Main Page «
Front Page «
Metro «
Business «
International «
Sports «
National «
Editorial «
Home «
Timeout «
Letters «

Archive «
Launch Supplement «
Special Supplements «

Blood tests ordered by my cyber medical consultant, Dr Mahjabeen Islam MD, Toledo, state of Ohio, USA, have plunged me not into any kind of depression—I hope I’m made of sterner stuff —but a decidedly pensive mood.
   Confronted with evidence of super-high cholesterol and the readings of what I can only call an outrageous weighing machine, my mind has been dwelling on the vanity of human wishes, the hollowness of human pretensions, the transitory nature of all things, etc. It is surprising how philosophic you can get because of a comprehensive blood picture.
   I haven’t yet reached the dreaming-of-undertakers stage although my cyber doc helpfully suggests that with cream rather than blood floating around in my veins, and Pakistanis having small-calibre arteries (which is a new one for me), “there is not too much room and it is only a matter of time before there is a clot around a narrowed artery aka a heart attack.” Thanks Doc.
   Part of the problem, I don’t mind confessing, has been Latif Ghee from the good parish of Chakwal itself which I am now informed is the favourite cooking medium of the place from where I regularly used to get my halwa-puri on Thursday mornings. It was a wonderful way to begin a writing day but not so wonderful, as I now realize, for my blood factory.
   Local gourmets tell me Latif Ghee is several lethal stages ahead of regular dalda, our favourite cooking ghee which is pushing Pakistan relentlessly into the top drawer of nations most at risk from cardio-vascular disease. I think our Islamist salvationists have it all wrong. It is not so much our faith which is weak, although much can be said on that subject as well, as our cooking oil. A nation fed on dalda. What can you expect?
   In one respect, however, I am sure I disappoint my Toledo consultant. Besides being extremely good at her work, Dr Mahjabeen is also a columnist with an engaging style. Writing in the News yesterday, she mentions a qawwali she went to in Karachi during one of her visits. “To my horror,” she reports, “prior to the start of the qawwali I noticed glasses being carried by many, full of that incriminating light yellow liquid.” When the host announces that since the qawwali would start with a hamd (poetry in praise of the Lord of the Worlds) people should refrain from smoking, she can barely control her anger. “Excuse me. What about the yellow brew?”
   Considering her views about the yellow brew, and knowing something of my weakness, she expected my liver to be nearer collapse than my heart. The tests, however, show my liver coping rather well with the wear and tear of recent years. There’s a moral in this tale but I’ll leave it for later.
   The ugliest part of the human anatomy is the belly, or rather the protruding belly (a well-shaped waist being a different thing altogether). As for the Pakistani or sub-continental paunch—-for we share it with our Indian and Bangladeshi cousins—-it is like no other paunch in the world, made more pronounced by our relatively smaller frames and none-too-spectacular legs. What the belly breeds is the worst sin of all, gluttony (and imagine when it comes floating on Latif Ghee).
   The yellow brew is at fault not so much in itself as for promoting gluttony. When I think of the vast quantities of nuts, peanuts and seekh kababs I must have consumed while dabbling in the stuff that so exercises my good doctor, I am overcome by a sense of shame at not having the strength to resist the siren calls of minor gluttony (for big gluttony I never had the stomach).
   If I had to do it all over again, what would I do? Cut out the nuts, especially the peanuts which are the biggest culprits of all, and go easy on the greasy stuff. Too much fat, and of the bad sort, is a more serious national problem than the demonisation of things yellow which has stood at the top of our moral agenda since that fateful summer of 1977 when in order to appease the religious right wing, on the warpath because of the disputed elections of that same year, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto thought he had played a masterstroke by banning drink, gambling and horse-racing.
   Far from being appeased the legions of the religious right became bolder, perceiving that they had Bhutto on the run. When Gen Ziaul Haq seized power not long afterwards, Bhutto’s masterstroke became one of the central tenets of state policy, ban this and that, the glory of Islam reduced to a set of punitive decrees.
   We didn’t become any more Islamic during those years but hypocrisy of the most blatant kind, radiating from the top and reaching to the bottom, became the number one national industry. Appearance, make-believe and sham piety was everything, substance nothing.
   Thus official letterheads were inscribed, had to be inscribed, with the kalima, the assertion of faith which makes a Muslim a Muslim. It was not enough to start official functions with the words “In the name of Allah, the most compassionate, the most merciful…” which one would have thought took care of everything. Lengthy recitations from the Holy Book were invariably followed by hymns in praise of the Holy Prophet.
   Never mind that PIA was steadily going to the dogs, it began its flights with a prayer that the Prophet used to say before setting out on a journey. Mosques were built everywhere. When time was set aside for prayer during office timings, a bureaucracy not famous for efficiency or hard work had another, higher excuse to avoid work.
   Beards and dopattas first invaded then dominated the TV screen. The begums of the great went in for milads (religious functions) in a huge way, at official expense of course. Another practice of the good and great honed in those days but from which we haven’t entirely escaped was to perform the Hajj and undertake other pilgrimages to the Holy Land at state expense.
   Bhutto’s ban on drink was not enough. It was made stricter, inviting heavier punishment, by the Hadood laws passed by General Zia in February 1979.
   All very well and highly desirable if these practices in any way tended to produce a more pious nation. Alas, in its everyday life the nation continued to be as cheerfully sinful and corrupt as before.
   “Aaway ka aawa hee bigra hua hai” (things are rotten to the core, a rough translation which doesn’t do justice to the original) was one of Gen Zia’s most memorable observations. Despite the officially-inspired sanctimoniousness of his rule, the “aaway ka awa” was as “bigra hua” in 1988 when he left this world for his heavenly abode as it was when he had seized power eleven and a half years earlier.
   The crucial difference was that cheerfulness or merrymaking went underground. Two consequences followed: cheerfulness became more expensive and thus beyond the reach not only of the poor but of the white collar class; and a premium was put on make-believe compelling perfectly sensible people to behave in a manner at odds with their natural or spontaneous behaviour.
   Ours was a perfectly healthy and normal society, with huge problems of course but with none of the psychological distortions that have crept in now. If we are a sick society today it is not so much because of the elusive quest for constitutionalism and other things political as because of the violence we have done to our social mores, pushing perfectly normal patterns of behaviour into the realm of the criminal and the sinful.
   Communist totalitarianism produced a culture of looking over your shoulders before you spoke. The moral brigadism visited upon the hapless people of Pakistan has produced a culture of taking the perfectly normal and natural behind closed doors.
   Khawaja Pervaiz who writes regularly in Khabrain is one of my favourite columnists. The title of his column says it all: ‘Fake fairies, bald angels’. In his most recent column he says: “By banning nightclubs and considering other forms of entertainment as sinful, and indeed pushing them beyond the reach of the poor, Muslims are managing to produce many more children as compared to the votaries of other religions.”
   Sensible thought: when you have nothing else to do, what do you do?  

At long last the long cherished independent Anti Corruption Commission (ACC) has come into being, doing away with all speculations. The government announcement to this effect on November 21 has fulfilled a long felt desire of the country’s people. This was a fulfillment of an election pledge of the ruling BNP led alliance. The government was also under incessant pressure from the donor countries and agencies for the formation of the independent Anti Corruption Commission. Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Moudud Ahmed, at a press conference held at his ministry, claimed that the formation of the commission was a landmark step of the government in order to fulfill its election pledge of combating corruption. Whatever may be the fact; the people at large welcomed the formation of the much demanded independent Anti Corruption Commission and expect it to play a major role to control the unabated corruption in all sectors.
   But from the beginning, the Commission has been limping. It is faced with crises due to lack of coordination in the Commission, and between the government and the Commission. Talking to a group of journalists at his new office (at Agargaon), Justice Sultan Hossain Khan, the Chairman of the Commission, admitted that there had been lack of coordination in the Commission, but added that this was not unusual for a new organisation. He said that things should be all right soon. The Anti Corruption Commission was faced with another crisis lately as its Director General (DG) and Secretary in charge Major General (Retd.) M. A. Matin expressed his inability to carry on his duties in view of the prevailing condition in the Commission and the ‘controversial’ decision of the cabinet division. Earlier, the Chairman of the Commission, Justice Sultan Hossain Khan, asked Director General M.A. Matin to work as Secretary of the newly formed Commission in addition to his own duties. The government earlier scrapped the contract of M.A. Matin, whose service was absorbed in the Commission from the Bureau, before he was given additional responsibilities by the Commission. Later, the government appointed Reza-e-Rabbi, a former bureaucrat, as Secretary of the Commission on December 22, 2004, reportedly in violation of the law, under which the authority of employing staff for the anti graft body lies with the Commission.
   The appointment of the Secretary by the government sparked questions in the civil society as well as the political arena about the government’s “crafty” manoeuvre as regards the functioning of the Anti Corruption Commission independently. Some termed it executive interference in what is designed to be an independent organisation, as unwarranted. However, the High Court stayed the appointment of Reza-e-Rabbi on December 27, 2004, and issued a rule nisi on the government to show cause within three weeks why the appointment would not be declared illegal and also ordered that the stay will continue until a regular bench hears the case after the Supreme Court reconvenes following the winter holiday. The order was passed on a writ petition, filed by a Supreme Court lawyer, challenging the government’s appointment without consulting the Commission. Reza-e-Rabbi, who had proceeded to the Commission twice after the appointment, has been declined to join.
   It is about two months that the Commission has started functioning. The chairman sought all out cooperation from the government, opposition political parties and people for effective functioning of the Commission, and said the Commission would succeed in getting rid of corruption if gets everyone’s cooperation. By this time, it has been reported that the Commission has taken up a number of corruption cases for investigation in phases. The cases include over 4000 missing cars belonging to various ministries, which certainly should have been deposited at the Central Transport Pool on completion of projects for which these vehicles were purchased, the open market sale of rice worth Tk 10 crore after unloading from Mongla Port, and others. These posh cars worth hundreds of crores of taka were purchased with public money for using in different development projects, and those have been under alleged disposal of high officials of the concerned ministries even after completion of the projects. Earlier on January 01, such a notice was served to 13 Secretaries about 1028 missing vehicles worth Tk 200 crore, but the concerned Secretaries reportedly dared to defy the Commission’s notice, as this was signed by a Deputy Director, the post that has become invalid soon after in the Commission after the government decided to put all officers and staff of the defunct Anti Corruption Bureau on “reserve” category and asked the Commission not to involve them in the activities of the Commission until framing of their absorption rule is completed.
   According to the Anti Corruption Commission Act, the Commission does not need any approval from anybody to investigate or prosecute any person whosoever on charge of corruption. It will have an investigation unit to investigate any allegation of corruption. It is learnt that at this moment the Commission has about 20 thousand cases, though it is yet to initiate any investigation. These cases were filed by the now dissolved Bureau of Anti Corruption and are now pending in different courts. According to the Act, all the pending cases filed by the defunct Bureau will not come under jurisdiction of the Commission. The Commission will conduct investigation for the offences under Anti Corruption Act 2004 and for the punishable offences under Prevention of Corruption Act 1947. It can initiate suo moto investigation into any case of malpractice, but it is yet to formulate its rules to apply the power of trial of any person found guilty of any corrupt practice. For creating public awareness against the dangerous malaise corruption, the Commission will arrange seminars, symposiums and workshops on the functions, duties and responsibilities of the Commission, vested by Anti Corruption law. It will also identify the causes of corruption and will suggest remedies to the President. It is absolutely imperative that some provisions relating to ‘time frame’ are inserted in Anti Corruption law for quick disposal of corruption cases.
   Corruption has got an institutional character in our country while it has crept into every sphere of life. Elimination of corruption was one of the principal election pledges of the alliance government. But the present government scored a hat trick after winning the world championship in corruption successively for three years by the Berlin based Transperancy International (TI), after it came to power in October, 2001. And the last government also surpassed all the records of corruption as well as politicization, earning the top position in corruption according to the TI report. The members of the treasury bench have always refused the TI report as usual while the opposition members are used to welcoming it. It is no doubt a matter of deep embarrassment for the nation to the international community, as a result of which our country is suffering serious image crisis abroad. Some extremely corrupt politicians together with their “loyal” government servants are guilty of this serious negative imaging abroad. There may have any dispute over the ranking of Bangladesh as the most corrupt country in the world, but prevails no scope of denying the widespread corruption in the country. The unabated corruption in the country has been substantiated by the news of corruption in most of the departments of the government including taxation, police, education, customs, finance and administration. This unabated corruption has been strangling the economy for a long time as well as impacting seriously on society and the people. The common people of the country face innumerable problems in their day to day life events because of widespread corruption in public life. The present government as well as its predecessor came to power with firm pledges to wipe out corruption from the country on top priority basis. But the ground reality is that none of the governments honoured their pledges so vital for the better growth of economy and wellbeing of the people. However, it is nice to see that the present government has at last formed the independent Anti Corruption Commission. But the establishment of the Ombudsman’s office despite the passage of law, to act effectively as the watchdog against corruption, is still hanging fire.
   For a country, that has been winning foreign certificates repeatedly in corruption, the formation of an independent Anti Corruption Commission is a laudable development. But the formation of the ACC can fulfill a long standing public demand, only when it is allowed to operate independently and neutrally with absolute powers to investigate any sort of corruption by any people without interference of any kind. Quite a few extremely corrupt government officials including bureaucrats, police officers, engineers, doctors, revenue and tax officials, and many others, and political bigwigs as well as their associates have to be investigated immediately, who have made, and are still making huge money and property comfortably by virtue of being in their ‘heavily protected’ positions. These people must be brought under corruption charges and punished, and their all “misappropriated” public property and money have to be “confiscated” anyway. Otherwise, the significance of the Commission will be futile as well as questioned.
   Corruption breeds inefficiency in most cases. Ruling government, its Ministers and MPs are always on the lookout for their own men and thru’ various mechanisms to place them, whether inefficient or ignorant, in different important positions as they like. This culture has been continuing in successive regimes. As a result, accountability is lacking everywhere in the government, which is further giving birth to corruption endemically.
   The ACC is already at loggerheads with the government over quite a few problems, all serious ones. There is, importantly, the matter of its staff. However, the Commission is now initiating measures to thrash out differences with the government. The Chairman and his colleagues of the Commission met up with Finance Minister M. Saifur Rahman on January 5, as part of their move to remove disputes and differences between the Commission and the government, for the sake of smooth functioning of the Commission. Adroit handling of corruption cases is a very tough and complicated job and sensitive at the same time. Because, people have long witnessed awful act of harassing people resorting to corruption in the name of curbing it. Which is why the new commission has been formed to restore the loss of credibility the people developed over the years about the now defunct Anti Corruption Bureau. And those who will work under the Commission must work honestly and independently of the executive. It is the position of the Chairman which is of immense importance and ideally he should be enjoying a degree of respect and authority that should keep even ministers at bay. And to make the Commission for independent functioning, sufficient budgetary allocation should be provided. There is a tendency in a section of our “crafty” politicians to befool the people in the name of their welfare. But the common people always want to see their dear motherland happy and flourishing in every respect in every sphere of life.
   The writer can be reached at msaifulh2003@yahoo.com

It is unusual to see a country as large and as lumbering as the US reverse itself. With so much momentum propelling it toward seeking ‘stability’ in its foreign relations, George Bush made a U-turn as nimble as any football player and is now heading for the goal of ‘freedom.’
   During his Inaugural speech, setting the tone for his second term, President Bush shocked even the most seasoned observers by changing US policy. ‘So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world,’ he announced.
   He didn’t say a policy or one policy: no, now supporting democracy is the policy, a radical change from decades, even centuries, of American accommodation of tyranny.
   During his address, President Bush intertwined the logic of the realists and the idealists, merging Hobbs and Locke into one word: freedom. ‘The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.’
   Apparently, it was not hollow rhetoric when President Bush apologised to the world many months ago for America’s long support of dictators. Indeed, his close advisor and now Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice, foreshadowed the President’s speech at her confirmation hearings: ‘In the Middle East,’ she said, ‘President Bush has broken with six decades of excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the hope of purchasing stability at the price of liberty. The stakes could not be higher. As long as the broader Middle East remains a region of tyranny and despair and anger, it will produce extremists and movements that threaten the safety of America and our friends.’
   ‘America’s vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one,’ George Bush intoned from the windy platform. Careful to clarify this was ‘not primarily the task of arms,’ and that ‘Freedom, by its nature, must be chosen,’ Bush unveiled what he believes are the most powerful weapons of all in the War on Terror-freedom, liberty, democracy. America’s policy is now to ‘help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom, and make their own way.’
   And thus Zarqawi’s hopes for a precipitous US withdrawal from Iraq were dashed, and bin Laden’s dream of a global Taliban-like regime became yet more unrealistic. Without naming names, Bush issued a rebuke to the obstructionists of democratisation efforts, ‘Division among free nations is a primary goal of freedom’s enemies.’
   During the speech, in a nearby park the protesting class was chanting, ‘No justice-No peace. US out of the Middle East!’ Within minutes of the speech’s end, the chattering class of Bush’s domestic critics began their own narrative: Too much money! We need our despots! Not realistic! Over-reaching! Ending tyranny, impossible!
   So ingrained is the acceptance of tyranny that many were stunned. Peggy Noonan, contributing editor to the Wall Street Journal, opined: ‘The inaugural address itself was startling. It left me with a bad feeling, and reluctant dislike. It carried a punch, asserting an agenda so sweeping that an observer quipped that by the end he would not have been surprised if the president had announced we were going to colonise Mars.’
   All the world leaders who blustered so heartily against the Greater Middle East Initiative because it was named wrong, presented wrong, and just plain pushy must have blustered again upon hearing, ‘The leaders of governments with long habits of control need to know: To serve your people you must learn to trust them. Start on this journey of progress and justice, and America will walk at your side.’
   Experience with this president has shown his words are not to be taken lightly. So these words are of import: ‘We will encourage reform in other governments by making clear that success in our relations will require the decent treatment of their own people. America’s belief in human dignity will guide our policies, yet rights must be more than the grudging concessions of dictators; they are secured by free dissent and the participation of the governed.’
   Yikees! Free dissent?! But, but, but jails were made for journalists! Participation?! Surely Bush doesn’t mean that presidents should be elected more frequently than every thirty years! What about economic reforms, human rights conferences, and magnanimously accommodating NGO’s and their literacy programs— are all of these not good enough anymore?
   The metric was clarified earlier at Ms. Rice’s hearing. ‘If a person cannot walk into the middle of the town square,’ she said, ‘and express his or her views without fear of arrest, imprisonment, and physical harm, then that person is living in a fear society.’ The fate of those in the ‘town square,’ President Bush believes, has a direct impact on the security of the Americans he is sworn to protect.
   This American president cannot single-handedly free the world’s people, but his earlier statement that ‘You are either with us or against us,’ now has a corollary: ‘We will stand with you.’ It is America’s declaration of dependence on the liberty of all, and it may be a declaration as profound as its earlier founding documents.
   The writer is an American political analyst and a regular columnist in the Gulf, Middle East, South Asia