A sordid drama

WITHIN three weeks of election day, when the predominant feeling was that of relief, the nation has all reason to feel nervous. There is no evidence yet of a split between the two coalescing partners, but a trickle of what has already appeared in the press about the goings-on in the PPP camp is enough to cause concern among euphoric supporters. Evidently, the PPP leadership does not seem to be conscious of the historic position in which the Feb 18 polls have placed it. While recklessness is too harsh a word, it is safe to say that the party leadership has not demonstrated the maturity that was expected of it. As people wait with bated breath, they are shocked to see the beginning of what could be a slide into the unknown. Who should be the prime minister is essentially a decision that is for the PPP to take. If there is controversy within the party, it is nothing out of the ordinary. But must the junior coalition partners be allowed to issue a public veto on this issue? It seems the Sharifs’ wishes prompted Mr Amin Fahim’s absence from the Bhurban talks. Leaving aside the truth or otherwise of the reasons for the PML-N’s distrust of Mr Fahim, the issue boils down to the propriety of publicly conducting party business and negotiating with others.

It was, of course, quite normal for the PML-N team to raise any issue they wished to with their senior partners, and it was equally incumbent on the PPP to try to accommodate their interlocutors’ views, where possible. But Mr Asif Ali Zardari and his colleagues could have explained their point of view to the PML-N without the gaucherie that has led to the public humiliation of the party’s vice chairman. The party leadership must now learn from this faux pas, and the obvious lesson is that it should prevent differences within the party’s fold from spilling into the open. This is part of the fundamentals of a party’s inner working and discipline. If the PPP now tries to ‘rehabilitate’ Mr Fahim does it not risk annoying the Sharifs and jeopardising the March 9 declaration? Will this then be considered by the world as an auspicious beginning for the new democratic era? President Pervez Musharraf must now be the happiest man on earth. He has called a session of the assembly on Monday. Given the squabbling in the victorious party, the impression conveyed is that the parties themselves were not very keen for an early NA session.

Also, it is time the controversy about the modalities of the judges’ restoration was ended. The attorney-general thinks only a two-thirds majority can undo the effects of the Nov 3 emergency; the other view is that a simple executive order can restore the judges. Why not lay the controversy to rest and accept the March 9 declaration which says that the NA will decide the issue through a resolution within 30 days of its first meeting? After all, the will of the people reflected in the election result can only be ignored at great peril to the nation.

Horror in Lahore

TWO deadly car explosions — suspected to be suicide attacks — in Lahore in the space of a few minutes on Tuesday morning left a trail of death and destruction. The militants had struck in the city for the third time in two months, mainly targeting the security forces. The first suicide bomber had hit the city in January to kill 24 people, a majority of them policemen, and the second attack was carried out only a week ago at the Pakistan Navy War College, leaving six dead. The bombers’ choice of targets on Tuesday was significant. The first blast took place at the provincial headquarters of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) on Temple Road — just 100 or so yards from The Mall, the city’s political and commercial nerve centre. The second explosion occurred in the office of an advertising agency in Model Town — which is home to former prime minister Nawaz Sharif and other political heavyweights of the province and also houses the residence and office of the Pakistan People’s Party co-chairman.

The message the terrorists seem to be driving home is that there’s no turning back on the war on terror as the PML-N is all set to assume power in Punjab. While many ascribe the party’s poll victory to its pro-judiciary stance, there is a theory according to which the PML-N’s election gains are explained in terms of the security that the coming to power of its rightwing leaders promises to the people. Amid talks that Pakistan needed to exit the American war on terror in favour of a war on terror of its own, the PML-N has been rather tightlipped on the subject. It will find it difficult to maintain this silence for long and will have to decide either way. Right at this moment, there is no shortage of people in Lahore who would be hoping the decision will be in favour of a non-military solution to the problem.

President Pervez Musharraf has denounced the attacks, saying such acts “cannot deter (his) government’s resolve to fight the scourge with full force”. World leaders will repeat the message and hail Mr Musharraf’s resolve against terrorism. In Pakistan his anti-terror policies are increasingly seen as being aimed at securing the West against terror while the people of Pakistan are becoming more exposed to the most horrifying of all horrors.

Too limited a mandate

HRCP chairperson Asma Jehangir’s credentials as a vocal critic of human rights abuses in the country are, no doubt, impeccable. However, her visit to occupied Kashmir and the Indian state of Gujarat left much to be desired. True, she was visiting as a UN representative whose mandate was to report on the extent of freedom of religion and faith — and nothing else, as she made clear to the Kashmiris recently. If that was the case then she should have stuck to her agenda and not made comments on poll participation in Kashmir. In fact, her reluctance to speak about human rights violations in the Valley disappointed many Kashmiri leaders who, understandably, found it difficult to de-link Ms Jehangir, while in the occupied territory and India, from the cause she serves in Pakistan.

What aggravated the situation was her visit to the Indian state of Gujarat where she met a beaming Chief Minister Narendra Modi and was photographed receiving a memento from him. No doubt, Ms Jehangir had also met Kashmiri Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad. But this was altogether a different matter, for despite Mr Modi’s secure political office in his home state, a large section of Indians are convinced of his culpability in the Gujarat communal riots of 2002 when some 2,000 people, predominantly Muslims, were massacred. Quite naturally, this drew the ire of Pakistan’s religious parties who believe in leaving no stone unturned to demonise those fighting for fundamental liberties, and who have now been given fodder for future attacks. But, more than that, Ms Jehangir’s much publicised meeting with Mr Modi has also left many liberals ruffled. After all, many people who believe in pluralism also have religious sensitivities, while others for whom faith is not a major consideration oppose human rights violations as a matter of principle.

Ms Jehangir’s silence in Kashmir and her meeting with Mr Modi have disappointed both.

OTHER VOICES - European Press

Make polluters pay

The Independent

THIS government has a lamentable record on environmental taxation. While ministerial rhetoric on the need to reduce carbon emissions has soared into the stratosphere, environmental levies have actually fallen as a proportion of overall taxation under Labour. As the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee pointed out last week, its share has fallen from 9.5 per cent in 1999 to 7.3 per cent today.

Mr Darling has a chance tomorrow to show serious commitment to the principle that the polluter must pay. There is talk of a rise in fuel duty and higher taxes on heavily polluting vehicles.

Environmental levies need two key features. The first is that they be substantial enough to change behaviour. The second, and no less important, is that the proceeds are seen to be channelled into green schemes.

The London mayor, Ken Livingstone, showed how it needs to be done with his congestion charge on cars. The proceeds of the charge were invested directly in improving the bus network in the capital. People grumbled, but they could see where their money was going. — (March 11)

Bad habits die hard

The Slovak Spectator

ALMOST everyone in Slovakia has a story to tell about corruption. But even those who have encountered it first-hand are eager to put the experience behind them, or justify it as an inevitable by-product of a society built on interpersonal connections.

Last year, the number of corruption cases reported to the Corruption Office was the lowest since the office was founded in 2004…. While optimists will be tempted to interpret this as a sign that corruption is on the decline in Slovakia, pessimists will say that society is simply becoming apathetic about reporting it.

… Strict legislation is undoubtedly an important element of the battle against corruption, but the laws themselves are not enough. Governments also need to show commitment to the fight. While Vladimír Mehiar’s government mostly swept the problem under the carpet, the Mikuláš Dzurinda government declared a war on corruption in 2002.

But the war certainly isn’t over.… No one believes one government can completely weed out bad habits, but whenever governments cool their jets in the fight against corruption, it sends out a signal of indifference. — (March 10)