Rigged Elections-Ex-judge files plea in SC against 2013 polls

As if the continuing sit-in on the Constitution Avenue demanding dissolution of the assemblies were not enough, a former Supreme Court judge has filed a petition in his own institution, seeking a declaration that last year’s general elections were illegal.

The petition was filed on Saturday by a former judge from Bahawalpur, Mahmood Akhter Shahid Siddiqui, through his counsel Mian Allah Nawaz, pleading to order fresh elections. Justice Siddiqui had retired on Oct 3, 2011.

The petitioner also sought a directive to the political parties to exercise their right of protest and free speech in accordance with the law while ensuring peace and tranquillity.

The petition was filed two days after the publication of a damning report by a commission comprising Sheikh Mohammad Tareef, a retired district and sessions judge appointed to examine polling bags and other record of the National Assembly’s constituency NA-125, Lahore, from where Railways Minister Khawaja Saad Rafiq won the elections. The commission found several irregularities in the elections.

Apex court asked to issue orders for fresh elections
The petitioner sought orders to the appropriate authorities to punish after initiating criminal as well as departmental actions the members of the Election Commission and officers who purchased defective ink from the Pakistan Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (PCSIR) laboratories and the National Database and Registration Authority (Nadra) and supplied it to the returning officers and presiding officers for use in polling stations.

The petitioner said the main issue was why ECP members, ROs and POs did not follow the statutory pre-requisites to the election process.

He said he had conducted preliminary investigation by interviewing ECP members and discovered that the commission had deliberately and with hideous intentions not performed its duties laid down in the statutes.

He claimed that the ECP had admitted in a report that the PCSIR and Nadra had submitted three samples of magnetic ink -- one containing chemicals which could retain thumb impressions for a long time, the second effective for over a year and the third that had the capacity to maintain the impressions for not more than five hours.

The ECP spent about Rs2 billion on the preparation and printing of ballot papers from the state exchequer.

The former judge alleged that the ECP members, including the former chief election commissioner, had committed a heinous crime that even Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan had to admit before the National Assembly by acknowledging that more than 30,000 ballot papers were unverifiable in every constituency since the ridges of the thumb impression of voters had spread.

The petition said the ink used was defective and was suicidal to the transparency of the electoral process.

The current situation had arisen out of the acts of misfeasance, malfeasance, omission and commission of totally criminal negligence on part of ECP, the petition said and added that these acts which had plunged the nation into a trauma not known to history of electoral process under the Constitution could not be remedied before any institution, election tribunals or even the ECP.

Since the announcement of the results of the elections, the country had plunged into uncertainty, agitation and violence and the state had almost turned into an oligarchy, it said.

“Thus no remedy under the Constitution or under the law is available to the citizens of the state except the plenary and inherent constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court,” the petition argued.

Published in Dawn, October 5th, 2014

Dismantling the elitist model by Ishrat Husan

THERE are two ways of drawing lessons from the PTI and PAT dharnas and protests. The government may feel it has been so bruised and weakened that it has no courage or conviction left to undertake tough economic and structural reforms. The fear of adverse reactions and protests by those likely to be the losers if reforms are carried out may lull the decision-makers into a state of continued inaction. If the losers happen to be their political allies and supporters the fear may be heightened.

A more charitable expectation could be that the ruling party and other leading political parties have sensed the general mood of dissatisfaction with the prevailing state of affairs and may be galvanised into taking long-postponed decisions and overdue reforms. They may realise that the political cost of not carrying out these reforms is becoming unbearable. These protests and general public sentiment should appeal to the conscience of the political leadership that status quo and business as usual are no longer acceptable.

Having mobilised the support of the opposition parties and forged a united front for the survival of democracy it is only logical that they should together repair and reconstruct the damaged apparatus of governance and the enfeebled institutions of state. After all, democracy cannot be meaningfully implemented in the absence of strong institutions and good governance. As these reforms are of a long-term nature, the consensus and support of the opposition parties are badly needed to neutralise the pressure tactics of those opposing them.

Viewed in this context, the recent appeal filed by the government against the Supreme Court decision in Khawaja Asif’s case is highly disconcerting. As per the decision, an independent commission of experts puts up a panel of three nominees for each post of the chief executive of regulatory and other key state organisations through an open, transparent process. This does not, in any way, take away the powers of the prime minister in making appointments, but facilitates him in choosing from among the panel that has gone through an independently conducted process of screening and scrutiny to determine suitability for the job.

The prime minister has always the power to reject the panel recommended by the commission and to ask them to submit a fresh panel. This process would in fact help strengthen the prime minister’s position as nobody could then accuse him of nepotism, favouritism or choosing a person on the basis of loyalty.

In most cases, the head of the organisation selected on merit through this transparent process would choose his own team on the same consideration. An autonomous board of directors appointed on the same criterion can then hold the chief executive accountable for results. This mechanism, if put in practice faithfully, can turn these key institutions of state around, place them on a sound footing and bring about a difference in their performance.

Imagine, for a moment, if the heads of SECP, CCP, Nepra, Ogra, Pemra, Pakistan Steel, PIA and of Gencos and Discos are selected this way. This would have restored confidence in the sanctity of these organisations, enhanced the latter’s capability and conferred legitimacy on their functioning. By insisting upon the old beaten track of complete centralisation of powers and the exercise of discretion by top decision-makers in making these appointments it is unlikely that these organisations can either achieve capability, legitimacy or efficiency.

Protests and dharnas are a manifestation of deep-rooted frustration with the way the country has been governed for most of its 67 years. It is time that these sources of disenchantment and lack of trust in the state and its institutions are gradually removed. The main goal for every political party should be to bring about a change from the present elitist model of state to one in which the benefits of growth are shared widely. This can only happen if the current process of decision-making dominated by personalisation, discretion and patronage gives way to a more inclusive and consultative process, adherence to rules and checks and balances.

This is easier said than done and would require a great deal of effort, time and perseverance. That is why the coming together of all political parties around this agenda is the first step forward. Responding to the genuine sentiments of the protesters and others who feel the same way, and utilising the present harmonious relations among all major political parties provides an ideal opportunity for initiating this journey.

The reform agenda for such change has to be comprehensive, encompassing the judicial and electoral, parliamentary, civil service, local government, economic and social sectors. In many instances, detailed road maps are available and can be viewed by the cabinet and parliamentary committees. In other cases, work is already under way as on electoral reforms.

For others, new blueprints have to be developed. One of the instruments which has worked well in democracies such as India is the setting up of blue ribbon commissions consisting of experts, practitioners, parliamentarians, civil society and provincial representatives etc. These commissions should be asked to have broad-based consultation with stakeholders including civil society and come up with recommendations and a time-bound action plan. The proceedings of these commissions should be open to the public and media.

The experience so far in Pakistan is that the reports of such commissions have been put in cold storage. The reason? Decision-makers have wanted to continue with the status quo and dare not give up their powers of patronage, privilege and pelf. Decision-makers should in the new and changed circumstances have no other option but to sincerely implement the recommendations after arriving at a consensus with all other political parties.

Let us hope that history will remember that this political crisis was turned into an opportunity for the transformation of Pakistan driven by an enlightened political leadership and a meritocratic, performance-oriented bureaucracy free from political interference.

The writer is the author of The Economy of an Elitist State. Dawn.com

MQM: Trial and tribulation

IT is hard to decipher the contradictory statements made by Altaf Hussain in recent weeks. One day he calls for a military takeover and setting up a long-term caretaker administration; and almost the next he lashes out at the military establishment for pinning his party to the wall. How do these views square with each other? We have to leave it to the imagination.

It is not unusual for our political leaders to be inconsistent. Yet it is hard to beat the MQM supremo. Whether his theatrics during his marathon telephonic addresses or live TV interviews are a source of embarrassment or entertainment for even some extremely dedicated followers must be left to the latter to decide.

It has become almost a routine affair for Altaf Hussain to sack his party’s coordination committees or threaten to quit the party leadership, only to renege at the pleading of his sobbing followers. It all sounds bizarre and yet the MQM remains the most organised, disciplined and feared political party in the country. Its unwavering mass base has survived despite ups and down experienced by the party since its inception some three decades ago.

Is the MQM finally losing its unchallenged political supremacy over the country’s biggest city?
But is the MQM finally losing its unchallenged political supremacy over the country’s biggest city and financial hub? The increasingly incoherent statements of Altaf Hussain and policy flip-flop are a manifestation of a growing sense of insecurity. It is the pressure both inside and outside the country that appears to have shaken the party leadership. The investigation by the London Metropolitan police into Imran Farooq’s murder and the money-laundering case has surely become a major cause of worry for the party.

But a much bigger concern is the alleged leverage position of the Pakistani security agencies over the party, by holding the two main suspects in the London murder case. The crackdown on party members allegedly involved in criminal activities has brought the MQM under further pressure. That to some extent explains the blow hot, blow cold approach of the party leadership. While desperately trying to appease the security establishment, it also finds itself cornered by the alleged extra-judicial killing and arrests of its workers.

It has been a love-hate relationship between the MQM and the security establishment since the party’s formation in 1984. For sure, the emergence of the group as a major political force in Karachi, and in Sindh’s other urban centres, was rooted in the growing ethnic divide in the province. And many believe that the formation of an urban-based Mohajir party received the tacit approval of Gen Zia’s military regime seeking to contain the political hold of the PPP in Sindh.

Some kind of liaison between the MQM and the military establishment continued after the return of democratic rule in 1988. But that relationship came under severe strain in the beginning of the 1990s when the MQM’s stranglehold over the country’s economic jugular worried the security agencies. That led to the disastrous military operation against the group in 1992. The party was then divided by the intelligence agencies and most of the leadership including Altaf Hussain fled the country. The factional fighting resulted in the killing of many senior leaders. Though badly fractured, the party survived the crackdown.

Another police operation in 1995 dealt a more severe blow to the party wiping out its much-feared militant wing. But ironically, it was yet another military ruler, Gen Musharraf, under whom the MQM was resurrected. For the next seven years, it remained a critical part of the military-led administration. During this period, almost all the police officers involved in the 1995 operation were eliminated one by one by, many allege, the party’s armed supporters.

The MQM remained a part of the ruling coalition formed after the restoration of the civilian democratic rule in 2008. But the situation now seems to be changing yet again. Marginalised in the new power structure and facing another crackdown, the sense of insecurity in the leadership is evident.

Altaf Hussain’s 14 questions addressed to the army chief manifests a fear of being under siege. Unsurprisingly, he has raised the issue of the 1992 and 1995 operations that keeps haunting the party leadership. The allegation of excesses against the security agencies may not be credible, but the MQM’s anxiety is not without reason given its experience of the past operations.

In the absence of an elected city government the MQM’s political control over Karachi appears to have weakened. Therefore the party’s demand for granting Karachi a separate administrative status is understandable, though hard to materialise in the current political clime. There’s no sign of the local government system being restored soon. But even if elections are held it is not certain that the MQM will retain its full control over the Karachi city government.

Above all, the massive influx of immigrants has changed the ethnic balance of Karachi’s population in the last decade. And despite its serious efforts, the party has not been able to shed its Mohajir predisposition, making it difficult for it to win over the confidence of other ethnic groups.

The party may still have maintained its stronghold among Mohajirs, but even that support is not unquestionable anymore. For the first time, in last year’s elections, the MQM was seriously challenged in its bastion by Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf which is in a better position to win over other ethnic communities. With the rapid demographic change, the dynamics of Karachi’s politics of control have also transformed. The future politics of the city will be defined by these changing realities.

A truly middle class and secular party, albeit with its own paradoxes and contradictions, the MQM now faces, perhaps, its toughest challenge. Though it has broken into dynastical power structures, it is a party driven on personality cult. The future of the party without Altaf Hussain is hard to imagine, and yet his continued grip of the leadership may be the biggest threat to it.
By Zahid Hussain
The writer is an author and journalist.
zhussain100@yahoo.com
Twitter: @hidhussain
Published in Dawn, October 1st, 2014

Our civil-military muddle

There is an urgent need for an earnest dialogue between our political and military leaders. Notwithstanding who emerges as winner in the current political crisis, one thing has been laid bare: the roots of democracy and constitutionalism in Pakistan are skin-deep and a significant section of our political class and society still deems direct or indirect military intervention a viable and desirable means to effect regime change.

This is not a conversation about how things ought to be but how they are. Our military has a history of interfering in politics and no manifest appetite to endure civilian control. Our elected leaders seem utterly incapable of putting their own house in order, let alone rising to the multifarious challenges confronting our polity. And many in our society have been socialised into thinking that an adventurous military saving us from ourselves is a blessing.

The manner in which we approach and resolve our civil-military conflict is no academic matter. Pre­sently, our foreign, trade and internal security policies are subsets of our defence policy (which masquerades as a national security policy).

Our military believes that defining and implementing such a policy falls within its exclusive domain. The resulting civil-military conflict is a natural outcome of the mili­­tary’s articulation of its role and responsibilities.

Our polity continues to function on the premise that the military sits atop the food chain.
Those who think that our civil-military imbalance will be fixed either by trying a general or appeasing other generals must think again. Our history of military predominance has perpetuated certain institutional and societal norms that are more relevant to shaping the behaviour of both the military and political actors amidst a crisis than anything written in the Constitution. Reality is that our polity continues to function on the premise that the military sits atop the food chain.

Why should a prime minister backed by parliament ask his army chief to become the arbiter-in-chief in a political crisis? Why did he feel the need to demonstrate to the public that the army chief stood by and not against him? Why did Imran Khan and Tahirul Qadri run helter-skelter to meet the army chief when summoned? Why did they wish to be on his right side? Was it perceived ‘national aspirations’ that prodded this wartime army chief to ‘sort out’ squabbling politicos?

We have had Gen Ziaul Haq declare that, “when political leaders fail to rescue the country out of a crisis, it is an inexcusable sin for the armed forces to sit as silent spectators…” We have had Gen Musharraf proclaim that with a government intriguing to destroy “the last institution of stability” (ie the army), the choice is “between saving the body — that is the nation, at the cost of losing a limb — which is the Constitution”.

We have recently seen Gen Sisi of Egypt successfully argue that political protests can lead to civil war and translate into a national security threat requiring military intervention. And further that while an elected government acquires legitimacy through polls, people can withdraw support through street protest and vest it in someone else. In other words, a street protest-based regime change model involving political protesters and a saviour military is no crazy idea.

So cynics imagine scriptwriters (to GHQ’s chagrin) because (i) there is no legal means to oust the government at present, (ii) Imran Khan and Tahirul Qadri claim that the government has lost its legitimacy due to their protests and if left ‘unattended’ the situation could lead to civil war, (iii) military interventions aren’t a thing of the past (eg Egypt and Thailand), and (iv) our military has neither lost its ability to intervene nor its perceived overarching role as guardian of the state.

The Army and Democracy, an incisive analysis of military politics in Pakistan by old friend and accomplished scholar Dr Aqil Shah is a must read for thinking civil and military leaders. His main thesis is that the “military’s tutelary beliefs and norms, a legacy of its formative experience under conditions of geopolitical insecurity and nation-building problems, have profoundly shaped its political interventions and influence by justifying the authoritarian expansion of its role in state and society”.

Shah convincingly argues that the brand of military professionalism that has evolved in Pakistan drags the military into politics as opposed to keeping it away. And that the “Pakistani army … unaccustomed to the norms of civilian supremacy … has yet to unconditionally consider democracy the only game in town”.

Our political class that has failed to aggregate citizen interests, respond to our needs and shepherd us out of the woods is indefensible. But if a majority of this class is the outcome of military interventions of the past, what makes sane minds think that similar interventions will bear different results? Let’s throw out a rotten system. But what shall we replace it with? Isn’t our system rotting due to failed khaki experiments that have blown up in our faces and not despite them?

Even a functional government will find it hard to achieve smoother civil-military ties because the perceived roles of civil and military institutions at present are not complementary but overlapping and conflicting. So long as the military is the sheriff in town, it will remain politically expeditious for newer political players to seek khaki sponsorship. In short, Pakistan’s problems are such that eliminating opportunities for military intervention is no cakewalk.

Our civil-military divide is consuming us. To address it we need an honest dialogue between our political and military elites leading to a consensus over three foundational issues: what is our vision regarding the future of our state (ie welfare or security state internally; revisionist or conformist state internationally)? Who will do what (ie will defence policy trump foreign policy and who will have the final say)? What will be the accepted means of regime change (ie as laid down in law or street power)?

Once we have agreement on the overall vision and rules of the game, rethinking institutional norms and re-socialising emerging civilian and military leaders will be the easy part.

The writer is a lawyer.

sattar@post.harvard.edu

Twitter: @babar_sattar

Published in Dawn, September 29th, 2014

عمران خان کیوں ?Why Imran Khan

ایک اہم سوال جو لکھنے اور تجزیہ کرنے والوں میں گردش کر رہا ہے کہ آخر نوجوانوں ، پڑھے لکھے لوگوں کی ایک بڑی تعداد عمران خان کے گرد کیوںاکٹھی کیوں ہوگئی ہے،؟ اس انقلابی طبقہ میں خوشحال اور متوسط طبقات کے لوگ نمایاں ہیں ، مگر یہ حقیقت ہے کہ نچلے طبقہ کا عام آدمی بھی اس طرف متوجہ ہوچکا ہے۔ تجزیہ کار اپنے اپنے انداز میں اس کی تعبیر وتشریح کر رہے ہیں۔ کسی کے خیال میں یہ عمران کا شخصی کرشمہ ہے تو کچھ لوگوں کے خیال میں خان نے اپنی تقریروں سے لوگوں ، خاص کر نوجوانوں کو ایسا رومانویت آمیز خواب دکھایا ہے کہ وہ اس کی تعبیر پانے کے لئے سرگرم ہوچکے ہیں۔

عمران خان میں بہت سی کمزوریاں اور خامیاں ہیں۔ سیاست میں دو عشرے گزارنے کے باوجود اس میں ایک خاص قسم کی سادگی اور ناپختگی ہے۔ وہ ہمیشہ کچھ زیادہ بول جاتا ہے، اس کی میڈیا ٹیم کو بعد میں سنبھالنے کی کوشش کرنی پڑتی ہے۔

اس کی مشاورت کا نظام زیادہ مضبوط نہیں، اس کے اردگرد موجود لوگوں پر کئی اعتراضا ت کئے جا سکتے ہیں۔عمران خان کی سیاست اور اس کے کئی فیصلوں پر ہم تنقید کرتے ہیں۔

بہرحال حقیقت ہے کہ عمران خان ہماری جدید سیاست کا واحد شخص ہے ،جس نے اس قدر پرزور انداز میں روایتی سیاست اور سٹیٹس کو کے نظام کو للکارا، اسے بھرپور طریقے سے چیلنج کیا۔
پینتالیس سال پہلے ایک اور شخص نے بھی ایسا ہی کیا تھا، جس کا نام ذوالفقار علی بھٹو تھا۔عمران خان بھٹو نہیں ، انہیں بننابھی نہیں چاہیے۔ ہر دور کے اپنے تقاضے ،رواج اور دستور ہوتا ہے۔ بھٹو صاحب کے اپنے مثبت ، منفی نکات تھے،ویسے بھی وہ اپنا دور گزار کر تاریخ کا حصہ بن گئے۔

عمران کو ابھی خاصا سفر طے کرنا ہے، ان کے بارے میں حتمی رائے دینا مورخ کا کام ہے۔

عمران کی دیانت میں کسی کو کوئی شک نہیں اوران کی یہی کریڈیبلٹی ہی ان کی سب سے بڑی طاقت ہے۔لوگ جانتے ہیں کہ یہ شخص روایتی نظام سیاست کا حصہ نہیں اور شائد بن بھی نہ سکے۔

جو لوگ تبدیلی کا سپنا آنکھوں میں سجائے عمران خان کے گرد اکٹھے ہوئے ہیں، انہیں انڈر اسٹیمیٹ نہیں کرنا چاہیے۔ ان میں پڑھے لکھے لوگوں کی اکثریت ہے۔ فعال طبقات سے تعلق رکھنے والے ڈاکٹرز، انجینئرز، سافٹ وئیر ایکسپرٹ، اکائونٹنٹ،آئی ٹی ایکسپرٹ، فنانشل سروسز اور شعبہ تعلیم سے تعلق رکھنے والے ، کاروباری طبقات،فن کار، ڈیزائنرزاور دیگر پروفیشنلز کے ساتھ خواتین اور طلبہ و طالبات ۔
یہ وہ لوگ ہیں، جن کا سیاست سے کوئی تعلق نہیں، اقتدار یا اختیار ان کی توجہ کا مرکز ہے نہ ہی ان کے پاس اتنا وقت کہ وہ سیاست کر سکیں یا بلدیاتی الیکشن لڑ سکیں۔

یہ رائے بھی درست نہیں کہ ان لوگوں کو نظام سے فائدہ ملا ہے۔ سوال تو یہ ہے کہ نظام سے مرادکیا ہے؟ٹھیک ہے، جن لوگوں نے اپنی تعلیم پر توجہ دی، اچھی پیشہ ورانہ ڈگریاں حاصل کیں، انہیں نجی سیکٹر میں اچھی ملازمتیں ملی گئیں، ان کی زندگیوں میں کچھ آسودگی آئی۔زندگی گزارنے کے لئے مگر اچھی ملازمت کافی نہیں۔

وہ سماج میں رہتا، زندگی بسر کرتا، اتارچڑھائو کا سامنا کرتا ہے۔ لااینڈآرڈر کے مسئلے سے اسے روز واسطہ پڑتا ہے۔ اس کا صاف ستھرا لباس اور گاڑی بھی اسے پولیس کے ہاتھوں ذلیل ہونے سے نہیں بچا سکتی۔
کمر توڑ مہنگائی کا نشانہ اسے بھی بننا پڑتا ہے، بیس بیس تیس تیس ہزار کے بل اس کے لئے بھی سوہان روح ہیں، لوڈ شیڈنگ کے ہاتھوں دم توڑتے یوپی ایس اور جنریٹر اسے بھی اس شدید کوفت اور تکلیف سے دوچار کرتے ہیں۔

سب سے بڑھ کر یہ کہ پچھلے دس پندرہ برسوں میں ہمارے ریاستی ادارے ایک ایک کر کے تباہ ہوگئے۔
پولیس کا نظام زیادہ ظالمانہ اور وحشیانہ ہوگیا، پٹواری کی آہنی گرفت ڈھیلی نہیں پڑی۔
ریاست اپنی ذمہ داریوں سے ہاتھ پیچھے کھینچ رہی ہے۔ سرکاری سکول سسٹم مکمل طو رپر ناکام ہوچکا۔
دانش سکولوں کے ڈھکوسلے کسی پڑھے لکھے سمجھدار شخص کو بے وقوف نہیں بنا سکے۔
ہر سال لاکھوں لوگوں کو سرکاری کالجوں میں داخلہ نہیں مل پارہا کہ نئے کالج اور یونیورسٹیاں تعمیر کرنا حکومتوں کی ترجیح نہیںرہی۔
یہی حالت محکمہ صحت کا ہے۔
جس شخص کا کسی بھی سرکاری دفتر سے کبھی واسطہ پڑے ، شدید تذلیل اور ذہنی اذیت لے کر وہ واپس لوٹتا ہے۔

پڑھے لکھے، باشعور لوگ اس بات کو زیادہ محسوس کرتے ہیں۔ وہ سوچتے ہیں کہ ہمارا پڑوسی ملک بھارت کہاں سے کہاں چلا گیا، وہاں قومی تفاخر عروج پر ہے ، جبکہ ہمارے ہاں بھارت کی برابری تو دور کی بات ہے، اس سمت میںسفر شروع بھی نہیں ہو رہا۔

2007ء کی عدلیہ بچائو تحریک نے اس قوم پر ایک بڑا احسان یہ کیا کہ ایسی بحثیں شروع ہوئیں، جن سے عوام میں شعور جاگا ، انہیں احساس ہوا کہ دنیا میں کیا ہو رہا ہے اور ہمیں کن کن چیزوں کی ضرورت ہے؟
اخبارات میں ادارتی صفحات اور کالموں کی ریڈرشپ کئی گنا بڑھ گئی اور سیاسی ٹاک شوز نے بہت کچھ ایکسپوز کر دیا۔ ہماری روایتی سیاسی قوت کا ذہنی افلاس اس نے واضح کر دیا۔

تبدیلی کی خواہش رکھنے والے، اس کے لئے باہر نکلنے والوں سے بے شک اختلاف کیا جائے، کسی کو ان کے اجتماع پسند نہ ہوں تو نہ دیکھے ، مگر خدارا انہیں یہ گالی نہ دیں کہ یہ لوگ اقتدار اور اختیار کے لالچی ہیں، اس میں حصہ چاہتے ہیں۔
یہ ان باغیرت، باشعور، درد دل رکھنے والے لوگوں کی توہین ہے۔اس گالی کا، ایسی توہین کا حق کسی کوحاصل نہیں ۔ یہ زمین کا نمک ہیں۔ان کی قدر کیجئے، تربیت کیجئے، آگہی دیجئے، دلیل کے ساتھ اپنانقطہ نظر سمجھائیے، قائل کیجئے ،مگربراہ کرم تذلیل ، توہین نہ کریں۔
Edited extract from column by Amir Hashim Khakwani.  Dunya.com.pk

Indian Intelligence Agency RAW buying Geo TV thru 3rd party arrangement

dailymailnews.com | September 11
- Move being initiated to repair the blown covert nexus with Geo
- Middle Eastern businessperson being planted by RAW as front man to purchase Geo group
- Raw funded Sony TV and Zee TV of managements playing vital role in deal
- Geo TV's top officials travelled to Mumbai along with ME investor last month
- Geo team included Mir Ibrahim, Babar Javed and Kamran Hafeez
- Sony TV and Zee TV personalities also included in the game for technical assistance
- Sony TV's Trishikha Ashish Tripathi also interviewed by expected new management of Geo
- RAW having notorious history of manipulating media both inside India and abroad.
- Prominent Indian researcher Satish Chandra confirms RAW's deep involvement in media
- Meetings were held under supervision of Joint Secretary ( Area-I) , Joint Secretary (Area II) of RAW, Joint Secretary E T section and Sanjeev Tripathi, former Secretary RAW
- Snajeev Tripathi is the founder of Aman Ki Asha project
- Self exiled media tycoon is back in country to sign certain documents with regard to the new deal

From Christina Palmer & Anjali Sharma in New Delhi and Kapil Verma in Mumbai

In a plan to repair the damage, caused to their covert association with Pakistan's Jang/Geo Group due to a series of events in the recent past, Indian officials at the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) have decided to purchase their covert media arm in Pakistan and that too through a third party arrangement, reveal the investigations of The Daily Mail. The Daily Mail's investigations indicate that after the series of events starting from September/October 2013 when top Indian newspaper Hindustan Times exposed the links between Indian Intelligence and Geo/Jang Group up to a dramatic attack on a Geo TV's anchorperson in April this year, RAW bigwigs developed a feeling that their covert nexus with that media group in question was exposed very badly. It was decided at a very high level RAW meeting in which former RAW Chief Sanjeev Tripathi was also present, that Geo should be given a face saving to establish that it has no more links with RAW. Insiders inform that during the meeting, Sanjeev Tripathi, who is now a member of India's ruling party BJP, was asked to create a comprehensive proposal to tackle down the issue.

Sources say that Tripathi, in the very first place, expressed his deep dislike over the RAW's April episode through which Pakistan's ISI Chief was targeted. Tripathi termed the episode as a huge blunder and said it was done in a very crude manner while the same could have been materialized in a much secure and professional way.

It is worth mentioning here that during his tenure as RAW Chief or secretary RAW, Tripathi remained very instrumental and desperate to enhance funding and ties not only between RAW and Indian media but also to create RAW's media arms out of Pakistani media and is considered as the founder of several media projects including Aman Ki Aasha. He made efforts towards Aman Ki Asha even before assuming the top seat at RAW headquarters.

The sources close to the affairs reveal that after Tripathi agreed to rescue RAW in the backdrop of his experience in this direction, he flew to UAE and held several rounds of talks with self-exiled Pakistani media tycoon and held deliberations over the situation emerged. These sources say that Tripathi asked the Pakistani media tycoon to follow the proposals that he had brought from New Delhi.

The sources reveal that these proposals suggested that the Geo management should first create a campaign to show that it was suffering from huge financial crisis due to wrath of ISI and Pakistan army and should also hold protests and rallies in this regard. This campaign should end by announcing that it was left with no other option but to sell the rights to a third party.

The Daily Mail's investigations indicate that Tripathi managed to agree a Middle Eastern businessman who has a huge business network in UAE, India and South Africa, to come as a front man to purchase Geo TV. Tripathi ensured the said ME businessman that all the funds for the purchase and at least three years funding of entire running operation would be arranged from India (RAW) and he will just have act as an independent media boss. Sources that Tripathi's idea of bringing up a ME businessman to head RAW's covert media arm would remove all the clouds over the RAW-Geo nexus and would make the media organization look more credible.

The sources reveal that once the basics of the deal were settled down, the son of the self exiled media tycoon, in early August embarked upon a visit to Mumbai along with a three member team from his media group and a four member team of the Tripathi-created buyer from ME.

The Daily Mail's investigations indicate that at least three rounds of meetings were held at Mumbai between the foreigners and RAW officials as well some media experts from Sony TV and Zee TV, both the RAW funded media organization of India. However the high profile meeting was held at RAW headquarters in New Delhi which was attended, besides others by Sanjeeve Tripathi, Joint Secretary Area One( Pakistan), Joint Secretary Area Three (Middle East and Africa) and Joint Secretary of Electronic Technical Section of RAW.

This meeting also favored the idea of smartly concluding the Aman Ki Asha campaign as it had completely lost the credibility, due to cheer mishandling after Tripathi left the Chair of the RAW Chief. During this meeting, a rather rough shape of the plan was modified while the dates and agenda for the next meeting were also fixed.

Intrestingly, during the meetings between the Pakistani and Middle Eastern parties and RAW funded Indian media experts, Sony TV's host Trishikha Ashish Tripathi was specially interviewed by the visitors as it was advised by Indian media experts to organize a show run by. Ashish Tripathi on Pakistani TV channel in question and through this show, 2 nation theory may further be targeted while hiding behind the notions of freedom of press.

According to certain unconfirmed reports, the self exiled media tycoon is back in Pakistan these days on a rather secret trip to sign certain documents with regard to this new deal.

The findings of Daily Mail further reveal that RAW controls a whole paraphernalia of media network including ZEE TV and Films Network, Asian News International (ANI), as well as some national and regional language newspapers especially in Urdu, Gujarati, Punjabi, Tamil and Kashmiri. The ZEE network retains the pivotal position in this RAW controlled propaganda and misinformation spiral. It was actually RAW that has been the master mind behind the establishment of ZEE Television Network. According to our sources the proposal for establishing a private sector television channel actually under the control of Indian intelligence agency was first presented to the Late Indian Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi. The proposals could not materialize at that time as Mrs. Gandhi had certain reservations about giving more powers to RAW for she suspected it of being behind her earlier electoral defeat at the hands of another Late Prime Minister of India Mr. Murarji Desai. However, Indian movie star Amitabh Bachan who was a personal friend of Rajiv Gandhi got the cue. His brother later reportedly siphoned part of the Rs.64 crore kick-backs of the Swedish Bofor guns deal into setting up a private satellite channel by the name of TV Asia.

TV Asia enjoyed certain patronage from Indian government and intelligence agencies though it was financed privately. In return RAW enjoyed certain leverage on TV Asia; nonetheless its officials continued the campaing for having their own channel. The breakthrough was achieved when a high ranking RAW operative Vasant Parekh found a willing partner in the Chairman of Essel Group of Industries, Subash Chandra. The Essel Group was mainly involved in the business of entertainment and amusement parks. Being an adventurous entrepreneur, Chandra indicated his willingness to Vasant Parekh for investing partly in the RAW's satellite TV venture provided it also shared a big portion investment and backup support. RAW hierarchy did not require much persuasion to dole out a hefty amount of US$ 25 million as an initial participation share in the project. The deal was struck and the ZEE Television Network was formally launched in 1992 with Subhas Chandra as the Chairman and Vasant Parekh as the founding member on its Board of Directors. It was agreed to induct and employ a certain number of RAW operatives in all cadres of the network. RAW personnel were thus recruited amongst the programme producers, anchors, newscasters, and even amongst the marketing and business managers. The arrangement facilitates RAW to send its agents undercover to Pakistan and even other countries. Having a media tag gives these operatives an easy access to cultivate a number of personalities in the target country, which would have been otherwise difficult. The broad outline of the propaganda objectives of ZEE TV defined by RAW were:

- Undermine the ideological frontiers of Pakistan through oft repeated Indian rhetoric of cultural and social uniformity of South Asian sub-continent;
- Malign Pakistan by a deliberate negative projection of the events and developments in the country. The aim was to systematically build a poor image of Pakistan may it be in the context of internal political developments, religious or social events, women issues, child labour, brick kiln workers, Ahmedi or Christian minorities, secretarian clashes, Mohajar ethnic movement, foreign policy or bilateral relations with India. Although human rights violations, social, cultural, religious and economic problems exist at a much gigantic proportion in India these were to be downplayed in Indian context;
- Projection of India as a modern secular and progressive state which is the world's largest democracy;
- Propagation of India's foreign policy objectives and its position on Kashmir;
- Promotion of Hindu mythology through serials based on mythology as well as soap operas telecast on the network;

In pursuance of this policy ZEE lays special emphasis in cultivating prominent personalities in Pakistan for accomplishing the ideological agenda. Bigwigs in Pakistani entertainment and show biz, poets, writers, eminent sportsmen and politicians are a prime target. The common modus operandi is that Pakistani celebrities are invited as chief guests or special guests to various ZEE programmes. A lot of praise is showered, calling them artists whose talent is not restricted by any boundary, frontier or divide and that the people of the two countries love each other, only the politicians conspire to keep them separated. Overwhelmed by the tremendous show of hospitality the artist either ends up unwillingly endorsing the host's views or says something that is construed to be negating the ‘Two Nation' basis of Pakistan's independence. According to credible information RAW also sponsors organizing of performances, shooting of videos and securing of contracts for Bollywood movies and entertainment agencies for some of these personalities belonging to the Pakistan entertainment, film and music.

The Daily Mail has learned that RAW's further tightened its noose on media during the first government of BJP under the then Minister for Information and Broadcasting Parmod Mahajan. RAW had in the meanwhile already taken control of the struggling television news agency Asian News International (ANI) founded by an ambitious cameraman Prem Parakash. When the agency ran into financial troubles RAW came forth to help it with idea of producing South Asia News line which all the Indian entertainment TV Channels not producing their own news bulletins were force to telecast. Parmod reportedly threatened these channels with the sweeping powers under the PRASAR BHARATI (Indian Broadcasting) ACT, 1990 Chapter IV, 23; “Power of Central Government to give Directions” if they did not comply. Even his successor Sushma Swaraj has been calling shots at the media also making coercive use of the draconian Indian National Security Act, 1980. Three Advisory Bodies have been pivotal in this regard to streamline m. The DFF amongst other things virtually controls the films dealing with news, current events and documentaries. RAW has a permanent representation on this Committee which can use any pretext to penalize channels not receptive of its directives.

The Daily Mail's investigations further reveal that the enormous success of ZEE in South Asia and Middle East encouraged its sponsors to target the Asian viewers in Britain and Europe. The prime objective was to disillusion the expatriate Pakistanis and Kashmiris from their ideological basis. Britain being the home of largest Kashmiri refugee community outside Asia has become a cause of concern for the Indian establishment. The growing influence of Kashmiri community in the political circles of UK, their frequent protests over the human rights violations in the Indian held Kashmir and demand for the right of self-determination for Kashmiris is often embarrassing for the Indians.

ZEE UK was therefore launched in 1995. The ZEE's strategists, however, realized that Braitain and Europe was a different ball game. To lure the Pakistani expatriates it was decided to telecast a mix of Indian and Pakistani programmes. It is learnt that a team was sent to Pakistan to negotiate the purchase of PTV programmes for telecast on ZEE UK. ZEE was able to procure from the PTV library many classical dramas, the most recent hit telecasts, musical programs, special occasions telecasts for Eid, Muharam, Ramadan including and other purely Islamic religious programs. These programs were reportedly sold to the ZEE at throw away prices. The PTV establishment of the time credited itself for having sold the programmes with no other clientele. Little did they know the diabolic use that ZEE had planned for these programs. However, PTV authorities maintain that some of its programs were recorded off air by a Lahore based spurious company and sold to ZEE TV. Subsequently PTV obtained a court injunction to stop ZEE from telecast of some of its programs. Nonetheless this gap is now filled by the private productions that have mushroomed in Pakistan over the last few years.

The ZEE UK program managers ran an extra-mile in their endeavours to establish it as a neutral TV of the entire South Asian community in Europe. The propaganda against Pakistan was deliberately kept sublime in the initial year of its launching. However, it continued its policy of reporting negative developments in respect of Pakistan and black outing positive aspects may it be as non political news as winning a cricket match by Pakistan. Nonetheless, ZEE's one sided hype during events such as the Kargil conflict gave away any semblance of neutrality that the channels had been portraying.

RAW prolific media network however received a setback when its sponsored Reminisce Television Network (RTN) could not succeed in UK and Europe. The free to air transmission of RTN's Channel Asia 1 could not get enough advertisements due to overcrowding of the market by many Asian Channels. The RTN also had an Urdu Channel ANJUMAN to target Pakistani viewers besides Gujarati, Lashkara (Punjabi), Bengali and other regional language channels. RAW later took control of Sony TV as well through massive funding.
Source: http://www.dailymailnews.com/2014/09/11/special_report/RAW-buying-Geo-TV-thru-3rd%20-party-arrangement.php

Plans ABC…made in Raiwind not London

Why give London a bad name? The sophistication we are witnessing could have been concocted only amongst the rolling acres of that spot in the sun, Raiwind. The brainwave hitting the brightest of the Punjab administration, starting with the Khadim-e-Aala, to teach the Sheikhul Islam a lesson came not in far off London but here in Lahore.

The arrogance behind the decision to remove the security barriers – set up on the express orders of the Lahore High Court – in front of Allama Qadri’s one-kanal house in Model Town was a mark of the Punjab government, not that of the Greater Council of London.

And the police force that went in to implement the decision, and knock sense into the workers of the Pakistan Awami Tehreek, was from the force famous in legend, the Punjab police, and not London’s Metropolitan Police.

London may be home to some of the greatest theatres in the world but all of them together could not have produced a character like the honourable Gullu Butt. The picture of him wielding his danda, the images caught on camera for eternity, could never have come from London.

However great the marksmanship skills of the London Police, in their wildest dreams could they match the performance of the Lahore police? 14 dead, including two women, and 80-90 wounded by live gunfire. Apart from the live firing, the beating and roughing up of PAT workers, men and women…such spellbinding theatre was possible only in our climate.

Nor was this an isolated incident, coming out of the blue. It was part of a larger picture outlined by Raiwind Palace’s self-imposed and self-propelled tussle with the army and ISI. The mishandling of the Musharraf plot – agreeing to let him flee his coop once he made a court appearance, and then going back on this understanding – was conjured up in the feverish atmosphere of Raiwind Palace, where every stray whisper is magnified into a conspiracy, and not on the banks of the Thames.

If Musharraf had been a British headache, the Brits would have handled it differently. At the least they would have made sure that anyone looking like Pervaiz Rasheed, Khawaja Asif and Saad Rafiq came nowhere near the TV cameras.

It takes someone special like Saad Rafiq to come up with such a gem as his famous challenge: “mard ka bacha ban”…be the son of a man, this hurled at Musharraf when he was not appearing in court. The Brits can produce The Three Stooges, Norman Wisdom, Peter Sellers, and so on. The whole of British comedy, from Falstaff onwards, would be hard put to copy, much less mimic, some of the Lahori members of the Raiwind cabinet. Pervaiz Rasheed has such a mournful countenance he gives mourning a bad name. And he is the Goebbels of this setup. Goebbels would be turning in his grave.

Refusing to register the Model Town case…could this have been part of any London Plan? The British have not been above some of the most devious tricks known to history. After all you don’t go about grabbing colonies and creating an empire just like that. But in any plan set in London would it be part of the script not to allow the law to take its course after 14 persons were shot in cold blood? Tell this to a British audience and they wouldn’t believe it.

For over two months the provincial government saw to it that a case was not registered. It took a brave additional sessions’ judge to eventually order that the needful be done. Even then the ministers nominated by the aggrieved went in appeal to the Lahore High Court. And a judge of that honourable court gave a decision almost unparalleled in judicial history: directing the police not to arrest the accused unless there was sufficient evidence to implicate them. If this becomes a standing precedent, every accused in a murder case will have reason to rejoice.

And the alleged rigging in Lahore constituencies in the last elections… was this part of an MI 6 plan to destablise Pakistan? This could only have happened here: polling stations packed like never before in Lahore’s history, most anecdotal evidence pointing to an urban wave in favour of Imran Khan’s PTI. But as evening fell and votes were counted a dumbfounded city discovered that the palm of victory had gone to the candidates of Raiwind.

For a year and a half Imran Khan knocked at all the legal and judicial doors available to him under the constitution and the law. All he asked for was a vote recount in four constituencies, nothing more – a recourse provided in the election laws. But on one pretext or the other he was dealt with like a shuttlecock. Left with no other option, he took to the road, exercising his constitutional right of protest. Was this part of a London Plan?

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his brother, the visionary leader of Punjab, can blame the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria or Boko Haram for their troubles. But even a cursory examination of the evidence would suggest that clumsiness and a gift for butting at windmills are responsible for the mess they are in. No London Plan can match their inventiveness in creating problems for themselves.

Incidentally, if there was a Truth Prize it would go to Finance Minister Ishaq Dar, bona fide member now of the Raiwind clan. Some of the fiction he generates in the name of economic analysis would be rejected as unrealistic even by a jury judging works of fiction. He lets no opportunity go by without trumpeting the claim that there has been an economic turnaround and that it is now threatened by the dharnas and the floods. Read any worthwhile economic commentator, and there are a few good ones around, to judge the worth of this claim. But hand one thing to him: he does a reverse Pervaiz Rasheed, his glib assertions made with a bold face.

The ruling clan – and it is now a clan, the tentacles of it spread far and wide – is having a hard time recognising something basic. They represent a bygone age, one identified with the archaeological remains of Gen Ziaul Haq and whose key feature was the marriage of power and high finance, public banks milked to pave the path to political glory.

No one did this better than the present lot. The loan in the early 1990s, amounting at that time to four billion rupees, taken from a consortium of seven banks, and to date not a penny returned, is just one example of their skill in this field.

The Mehrangate scandal in which the ISI – under the directions of that symbol of integrity, General Aslam Beg – took money from Younus Habib’s Mehran Bank and distributed it amongst a list of PML-N beneficiaries, including our friend Javed Hashmi, is another example of what went on at that time.

Pakistan’s urban class, its educated middle class hitherto not much interested in politics, the youth, students across the gender divide, and educated people and youth from rural areas as well…all these classes are sick and tired of that old politics. These are the people rallying to the standard of Imran Khan and listening to his speeches and the orations of the firebrand Qadri. And something is stirring within their souls.

This is no London Plan. This is a Pakistani phenomenon which has been a long time in coming but which having come seems here to stay. With luck it may even change the established order of things.
Ayaz Amir

Real Crisis: If Dharna continues!

It is an indisputable fact that the country is in deep political crisis that cannot be dismissed by the assertion that the government has a comfortable majority and that all the conventional political parties, except of course, the PTI, are supporting it. There is also a misplaced optimism in the ranks of the government and other parties with high stakes in the political order — from which they benefit immensely — that the protests will peter out. They also build their case on ‘popular mandate’, which means the right to rule on account of majority of seats in the National Assembly, and the constitutional legitimacy that entitles them to the positions they occupy. I am afraid that none of these arguments, nor the bonding together of the old political players in ‘defence’ of the system is going to work. The crisis is much deeper, and it is for real. All declining and dying political forces everywhere have used the system stability argument for their survival.

The crisis lies essentially in the formidable challenge that the Kaptaan has presented to what he rightly portrays the old forces or players. Since they have nothing or very little to show to the public in terms of anything good — rule of law and justice, development or governance — they, like any other political establishment, seek refuge in the procedures they have used to stay in power. Since narratives and political spins matter, they confuse attacks against them as attacks against the Constitution and democracy. They are not the same thing. The challenge is much bigger and more complex than the PML-N government and other political parties trying to defend the ‘system, would like us to believe. The Kaptaan has brought into the public debate, far and wide in Pakistan, for the first time, the real character of three critical institutions that have played a central role in the politics of Pakistan for decades. These are the electoral system, Parliament, and the political parties.

The Pakistani public since long has known the truth about what usually happens on election day and what the parties which come into power have done to reach their good. My own observation is that people at the grassroots level have grown cynical of politics and the political class that appears to be diverse but shares common interest in the status quo. In the absence of real democratic politics — participation and representation — the people have become inert and inactive. Their choice has been limited to two traditional rival parties or candidates affiliated with two political dynasties. For the first time after the rise of the PPP in the 1970s, there appears to be a realistic third choice that might be the first choice in any free and fair elections next time. The Kaptaan has not only given the people of Pakistan a choice but he is saying exactly what the public at large has known for decades about widespread official corruption, dysfunctional institutions and poor state of governance. More importantly, he has brought to public attention the curse of dynastic politics and why it conflicts with the spirit of democracy, corruption and stashing away of looted money in foreign banks and how the powerful sections of the political elites have escaped accountability.

Among all, he has very successfully challenged the credibility of the electoral process that theoretically gives the right to the current governments at the federal and provincial levels to rule. Though belated, he appears to be succeeding in throwing the 2013 elections in serious doubt. His optimism, perseverance and very effective use of media place him in driving political position. It looks, he is not going back without THE wicket.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 24^th, 2014.حقیقی بحران

یہ ایک ناقابل ِ تردید حقیقت ہے کہ ملک اس وقت جس گہرے سیاسی بحران کی زد میں ہے، اسے صرف اس وجہ سے رد یا نظر انداز نہیں کیا جاسکتاکہ حکومت کو اکثریت حاصل ہے اور پی ٹی آئی کے سوا تمام اہم سیاسی جماعتیں اس کے ساتھ کھڑی ہیں۔ حکومت کے علاوہ سیاسی نظام کی شراکت دار دیگر جماعتوں، جو موجودہ نظام سے بے حد استفادہ کرتی ہیں، کی صفوں میں غلط فہمی پر مبنی رجائیت پائی جاتی ہے کہ یہ احتجاج رفتہ رفتہ خود ہی دم توڑ جائے گا ، دھرنے کے قائدین اور شرکا تھک ہار کر واپس اپنے اپنے گھروں کو لوٹ جائیں گے اور وہ جمہوریت کی فتح کے گن گانے کے لیے اپنی جگہ پر موجود رہیںگے۔ حکمرانوں اور ان کے 'اصول پرست اتحادیوں‘ کا یہ بھی کہنا ہے کہ چونکہ ان کے پاس عوام کا دیا ہوا مینڈیٹ ہے اور وہ قومی اسمبلی میں اکثریت میں ہیں، اس لیے وہ آئینی اور دستوری اعتبار سے حکومت کرنے کے حقدار ہیں۔ تاہم خدشہ یہ ہے کہ نہ تو ایسے دلائل اور نہ ہی روایتی سیاسی جماعتوں کا ''نظام کو بچانے ‘‘ کے عہدکا نسخہ کارگر ثابت ہونے جارہا ہے۔ اس بحران کی جڑیں کہیں زیادہ گہری ہیں اور اسے چائے کی پیالی میں طوفان ہر گز نہیں کہا جاسکتا۔ تمام ساکھ کھونے والی زوال پذیر سیاسی جماعتیں نظام کو بچانے کا دعویٰ کرتے ہوئے صرف اپنے بچائو کا سامان کررہی ہیں حالانکہ دل کی گہرائیوںسے وہ بھی جانتی ہیں کہ اب لفاظی اور اشک شوئی کا وقت گزر چکا ہے۔ 

اس بحران کے تانے بانے بننے والی چیز وہ خوفناک چیلنج ہے جوکپتان روایتی سیاسی قوتوں اور سیاسی کھلاڑیوں کے سامنے رکھتا ہے۔ چونکہ حکمرانوںکے پاس عوام کو دکھانے کے لیے اچھی طرز ِ حکمرانی، آئین اور قانون کی بالا دستی یا عوامی مسائل کا حل یا ترقی، نہیں ہے، اس لیے وہ کسی بھی سیاسی اسٹیبلشمنٹ کی طرح اقتدار میں رہنے کے لیے جمہوری طریق ِ کار( جو اکثریت کوحکومت کرنے کا حق دیتا ہے) کا سہارا لے رہے ہیں۔چونکہ بیانات اور سیاسی اتار چڑھائو کی ایک اپنی اہمیت ہوتی ہے، اس لیے وہ اپنے اوپر ہونے والے حملے کو آئین اور جمہوریت پر حملہ قرار دیتے ہیں۔ جب وہ کہتے ہیں کہ وہ جمہوریت کو پٹڑی سے اتارنے کی اجازت نہیں دیںگے تو دراصل وہ اپنی حکومت کا بچائو کرنے کی فکر میں ہوتے ہیں۔ تاہم یہ دونوں (جمہوریت اور جمہوری حکمران) مترادف نہیں۔ اس لیے حکمران جماعت، پی ایم ایل (ن)اور ان کا ساتھ دیتے ہوئے ''نظام کو بچانے‘‘ کی کوشش کرنے والی دیگر جماعتوں کے سامنے اُس سے کہیں زیادہ سنگین اور پیچیدہ چیلنج موجود ہے جتنا وہ ہمیں تاثر دیتے ہیں۔ بظاہر وہ ٹی وی پر بہت پراعتماد دکھائی دیتے ہیں لیکن اندر سے وہ ڈرے ہوئے ہیں کیونکہ ایک ماہ پہلے اُنہیں موجودہ حقائق کا ادراک نہ تھا۔ دراصل کوئی سیاسی مبصر بھی یہ اندازہ لگانے میں ناکام رہا تھا کہ یہ دھرنا ایک ماہ کے بعد بھی جاری رہے گا۔ یقینا اس کے شرکا کی تعداد میں کمی ضرور واقع ہوئی ہے ، اس کی شدت میں نہیں۔
درحقیقت عمران خان پہلی مرتبہ پاکستان کے طول و عرض میں جمہوری نظام کے تینوں اہم عناصر کا اصل کرداراجاگر کرنے میں کامیاب ہوگئے ہیں۔۔۔ وہ کردار جو یہ فیصلہ کن عناصر کئی دہائیوںسے پاکستان کی سیاست میں ادا کرتے چلے آرہے تھے۔ یہ عناصر انتخابی نظام، پارلیمنٹ اور سیاسی جماعتیں ہیں۔ بلاشبہ جو حقائق آج کھل رہے ہیں، پاکستانی عوام انہیں بہت پہلے سے ہی جانتے تھے کہ انتخابات والے دن کیا ہوتا ہے ،سیاسی جماعتیں ایک دوسرے کے ساتھ اتحاد کیسے اور کیونکر بناتی اور توڑتی ہیں اور ان جماعتوںنے اب تک ملک کو کیا دیا ہے۔ میرا اپنا مشاہدہ ہے کہ گراس روٹ لیول پر لوگ سیاست اورسیاسی طبقے سے بیزار ہورہے ہیں کیونکہ کہنے کو یہ روایتی جماعتیں اور رہنما الگ الگ نظریات اور نعرے رکھتے ہیںلیکن ان سب کا موجودہ نظام کے جاری رہنے میں مشترکہ مفاد ہوتا ہے۔ کپتان اس نظام کو عوامی زبان میں ''باریاں لینا‘‘ کہتا ہے۔ عوام کی نمائندگی اور شمولیت رکھنے والے حقیقی جمہوری نظام کی غیر موجودگی میں لوگ جمہوری عمل میں دلچسپی نہیں لیتے۔ زیادہ تر افراد کا موقف یہ ہوتا ہے کہ انتخابات اور سیاست سب ڈھونگ ہیں ، اس لیے ہمیں ان سے کیا لینا دینا۔
عوام کے سامنے انتخابی چوائس بھی دو روایتی سیاسی حریفوں تک محدود ہوتی ہے۔ دراصل یہ دو نظریاتی سیاسی جماعتوں کی نہیں، دوخاندانوں کی مسابقت ہوتی ہے جس کا نام ہم نے جمہوری عمل رکھا ہواہے۔ تاہم اب سیاسی معروضات تبدیل ہورہے ہیں۔ 1960ء کی دہائی میںپی پی پی کے وجود میں آنے کے بعد سے لے کر اب تک پہلی مرتبہ ایسا ہوا کہ لوگوں کے سامنے ایک حقیقی تیسری سیاسی قوت بھی آن موجود ہوئی۔اگر ملک میں آزاد اور غیر جانبدارانہ ماحول میں اگلے انتخابات کا انعقاد عمل میں آیا تو یہ تیسری قوت عوام کی پہلی چوائس بن کر بھی ابھر سکتی ہے۔ اس طرح کپتان نے نہ صرف پاکستانیوں کے سامنے ایک چوائس رکھی ہے بلکہ ان کی طرف سے روایتی سیاسی جماعتوں پر لگائے جانے والے الزامات وہی ہیں جو کئی عشروں سے زبان ِ زد ِخاص وعام ہیں۔ جب وہ بدعنوانی، اقرباپروری، رشوت ستانی، اداروں کی نااہلی اور بدانتظامی کی بات کرتے ہیں تو لوگوں کو یوں محسوس ہوتا ہے کہ وہ ان کے جذبات کی ترجمانی کررہے ہیں۔ وہ لوگ جن کی سیاسی حمایت عمران کے ساتھ نہیں، دل سے وہ بھی تسلیم کرتے ہیں کہ ان کی باتوں میں وزن ہے۔
عمران خان موروثی سیاست کے منفی پہلو کو بھی اجاگر کرنے میں کامیاب ہوگئے ہیں۔ اُنھوںنے عوام کو یہ بات تقریباً سمجھا دی ہے کہ جمہوریت اور نسل در نسل بادشاہت میں بہت فرق ہوتا ہے۔ اگر باپ کے بعد بیٹے نے ہی حکومت کرنی ہے تو جمہوریت کا بکھیڑا کرنے کا کیا فائدہ۔اس کے علاوہ جمہوریت حکمرانوں سے باز پرس کرتی ہے۔ اور اگر جمہوریت طاقتور حلقوں کا احتساب نہ کرسکے اور نہ ہی ریاست کے وسائل کو لوٹ کھسوٹ سے بچا سکے تو وہ جمہوریت نہیں، اس کے نام پر قوم سے کیا جانے والا ایک سنگین مذاق ہے۔ اسی طرح سیاسی حکمرانوں کو زیب نہیں دیتا کہ ان کی دولت غیر ملکی بینکوں میں پڑی رہے اور وہ حکومت یہاں کرتے رہیں۔
دیگر منفی معاملات کو منکشف کرنے کے علاوہ، عمران خان نے انتخابی نظام کی ساکھ کو بہت کامیابی سے چیلنج کیا ہے۔ یہ انتخابی نظام ہے جو تھیوری کے اعتبار سے کسی بھی وفاقی یا صوبائی حکومت کوحق ِ حکمرانی عطاکرتا ہے۔ اگرچہ قدرے تاخیر سے لیکن خان صاحب نے بہت شدومد سے 2013ء کے انتخابات پر سنگین سوالات اٹھا دیے ہیں۔ ان کے عزم وہمت، ان کی رجائیت اور میڈیا کے موثر استعمال نے اُنہیں اس وقت ملک کا اہم ترین سیاست دان بنا دیا ہے۔ ایسا لگتاہے کہ وہ اپنے رن اپ پر ہیں اور اب وہ وکٹ لیے بغیر نہیں ٹلیںگے۔ دوسری طرف حکومت کو سمجھ نہیں آرہی کہ وہ دھرنا دینے والوں کو ڈی چوک سے کیسے نکالیں۔ وہ نہ تو طاقت کا استعمال کرسکتے ہیں اور نہ ہی مذاکرات میں اب تک کوئی پیش رفت ہوئی ہے۔ حکومت کی تمام تر امیدوں کا مرکز دھرنے کے شرکا کی ناامیدہوکر اپنے اپنے گھروں کو واپسی ہے۔ لیکن اگر ایسا نہ ہوا تو کیا ہوگا؟ یہ اندازہ لگانا زیادہ مشکل نہیں۔
Rasul Buksh Raees

Bad governance Shahbaz Sharif Model

شہباز شریف ماڈل
شہباز شریف ماڈل اور اس کے مثبت و منفی نکات پر کھل کربات کرتے ہیں، مگر پہلے یہ دیکھ لیا جائے کہ اس ماڈل سے کیا مراد ہے۔
میاں شہباز شریف ہماری پچھلی پندرہ بیس سالہ سیاسی تاریخ کا ایک اہم حصہ ہیں۔پچھلے سات برسوں سے وہ مسلسل وزیراعلیٰ چلے آ رہے ہیں، پہلی بار وہ 97ء کے عام انتخابات کے بعد وزیراعلیٰ پنجاب بنے۔ان دو ڈھائی برسوں کا عرصہ شامل کر لیا جائے تو دس سال بن جاتے ہیں۔ شہباز شریف صاحب نے اس دوران اپنا ایک خاص گورننس ماڈل متعارف کرایا۔ان کے طرز حکومت کے دو تین بنیادی اجزا ہیں۔ وہ نہایت متحرک اور فعال شخص ہیں۔ صوبے میں جہاں کہیں کوئی واقعہ ہو، وہ برق رفتاری سے وہاں پہنچتے ، مقامی انتظامیہ کو معطل کرتے، اعلیٰ انتظامیہ کو لوگوں کے سامنے ڈانٹ پلاتے ہیں اور متاثرین کو ریلیف پہنچانے کی کوشش کرتے ہیں۔اخبارات میں ان کی ایسی تصاویر شائع ہوتی رہتی ہیں، جس میں وہ گھٹنوں گھٹنوں گندے یا سیلابی پانی میں چلتے ہوئے صورتحال کا جائزہ لے رہے ہیں۔ وہ ایک سخت گیر منتظم کے طور پر بھی مشہور ہیں، جو بیوروکریسی سے رعایت نہیں کرتا، بڑے سے بڑے افسر کو کوتاہی پر معطل کرنے سے گریز نہیں کرتا۔
شہباز شریف صاحب کے بار ے میں کہا جاتا ہے کہ وہ سولہ سے بیس گھنٹے روزانہ کام کرتے ہیں اور اپنی ٹیم میں بھی ایسے لوگ چاہتے ہیں جو سولہ سولہ گھنٹے کام کریں۔ ان کے حامی دعویٰ کرتے ہیں کہ وہ اپنی انتظامیہ میں کسی کرپٹ افسر کو برداشت نہیں کرتے، ہمیشہ اچھے اور دیانت دار افسروں کا انتخاب کرتے ہیں۔یہ بھی کہا جاتا ہے کہ وہ ہر معاملے کا خود جائزہ لینا اور براہ راست مشاہدہ کر کے فوری فیصلہ کرنے کے شائق ہیں۔ جو پراجیکٹ ایک سال میں مکمل ہونا ہو، اسے نو دس ماہ میں مکمل کرا لیتے ہیں۔ رات کو دو بجے وہ سڑکوں کا مشاہدہ کرتے نظر آتے ہیں۔ ان کے گورننس ماڈل میں میگا پراجیکٹس بہت اہمیت رکھتے ہیں۔اپنے پہلے دور حکومت میں انہوں نے لاہور میں انڈر پاسز بنانے کا سلسلہ شروع کیا، دوبارہ وزیراعلیٰ بنے تو اسے نکتہ عروج پر بنا دیا۔ ایسے ایسے فلائی اوور بنا دئیے کہ چند ماہ بعد اسی جگہ ایک انڈر پاس بھی بنانا پڑا۔مسلم لیگ ن کا میڈیا سیل میٹرو بس پراجیکٹ کو ان کی بڑی کامیابی قرار دیتا ہے۔ان کے ناقدین نے اگرچہ اسے شدید تنقید کا نشانہ بنایا ،مگر شہباز شریف اپنے اس ماڈل کو اب پنڈی ، اسلام آباد تک توسیع دے رہے ہیں، اگلے مرحلے پر وہ ملتان میں بھی ایسی میٹرو بس چلانا چاہتے ہیں۔ میڈیا کے حوالے سے بھی وہ خاصے کانشیئس رہے ہیں۔ اپنے امیج کا خاص خیال رکھتے اورمخصوص سٹائل کی تصاویر کی اشاعت پسند کرتے بلکہ اسے یقینی بناتے ہیں۔مختلف اخباری خبروں اور کالموں کا وہ سرعت سے نوٹس لیتے اور ان پر فوری کارروائی کرتے ہیں، نتیجہ مزیددل خوش کن خبروں اور کالموں کی صورت میں برآمد ہوتا ہے۔ میاں شہباز شریف کے اسی گورننس ماڈل نے ہمارے کئی تجزیہ کاروں کو بھی مسحور کر رکھا ہے۔ اگلے روز ایک معروف کالم نگار نے میاں نواز شریف کو مشورہ دیا کہ اگر وہ اپنی حکومت بنانا اور تاریخ میں (اچھے لفظوں سے)نام لکھوانا چاہتے ہیں تو شہباز شریف ماڈل کو اپنا لیں۔ اس سے پہلے کہ یہ ماڈل وفاقی حکومت تک سرائیت کرے اور پھر ملکی سرحدیں عبور کر بین الاقوامی سطح پر اہمیت اختیار کرے، ضروری ہے کہ اس کا تنقید ی جائزہ لیا جائے۔
دنیا بھر میں گورننس اور ٹاپ لیول مینجمنٹ کے چند اصول برتے جاتے ہیں، انہی کی روشنی میں کسی بھی ماڈل کو جانچا اور پرکھا جا تا ہے۔ ان کی تکنیکی تفصیل اور دقیق اصطلاحات میں جانے سے گریز کرتے ہوئے میں ان کا نچوڑ پیش کرتا ہوں۔ سب سے پہلے تو یہ دیکھا جاتا کہ جو بھی گورننس ماڈل ہے، اس نے کیا اثرات مرتب کئے، کس حد تک وہ کامیاب ہوااور کیا اسے آنے والوں کے لئے کسی فریم ورک کی صورت میں پیش کیا جا سکتا ہے۔ کسی لیڈرکی کارکردگی کے حوالے سے یہ لازمی دیکھا جاتا ہے کہ اس نے کیسی ٹیم بنائی،کیا اپنا متبادل تیار کیا اور مستقل بنیادوں پر ایسا سسٹم بنایاجو اس کے بعد بھی کام کرتا رہے۔کوئی بڑی کمپنی ہو، محکمہ ہو ، صوبہ یا ملک... اس کی ٹاپ پوزیشن میں کام کرنے والی کی کارکردگی پر کوئی فیصلہ دینے سے پہلے سادہ سی بات دیکھی جاتی ہے کہ اس کے آنے سے پہلے جو بنیادی مسائل درپیش تھے،اس شخص کے دور حکومت میں وہ کس حد تک ختم کئے جا سکے۔
ہم شہباز شریف گورننس ماڈل کا ان اصولوں کی روشنی میں جائزہ لیں تو بڑی حد تک مایوسی کا سامنا کرنا پڑتا ہے۔ گزشتہ سات برسوں کے دوران ہمیں پنجاب میں حکومتی سطح پر کوئی ٹیم نظر نہیں آتی۔ وزیراعلیٰ کا متبادل تو دور کی بات ہے، ان کی کابینہ
کے ایک دو وزرا کے سوا باقیوں کی کسی قسم کی سرگرمی نظر آتی ہے نہ ہی ان کی میڈیا میں کوریج کا اہتمام کیا جاتا ہے ۔صوبائی وزرا نجی محفلوں میں اختیارات نہ ہونے اور اپنی ٹاپ لیڈرشپ کی جانب سے عدم اعتماد کا رونا روتے نظر آتے ہیں۔ یہ ماڈل دراصل ون مین شو اور سپر ہیومن ازم کی بنیاد پر بنایا گیا، جس کا بنیادی محور ایک ہی شخص ہے۔ یوں لگتا ہے کہ پورے صوبے کے معاملات اکیلا شخص چلا رہا ہے اور وہی چلانے کی اہلیت رکھتا ہے ۔ یہی وجہ ہے کہ بہت سے غیر معمولی نوعیت کے فیصلے برسوں کے التوا کا شکار ہیں، یوں لگتا ہے کہ محکمے کے سیکرٹری ، وزیر، کسی کو بھی فیصلے کا اختیار نہیں،حتمی فیصلہ چیف منسٹر ہی نے کرنا ہوتا ہے، ان کے پاس وقت نہیں تو سب کچھ لٹکا رہ جائے گا۔ پچھلے سات برسوں کے دوران نئے ادارے قائم ہوئے نہ ہی پہلے سے موجود اداروں کو مضبوط اور خودمختار بنانے کی کوشش کی گئی۔ پرویزا لٰہی اوسط درجے کے وزیراعلیٰ تھے، ان پر کئی قسم کے الزامات لگائے جاتے ہیں، مگر ریسکیو 1122جیسا شاندار ادارہ وہ صوبے کودے گئے، ٹریفک وارڈن بنا کر روایتی کرپٹ ترین ٹریفک پولیس کا خاتمہ بھی انہی کے دور میں ہوا۔ شہباز شریف گورننس ماڈل کے پاس ایسا کوئی حوالہ موجود نہیں۔
پنجاب میں عام آدمی کے مسائل کا منبع دو تین اہم محکمے ہیں۔ پنجاب کے عام آدمی کا سب سے بڑا مسئلہ پٹواری اور تھانہ ہے۔ پٹواری اور پولیس کے ظلم وستم سے عام آدمی بری طرح پریشان ہے۔ میاں شہباز شریف بہت بار یہ کہہ چکے ہیں کہ وہ اس گلے سڑے سسٹم کو بدلنا چاہتے ہیں، حقیقت مگر یہ ہے کہ ان کے گزشتہ سات برسوں کے دوران پولیس کے نظام میں ایک فیصد بھی بہتری نہیں آئی۔ عام آدمی بلکہ اچھے خاصے پڑھے لکھے متوسط طبقے کے لوگ جس طرح پہلے تھانوں میں ذلیل ہوتے تھے، آج بھی ان کے مقدر میں وہی ذلت آتی ہے۔ پٹواریوں کے طرز عمل ، ان کی لوٹ کھسوٹ میںذرا برابر کمی نہیں آئی۔محکمہ صحت اور تعلیم بدترین زوال کی واضح مثال بن چکے ہیں۔ سرکاری سکول سسٹم مکمل طور پر فیل ہوچکا ہے۔ حال یہ ہے کہ جو آدمی تھوڑا سا بھی افورڈ کرتا ہے ، وہ اپنے بچے کو گلی محلے کے کسی پرائیویٹ سکول میں داخل کرائے گا۔ ہسپتال آج سے سات سال پہلے بھی بد انتظامی ، لوٹ کھسوٹ، سفاکانہ طرز عمل کا نمونہ ہوتے تھے،آج بھی وہی حال ہے۔ کسی کو آزمانا ہے تولاہوریا صوبے کے کسی بھی بڑے سرکاری ہسپتال میں چلا جائے، اسے خود ہی اندازہ ہوجائے گا۔ایک زمانے میں پرائس کنٹرول کمیٹیاں مہنگائی کسی حد تک کنٹرول کر لیتی تھیں۔ اب تو لگتا ہے کہ پورا سسٹم ہی دیمک سے کھوکھلا ہوگیا۔ کسی کو اندازہ ہی نہیں ہو رہا کہ روز مرہ استعمال کی اشیا ء کس طرح کنٹرول میں لائی جا سکتی ہیں، لااینڈ آرڈر خوفناک صورت اختیار کر چکا ہے۔ لاہور میں رہنے والے تو صبح گھر سے بحفاظت لوٹنے کی دعائیں مانگ کر نکلتے ہیں، چھوٹے شہروں کی صورتحال بھی کچھ کم نہیں۔ سوال یہی ہے کہ گورننس کے اس ماڈل نے کیا ڈیلیور کیا اور اس کی افادیت کیا ہے؟جس سسٹم میں انتظامیہ صرف کرائسس مینجمنٹ اور فائر فائٹر ہی کا کام کرے ، اسے کسی صورت کامیاب قرار نہیں دیا جا سکتا۔ وزیراعلیٰ شہباز شریف کے حامیوں کو چاہیے کہ ان کے موجودہ گورننس ماڈل کے قصیدے پڑھنے کے بجائے اس ماڈل کی خامیاں دور کرنے اور اسے ڈیلیور کرنے کے قابل بنانے کی تجاویز دیں۔ حقیقی ہمدردی کا تقاضا تو یہی ہے۔
Muhammad Aamir Hashim Khakwani
Dunya.com.pk