And Ne’er The Twain Shall Meet?

By Amir Zia
Monthly Newsline
July 2012

The frail democratic system is indeed creaking under the weight of heightening government-judiciary tussle. There are genuine fears not just about its future, but also about the state’s viability and writ that has been shaken to the core due to the many years of misgovernance and misrule and the growing challenge of extremism and terrorism.

It is now a guessing game; how long can Raja Pervaiz Ashraf survive on the wicket as prime minister? If all goes well, though few are likely to bet on it, Ashraf will be in the prime minister’s house for not more than eight months before the hurly burly of elections starts and an interim set-up takes over. But if the judiciary strikes again, which remains the most likely scenario, his days are numbered. His exit could be in a couple of months at the most, or even in a few weeks.
The country’s executive and judiciary have already laid their cards on the table. The new prime minister has categorically announced that he, like his predecessor, will not write to the Swiss authorities regarding the opening of graft cases against President Asif Ali Zardari. Yousuf Raza Gilani chose to be disqualified rather than follow the Supreme Court verdict on the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) case. The Supreme Court has now given the new prime minister the deadline of July 12 to formally indicate whether he will ask the Swiss authorities to reopen cases against President Zardari, who, the Pakistan Peoples Party’s constitutional and legal experts maintain, enjoys immunity from prosecution as head of state.
Between these two inflexible positions there appears to be no middle ground. It is either “my way or the highway.” The country is thus destined to remain in the throes of political uncertainty and strife for the foreseeable future, as two of the important state institutions remain openly at loggerheads. Although the other institutions, including the mighty military establishment, declare neutrality, they continue to operate from the shadows, as they have been doing since the return of democracy to the country – sometimes showing restraint and at other times working as a catalyst in determining the course of events.
The opposition – from the Pakistan Muslim League (N) to Imran Khan’s Tehreek-e-Insaf, and marginal players like the Jamaat-e-Islami – have their daggers drawn for an early ouster of the PPP-led government, even if it means cutting short its five-year term by only a few months. The opposition is the foremost cheerleader of the judiciary, along with the mainstream media which is serving as the main battle tank trying to clear and mould public opinion against the government.
The frail democratic system is indeed creaking under the weight of this heightening tussle. There are genuine fears not just about its future, but also about the state’s viability and writ that has been shaken to the core due to the many years of misgovernance and misrule and the growing challenge of extremism and terrorism.
No wonder Islamabad remains rife with rumours, with political pundits, experts and analysts drawing out different future scenarios for the country – from the ouster of this government through direct military intervention, to its removal through the judiciary and the induction of a set-up comprising technocrats and relatively clean politicians. The buzz around town is that some kind of Bangladesh model is being created. Critics meanwhile, contend that this is doomed to fail having already been tried, tested and found defective. The grinding of rumour mills aside, the underlining point is that most doubt the continuity of this democratic setup.
Zahid Hussain, senior analyst and author, says that the noose appears to be tightening around the PPP. “Zardari has saved the government from falling temporarily, and in doing so has increased the PPP’s reliance on its allies manifold, especially the PML-Q (Pakistan Muslim League Quaid-e-Azam group), but the crisis remains very much there.”
He continues, “Despite compromises, the question is, will this alliance survive in the mid to long run? Zardari accepted the verdict (of Gilani’s disqualification) because of the pressure of his coalition partners. These compromises will lead to other compromises…the situation is tenuous and this critical tight-roping cannot work for long.”
Government circles, however, remain hopeful that they will once again prove successful in defying prophecies of doom as they have managed to do in the past, complete their five-year term, hold elections and return to power. This view may appear almost unbelievably optimistic, but PPP stalwarts say that their support in the rural areas, which consistitutes the majority of the vote bank, remains intact due to this government’s pro-agriculturist and farmer policies and pro-poor programmes. In the urban areas, they maintain they still retain their support base, along with help from their allies.
Meanwhile, the routine conciliatory statements of top government officials towards the judiciary, replete with obsequious vows of respect for its authority, for the rule of law and the desire to avoid a clash of the institutions, appear deceptive as many of the government lawmakers, second-tier politicians and supporters aggressively accuse the superior courts of trying to stage a ‘judicial coup,’ of activism and of infringing on the grounds of the executive.
Perhaps in defence of the abysmal failure of governance witnessed in the past four years, the Pipliyas also keep highlighting the fact that the coalition government has been kept on the ropes since the start of its term, with the judiciary serving at the vanguard of the assault. From the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO)-related cases, that include the implementation of the courts judgment to that of Zardari concurrently holding the two positions of head of state and party co-chairman, the cases against Zardari are being cited by government loyalists as merely the tip of the iceberg that aims to sink the PPP-led coalition. Other roadblocks, which have made it difficult for the government to run even mundane day-to-day affairs, government officials contend, include the scrapping of the executive orders regarding appointments for senior positions, and efforts by the superior courts to micro-manage who should represent the government or investigate high-profile corruption cases against its senior members and their relatives. “The superior judiciary even tried to fix sugar prices rather than leaving it to market forces, and has kept the executive in the dock in regard to various high-profile cases, including that of missing persons, rental power and privatisation,” says one PPP official.
Senior PPP politician Taj Haider contends that Zardari is the actual target of all the attacks, but the PPP has so far managed to divert the frontal assault on him. “Gilani took the shot aimed at him, and we have shown that the PPP and its allies have no dearth of candidates for the slot of prime minister. We are all set to complete our term and Zardari will be president even after the elections. This scenario has made our opponents nervous. They are now getting desperate,” he says.
But the bravado and defiance of the PPP leaders and their allies have failed to impress detractors. They argue that the judiciary’s firm stance against the government’s open efforts to undermine the law, misuse its power and penchant for corruption and nepotism has proved, at least in part, a successful deterrent and prevented the government from going even further overboard in its wanton abuse of power.
As proof of this they cite the NRO case, in which the judgment to strike down the ordinance was announced unanimously by the Supreme Court judges in December 2009, and the government confessed in writing that the controversial ordinance was indefensible and unconstitutional.
“Despite having a two-third majority at that time, the government failed to have the NRO validated by parliament because it was discriminatory and unconstitutional,” says former law minister Iqbal Haider. “This shows that the Supreme Court judgment on the NRO had constitutional and political backing.” Ironically, legal experts say, the government filed a review petition in the NRO case even though it had admitted that it was “unconstitutional.”
Former Supreme Court judge Wajihuddin Ahmed maintains that during the NRO case hearing the Supreme Court did not insist on the implementation of its decision.
Lawyers agree that it was only after the dismissal of the review petition that the Supreme Court directed Gilani to implement the court order by writing to the Swiss authorities, but he defied the orders, which led to the contempt of court proceedings against him and his disqualification.
“The Supreme Court should be asked why it delayed doing this for so long,” says Ahmed. “The government filed a review petition in the NRO case, but it never asked for any stay, and if you don’t ask for a stay none is granted. Despite that, the judiciary showed utmost restraint, given the fact that in review petitions the success rate is usually less than one percent as the fundamentals of a case do not change.”
Experts say that even in the Lahore High Court verdict pertaining to Zardari’s holding of two offices of president and party chief, restraint has been demonstrated. The president has been given the option to choose either one of the two offices, and has been given time till September 5 to decide, which demonstrates that the judiciary does not want to undermine the democratic system and wants its continuity, they contend.
“But look at the government’s conduct on the other hand,” says Wajihuddin Ahmed. “After Gilani’s removal, they first tried to bring Makhdoom Shahabuddin in as premier – a man tainted by the ephedrine scandal along with Gilani’s son, Ali Musa Gilani. Once warrants were issued against him, they came up with Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, against whom there are also serious corruption allegations in the rental power case.”
PPP backers, unsurprisingly, insist that the allegations of corruption against their party members are fabricated. Taj Haider cites Zardari, who was imprisoned for 10 years, but not a single case was proven against him. “There is a clear bias towards the PPP and its leaders,” he says. “My question is, why it is only the PPP government which is being kept under the microscope? What about the performance of other institutions, including the judiciary, which failed to address the issue of hundreds and thousands of pending cases, to provide justice to the common man or even make appointments to vacant positions? “Therefore,” says Haider, “we propose to restructure the judicial system of the country and make four provincial Supreme Courts and a Federal Court in line with the charter of democracy, and ensure the accountability of judges as well”.
As the tussle between the two camps drags on, it is becoming ever more personalised, with a lot of mud-slinging from both sides. In an attempt to undermine the judiciary, the PPP and its allies point fingers toward Chief Justice Chaudhary Mohammed Iftikhar’s son, Arslan Iftikhar, who allegedly took bribes from real-estate tycoon Malik Riaz, promising to get him relief from his father’s court.
The chief justice’s supporters say that Arslan may have erred, but there is not a single case in which Malik Riaz’s Bahria Town has been provided relief by the court his father presides over.
Athar Minallah, a leading lawyer who was in the forefront in the pro-chief justice campaign during the days of former military ruler Pervez Musharraf, describes the situation as complex. “As an institution, the authority of the judiciary is at stake… some sections are trying to push the judiciary into the political arena. The question is, how can the judiciary step back on the NRO issue after Gilani’s disqualification?” The challenge is to ensure the sanctity and authority of the judiciary as well as to avoid the clash of institutions in which the ultimate loser will be Pakistan and its democratic system,” he says.
In this highly volatile and explosive situation, however, neither side appears to be backing down. In fact, each seems to be upping the ante rather than finding a workable middle ground.
“Politicians – be it in the government or the opposition – should have acted with more responsibility and maturity, rather than putting everything in front of the judiciary to decide,” Minallah says. “They should use parliament to decide contentious issues and seek political solutions in a rational manner. But, unfortunately, the country’s political forces have failed to do so.”
After Gilani’s dismissal, the judiciary indeed appears more confident and there are clear indications that the Supreme Court will further increase pressure on the beleaguered government, which seems to be fast running out of options as the opposition mounts the pressure for early elections.
One possible way out for the government is to call early elections, but this seems easier said than done. So far there has not even been an agreement between the government and the opposition on the composition of the interim set-up that could ensure free and fair polls. And even if they manage to cross this river, holding elections in this highly charged and polarised situation will be no mean challenge.
As political rivals and institutions lock horns, issues which are critical for the country are being placed on the back burner. The government has long abandoned the much-needed reforms vital for the battered economy, caught in a vortex of low growth and high inflation for the last four years. As feared by experts, the new budget 2012-13 (July-June) fails to address the structural flaws of the economy including expanding its narrow tax base, slashing the widening budget deficit which hovers at above 6.0 % in fiscal 2011-12, and reforming the energy sector and loss-making public sector enterprises which remain a huge drain on the economy.
In all the political turmoil and in the run-up to the elections, these urgent issues will have to wait to be addressed, which the country can ill afford. Simultaneously, the spectre of terrorism and extremism and the weakening writ of the state in different parts of the country pose a huge internal security challenge which is directly impacting Pakistan’s foreign relations and resulting in estranged ties not just with its neighbours, but also with the United States and other western powers. Given the government’s dismal performance on this front too, Pakistan’s future is becoming increasingly bleak. The government battles for the survival of its rule, but does so at the expense of the country.

Governance: Back to British Raj

By Amir Zia
The News On Sunday
July 24, 2011

The elected local governments flourished mainly under the military rule, while the democratic governments maintain a record of stifling them. The affection of military rulers toward the local governments stems from the fact that they wanted to alienate the mainstream political parties. The democratic governments abhor the local governments and in most cases chose to run them through hand-picked lackeys as they could never truly digest the concepts of sharing and devolution of powers.


On July 13, the Sindh Assembly restored the time-tested legacy of British Raj, known in our part of the world as the “commissionerate system.” In what may appear as a befitting tribute democracy La Pakistani-style, the Sindh Assembly lawmakers belonging to the ruling Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and its allies passed three controversial ordinances by a simple majority in barely 15 minutes, which repealed the former military ruler Pervez Musharraf’s Local Government Order of 2001 and amended the Sindh Land Revenue Act of 1967. One of the bills revived the British-era Police Act of 1861 by scarping the Police Order 2002.

The move is being described by the government loyalists as a victory for the democratic forces, though it is all set to increase polarisation and division in the ethnically diverse and volatile province of Sindh, which drifts from one crisis to another.

The PPP Sindh leaders claim that the Musharraf-era system remained alien to both masses and the administration and they wanted the old system back. Their rivals say that it gave powers to the grassroots level.

The government’s move first came in the form of Ordinances soon after its one-time ally, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), which supports the Musharraf-era concept of local governments, quit the treasury benches and its Sindh Governor tendered his resignation. Within four days of the passing of the controversial ordinances, which restored the commissionerate system, the government got them passed in the assembly despite the bitter opposition of the MQM.

Although Sindh Governor Dr Ishrat-ul Ibad resumed his responsibilities on July 18, indicating a thaw in the relations of these two parties, the brewing crisis over the commissionerate system appears far from over.

As the MQM continues to sit on the opposition benches despite having its man as Sindh Governor, one of its leaders, Wasay Jalil, says that his party will continue its campaign for the restoration of Musharraf-era local government system. “We say that if there were flaws in the 2001 Local Government Order, they should be removed,” he says. “We are demanding this not just for Karachi, or Sindh, but for the entire country. Instead of living in the 21st century, the vested interests want to drag us back to the 19th century. We only harm ourselves by repeating the past experiments.”

Sindh remains the only province where the Musharraf-era system has been scrapped altogether by the elected representatives. In Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, nominal changes have been brought in this system through executive ordinances.

Fahim Zaman Khan, a former PPP-nominated mayor of Karachi, who now leads a civil rights group, says that Sindh has reverted back to the 1979 Local Government Ordinance, while other provinces have made only symbolic changes, including restoring the old administrative titles. “Under the constitution, the local government is a provincial subject. The Musharraf government took the political, administrative and financial powers away from provinces and gave them to districts in the name of devolution and decentralisation. However, the military government made no attempt to transfer powers from the centre to the provinces. The step was taken with bad intentions from the day one,” Khan said.

“It was akin to Ayub Khan’s Basic Democracy, which was aimed at weakening political parties and dividing the people on the basis of ethnicity, clans, tribes and regions. Musharraf followed the footsteps of Ayub in his bid to eliminate the provincial authority.”

The traditional political forces viewed the 2001 local government system as full of anomalies and contradictions compared with the Municipal Act of 1848, enforced by the British East India Company.

Under the Musharraf’s planned system, police had to report to the elected nazim, but this part of the reform was never implemented, which, for many of its critics, led to the police becoming a “monster”.

Under the British Raj, they say, responsibilities and duties of police remained clear. For instance, police were not allowed to open fire without orders from the magistrate, but Musharraf gave this power to the police force itself.

Taj Haider, a senior PPP leader, says that Musharraf’s ordinance also remained in conflict with the constitution. “The system was full of loopholes… indirectly elected people were given vast financial powers.”

He says the PPP reverted back to the Ziaul Haq-introduced 1979 ordinance because it was closer to the spirit of constitution compared with the one introduced by Musharraf, which could not be reformed.

However, in line with its policy, the government ensured the separation of administrative and judicial powers, he says, adding that the recently resorted system will be improved further. “The government has setup a task force to decide whether commissioners, deputy commissioners and other officials report to chief secretary or the elected representative.”

Analysts say that the traditional political forces, especially belonging to the rural areas, felt that the powers of ministers were slashed under the Musharraf’s local body system. That was the reason many influential feudal lords chose to get themselves or their relatives elected as nazims rather than going for the provincial or national assemblies.

Danial Aziz, a former federal minister, who is leading a campaign for the devolution of powers and restoration of the 2001 local body system, says that vested interests are opposed to it because Musharraf’s system loosened their grip on the power structure. “These so-called democratic politicians, who run parties as their fiefdoms and nominate their heirs, saw a dark future because power was being transferred to the grassroots level.”

“They use deputy commissioners and other bureaucrats as their political agents. Obviously, they won’t like institution-building and decentralisation of power where people take ownership and hold elected representatives accountable,” Aziz says.

Sardar Ahmed, a senior MQM leader and a former bureaucrat, says the commissionerate system fitted the needs of colonial times and undemocratic rule, but enforcing the 19th century system in this day and age remains a cruel joke. “Only local representatives remain in a position to address problems of their people. It is not the job of members of the national or provincial assemblies or ministers to do this. The PPP never reconciled with the concept of transferring powers at grassroots.”

Differences over the local body system remained the main bone of contention between the PPP and the MQM even when they were allies. But PPP officials say that they can work together even with difference of opinion on this vital issue.

The elected local governments flourished mainly under the military rule in Pakistan, while the democratic governments maintain a record of stifling them. The affection of military rulers toward the local governments stems from the fact they wanted to alienate the mainstream political parties and create an alternate. The democratic governments abhor the local governments and in most cases chose to run them through hand-picked lackeys as they could never truly digest the concepts of sharing and devolution of powers.

One can call it the absurdity of Pakistani politics that our ruling elite keeps reopening and revisiting issues, which should have been decided long ago. The PPP government’s attempt to address the problems of 21st century Pakistan with the 19th century system remains ironic in itself, underlining the intellectual bankruptcy of our times in which past not just continues to hound us but seen as a panacea of all our ills. Pakistan, indeed, is set for more testing times.

The Business Of Crime

By Amir Zia
Newsline
April 2011

Welcome to one of the world’s most dangerous megacities, where the roaring business of organised crime has cast a pall of gloom over commercial, business and industrial life.

Against a backdrop of mounting crime, the Karachi Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KCCI) established a crisis management cell this February to help its members secure themselves against organised gangs of extortionists and kidnappers, who have made life miserable for shopkeepers, traders, business people and industrialists in the teeming port city in recent months.
The statistics are telling. Citizens-Police Liaison Committee (CPLC) data indicates a record surge in the daily crime reports at its centres – ranging from broad daylight mobile and vehicle snatching to extortion and kidnapping for ransom. Cases now average 4,500 a day, compared with 2,500 in March 2010. Additionally, the less-publicised Sindh Home Minister’s telephone complaint centre has been receiving 50-60 complaints daily on an average – the maximum number of these reporting extortion, kidnapping and police excesses.
Welcome to one of the world’s most dangerous megacities, where the roaring business of organised crime has cast a pall of gloom over commercial, business and industrial life. Groups of politically connected criminals and mafias now hold the city hostage and strike at will. In most parts of Karachi, you cannot do business or keep a shop open without paying “protection money.” Youngsters brandishing automatic weapons can descend on you in any part of Karachi – demanding your mobile phone, cash or vehicle. Kidnappers can abduct you or a family member for a few hours, weeks or even months – and payment, ranging from a few hundred thousand rupees to millions in cold, hard cash, is the only way to win freedom in most cases. And armed robberies at the workplace or at home are commonplace.
These gangs encroach upon government and private land, sell drugs and weapons and kill rivals. Often the assassinations of political activists – or even notorious gangsters – bring armed youngsters on the roads, who force shops and commercial centres to close shutters as a mark of protest.
There are some standard modus operandi: political activists-criminals knock at your door demanding donations on the pretext of buying party flags to organise celebrations for a sacred event such as Eid Milad-un-Nabi. If you refuse, there are threats, public beatings, or even a bullet. One of the worst of such cases occurred in the Sher Shah Kabari Market last October, when around a dozen shopkeepers lost their lives because they refused to pay extortion money. In recent months, a number of shopkeepers have also been murdered in hit-and-run attacks in busy commercial areas. Not surprising then that as the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP)-led government continues to allow matters to spiral downwards, a climate of fear and insecurity and a general sense of hopelessness prevails among the citizens of Karachi.
“The business environment has never been as bad as it is today,” Muhammad Saeed Shafiq, president of KCCI, told Newsline. “It is not just the country’s economic situation which is challenging. It is the poor law and order and the 24/7 insecurity that has shaken the confidence of the business community. Almost every second or third day shops and businesses are being forced to close in many parts of the city under one pretext or the other. Ongoing incidents of extortion, kidnappings and other crimes have made Karachi one of the most unsafe places for doing business.” (See interview on page 19)
Ikram Sehgal, chairman of private security firm G4S, and a leading security analyst, disclosed that leading private security companies have been innundated by requests from nervous businessmen, industrialists and professionals, who want security guards for themselves and their families.
“We simply cannot meet their demand because of the lack of trained manpower,” he said. “The criminals’ numbers have burgeoned. And now they are not just targeting the small affluent elite, but the upper-middle class as well. Only a day ago, two of my friends each got threatening calls that their son or daughter would be kidnapped if a hefty ransom amount was not paid.”
It is true that in Karachi today virtually every second or third person has a harrowing story to tell about a direct encounter with criminals, or their friends, relatives or acquaintances running out of luck. The numbers speak for themselves.
A majority of Karachi’s 110 police stations report a massive increase in the crime rate. In 2010, there was a formidable 20% jump from the previous year in reported-crime cases: 59,000 compared with around 49,500 in 2009, according to official Sindh police statistics. The rising crime tide has shown no signs of reversal in the first three months of 2011. The total number of killings in Karachi since January to the present has crossed the 200 mark. In the first 25 days of March alone, more than 150 people fell victim to targeted assassinations in the city. According to the police, around 50% of these fall into the category of political and religions or sectarian murders, while the rest were killed because of personal feuds or were routine crimes.
According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, 242 people were killed in political strife in 2009 and 748 in 2010. The police put the total number of murders in 2009 at 801 and 1,339 in 2010. These include crimes of every nature, not just politically or religiously motivated killings.
The statistics of reported crime, though mindboggling, do not, however, reflect in entirety the state of a city where the majority of citizens live on the knife’s edge. Experts say that reported crime remains only the tip of the iceberg, as even according to conservative estimates, more than triple the number of crimes that occur remain unreported. Fear of reprisal from criminals, or the peoples’ lack of confidence in the police are not the only factors that stop people from lodging first investigation reports (FIRs). Policemen themselves discourage many victims from registering complaints in an attempt to keep the number of reported crimes low in their respective jurisdictions.
CPLC chief Ahmed Chinoy reveals that extortion has emerged as the top crime in Karachi. “But the problem is that barely 30% of the victims of extortion or even street crime come forward to report. The rest remain silent,” he said. “Until people report crimes, the police or we will be unable to help them.” That notwithstanding, CPLC information call centres remain flooded with distress calls spiking of late to 4,500 a day on the average in recent months.
While all the major political parties in the country have a history of patronising criminals, the recent unprecedented surge in crime has been blamed largely on the newest entrant on Karachi’s political horizon – the Peoples’ Amn Committee of Lyari. Although the Amn Committee, comprising mostly known gangsters and disgruntled PPP workers, announced a closure of its offices and claimed it was disbanding following Interior Minister Rehman Malik’s March 17 announcement that the government plans to ban it, business leaders say that its activities continue. (See box: La Cosa Nostra)
A police officer acknowledged, “More than two weeks down the road since the government announced the ban on the Amn Committee, there has been no operation against gangsters. The ban remains only on paper.”
Echoing this, said a leading businessman, requesting anonymity: “Nothing has changed on the ground. All the major retail and wholesale markets located in Lyari’s vicinity remain at the mercy of gangsters, who continue to extort money and rob people. All the notorious criminals continue to roam freely.”
Some of Karachi’s oldest and busiest markets, including Jodia Bazaar, Sarafa Bazaar, the Timber Market, Bolton Market, Jamaa Cloth, Denso Hall, Shoe Market, Burns Road, and even Saddar suffer the brunt of the spiralling crime, because of their proximity with Lyari.
A senior police officer, who also asked not to be identified, said criminals from Lyari fan out in the city’s main commercial areas to carry out their activities. “But ironically, this area, one of Karachi’s oldest neighbourhoods, is not itself among the top 10 most crime-infested areas of the city.” The reason, he said, is a lack of reporting of crime, as well as the fact that Lyari’s gangsters usually strike in neighbourhoods outside their own.
However, the closure of many of Lyari’s storage houses and cottage industry is contributing to unemployment in the area. Lyari residents contend that many young men are thus forced to resort to criminal activities.
While Lyari residents feel the authorities are missing in action when it comes to readressing their grievances, Sharfuddin Memon, a former CPLC chief, who now works as a consultant on planning, policies and public relations at the Sindh Home Ministry, said that the perception of inaction against criminals is wrong. According to him, the police have arrested 89 people involved in targeted killings in recent months. “There have been raids in Lyari as well, along with other pockets of the city,” he said. But, he conceded there should be a continuity in operations and all three coalition partners – the PPP, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) and the Awami National Party (ANP) – should work together to establish the rule of law. He added, “The law and order agenda should never be mixed with other issues.”
While the politics of expediency have prevented an even-handed crackdown on law-breakers, criminals and terrorists since the early 1980s, the Karachi of 2011 has never been more unmanageable and ungovernable than it is today. Now state institutions themselves play one political group against the other and nurture the trend of criminalisation of politics, ignoring the killings and criminal activities conducted by their stooges – if not overtly or covertly supporting them.
Memon said that a key impediment in fighting crime remains the poor prosecution of criminals. “The conviction rate is less than 5%. When the conviction rate is so low and there is no fear of accountability, then of course, criminals will take advantage.”
In fact, criminals get away not just because of corruption in lower courts and poor prosecution – they escape justice because they also threaten judges, witnesses and policemen.
Memon disclosed that a landmark witness protection plan has been approved by the Sindh cabinet, which will be tabled soon in the provincial assembly. “It will help us protect witnesses, who are afraid to testify.”
Farooq Sattar, MQM’s parliamentary leader in the National Assembly told Newsline that his party had held two rounds of talks with President Asif Ali Zardari who assured them that criminals would be taken to task regardless of their political association. However, since then – in just the month of March alone – crime and violence has intensified in the city – and the MQM has lost nearly 35 of its members in targeted killings. Said a disgruntled Sattar, “Criminals and terrorists are striking with impunity. We have recommended that a special PPP-MQM committee on crime, headed by the chief minister, should meet daily to address Karachi’s law and order challenge.”
Sattar added, “We have to regain the confidence of traders, businessmen and investors, who have stopped putting their money in Karachi. If this situation continues, there will be a flight of capital, which to an extent has already started. This trend needs to be arrested as it will impact not just Karachi, but the overall economy of the country. We have to revive Karachi’s role as the country’s main commercial hub.”
Taj Haider, a senior PPP leader, concurred that there should be a crackdown on criminals without any discrimination, fear or favour. “The city needs to be liberated from criminals and militants – there can be no dispute on this. For this we have to work together. Our resolve is firm,” he maintained.
That may well be, but it has not translated into any concrete action. So far the government has not managed to walk the talk. As the key political players in the ruling coalition remain sceptical about one another, their ability to rise above petty party politics remains moot. And till that happens, chances of peace and prosperity in Karachi remain elusive.