Director, finance, who was convener of the internal committee to look after the balloting is quite handicapped as he cannot read a single word without using a very powerful magnifying glass which he keeps with himself.
"It is really strange how he is performing his official duties. It is apparent that while he was convener, he did not enjoy any control on the working of the secretary or other persons associated with this committee. During the interview he conceded that he signed papers on advice of the secretary SITE....." (This sad little episode at least injects a bit of humour into this tale of scamming and skullduggery.)
"The committee saw the video of the balloting function and album of its photographs. There is a bearded young man who fed the secret code and operated the computer. Neither Mr Farrukh Saeed admits that he is an NBP employee nor SITE officials admit that he is a SITE employee. [Was he a Martian? Was he vapourized?] However, it is mainly for the SITE officials who allowed him at the balloting in presence of the governor to ascertain his identity. But SITE officials simply observe that he had come with the team of NBP and therefore they allowed him to operate the computer. On the other hand, Mr Farrukh Saeed says that he does not know him and he had not come with them." (Saeed maintains he was not allowed into the balloting booth for reasons of security.)
"SITE officials are unable to give names and designation of the officials of NBP except Mr Farrukh Saeed who had briefed them and conducted the balloting on 11.5.2004. Further, at the time of balloting Mr Farrukh Saeed, VP, NBP, who was the main figure for preparation of software should have been at the place of balloting with other dignitaries. Absence of VP, NBP, from the place of balloting weakens the efficacy of the statement of SITE officials that NBP conducted the balloting."
"Conclusion: The above evidence and analysis leads to the conclusion that officials of NBP as well as SITE have dealt with the issue of balloting non-seriously and in a very unscrupulous manner which resulted in a serious lapse and the result of the balloting do not conform to the criteria of rational and transparent working. They did not play their role prudently, diligently and cautiously, which triggers a feeling of a deliberate mishandling resulting in highly objectionable results. As such, officials of NBP as well as SITE... are responsible for the mishap. The role of Mr Farrukh Saeed, VP, NBP, as well as Mr Saqib Soomro, Secretary, SITE, is more conspicuous.
"Recommendation: Keeping in view the terms of reference of the enquiry the committee is of the firm opinion that the procedure adopted for balloting lacked transparency and genuineness. This finding is substantiated by the corrupted results. The committee therefore contends that the result of the ballot should be scrapped and fresh balloting must be carried out. A copy of the enquiry report may be sent to the board of directors of SITE Limited to go through its contents thoroughly and take further appropriate redress action at their end."
As a perfect example of bureaucratic quick thinking, another short excerpt from the committee's report:
"Government of Sindh, noticing the irregularity in the results of balloting, constituted a committee for a probe into the matter under the chairmanship of ACS (Dev.). Later on, realizing that ACS(Dev.) is the chairman, SITE, a revised notification was issued nominating Mr S Anwar Haider, ACS(Home) to be chairman...".
This report was tabled at the meeting of the SITE board of directors on June 15, 2004, and the following resolution was passed, the directors expressing neither 'shock' nor 'surprise':
"After careful and thorough consideration of the report prepared by the four-member committee the board of directors resolves as follows:
"That it resolves to unanimously adopt the report of the committee and agrees with the findings of the committee.
"That it compliments and lauds the pragmatic, judicious and enlightened [moderation?] decision of the Hon'ble Governor of Sindh who decreed that the matter be investigated in an impartial and fair manner.
"That it appreciates the decision of the Hon'ble Governor of Sindh to declare the balloting results as null and void since the results have established that there was substantial evidence to denote shades of non-transparency and irregular procedures. ('Shades'!)
"That it compliments the efforts put in by the committee to ascertain the facts and for deliberating on these with utmost sincerity and then announcing impartial and courageous findings.
"That it also appreciates the sincere and earnest endeavours of the managing director of SITE Ltd in facilitating, guiding and providing all assistance to the committee. [Strange - the report upbraided the man for having kept himself 'aloof'.]
"That it also acknowledges the cooperation, support and expertise provided by the secretary of SITE Ltd to the committee. [The man suspected of having engineered the scam in collusion with certain 'shining' ministers and politicians.]
"That it further resolves to appoint a four-member committee consisting of the managing-director and three designated directors, including one who would be chairman of the aid committee, to deliberate upon and discuss the findings of the report and to suggest the modus operandi for the eventual allotment of these plots in a genuinely transparent and open mode.
"That it further directs the committee to determine and decide on the modus operandi within a period not exceeding thirty working days."
This is an open and shut case, with no shade of doubt. Of General Musharraf, we ask : 'Who will be punished?'