MY friend, senior columnist Chaudhry of Chakwal, Ayaz Amir, despairs. His column on Friday was headed 'What is the point of criticism?' He feels that what he and others write makes no dent - the corrupt in government remain corrupt, the crafty remain crafty, the robbers rob, the conniving connive, the people remain hungry and thirsty, taxes for those million-odd citizens who pay taxes are crippling, prices are rising, millions remain unemployed, the employed are underpaid and stressed, the fat cats grow fatter, and not one man involved has yet committed harakiri in the aftermath of Kargil.
I tried to cheer him up by reminding him that a mutual friend, a well-read man, constantly reminds us that both India and Pakistan are not populated by Aryans and Anarayans, but by those he dubs subcontinental monkeys devoid of the intelligence or competence usually possessed by that species.
We all get disheartened, I told him. At least twice a month, I am lectured by various people on the futility of writing in the press. Futile it may be in the sense that one cannot shame the shameless leaders, administrators and politicians. But if one can get through to at least one citizen a week and make him aware of what is happening, it is surely worth it. The grumblers and mumblers drone on and on until they run out of grumbles. "Fine," I say, "I will not write next week". "No, no," respond the moaner-groaners, "that you cannot do. You must keep on writing." So much for logic.
Ayaz by profession has been a soldier, a foreign office diplomat, a journalist, a politician, and again a writer, a profession at which he is eminently qualified. He realizes that a columnist should inform, educate and entertain, and he efficiently does all three. Some would say that this newspaper has the privilege of printing his columns, others that he has the privilege of writing for it.
The last time Ayaz and I met was in Islamabad when he motored up from Chakwal when I was summoned to appear before the Standing Committee on Rules of Procedure and Privileges of the most honourable National Assembly of Pakistan, following the moving of a privilege motion by MNA Khwaja Asif, alleging that I had breached his privilege. Despite the fact that the committee secretary had notified the Director of Public Relations of the Assembly Secretariat to "attend the meeting, arrange press/TV coverage of the meeting, and also issue a press release after the meeting," no press people were allowed in, including Ayaz.
There are thirty-four standing committees of the Lower House, each with a chairman and ten to fifteen members. Apart from the normal perks and privileges accorded to our honourable, freely and fairly elected representatives, each chairman receives an additional Rs.7,700 per month, club class air fares when called to chair a meeting, a fully equipped office staffed by a private secretary, a personal assistant and a peon (who normally performs as a domestic servant at the chairman's home), a chauffeur-driven car, and free telephones. Each member when called to attend a meeting receives Rs.1,100 per day for five days as attendance allowance, plus air travel club class expenses from and to his constituency.
The present National Assembly's Standing Committee on Rules of Procedure and Privileges is chaired by a Nawabzada. For members it has two Mians, one Pir, one Rana, one Khwaja, one Sheikh, one Rai, one Sahibzada, one Chaudhry, one Syed, one Sardar and two plain and simple misters. These men meet at least once a month, often twice. A few samples of the matters they consider:
"Privilege motion moved by Rana Nazir Ahmad Khan MNA regarding rude behaviour of Director-General Customs Intelligence, Islamabad." Summoned to respond to this motion and attend the meeting in person, apart from the DG, were, inter alia, Secretary Ministry Finance, Chairman CBR, Member Indirect Taxes Settlement Commission, Superintendent Customs, Quetta.
"Delayed flight on 6.5.98 causing inconvenience to the Speaker of the National Assembly and other parliamentarians due to off-loading of a passenger allegedly travelling on fake passport/documents." Summoned in person: Secretary Ministry of Interior, ex-Director General FIA, present Director-General FIA, Deputy Director Immigration FIA Karachi.
"Privilege motion moved by Mian Atta Mohammad Qureshi MNA regarding alleged indecent language and rude behaviour of Mr Hafizullah Lund, Chief Engineer Railways." Summoned in person : Secretary Ministry of Railways, General Manager Pakistan Railways Lahore, Chief Engineer Railways.
"Privilege motion moved by Inamullah Khan Niazi MNA regarding alleged rude behaviour of Superintending Engineer WAPDA Sargodha." Summoned in person : Secretary Ministry of Water and Power, Chairman WAPDA, Chairman Area Electricity Board Faisalabad, Superintending Engineer WAPDA Sargodha, Superintending Engineer WAPDA Jhang.
"Privilege motion moved by Inamullah Khan Niazi MNA regarding alleged rude behaviour of Chief Settlement Commissioner Lahore." Summoned in person : Chief Secretary, Government of Punjab, Chief Settlement Commissioner, Lahore.
(Mr Niazi obviously has a problem.)
If any one of the persons summoned does not appear on the appointed day, the motion is adjourned until the next meeting, and those who have turned up are sent home. So, one matter can go on and on for years, with, say, five summoned each time and one or two not being able to attend. Merely to satisfy the inflated egos of little men, travelling and other expenses of government servants have to be borne by the government (by the people) and citizens summoned are inconvenienced, and sometimes humiliated.
"Alleged rude behaviour" and "alleged abusive language" are nowhere defined, they are somewhat on the lines of "the ideology of Pakistan." What one man may consider to be normal behaviour and routine language is by the sycophant or the uncomprehending uneducated or by the puffed-up prig taken to be rude or abusive.
A letter from MNA Kunwar Khalid Yunus was printed in this newspaper on August 19. He complained that his efforts to move a motion for breach of his privilege against the IGP Sindh were being thwarted by the honourable Speaker of the National Assembly. He accused the IGP Sindh of having made a public statement to the effect that the MQM MNAs would do well to "serve the people" rather than pursue their "anti-government and anti-people policies." How does this breach your privilege? I asked him. He had no explanatory answer to give other than that the IG has no authority to make such statements.
The Privileges Committee of our Lower House relies on procedures followed at Westminster, where democracy prevails and is practised without constitutional safeguards for the citizens of Great Britain - an incomparable system of government. But frivolous privilege motions are not entertained at Westminster. Our parliamentarians should study the chapter on 'The nature of parliamentary privilege' in 'Parliament - Functions, Practice and Procedures' by J A Griffith and Michael Ryle (1989), from which I quote :
"All actions of members of parliament, in the course of parliamentary proceedings, are protected by parliamentary privilege . . . . . On the other hand, the fact that the House, and its individual members, claim certain privileges not available to the ordinary citizen, and may seek to punish those who infringe them, tends to set the House apart from the people it represents and makes it liable to criticism - and even ridicule - if it appears to be asserting privileges which are not obviously essential for its functions . . . . . The reconciliation of these two claims - the need to maintain parliamentary privileges and the desirability of not abusing them - has been the hallmark of the House of Commons' treatment of privilege issues in recent years . . . . . . We will not attempt to describe in detail the somewhat complex (and in certain respects still uncertain) law of parliamentary privilege."
When I was summoned I asked my legal advisers if any law exists that entitles the privilege committee to summon me at the whim of an individual member and whether the fundamental rights guaranteed to me in our written constitution were being violated by being so summoned. The answer given was that the law protects me but that the present-day judiciary, with the judges functioning as they do, is not likely to so do.
One more set of three cheers for Prime Minister Mian Mohammad Nawaz Sharif for his successful subjugation of the independence of the judiciary, our country's most vital pillar of state.