You're Being Watched Mushy Baby!

Normal
0

false
false
false

EN-GB
X-NONE
X-NONE

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }

 

Normal
0

false
false
false

EN-GB
X-NONE
X-NONE

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

This article was published in The Post in October, 2007 after the NRO promulgation. I've posted it here just as a record of history.

As Pakistan treads through most dangerous decade of its political history, people keep witnessing densely shaded political kaleidoscope. Things have been especially precarious during past one week. Amid an intense public desire for the judiciary to play its independent role in country’s political well being, the apex court passed a judgment not very popular. Nothing could have been a surer recipe for political chaos than an adamant soldier to get re-elected as president, somersaulting politicians, a rubber-stamp parliament, a puppet executive, a divided judiciary and confused public.

 

Life has never been bed of roses for Pakistan’s uniformed president, General Pervez Musharraf after March 9, 2007 when top judge refused to succumb to the pressure exerted by the government to leave office. Invigorated by people’s support, judiciary risked going against the will of the government and first time in Pakistan’s history, people got an inkling of judiciary’s independence. Under the hang-over of a successful campaign for the restoration of Chief Justice of Pakistan, lawyers’ community announced to launch a campaign for the restoration of “true democracy” and for a president without uniform. Qazi Hussain Ahmad, the aged leader of extreme right winged orthodox religio-political party, Jamaat-e-Islami, joined hands with Imran Khan the only MP from Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaaf, for filing a petition against the election of president in uniform in the apex court.

 

Once again, people’s heightened expectations from recently got “independence” of judiciary bucked up the lawyers to make the petition a rallying point. On September 29, 2007 however, the Supreme Court saved the day for Musharraf by dismissing both the petitions on “technical grounds” for not being maintainable.  Lawyers and civil society, intrigued but not disappointed by this judicial drama stretched through the past two weeks, vowed to fight the battle through the Election Commission of Pakistan. “The decision of the apex court that the petitions challenging General Pervez Musharraf’s taking part in presidential election in uniform is not maintainable, might be on the grounds that it was premature as at the time of filing the petition General Musharraf had not filed his nomination papers as presidential candidate before the Election Commission,” Justice (Retd) Fakhruddin G Ibrahim said and added “In fact, nothing has been decided still and all issues raised in different petitions will be challenged again in a more effective manner now”.

 

The lawyers, now immersed in political game, announced their candidate for presidential race. Justice (Retd.) Wajihuddin Ahmad, a respected former judge who had to leave office when he refused to take oath under notorious Provisional Constitutional Order introduced by Musharraf immediately after his taking office of the Chief Executive of Pakistan. Proposed and seconded by religious parties’ alliance Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), Wajihuddin filed his nomination papers on September 27. Things went more baffling when Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) nominated Makhdoom Ameen Faheem as its Presidential candidate.

 

All Parties Democratic Movement (APDM), an alliance of opposition parties minus PPP, went on with their decision of resigning from the National Assembly and dissolution of NWFP Provincial Assembly, where MMA, a prominent member of APDM, was in power. The decision has not been an easier one for Jamiat-e-Ulamai Islam Fazlur Rehman group (JUI-F), a coalescing unit of MMA. Posed with potent threats of internal rifts that might amount to its ultimate breakage, MMA parleys took just too long to decide about the resignations issue. Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the JUI Chief, popularly dubbed as ‘soft opposition’ and ‘the king of double talk’, went head over heals to convince party mates not to resign. Qazi Hussain Ahmad, the Jamat-e-Islami (JI) leader, however, took it as a threat to his party’s credibility and insisted on resignations as decided by the All Parties Conference convened in early July by Mian Nawaz Sharif.

 

The complex political horizon got thickened by PPP’s resolve to support democracy by negotiating with the General for a broader national reconciliation – a move completely un-understandable by Pakistan’s politicians whose politics revolve around trumpeting superficial political morality. Little can they sense that an all powerful military general cannot be pushed to give off power, unless is negotiated. While PML-N chief did not stop cooing the song of “threatened democracy” by Bhutto’s talking to the General, BB kept on playing table talk with the dictator’s front men for a national consensus formula that would include her three point agenda; ONE: repealing the constitutional amendment that includes bar on third term of the Prime Minister and 58-2(b); TWO: dismissal of all corruption cases on politicians, which were registered by successive political regimes against each other in their bid to eliminate opposing party from the political scene of the country, since 1985; and THREE: doffing off of the uniform by the president alongside bringing electoral reforms to ensure free and fair elections in transparent manner.

 

In an unexpected move from the presidency on October 2, withdrawal of all politically motivated cases against many politicians and thousands of non-political victims was announced. The announcement was also made nominating General Ishfaq Pervez Kiani, former spy chief, as Chief of Army Staff, which is being discussed in all drawing room discussions as being Bhutto’s recommendation, since Kiyani is said to have a “good working relationship” with Benzir Bhutto. The next day, Maulana Fazlur Rehman together with fellow clerics resigned from the National Assembly. His clever move of announcing dissolution of provincial Assembly on September 29, almost four days before the scheduled dissolution, gave government enough time to move a No-Confidence Motion against the MMA Chief Minister (According to the Constitution, a Chief Minister cannot dissolve the Assembly if a No-Confidence Motion comes against him). Exactly according to the expectations, the Provincial Assembly opposition members (the ruling party at federal level) filed a No-Confidence motion. To counter which, smart strategy should have been to take a vote of confidence next day and go for dissolution. On the contrary, the Chief Minister adjourned the session till Oct 8 – two days after the presidential polls.

 

Benazir Bhutto, meanwhile, successfully crossed all milestones of negotiations with the General and agreed on a “National Reconciliation” Formula in lieu of which, PPP would not resign from the parliament thus ensuring a legitimacy of presidential polls and giving the General a space to give off something as a gesture of reciprocating. A politically sagacious Bhutto has shown a farsightedness par excellence in that only this kind of give and take could make a long serving dictator give off maximum of his power to political actors.

 

A National Assembly Session was heard to be summoned on Oct 3, but was delayed due to ongoing parleys with Bhutto. As a successful breakthrough on these parleys could lead to hurried issuance of an Ordinance, which can only be done when Parliament is not in session, the National Assembly session was delayed for two more days. 

 

As a confident president calmly announces his resolve to contest presidential elections while in uniform, and working on post election business details with Bhutto, Justice ®Wajihuddin Ahmad, another presidential hopeful, moves a petition to the Supreme Court for a stay on presidential elections. After three days of rigorous debate, the court adjourned on Oct 5, a day prior to the elections, to Oct 17 refusing a stay on elections and barring any announcement of results till Oct 17. The decision makes both sides happy and hopeful. It seems that the newly freed judiciary is not yet ready to do away with doctrine of necessity. It has generated an unbearable disappointment among those sections of civil society, who were hoping the judiciary will now be able to play its long awaited role for strengthening democracy.

 

Maulana Fazlur Rehman is left alone by JI, its coalescing partner after a rift over resigning from the provincial Assembly of NWFP. While Maulana was facing sheer opposition from his own party members against resigning from NWFP Assembly,  he was consoled by Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, the top leader of the ruling Muslim League who issued orders to his party men in the Provincial Assembly of NWFP to withdraw the No-Confidence motion. It has taken all the air from the Opposition balloon, leaving JI and Nawaz League as a shaky opponent.

 

As these lines are written and presidency has announced a National Reconciliation Ordinance, right wing politicians powered by a short sighted civil society and media are raising hue and cry on the Ordinance. People are being dragged to believe that the Ordinance is something which is going to give way to corruption in country. Little can we realize, had this move not been there, Musharraf would be keeping on with his unbridled power despite newly found alliance of media and civil society.

 

The life seems bed of roses for powers that be, which have traditionally been against the idea of a pro-people polity in the country. Bhutto being the only hope for people right now, is giving unflinching signs of returning back home. It is hoped that people of Pakistan would see the events with greater maturity, rather than being manipulated by the media hostage to the designs of establishment.

What Can People Do For Peace?

Today, our country is confronting a host of issues ranging from economic crunch to more basic challenge of peace and security. Our people are living in a war zone, especially in northern part of our country. Every other day, we hear of a terrorist activity and resultant killings of dozens of innocent citizens. People are sending their kids to educational institutions under strong threat of their security. Our children are growing and youth is living under constant threat to their lives.

In all this mayhem, what makes one thoroughly disappointed is our people’s propensity of being manipulated by so many actors of power game and a highly “corporatized” media, often against the larger good of our beloved country, but for the benefit of few stakeholders of the system.

It is high time to realize our own responsibility instead of putting blames on irresponsible media, “incapable” politicians and ready-to-grab-power institutions of tis fateful country. Let’s try to see where we can make our contribution towards better future of our next generations and of our country.

Let me cite here, how the initiatives from people and the civil society have been preventing war between Peru and Ecuador.  In 1995, for the third time since 1941, Peru and Ecuador went to war. There were calls for a cease-fire, a separation of forces, and negotiations to find a definitive settlement to the longest-running  border dispute in the Western Hemisphere. The diplomatic initiatives concluded, eventually, with the signing of a peace accord on 26 October 1998, in Brasilia. Running parallel to the diplomatic moves, was a process referred to as “citizen diplomacy”—an initiative in which civil-society groups discussed issues underlying the conflict, and ways of resolving it without official and diplomatic constraints.

Similarly, older people – the senior citizens – came out to play their role in resolving the political turmoil in Kyrgyzstan in 2005. A report by HelpAge International states that due to the turmoil, pensions of older people were suspended. They came out and negotiated peace between the conflicting factions of political parties.

But this is not about launching a “mass movement”, it is just to realize our own responsibility and then thinking together what the people can do constructively to get the country out of this labyrinth of problems.

With this view, I’ve launched a series of on-line seminar, for which I’m very grateful to  Ms. Zoia Tariq, for helping me mature this idea. I invite all of you to kindly participate in this seminar under this and post your comments / suggestions. We’ll compile all your recommendations and suggestions into a citizen’s resolution and then put it to action.

You can also place your comments on my Facebook page, http://www.facebook.com/pages/Marvi-Sirmed/54285023894?ref=ts Earnestly waiting for your contribution!

NRO Actually! (1st Instalment of Truth)

Before I write something about my own personal take on NRO and its legitimacy, I would like to analyze what it actually is and what it is about. While we hear a lot about in the media (generally biased against one party or the other), it is all the more necessary to look into what this word NRO means, what document it is and what it means to the politics in Pakistan. Since the writing could take many pages, and I’m doing it in detail clause by clause, I think we should make it easier for the reader to grasp the information in easiest possible way.

I would apologize from my lawyer friends for not writing this piece in a way they are used to read legislations in. And it is mainly because this piece is intended to serve lay people instead of technical professionals in the field of law. I would try my best to refrain from the legal jargon as far as it is possible. Even then, if there’s something beyond the understanding of a common person (me included), I would request the reader to kindly bring it in the comments so that we could collectively try to understand it. For the purpose of making the continuity easy, I’m calling these pieces “Instalments of Truth”, and this is the first instalment!

I often hear and read comments by lay-persons, saying that NRO was “signed” by Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto. Now, here’s where the folly lies! NRO is an abbreviated form of National Reconciliation Ordinance 2007, which is a piece of legislation. Legislation, as we all know, is a forte of the parliament in a parliamentary democracy like Pakistan. Pakistan, like many other nation satates, follows West Minster style of parliamentary system (UK, India, Australia, Canada to name few of the parliaments that follow West Minster). There is a corresponding system of government, commonly called Jeffersonian Parliaments, commonly called Presidential form of government (mainly USA). In a West Minster style parliamentary system like the one followed by Pakistan, President is the ceremonial head of the state, who has limited role in legislation.

According to the powers conferred upon the president, by the Constitution of Pakistan 1973, the President can issue an Ordinance as a piece of legislation when the Parliament is not sitting. Exercising the same power, General (now retired) Pervaiz Musharraf issued an ordinance called National Reconciliation Ordinance 2007, commonly known as NRO. Since it was an Ordinance, it was signed by the President of Pakistan, not by any political party sitting outside the government at that point in time. It is however, debatable, how this ordinance came into being. Without getting into the details of its origin for the time being, we’d go to what it says. The readers can refer to the original text of the NRO wherever s/he deems necessary, which I’ve already put on one of my blogs under the link: http://marvi-sirmed.blogspot.com/2009/10/national-reconciliation-ordinance-2007.html

The Ordinance has seven distinct Sections. Section I deals with the title of the Ordinance as is the usual practice of drafting a legislation.

Section II deals with an amendment in the Criminal Procedures Code (CrPC), which has been there since 1898. This Section of NRO amends section 494 of the CrPC, which empowered only the Prosecutor Generals to withdraw pending Criminal cases. After the amendment introduced by NRO, the Boards at Federal and Provincial Levels could be constituted to review the cases pending from 1^st January 1986 to 12 October 1999.  These Boards will see if the accused persons in these cases have been falsely involved in these cases on politically motivated reasons. In this case, the Review Boards thus created, can recommend withdrawal of cases to the respected governments.

These Review Boards would be of two types: Provincial and Federal. The Provincial Boards will be chaired by respectable retired Judges of High Courts and will comprise Advocate General / Prosecutor General and the Provincial Law Secretaries. The Federal Board will be chaired by a retired judge of the Supreme Court and will have Attorney General and Federal Law Secretary as its member, while both of these Boards would be appointed by federal and provincial governments as the case may be.

It is noteworthy here that NRO does not bind the federal and provincial governments to act upon the recommendations of the Review Boards. So, if any of the government doesn’t want to withdraw any of the cases, there’s no binding on them to comply with the Boards’ recommendations. In other words, the status of the Boards is recommendatory, not obligatory. It should also be noted here that this particular clause was included on the insistence of MQM, who was part of discussions made on such legislation. The dates mentioned in this section provide cover to the criminal cases made on MQM during the period from 1986 to 1999.

Lahore is Lahore, Even if it is in Virginia!

Yesterday my very dear FB friend Qaisar Janjua posted a picture on my page that gave an impression that a car in America might have a registration number of Lahore. That reminded me of an incident that happened in late 1990s when I was working with South Asia Partnership Pakistan. We were based in Lahore and used to communicate with our desk in Canada on regular basis. Email was there, but not that commonly used for official approvals etc. So snail mail was a routine. It happened so often that I did not get mail from Canadian colleagues which they would insist they had sent. The anomaly was resolved soon when we discovered that our mail was going to Lahore, Virginia instead of Lahore, Pakistan!

I was thrilled to know that. Tried to research a bit on it but could not find anything except that it was a small village comprising few households in Orange County. The village, it was told, was established by an American couple in 1860s who chose its name through random reading of a book on India, which was quite in news those days because of War of Independence fought by the natives against the English.

The story got Pakistani media’s attention in mid seventies when a Pakkistani American journalist, Mr. Akmal Aleemi wrote a column in a then popular Urdu Daily Imroz. The column informed about the existence of Lahore in Viriginia, which Mr. Aleemi discovered accidentally, when he lost his way in Orange County. The story although, got lost in people’s memories and the life went on. Khalid Hasan, another very senior Pakistani journalist (who died early this year), broke the story once again in early 2007, with a pleasant news of a Lahori soul who was trying to buy the village of Lahore in Virginia.

Noor Naghmi, son of very well-known broadcaster Abul Hasan Naghmi brought the American Lahore to the news once again in 2007. The senior Naghmi would still be alive in the memories of 1970s’ kids who would devoutly  listen to Mohni Hamid’s (Apa Shamim) program on Radio Pakistan those days. Naghmi sahib played a much loved “Bhaijan” in that program and was famous for his typical tone and polished accent. The junior Naghmi is a dealer in mortgage and rental of properties in Washington’s Fairfax County. After a years long negotiations with Nancy Wallace, a farmer and tough negotiator who owned the 235 acres of American Lahore  including the center of the town, Naghmi was able to strike a deal for USD 3 million. It was not, however, an easy venture with an owner who believed she had no plans to sell, although “everything I have is for sale, for the right price,” she said.

Naghmi now, has a dream. The centre of the 1,500-resident farming town about 75 miles south of Washington is a strip of whitewashed buildings on a quiet stretch of road. An old water pump sits idle. A faded Esso sign creaks in the breeze. “The venture is an expensive gamble for Naghmi,” a Washington based newspaper says, but quotes Naghmi as saying, “I have this feeling I was born to do this. People might think I’m crazy for saying so, but that is what I believe.” He says he thinks that his successful ventures will help make his Lahore dream possible.

Naghmi told the Washington Post’s Indian-American reporter Sandhya Somashekhar in 2007 that his $3 M deal will turn Lahore, Virginia into a regional tourist attraction for South Asians and others. His plans include a banquet hall fashioned after his hometown’s famous Shalimar Gardens. He envisions a library and a museum dedicated to the histories of both Lahores. He wants to open a bed-and-breakfast place to serve chickpea curry alongside eggs and toast. He wants to organize Basant with all its fan fare and pomp, in American Lahore.

The Washington Post, however, sees it with suspicion that Naghmi would be able to materialize it with out hurdles. Its not only money that could alone make dream a reality. Racism is a big hurdle in Naghmi’s way. It would be difficult for American whites to see colored people  having all that fun in the heart of Orange County.

But Naghmi is not deterred. He is confident that his vision will gain approval from the County and the project’s neighbors. According to reports, he has begun negotiating with a film studio in Hyderabad, India, to create the facades for his buildings. He recently put up a sign — written in English, Urdu, Hindi and Punjabi — advertising the coming of the Lahore Museum!

For the benefit of the readers, I’m posting here an interview with Naghmi and following link to Lahore on Google Map:

Google Map for Lahore, VA

http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/u-z7SrqTZZw&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1

Job Openings – World Bank / Balochistan Education Foundation

Balochistan Education Foundation (BEF)

BEF is a rapidly growing development organization which aims to bring lasting solutions in the Education sector of Balochistan province.  BEF is operating as an apex body in 4.5 years World Bank funded Primary Education initiative; Balochistan Education Support Project (BESP). The project has established 648 community and 207 private school in all 30 districts of the province. It is identified as the best project in South Asia by the World Bank’s Quality Assessment Group (QAG). Currently we are looking to fill some key position in our management cadre. All positions are Quetta based.

Challenging Opportunities in the Development Sector

1. Manager – Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E):

S/he is responsible for developing and institutionalizing M&E framework and tracks quantitative and qualitative achievements against Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) of BESP. The incumbent is responsible for designing effective M&E tools, organizing all necessary data collection and data management protocols, overseeing data quality and accuracy through supervising  MIS Section, training field staff in data collection and reporting, and leading baseline assessment and data quality assurance surveys.

S/he will produce narrative and empirical write-ups for all project and donor progress reporting, and will assist in the documentation and development of project success stories; lessons learnt which will assist BEF’s upcoming discussion with the Bank on BESP II. Incumbent will develop, organize and report evaluation exercises and impact assessments of project components. S/he will also engage in desk and field appraisal of potential partners.

S/he will conduct random field visits to BESP school in the province, directly manage a team of 13 staff (including one Program Officer and one Research and Evaluation Officer), guides field monitoring staff and supervise their activities, coordinates with a wide range of IPs (local, national and international NGOs), process payments to different partners against set budgets, deliverables and milestones.

As a head of M&E and MIS section, the person is a key member of BEF’s Management and Procurement Committee and involved in all strategic planning exercises. S/he will give BEF-M&E presentations in orientation seminars and different discussion forums.

Qualification, Experience and Skills:

• Masters degree in Social Sciences (preferably major in Economics or Statistics)
• 8-10 years experience in the development sector, ideally 5 years in M&E section
• Demonstrated experience in managing and leading a team
• Demonstrated experience and knowledge in establishing M&E systems and overseeing the collection and analysis of metrics;
• A good understanding of Results-based monitoring – preferably demonstrated past experience
• Have exceptional interpersonal & communication skills; with an excellent command of written and spoken English.  Be able to manage and lead a team to deliver objectives;
• Demonstrated skills in budgeting, forecasting and reporting;
• Be able to solve problems, think creatively and take timely decisions;
• Be able to work under pressure and meet deadlines;
• Be confident & require minimum supervision at work; and
• Have strong IT skills (MS Office applications).
• Knowledge of local languages will be a plus

1. Program Officer – Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E):

S/he will strengthen BEF’s M&E systems by continuously improving quality of monitoring tools, partners reporting, data collection techniques, data entry, reporting to BEF senior management, identifying gaps and suggesting timely corrective measures. The individual will closely coordinate with a wide range of implementing partners in the field and through monthly/quarterly partners progress reviews.

S/he will support Manager M&E in development and compilation of progress reports, quarterly and monthly field visit plans, annual and quarterly budgeting for the M&E section, timely payments to partners, accuracy of field data, training/mentoring/coaching of M&E staff, identifying staff training needs and conducting evaluation exercise. S/he will facilitate workshops, orientation seminars and other capacity building initiatives.

S/he will provide field-monitoring support to the project components through regular visits and directly supervise a team of field supervisors and organize monthly visits to BESP schools

Qualification, Experience and Skills:

• Masters degree in Social Sciences (preferably major in Economics or Statistics)
• 5-8 years experience in the development sector, ideally 2 years in M&E section
• Demonstrated experience in managing and leading a team
• Demonstrated experience and knowledge in establishing M&E systems and overseeing the collection and analysis of metrics;
• A good understanding of Results-based monitoring – preferably demonstrated past experience
• Good interpersonal & communication skills and a good command of written and spoken English.
• Have some experience of budgeting, forecasting and reporting;
• Be able to work under pressure and meet deadlines;
• Have strong IT skills (MS Office applications).
• Knowledge of local languages will be a plus

1. Program Officer – Administration:

S/he will understand and follow the administrative procedures of BEF. S/he will manage legal issues, Human Resources, project administration, staff recruitment, Housekeeping, Vehicle maintenance and log books, Office maintenance

S/he will supervise all support and service staff working in the Admin Section; maintain staff personal files, tracking of leave records/daily time sheets. Incumbent will organize orientations for new staff members, ensure BEF policies and procedures are complete, up-dated regularly and understood/adhered by all staff.

S/he will assist the program staff in arrangements for travel, hotel booking, and preparations for workshops, seminars, trainings, peer-learning exercise and progress reviews.  S/he will be involved in purchases of supplies, stationery, office equipment, and other office related machinery.

S/he will supervise administration staff in developing filing system, mail procedures, manage and maintain BEF property and equipment by developing internal procedures.

Qualification, Experience and Skills:

• Masters Degree in Social Sciences  preferably MBA or MPA
• 3-5 years experience in administration, human resources, ideally in the development sector
• Good organization skills, diplomacy, PR skills
• Demonstrated experience in managing and leading a team
• Skills of Time management, resourcefulness, initiative
• Good interpersonal & communication skills and a good command of written and spoken English
• Be able to work under pressure and meet deadlines;
• Have strong IT skills (MS Office applications).

Special Note

• There will be a written test (including test in Word, Excel and Power point) followed by an interview by the BEF Board
• Applicants who do not have the required qualification, experience & skills should kindly abstain from applying, as their applications will not be considered;
• Test and Interviews will take place within 2-4 weeks of the closing date;
• Applicants must abstain from contacting the BEF for information on the selection process. Any applicant who in any way tries to influence the selection process will be disqualified immediately;
• Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted;
• Shortlisted applicants will be asked to provide supporting documents for any qualification & experience certificates;
• Appointments will be subject to reference check from the past employer.

How to apply:

Please submit a cover letter clearly indicting the position interested in the subject line and up-dated CV (including 2 references) via email info@bef.org.pk or by post to: 32-C Railway Housing Society, Quetta within two weeks of this advertisement. Your cover letter should explain how you meet the required criteria and give examples from the past employment.

BEF provides congenial working environment with opportunities of growth, learning, and exposure to a wide range of development actors. BEF is an equal opportunity employer and encourages qualified females to apply.

The Kerry-Qureshi Ruckus

Such a ruckus about the son of Pakistani Foreign Minister being an intern with Senator John Kerry of US Senate! After a host of blogs, columns and news items on spreadsheets and on cyberspace, I could not make out what exactly is the problem with a young kid getting education in one of US institutions, and getting a fellowship in US Senate? A friend Mosharraf Zaidi resolved it for me this morning by citing a column by Ms. Anjum Niaz, an experienced journalist turned columnist.

A scanned image of the visiting card of Mr. Zain H. Qureshi, son of Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, has been in circulation among the ‘Twitteretti’ and cyber-based social networks ever since Jang group gave it prime printed and airspace. The image shows Mr. Zain as a Legislative Fellow with Senator John Kerry in US Senate. The propaganda had been done as if the intern son of the Foreign Minister has been a key factor in government’s support of recent media-inflated Kerry-Lugar Bill.  The impression was also given as if this ‘great favour’ was won by Qureshi, in lieu of his ‘baseless’ support to KLB.

Ms. Anjum has come up with a little piece of research for us before terming it a “conflict of Interest”. She, probably the only one who cared to do this before publicly mudslinging on Mr. Qureshi, was responsible enough to make a call on the numbers given in the card. The cell number, as her research goes, “ . . . on ZHQ’s call card has been disconnected; while the mail box belonging to “Zain Qureshi” was “full!” So, I couldn’t get to him”. But she did not give up. A professional journalist she is. She tried to make calls to Senator Kerry’s office, and after “a number of calls” she finally got connected to a male staffer of the Senator (as if Senator’s office knew she’s going to call so they must not take the call . ..  so she had to make “number of calls”). Without doubting the credibility of as professional a journalist as Ms. Niaz, let’s put no questions to what she has written in her column dedicated to the Foreign Minister’s son.

So she made calls, I mean number of calls, and found out that Mr. Zain had indeed worked for Senator’s office, but he doesn’t now. Brilliant work indeed. But one thing was missing, the staffers did not tell her, what capacity Zain was working there. Probably she forgot to ask, or maybe it was just not important. Because someone just wanted to blow up the fact that the young Qureshi was associated with Kerry. Nothing else. And Ms. Niaz in very supportive cooperation with our media pundits did not take long before making it news of the hour.

Why do I say that? Because anyone with an average level of intelligence and with half an hour of close watch on Kerry-Lugar Bill (KLB) debate in Pakistan, could tell where the criticism has been coming from. Without going into the details of KLB for it has been discussed and swollen in Pakistani media to serve those who were not given a good share from the cake of the AID for the first time in Pak-US Aid history.

Coming back to the fellowship issue, the issue would appear rather strange, if we examine how these fellowships are awarded. Anyone who’s familiar with the system would know that Senate does not offer these fellowships, nor do individual Senators unless they offer it for their own firms, companies and offices. In that case, the interns are not given visiting cards bearing Senate insignia. Since the circulated image of ZHQ’s card bears one, we would assume he was neither an employee nor an intern employed by Senator Kerry in his private capacity.

Senate of US does not allocate budget to support these fellows and interns for individual members. What happens is, the associations, organizations and Foundations who work in close association with the educational institutions and the Congress, often offer these internships and also pay for them. According to a “How to do” website for students of American Universities “there are several organizations out there who want to get their little protégés up the steps and onto the Hill”. Students often search for the best fellowship that mirrors them and their ideals in best possible manner, for example, AGU Science and Society or American Association for the Advancement of Science for science fellowships etc. Students contact the American Political Science Association for fellowships through its organization; the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation or the Asian Pacific American Institute for Congressional Studies for minority fellowship possibilities. There are many other fellowships ranging from religious issues to nuclear science fellowships in Congress.

The stipend / pay for these fellowships differs on where the funding is coming from and the duration of these fellowships in turn differs on how much the budget is. In many such fellowships, the awarded is even expected to raise funds for not only his/her stipend, but also for the Foundation. We can understand what the fellowship expects of the Fellow simply, you are working in Congress and usually for a congressman, but you are paid by another employer. It is usually the employer in consultation with the congressman who decides about the jobs description of the Fellow.

Having explained all this, I fail to understand, where does this issue of “conflict of Interest” stem from? In order to understand this, we may recall the introductory lines that usually appear before Ms. Niaz’s columns: “First Pakistani woman to qualify under US Government Immigration as possessing Extraordinary Ability in Journalism, Coordinator at Johns Hopkins University and a Board Director The Population Institute in Washington DC”. Well, that raises some questions about how come a knowledge beneficiary of American education system, speak so loudly about it? In one of the columns Ms. Niaz is accusing US of hatching a conspiracy against democracy in Pakistan by developing rifts between Zardari and the army through KLB, on the other hand she is becoming an implement with those trying to prove that KLB is a conspiracy against Pakistan and Zardari and his cabinet (read Shah Mehmood Qureshi) is the part of that conspiracy. Oh Ms. Niaz, you need to put your mind and your pen in the right place. And so should the Twettering and ‘FaceBook’ing intellectual elite of Pakistan.

British Council – Active Citizens Pakistan Programme (2009-11)

Active Citizens Pakistan Programme – 2009-2011

The British Council in Pakistan implemented an exciting programme for young people aiming at strengthening active citizenship and participation. We are currently looking for facilitators to be trained to deliver key trainings of the programme.

The programme aims to build the capacity of 4000 young people as leaders, influencers and active citizens within their communities developing their skills in leadership, communication, advocacy, citizenship, proposal writing, social action project delivery, fund-raising, entrepreneurship, partnership and network building during the first phase of capacity building in 2009 – 2010. the second phase will be implemented during 2010 – 2011.

We are looking forward to select a group of a total of 35 participants, to attend a five day Facilitators’ Training to be organised in Lahore from 17 – 21 November, 2009 and deliver the modules with young people.

The facilitators’ training is aimed at understanding the Active Citizenship training package including the content and modality. The participating facilitators will be expected to develop a plan for follow up trainings’ delivery during December 2009 – March 2011. This training will be conducted by International Facilitators from the United Kingdom.

Active Citizens Pakistan Programme 2009 – 2010 Facilitator’s Profile

Essential: Pakistani national Age bracket: between 25 – 40 years old. Staff member of nominating organization Excellent facilitator and trainer: good interpersonal skills, good manager of groups, excellent at synthesis and analysis, good presentation skills etc. Experience of delivering training of trainers. Strong sense and understanding of local and national culture and identity. Excellent communication skills in relation to target audience and cross cultural work. Good understanding of global interdependency, global citizenship and sustainable development. Experience of working on Youth development and youth issues Understanding of and commitment to local community development, local community systems and processes. Established local and national professional networks Available to deliver trainings in the 16 districts Active Citizens programme is working with Available for Facilitators’ Training and be able to deliver follow up trainings as a commitment during December 2009 – March 2011 as per agreement with British Council. Desirable: Experience of working with the local community Understanding of BC agenda in relation to diversity and working effectively with difference. Experience of mentoring young people in learning and development Strong English language skills Strong local language skills

Facilitator’s role: Agree and confirm contract terms and conditions before attending the PK training Attend the AC training for Facilitators from 17 October – 21 November 2009 in Lahore Deliver the local training component and follow-up modules with BC identified groups of young people (number of trainings to be decided by British Council) Offer feedback on all elements of the programme Facilitators will also have additional tasks as identified by delivery partners and the British Council local offices including reporting of trainings, M&E of capacity building cycle, participating in selection of master trainers from trainings, provide back-up support to master trainers during cascading model, provide debriefing sessions to master trainers at least once/as and when required

BC Role: Provide training opportunity to potential facilitators Plan training delivery calendar in consultation with facilitators Cover training costs Provide facilitators accommodation and out station travel (if the facilitator delivers training outstation) Provide daily subsistence allowance (if the facilitator delivers training outstation) Facilitators will NOT be paid remuneration for delivering trainings

Please send your applications through email to Sadia Rahman, Projects Manager, Active Citizens programme, British Council at sadia.rahman@britishcouncil.org.pk by 23 October, 2009.

The application should include letter of interest, dully filled application form, complete CV and at least two references.

Active Citizens Programme Districts:

1. Karachi
2. Hyderabad
3. Quetta
4. Lahore
5. Multan
6. Bahawalpur
7. Narowal
8. Sargodha
9. Rawalpindi

10.  Islamabad

11.  Peshawar

12.  Abbottabad

13.  Muzaffarabad

14.  Mirpur

15.  Kotli

16.  Bhimbur

Following is the form:

Active Citizens Programme

Facilitator Application Form

COUNTRY:

NAME:

Community Name (place of work)
Name of the facilitator
Date of Birth
Sex
Address, contact information, email address
Position in the organisation
Level of training skills and experience. Please tick the box for relevant option	–       Above five years –       At least five years –       At least three years
Please mention trainings you have facilitated and the profile of participants
Experience of training trainers Please mention the profile of participants
Experience of working with young people
Experience of working with the local community (if applicable)
Level of competence in English Level of competence in local language
Experience/knowledge of BC
International experience
Networks you are linked with
Other information; e.g. regarding commitment, availability, requirements etc
Availability for Training Dates 17 – 21 November 2009
Availability for Module 1 Delivery December 2009 – March 2011
Organizational support available
Please mention at least two references

Positions at NWFP Integrated Health Program

NWFP- INTEGRATED HEALTH PROGRAM

MEDICAL DOCTORS (Male & Female)

Primary responsibilities

–     Carrying out primary health care consultations.

–     Referring emergencies to hospital and follow-up of referrals.

–     Working in collaboration with a multi-disciplinary team: paramedics and social workers

–     Supervise activities of the paramedics in the team.

–     Organizing and conducting Medical Camps

–     Conducting issue specific health awareness sessions (facility/community based).

–     Support drug management.

–     Prepare reports on a daily and weekly basis and identify suspected epidemic diseases.

Requirements

–     MBBS with PMDC certification with working experience with (I) NGO is an asset.

–     Practicing MD for a minimum of 2 years.

–     Male position requires experience in general medicine and paediatrics while female position requires experience in general medicine and in Gynae/ Obstetrics.

–     Proven ability to work in a team

–     Good communication and reporting skills

–     Ability to travel.

–     Experience in emergency situations or with mobile units is an asset.

–     English and Pushto fluency required.

Lady Health Visitors (LHV)

Primary responsibilities

–     Carrying out primary health care consultations (ante/ post natal care, general consultations under supervision).

–     Participation in organizing and conducting Medical Camps

–     Growth monitoring/nutritional assessment of children.

–     Referring emergencies to hospital and follow-up of referrals.

–     Working in collaboration with a multi-disciplinary team: paramedics and social workers.

–     be involved in advocacy and awareness activities together with other mobile team members

–     Prepare reports on a daily base.

Requirements

–     Possession of certified LHV diploma.

–     Practising since a minimum of 2 years

–     Working experience with NGO is an asset.

–     Experience in emergency situations or with mobile units is an asset.

–     Proven ability to work in a team

–     Good communication and reporting skills

–     Ability to travel

–     Pushto fluency required.

FEMALE HEALTH EDUCATOR / LADY HEALTH WORKER(LHW)

Primary Responsibilities:

–     To promote healthy behavior among patients and in the community.

–     To visit homes to identify cases in need for PHC services and follow-up patients if necessary.

–     To identify needs of the population and specifically among the women.

–     To prepare weekly reports related to the activities.

Requirements:

–     Possession of Diploma of LHW / Health Educator

–     Practising since a minimum of 1 years

–     Proven ability to work in a team

–     Good communication skills

–     Ability to travel within the district and to visit homes

–     Working experience with NGO is an asset.

–     Experience in emergency situations or with mobile units is an asset.

–     Pushto fluency required.

HOW TO APPLY

–     Please send your resume with covering letter to cordaid.pakistan@cordaid.net or P.O. Box 236 Islamabad by 2^nd November 2009. Please specify the post you applied for in subject line of your email or on the envelope. Due to the urgent need to fill the position, we might select some one even before the closing date. Only short-listed candidates will be contacted.

–     Note: Candidates who are available to join within 7-10 days after closure of the application date will be given preference.

Cordaid is an equal opportunity employer and offers attractive remuneration package.

The Story of My Beloved

Published on March 14, 2007

The story of my beloved has taken many turns, pleasant and unpleasant, cheery and miserable, heartwarming and upsetting, pleasing and distressing. Some times it seems to be ‘child of lesser god’. And at others, it appears to be the victim of sheer credulity of those who gave birth to it and disregard of its guardians. Who is this ill-fated fellow? It’s none other than my beloved country.

Born out of wedlock, it showed the world one of the chain products of the end of colonial era. Those at the helm of affairs at that point in time, probably knew very well what unfortunate course of actions they’ve allowed to happen for superficial reasons. They wrote the history with a vision to push the posterity in unfathomable oblivion. And sons and daughters of my age and the younger fell prey to immeasurable degrees of historical and geo-political visionless-ness at the hands of raped history that was taught throughout the decades. All the voices of dissent were termed against the spirit of “patriotism” – a dubious airy term that did not have a definite shape, colour and intensity. It acquired whatever shape and colour “they” wanted it to have. And it was “they” who continued to determine the level of ‘Muslamaaniyat’ of fellow citizens thereby nationalizing the religion.

People, who historically had been against the territorial concept of state and restricting Musalmaans to the geographical boundaries as opposed to a more totalitarian concept of Pan-Islamism, suddenly started dictating the terms to govern the new born country. Who let that happen? Probably the ones who had, besides professing the greater ideals of humanism, equality of opportunities and political participation of the socially excluded Musalmaans – the values far greater than blind theocracy, carried on with permitting the pregnant slogans like, Pakistan Ka Matlab Kia: La Ilaha Illallah. As an insightful and astute statesman, Jinnah soon comprehended the gravity of the turn of events and tried to mend the error (deliberate or un-deliberate) in judgment of the popular sentiment on the part of the political coterie of the time that led the euphoria to an unprecedented hike. He delivered a marvelously drafted speech on August 11, 1947, refuting any likelihood of a theocratic state in the making. The speech, understandably, was put under the carpet after his death.

During his very short post-partition life time, he tried his best to mend the ways the politicians had chosen as the mean to perpetuate their consolidation of power. The unbridled political cronies of that period went berserk after the death of their Quaid. The problems of governance resulted in a political penumbra that was unmanageable and irrepressible by them on account of being under trained in the traditions of democracy and business of politics. The country being diversified ethnically, linguistically and culturally, posed various problems of governance. The most intoxicating one being the tribulation of keeping un-natural adherents united. The air of distress and feelings of downright disillusionment of people of these diverse federating units accelerated the centrifugal forces amid oft repeated Indian apprehensions about sustenance of the juvenile country. The situation compelled the leaders to create something that could gel the culturally and ethnically disparate people together.

In the backdrop of a campaign for Pakistan run mainly by the British-leaning Muslim feudal triggering religious sentiments in order to gain maximum popular support for a bizarre political solution, the best solution that appeared to those in control was to continue with religious question as the prime concern of country’s polity. And that’s the point where things started to take a turn for worst. The right refused to budge in for slightest of disagreement. Politicians, out of their vested interests, continued to bow before the Islamists throughout Pakistan’s history checkered with intermittent short periods of democratic respite as well as longer autocratic regimes run largely by the supreme ‘protectionist’ institution of the country.

On the other hand, the ‘Protectionist Inc.’ was allowed to claim its political role in early years of Pakistan. The young country failed to inherit politicians with a farsighted vision, experience of parliamentary democracy and acquaintance with political nuances of the time, necessary to lead the popular prophecy. The lot that was available was content finding easy answers to strategic questions. Appointments of political personages at public offices without elections and a lack of unified inspiration to run the business of country on a dialogue and consensus-based governance structure took it away from democratic norms and traditions. The scripture of country’s security was written overnight to shift the attention from failures to deal with brawling issues of ethnicity and socio-political hegemony of a political powerful group. The notion of security took the rulers on the gates of Protectionist Inc. that ended up in continually empowering this institution with almost no accountability and frequent opportunities for it to exercise power beyond its ambit of security.

On economic front, the early rulers, wrongly or rightly, decided to sell the balance-of-power theory of the world powers in a post World War II scenario. The one with an offer of larger ‘profit base’ as opposed to the one more just but politically closer to India – the enemy, won the game. It’s the same point in time when Maulana Ubaidullah Sindhi warned to beware of the capitalist scheme but in vain. Pakistan succumbed to the glittering capitalist west and showed emerging communist neighborhood a thumb down in “larger interest” of the country. The shrewd capitalist used the religious euphoria of newly born nation that was in search of its identity after divorcing five thousand years of glorious history.

How much we gained and lost due to this policy, are questions the answer of which has now come to be known to all and sundry. But the story doesn’t end here. My beloved endured severest of blows in its face. It saw a nerve wrecking war within, it saw its daughters raped by those who were trusted for protecting it, it saw its own sons slaughtered in the name of internal security and saving federation. To the extent that its eastern arm was maimed. And when its shoulder was bleeding after the painful amputation, those who were responsible for the situation, started a high pitched drama to shift the focus from their failure to the alleged failure of the political parties. An excruciating defeat for which the people were not taken into confidence, they were not prepared for the results very well calculated by the army during the whole incidence. The scars were deep. The wounds were hemorrhagic.

The story still goes on. People were deceived, democracy was robbed, elected premier was hanged, a long black night prevailed. When my beloved saw a small ray of hope by comforting light of democracy, it turned out to be mirage. The same religious fanaticism was flourishing, political exclusion was at its peek, and lack of accountability had become a contagious epidemic, which had now infested politicians as well as other vital institutions. It was only then, that a strange thing happened. A good man of military came to the rescue. Beating the drums of equal opportunities, meritocracy, consensus-based governance, accountability for all, promises of probable economic boom, mixed slogans of eradicating poverty and hopes to become home of multinationals and what not? The civil society experienced a much desired political orgasm.

No, not a happy ending folks! It was only after that climax of excitement did the people find out that they were used as medieval concubines. Same era of sham democracy, exclusion, disregard of democratic institutions and now offense to the prime instrument of justice had returned with all its “pomp and glory”. My beloved is blubbering. My question from the most potent man of this country is: Is there any relief fro my beloved? When?

The Octagon of Governance

Published on March 4, 2007


Amid various international country ranking reports where Pakistan is fast approaching the victory stand of corruption, terrorism, lack of accountability, transparency and rule of law despite being a front line state in war against terror, one is inclined to see the larger canvas of overall governance in the country.

The term governance is being increasingly used in the latest development literature, among development professionals and political analysts all over the world. The gospel of governance, in simple terms, is the way where certain decisions are taken (or not taken) and implemented (or not implemented) to manage a society’s political, economic and social affairs. The onus of all the evils of a society is conveniently put on bad governance. Major donors and international financial institutions are basing their loaning and aid strategies in developing countries on the demand from the respective governments for a broader reform agenda ensuring good governance. In the presence of these “chaperons” for good governance, one can still see all the elements that contribute to the worst form of governance in the entire developing generally and in Pakistan particularly.

It becomes imperative to have a closer look at the term and its components in order to discern Pakistan’s performance on this pitch. Good governance, as the Governance Matters Report 2005 of our financial Vatican – the World Bank – warns us, has eight important elements: accountability, transparency, participation, responsiveness, effectiveness & efficiency, inclusiveness, stability and last but not least, rule of law. A steady performance and progress on these eight indicators would make the octagon of governance look balanced and poised.

Accountability – a self explanatory but largely misunderstood and abused term in Pakistan’s context – is a measure of the degree to which people are able to participate in selecting their government, have freedoms of expression and association alongside a free media. The need of making public officials and people’s representatives answerable for government behavior to the entity from which they derive authority can not be overemphasized. In countries with established democratic ethos and strong egalitarian roots, the accountability is ensured by audit covenants at one level and broadly elected legislatures and narrowly conceived committees etc at another. In Pakistan a simulation of democracy is doing the trick. Pakistan’s percentile rank (0 to 100) for accountability in governance among world’s largest populated twenty countries was 12.6 in 2005. Pakistan was fourth country from bottom, while China and Vietnam stood at the base of accountability pyramid. In South Asia, Pakistan was ranked second last among eight countries in 2005. The least accountable governance was carried by Afghanistan.

Transparency, correlated to accountability explains the accessibility of general public to information and government rules, regulations, procedures and decisions. The difficulty with ensuring transparency is that public access to information might very easily be restricted by the same authority that is responsible for providing that information. So, it is crucial to give the freedom of information a legal and legislative cover. Pakistan, having a scarcely envisioned Freedom of Information Act (which never saw itself explored by the parliamentarians on the floor of the House), is not displaying a pleasing picture on this front. With a country average of 16.1, Pakistan stands at the third least transparent country in its governance practices, rules, regulations etc. among South Asian countries closely beating Bangladesh and Afghanistan with country averages of 15.2 and 10.3 respectively. Maldives secures its place as the most transparent country with very tight regulatory framework among eight South Asian countries having a country average for transparency at 66.2 in 2005.

As far as government effectiveness is concerned, it’s a bit tricky to comprehend the concept and its relevance to good governance. As per definition accepted by most international governance assessment institutions, it measures the quality of civil and public service and degree to which both these services are independent from political pressures. It also gauges the quality of policy formulation and process of its implementation along with credibility of government’s commitment to such policies. Pakistan stands at fifth position among eight South Asian countries having a country average for effectiveness of 34 as opposed to Bhutan at number one with 64.6, India at number three with country average of 51.7, Nepal at number seven with 14.3 and Afghanistan at number eight with country average of 9.1. It demonstrates a devious kaleidoscope of political activity related to government effectiveness. Countries like Bhutan and Maldives may show higher averages of government effectiveness on account of being governed by autocracy and / or oligarchy, which leaves little space for non-state actors to dissent government’s actions. Countries with stronger democratic values may show a mid level average like that of India where government’s effectiveness indicators may confront a potent civil society interference. Countries like Nepal for example may show a major diversion and stay at the bottom as far as effectiveness stats are concerned, in the presence of a strong people’s opposition to autocracy. That explains Pakistan’s comparatively higher average compared to other indicators!

Rule of law, an important cornerstone of governance in any country is the measure of the level of social agents’ confidence in and abiding by the rules of society in particular, the value of writ enforcement, the police, the judiciary and the likelihood of crime and violence (we may use the word terrorism complying with emerging international linguistics). Pakistan ranks sixth among eight South Asian countries with a country average at 24.2 compared with Bhutan at number one with 64.7, Maldives at number two at 60, India at number three with an average of 56.4, Sri Lanka at number four with 54.1, Nepal at number five with 25.1, Bangladesh with 19.8 and Afghanistan with 1.4 at numbers seven and eight respectively. A country with greater value for democracy and people’s voices may display foreign and domestic policies with greater mass acceptance. A factor that minimizes people’s concerns resultantly less violent attitudes, more people-friendly policies, greater political and social freedom and social safety nets. All contributing to a just and equitable society thus leading to rule of law.

Conceptually and rationally, all these elements of governance support and reinforce each other. Accountability is related to citizens participation in decision making processes, which in turn is linked to transparency, information openness, government responsiveness to people’s needs and concerns, government efficiency and predictable decision making of autonomous government agencies. Similarly, the transparency and accessibility can not be ensured with out legal frameworks to balance people’s right to information against governments’ right to confidentiality along side a wide institutional acceptance to accountability. Finally, a democratic system facilitates governments to take informed decisions, incorporate people’s interests and voices in policy formulation, a free media to act as autonomous watchdog that props predictable outcome of governance. It, therefore, appears to be an unmistakable reality that the flag of good governance can only be unfurled under the bright sunlight of democratic system. The octagon has to be perfectly figured if soft image of Pakistan is to be popularized!

//

Two Courts, Why Not?

Published on: May 19, 2008

As the judicial imbroglio thickens the air between two coalition partners, the speculative analyses and predictions keep creeping through the op-ed columns and current affairs talk shows on umpteen TV channels in Pakistan. Whatever the analysts say, however serenity and reason PPP leadership tries to bring to the negotiating table, the fact remains that it’s not the dearth of solutions that is leading to uncertainty in reinstatement of judges, its lack of political commitment to do so. The solutions that have came up so far range from an executive order to a constitutional amendment or the act of Parliament. Considering the significant moves on the part of political movers and shakers, it is becoming all the more necessary to reach an upshot as soon as possible. The more time is spent on proving that every proposed way out has more cons than pros, the easier it would be for the anti democratic forces to draw the conclusion that no solution is possible for this political riddle.

The recent proposal, which was instantly denied by the Prime Minister, was that of establishment of two supreme courts. The idea perceptibly seems to be mala fide and an attempt to appease the lawyer / civil society pressure and placate a presidency that is shamelessly being lactated by the world powers. But at the same time, it deserves a serious thinking and analysis. The two Supreme Courts would mean a judicial system that allows the power of constitutional review to concentrate within a single judicial body. This proposal has a history of being in force in various countries of Western Europe alongside new democracies of Eastern Europe; and has displayed a widely accepted version of constitutional protection and control.

The presence of Constitutional courts gives rise to the anomalies of overlapping jurisdiction of Federal Constitutional Court and the supreme civil court, their absence critically contradicts with the principles of sovereignty of parliament and judicial review especially in democracies like Pakistan and India whose constitution remains a major source of this paradox. In India, where no Constitutional Court exists, the constitution has successfully fought back to be the supreme law of the land; in Pakistan, it still is a political instrument that every regime uses to consolidate its power. This fundamental difference in political cultures of both the countries makes them incomparable as far as judicial system is concerned. The emerging democracies in the European world, on the other hand, might offer an attractive judicial package to be replicated here in the backdrop of fierce battle between the state and the judiciary in Pakistan over last one year – a case much similar to postwar Germany when Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal Constitutional Court) was established.

The German Constitutional Court had to encounter five branches of specialized courts already well established in the pre-Natzi tradition of German judiciary. The specialized courts had to overcome the failure of their immediate past, whereas, the Constitutional Court was offered a considerable chance of success by the climate of postwar reform. If in Pakistan, the existing Supreme Court takes on the jurisdiction of civil, criminal and administrative cases and a new Federal Constitutional Court is established with the mandate of constitutional interpretation, it is expected to correspond well with the democratic tradition of separation of power and centrality of constitution.

It should, however, be kept in mind that developing a commonly accepted model of cohabitation at the supreme judicial level will be extremely difficult and would require stronger political commitment from parliament, the existing Supreme Court as well as from other power players. The answer to fundamental question of distribution of judicial power between the two courts would largely depend on the intent of establishment of such bi-faceted judicial system that divorces American system of diffused judicial review. If the sole objective is to keep one single individual from heading the apex constitutional court, and limiting his power to civil and criminal suits, the new system may lack vision and design to sustain and might not produce popularly desired results.

The apprehensions of some experts, as reported in media over last few days, about the establishment of Constitutional Court in Pakistan weigh much lesser compared to the positives of it. If established on the following lines, the system can, by design, respond to most of the apprehensions:

1. The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) should be structurally independent with respect to the Executive Branch and to the Supreme Court

2. The FCC should be mandated to develop the concept of direct applicability of the Constitution (including its guarantees of fundamental rights) and to impose that concept on other segments of the judicial branch.

3. Procedures of the constitutional complaints should be such designed that they should extend the applicability of complaints to all the situation involving conflicts with fundamental rights of individual liberty

4. The FCC, while preserving the last word in the wake of a controversy, should not claim a monopoly over application of the Constitution but, rather, should act as a coordinator of that process.

5. The FCC should be vested with the competence to review ordinary statutes and other legal regulations as well as to annul them in case of unconstitutionality or nonconformity with any international instrument to which Pakistan is a party. Such decisions of the FCC should be universally binding i.e., also binding on all other courts, including Supreme Court.

6. Each court (Higher and Supreme) while resolving an individual case should consider whether the statutory provisions based on which the judgment will be give, are in conformity of the constitution or not. In case of a doubt expressed by the complainant or the judge herself about the constitutionality of such provision, the judge should refer that issue to the FCC as a legal question. The decision of FCC should be binding on the other courts to be applied to the case(s).

7. The FCC’s composition should be such that all the provinces and other federating units are equally represented.

While smoothening public opinion on any set of judicial solutions, we need to keep in mind that present crisis has a hidden opportunity – the opportunity of making our judicial system more relevant to a parliamentary democracy and constitutionalism. Change is sometimes uneasy, but it surely bears the fruit of development. And the key to change is . . . let go of fear!

//