Democracy's antithesis

By Amir Zia

The News
August 19, 2010

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari's formal launch into politics has been put on hold – at least for the time being. He pulled out of the Pakistan People's Party's (PPP) rally in Birmingham, UK at the last minute, saying that he would rather collect money to help the flood-hit people of Pakistan. Younger Zardari's statement came following an uproar in both the local and the international media on the timing of his father's visit to France and the UK as his countrymen faced the worst floods in 80 years.

The sum-total of the trip certainly brought more embarrassment to President Zardari and the government on domestic as well as international fronts rather than any mileage. But the president and his aides sensed the public mood and anger too late. Their meek damage-control measure of keeping the younger Zardari away from the Birmingham rally -- where he had to be formally crowned as another ruler-in-waiting – seems more buckling down under pressure and an admission of guilt than an act of philanthropy.

Yes, the younger Zardari, being cultivated to take the reins of the party of his mother and maternal grandparents, has to wait a little bit more before he steps into their big boots as the chairman of the PPP -- seen as the biggest liberal, secular and democratic political party of the country. And here lies the biggest paradox of Pakistani democrats and their democracy. An inexperienced youngster seen as the galvanising force and saviour of a party, which takes pride in changing Pakistan's political landscape through its popular politics in the 1970s. It is an irony that Pakistani democracy is being fed and sustained on the basis of dynasty.

The burden of dynastic politics is not confined to the PPP alone, or even Pakistan, it weighs on the entire South Asia where it remains a force to be reckoned with. Be it Nehru's India or dynastic feuds between Hasina Wajid and Khalida Zia of Bangladesh, or our own Bhuttos, Sharifs, Khans, Nawabs, Chaudhrys or hereditary Maulanas, these political dynasties in the garb of political parties have been one of the inherent contradictions and flaws of South Asian democracy – where covert or overt authoritarian rule has reigned supreme. Widows, sons, daughters and brothers of one patriarch or the other have held South Asian politics and democracy hostage. There are arguments in favour of larger-than-life politicians, their importance and role in the Third World countries, but the fact of the matter remains that it defies the essence of democracy.

The case of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's PPP is a prime example as to how a party of the masses transformed into a fiefdom of a family and a small coterie comprising mostly feudal lords and their select middle-class sidekicks. The successive military rules definitely proved to be a factor in the blocking of the organic growth of political parties in Pakistan, but it also provided an excuse to politicians to deny internal democracy and elections within their parties. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was an elected PPP chairman. Nusrat Bhutto and later Benazir Bhutto transcended to this post in the unique and oppressive times of General Ziaul Haq. But after the return of democracy, Benazir Bhutto never thought of giving her party the democracy whose cause she championed all her life. She became the life-chairperson of the PPP after a bitter row with her mother, Nusrat Bhutto, who was ousted from the party's top honorary slot unceremoniously in 1993 for siding with her son Murtaza Bhutto in their family feud.

While the title of life-chairperson itself undermined the core democratic values, Benazir Bhutto even chose to run her party affairs through nominated office-bearers from top to bottom rather than the elected ones. She chose in favour of a cult following and cashing in on Bhutto's controversial judicial murder rather than transforming her party into an institution. And this pattern has been followed by most major Pakistani political parties where members of one family dominate their party.

This trend of dynastic politics, though seen as acceptable in our part of the world, remains incompatible with the modern age. It does not allow political parties to transform into genuine, functioning institutions and discourages merit. A political worker has no way to rise to the top by building trust in his constituency and serving his neighbourhood. Rather his political rise would depend on the judgment of the top leader or leaders who would pick and choose people on the basis of personal loyalty. This may suit political wheelers and dealers and cronies, but imagine the plight of genuine political workers and leaders – even if they make a grand compromise and choose to stay in the party.

The Raza Rabbanis, Aitzaz Ahsans, Taj Haiders, Shah Mehmood Qureshis, Sherry Rehmans and other PPP stalwarts need to come up with a rational answer why a 22-year-old gets the "divine right" to lead the party now or even after the completion of his education, as was said by the younger Zardari when he announced his withdrawal from the Birmingham rally. Why can't the PPP elect its leader? Why are party workers unable to choose their office-bearers? This is as illogical and undemocratic as handing over the party to a widower on the basis of a "will." Is the PPP a family estate which can be thrown in anyone's lap? The founding fathers of this party, including Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, certainly did not envision it this way.

Of course many leaders and the rank-and-file of the new-look PPP under President Zardari will hail the advent of the young "Bhutto Zardari" as their leader sooner rather than later. But it does not change the fact that the politics, creed and practice of the PPP of 2010 have no semblance with the PPP of 1970 or that of 1980 or even 1988. The genesis of today's PPP remains in the controversial decade of the 1990s which shattered the dreams of many of its followers and ushered in an era of unprecedented corruption and nepotism.

One should sympathise with the past and present workers and leaders of the PPP who have seen their party transform into a fiefdom. One should also sympathise with the toiling masses of Pakistan who have only been robbed and cheated in the name of democracy and people's power. Pakistan, democracy and this politics of dynasties cannot survive together for long. The country needs leadership from the masses and those political parties which practise democracy instead of paying lip service to it. This is the only way forward. This should be the only way forward. The era of dynastic politics should come to an end. The sooner it does the better will it be for Pakistan and its struggling democracy.

Airblue Crash: Compensation Question

By Amir Zia
The News On Sunday

August 15, 2010

As the state authorities, insurance agents and airlines officials struggle and haggle to determine the compensation, victims' families have nothing but days of agonizing wait ahead of them.

Many things which should have been straight and easy appear too difficult and complicated in Pakistan — even collecting insurance claims of victims of an air-crash by their families. More than two weeks after an Airbus 321 of Airblue crashed into Margalla Hills, the compensation claims of its 152 victims, including six crew members, remain a knotty problem. How much compensation will be paid per victim? When the family members of these victims get this money? These are the two important questions, which neither the government nor the Airblue authorities are ready to clarify — at least for the time being.
"It is a very complicated and sensitive issue, involving different laws," Air Blue’s General Manager Raheel Ahmed told TNS. "I am afraid right now nobody can give the exact amount of compensation or the date when its distribution will start."
Airblue got the Airbus on operating lease from the International Lease Finance Corporation, which provided an insurance cover of $35 million on its aircraft.
As the state authorities, insurance agents and airlines officials struggle and haggle to determine the compensation, victims’ families have nothing else but days of agonizing wait ahead of them. While many victims belonged to well-to-do families, others were the sole bread earners and their family members remain in the need of an immediate financial assistance.
Legal experts say that Pakistan’s laws regarding the payment of compensation to families of air crash victims were contradictory, allowing different interpretations.
Yahya Adeel, a top lawyer of international and local aviation law, said that at least three different sets of laws exist which apply to the air crash victims. "These laws not just overlap, but contradict one another."
Airblue’s management also says that compensation needs to be decided keeping in view the law of the land, the local civil aviation law as well as the international law. "It is indeed a touchy subject. But on our part, there will be every effort to maximise the insurance," Airblue’s Ahmed said. The national Carriage by Air Act, introduced in 1934 in British India in line with the 1929 Warsaw Convention and adopted by Pakistan after independence, calls for 125,000 Francs payment per victim. The Hague protocol of 1955 doubled the amount to 250,000 Francs, which does not include what airlines’ has to pay for the lost baggage. Adeel said that this protocol was inserted into the Pakistani law, which fixed it as the minimum compensation regardless of the cause of the accident.
This compensation needs to be given immediately. However, experts say that this minimum payment would not override any court verdict regarding an increase in this amount. The law also allows victims’ families to demand higher compensation if the accident is the result of human or technical error.
Pakistan is also a signatory to the 1999 Montreal Convention, which says each family of a victim to get 100,000 (SDRs) special drawing rights in damages. Some experts say that this applies only on international flights, but the local law does not discriminate on this basis. Provisions of Montreal Convention have been incorporated in the Carriage by Air Act 2010, which now needs a seal of approval from the Parliament.
However, the complication in these laws stems from a controversial amendment introduced in the past which says that for domestic flights, the Ministry of Defense can notify and reduce the compensation. Another government SRO fixes the amount of compensation at 500,000 rupees for domestic passengers.
Experts see it in violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed in the constitution, which sees all citizens as equal, while the international aviation laws also do not discriminate between international and domestic flight passengers. But while the aviation laws remain subject to debate, Airblue’s management has hinted that along with the law, insurers would also take into account the precedence, by which they mean that the compensation paid in the past to families of an air crash victims. Airblue mentions on the jacket of its ticket that domestic passengers are covered to the tune of one million rupees.
The 2006 crash of Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) Fokker in Multan is taken as a prime example in which a compensation of two million rupees was paid per victim.
Junaid Ameen, Director General of the Civil Aviation Authority, said payment of compensation remains the responsibility of airlines through its insurance agents. The amount of compensation varies from country to country and an exact number cannot be given now, he said.
The international conventions, to which Pakistan is a signatory, only provides guidelines and are not mandatory, Ameen said. "There are many intricacies involved in determining the compensation and insurers can take several more weeks before starting the actual distribution of money."
But apart from fixing the compensation amount, another challenge the Airblue faces is that of registering and verifying the next-of-kin of each victim. Ahmed of Airblue said that already more than 200 people got themselves registered as the next-of-kin of 152 passengers, while some bodies still remain unidentified. "In some cases there are disputes over who is the actual heir. We have a case where a man had two wives, then there is another in which wife and father of a victim filed separate claims. There are many such disputed cases." While the Airblue has almost completed the registration process, the real challenge of verifying the relatives still needs to be resolved and could take time, he said.
Given the slow pace at which the Airblue, its insurance companies and the government are moving on the issue of compensation, it seems a long wait for the family members of the victims, who only have questions and not many answers about the future. The laws and the system, instead of helping these families, seem to be used to delay and deny them a fair compensation in line with the international air travel conventions and laws.

City under siege

By Amir Zia

The News on Sunday
August 8, 2010

Presence of ethnic fault lines, sectarian and religious divide, political rivalries or bad governance -- what ails Karachi?

As being feared for the past several months, Karachi has again burst into violence and chaos. The killings of workers of various rival political and religious groups, which gained a fresh momentum over the last two months, finally led to the assassination of a Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) veteran Syed Raza Haider on August 2. The killing triggered a new wave of violence that claimed nearly 80 lives in just three days and left dozens of others wounded.

Armed bands of youngsters went on rampage setting ablaze vehicles, attacking shops and fuel stations and enforcing an unannounced strike in the city on the barrel of the gun. Most victims were ordinary citizens, who had no political affiliations, but targeted because of ethnic background. These victims were mostly daily-wage labourers, drivers, conductors and people doing small, odd jobs. Then there were those low-income group families, which were terrorised and some even saw their houses burnt because they lived in those parts where the other ethnic group remains in majority.

The focused media coverage, chain SMS messages, the word of mouth, propaganda of the rival parties, rumours as well as exaggerated accounts of brutalities -- as often happens in such cases -- only added fuel to the fire, plunging the city in a state of uncertainty and bringing its trade, business and industrial activity to a grinding halt.

The MQM had been quick to blame the Awami National Party (ANP) for the murder of its MPA. The ANP denied the charge and accused the MQM of fanning violence. Interior Minister Rehman Malik saw the outlawed Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan responsible for the murder of MQM's Shiite Muslim MPA. And amidst this overflow of information, claims and counter claims, Karachi continued to suffer. There was no sense of urgency seen on the part of the government to put an end to the lawlessness, while no political party took initiative to push the peace agenda and offer a healing touch. However, even the rivals agree that volatile Karachi needs immediate attention.

Faisal Sabzwari, a senior MQM leader and a provincial minister, called the situation "delicate". "The MQM hierarchy has not reacted to this assassination. We want to maintain peace, despite provocations, attacks and burning the houses of our people," he said. "But the problem is that the people who suffer violence do not listen to the local leadership. They just react. We are trying to contain the situation."

Shahi Syed, Sindh ANP chief, said that terrorism had never been part of his party's creed. "We know one thing, that among those dozens of people who died, there were only three or four ANP members. The rest were ordinary Pukhtoons."

The MQM says its slain leader Haider was an easy target because of the thin security cover. Haider represented one of the most volatile areas of the city -- Orangi Town -- where he also served as the sector in-charge, a key position in MQM's structure. Ethnically diverse and divided Orangi remains one of the biggest slums of Karachi. Both the MQM and ANP are at loggerheads in parts of this town to get an upper hand. Both accuse one another of trying to bring demographic changes not just in parts of Orangi, but also at other places as their preparations for the future elections.

ANP, which for the first time got two of its members elected to the provincial assembly from Karachi, says that this remain the main factor that antagonized the MQM. "The MQM sees ANP as a threat to its hegemony," Syed said. The MQM in its turn accuses ANP of patronising criminals and land grabbers.

In this barrage of allegations, indeed, the story of the unfolding tragedy in Karachi is not an easy one to tell. It is a grim complex situation in which ethnic rivalry remains just one manifestation of a bigger problem that has many grey areas. All these killings and the state of lawlessness, that descend on the city so often, have a pattern that keeps repeating itself. Though there are short and long periods of tense calm as well, the causes of this problem remain unaddressed. They range from the presence of ethnic fault lines in the city to that of sectarian and religious divide as well as political rivalries. The state's inability to resolve vital issues ranging from the long lingering transport problem to that of providing water, power or even a decent sewerage system -- all play their part in intensifying conflicts in Karachi.

A senior police official said requesting anonymity that the presence of the hard-core criminals in the ranks of major political parties remains one of the most troubling factors that emerged in recent years. "It acts as a catalyst in aggravating the situation."

Police in majority of the cases remain unable to take action against criminals because of their political affiliations. "Politicisation of crime and criminalisation of politics -- this has now become the main problem," the official said.

All the political parties do say they won't tolerate criminals in their ranks, but fail when it comes to match their words with action. No wonder, now for grabbing land, party flags are used in Karachi. The Sindh government's anti-encroachment drive crashed soon after takeoff in July because of the sharp differences within the allies of the ruling coalition.

To add to the problem of ethnic polarisation is the fact that many al Qaeda and Taliban operatives have slipped into the city in the wake of the military operation in the northern areas.

The MQM's stance that there has been growing "Talibanisation" in the city also proved a factor that led to sharpening the ethnic divide. ANP maintains that the issue of Taliban is being used to malign and target Pukhtoons in Karachi.

However, while a vast majority of Pukhtoons have nothing to do with extremists, security officials say that Taliban and their associates use Karachi to generate funds. From kidnapping for ransom to robberies and drugs and arms smugglings to extortion, huge amount of money is being raised every month by extremists from Karachi, they said.

In 2009 alone, media reports say that more than 160 militants were arrested in Karachi out of whom most were nabbed from Sohrab Goth and other Pukhtoon-dominated neighbourhoods. Police officials admit that even routine administrative issues have the potential to transform into ethnic confrontation.

Decades of political expediency and compromises by the successive governments have made situation messier in Karachi. Rather than going for rule of the law, institutions have gone for ad hoc measures -- often becoming a party themselves by propping one group against the other. The result has proved disastrous as not just state authority took a blow, but it resulted in complete lawlessness.

In every cycle of violence, the government avoided action against culprits and allowed wounds to fester. The city bounces back to normalcy not because of administrative measures, but by an inbuilt self-healing process, which offers only short-term relief. And between these extremes of temporary peace and bouts of violence, there are genuine fears of balkanisation of this city, which is awash with both illicit and licensed weapons. This remains a possibility because of state's inability to resolve its contradictions and establish its writ and rule of the law. The writing is very much on the wall, but rulers fail to read it. In this land of the pure, political expediency reigns supreme.

Karachi demands a solution

By Amir Zia

The News
Thursday, August 05, 2010

The assassination of MQM MPA Syed Raza Haider and his guard on Aug 2 that plunged parts of Karachi into violence and chaos was a tragedy waiting to happen. Nearly four dozen lives were lost within hours of Haider’s assassination and several others were killed over the next couple of days. This senseless, but organised, violence targeted mostly daily-wage earners and poor labourers. Vehicles were set ablaze, markets and bazaars were forced to shut as the city witnessed grueling traffic jams on key roads. This was followed by a complete shutterdown of businesses and industries for the next two days causing a loss of billions of rupees to the national exchequer. The country’s biggest city and the main industrial and commercial hub was in the grip of uncertainty, chaos and fear, reminding one of the bloody decade of the ’90s when the MQM and the state institutions were locked in conflict.

But that is history. It has been many years now that the MQM is a key component of Pakistan’s mainstream politics. However, its acceptance in the corridors of power and share in the provincial and federal governments have not changed those dynamics which make Karachi one of the world’s most violence-prone, lawless and crime- ridden cities. From the simmering ethnic, sectarian, religious and political contradictions and conflicts to coping with the challenges of its fast growing population, the sharp social and economic disparities and critical civic and transport issues, the state has so far failed to resolve or tackle any of them.

Making this grave situation more complex is the fact that in recent years politics and crime have started to overlap. Criminalisation of politics has become a core problem plaguing this city. It intensifies and further brutalises Karachi’s already simmering conflicts and contradictions. When crime mafias–from land-grabbers to drug-peddlers–become part of the country’s main political parties, it is next to impossible to establish rule of the law or ensure justice.

According to police figures, from January to July there have been more than 150 political assassinations, out of the nearly 900 murders that took place in Karachi during this period. August has started with a bang with the murder of a key MQM figure, followed by a general killing spree. And the death toll is climbing with each passing day. This has been the short- to long-term pattern of violence in Karachi since the early 1980s–a burst of violence and then a brief uneasy lull, followed by another bout of violence, killing and mayhem. The resilience of the people of Karachi keeps life and businesses going, but the spectre of violence remains. It manifests itself in different forms–from ethnic to sectarian on one level and inter-party and intra-party on the other.

In the first seven months of 2010, the MQM, its splinter factions led by Afaq Ahmed and Amir Khan, the Pakistan People’s Party, the Awami National Party, the Sunni Tehreek, the outlawed Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan, Shiite activists, the Jamaat-e-Islami and a few others have been both victims and perpetuators of the violence. Each one of these political and religious groups resorted to violence to the extent of their possession of their respective muscle power. It has not just been members of a rival political party fighting rivals. Even workers and militants of allied parties–including those belonging to the ruling coalition–have turned their guns on each another. The MQM-PPP conflict in the early months of 2010 and the low-intensity MQM-ANP tussle in recent months are its prime examples. So far it has been a low-intensity conflict between these forces, which has claimed dozens of lives. The kind of fire power these political forces have makes one shudder at the ferocity of a full-blown conflict if things slide out of control in this city of more than 16 million people.

The causes of the tussles among these political players stem from their desire to control the city of Karachi, or parts of it, because it offers big legal and illegal fund-raising opportunities. Therefore, demography is important, because it becomes a source of conflict as these parties try to consolidate their vote banks or build them in constituencies where balance of power can be tilted with a few thousand more votes. And this contest is solely on ethnic lines rather than political or ideological. That is the reason why the issue of land-grabbing has become central to the political discourse these days in Karachi. But the provincial government finds itself unable to take any equitable action to get thousands of acres of land vacated from the illegal occupants because its allies consider it against their interest. No wonder the anti-encroachment drive, which was started with fanfare in July, was stopped within three days of its launch.

And it is not just the thorny issue of land encroachment which can become ethnic or political in Karachi. Simple administrative issues and implementation of even traffic laws can transform into a source of conflict and fan ethnic polarisation. The state institutions succumb to the pressure groups when it comes to implementing even simple traffic rules. From the drive against smoke emitting vehicles to that of against noise pollution, the state and its institutions survive by conceding authority. Who says only the tribal areas remains lawless in Pakistan? One can see the lawlessness in Karachi where in most part of the city one would find no law.

The situation becomes aggravated by the fact that the government remains unable to curb the free flow of weapons into this city–both illicit and licensed. The liberal policy of issuing licenses even of prohibited bores on the recommendations of lawmakers to that of the influx of illicit weapons has made Karachi, certainly one of the most heavily armed cities of South Asia. It remains on the brink and survives on the balance of terror between rival groups. No wonder when tensions soar between rival groups, in many neighbourhoods one sees youngsters armed with rocket-launchers and rifle-propelled grenades guarding their neighbourhoods, streets and lanes. The much-celebrated Kalashnikov–a gift of the US-funded Afghan war against the former Soviet Union–is no longer the most lethal weapon in their arsenal.

But the balance of terror should not be taken as a guarantee for peace in such an ethnically diverse city, which has all the inherent contradictions that can spin out of control to result in far greater tragedies than we have witnessed so far. The ethnic violence of the mid ’80s, which saw tragedies of Aligarh and Qasba Colonies to that of the mayhem following the assassination of former premier Benazir Bhutto to that of the arson and killings after the bombing during the mourning procession last Ashura–the city has borne the brunt of it all. All these conflicts, despite their ferocity, had the potential to turn into even bigger tragedies. The state and its institutions were found wanting in all such situations.

There indeed are no easy fixes and solutions to this complex and complicated situation. But a beginning has to be made and the first step needs to be taken. And that should begin with freeing the police of political interference and restoring its independence. The government’s responsibility and commitment to ensure rule of the law–even if it is a bad law–would be better than the present state of lawlessness. The major political parties and their top leadership on their part have to see beyond their narrow and short-term self-interest. They need to clear their ranks of criminals, land-grabbers, drug-peddlers and assassins, in their own enlightened self-interest. It is imperative for the survival of this city and its people. The city of Karachi and its people deserve better than what they are getting from the political parties. The citizens of Karachi are not asking for the moon. They just want a peaceful city, where they can go to work daily, send children to school and if their pockets permit in these testing times go and eat out–once in a blue moon. Is it too much to ask?