Pakistanis and Super Pakistanis: Who Gets ‘Justice’?

Pakistan Support Nizami

Supporters of Pakistani religious party Jamaat-e-Islami condemn the execution of Bangladesh’s the party’s chief Motiur Motiur Rahman Nizami, in Peshawar, Pakistan, Wednesday, May 11, 2016. The head of Bangladesh’s largest Islamist party was executed early Wednesday for his role in acts of genocide and war crimes during the country’s independence war against Pakistan in 1971, a senior government official said. (AP Photo/Mohammad Sajjad)

Foreign Office released a curious statement in response to hanging of Motiur Nizami in Bangladesh. According to the government, the Jamaat leader’s ‘only sin was upholding the constitution and laws of Pakistan’. The government has carefully worded its furious response as a condemnation of the ‘flawed process’ that convicted Nizami, a point that has been made by international human rights groups. However these same human rights groups have also given the same judgment of our own legal process and said that hanging those convicted by military courts is ‘not justice‘.

This point of criticising legal process is for PR purposes only. In reality, Pakistani state does not care one iota about international norms of ‘due process’ and strongly defends our sovereignty as we know best what is required for our national security and how to best handle those who are working against the national interest. Therefore, our sympathy for Nizami is not out of concern for due process and international legal norms, it is out of nationalistic pride.

There is no concern for the ‘due process’ of those killed by Pakistani forces in extra-judicial killings, neither there is concern for those hanged following secret trials by military courts that have been condemned by international legal groups. These too are Pakistani citizens, but where is our outrage and concern for their rights?

Nizami is considered a hero for his actions, so we do not want to see him punished for them. Even though he stopped being a Pakistani in 1971, his actions supporting Pakistan military gave him status of Super Pakistani and therefore he is given more rights than actual Pakistanis. This is justice?

Hawaldar Media Accidentally Exonerates Husain Haqqani

Ex-dictator Gen Musharraf may have fled the country, but he still has a following of loyal subjects supporters, especially among the ranks of hawaldar media officers. Latest example is Lt Col (r) Khalid Masood Khan who vigorously defends the former COAS in an article that is filled with incredible revelations. For example, did you know that:

Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who was already been holding the office of the President and had a history of following the line of Benazir Bhutto would have made a natural and comfortable combination with her as the Prime Minister…

I am closing my eyes and trying hard but still having trouble imagining this magical ‘Musharraf – Bhutto’ regime. Obviously I do not have the powerful imagination of a Lt Colonel.

Did you also know that “General Musharraf however has no allegation of corruption against him”? None! So don’t ask how the General became a billionaire. That is ‘need to know only’ information.

Lt Col Khalid concludes that, ‘The mere fact that Gen. Pervez Musharraf who unprecedentedly returned to Pakistan of his own accord in order to face the charges against him shows his courage through the strength of his character and also proves his innocence.’ Actually, the Colonel is incorrect about the lack of precedence as it was actually set by Husain Haqqani who returned of his own accord in order to face the charges against him in two years earlier. Haqqani will surely be pleased to know that Lt Col Khalid believes this proves his innocence.

During the debate about military courts, there were many who doubted whether military officers would be impartial or any innocents would ever be acquitted. Thanks for Lt Col Khalid we know that military officers can give acquittals and be impartial in their judgment.

Pakistan Becoming a Police State

riot police Karachi

The term ‘police state’ is defined as “a state controlled by a political police force that secretly supervises the citizens’ activities”. Is this a fitting description for Pakistan, which is supposedly a democracy? The answer to this question may be unsettling.

Operation Zarb-e-Azb was long overdue as terrorist outfits had been given leniency since too long which resulted in the inevitable. However, there are a growing number of examples of ‘national security’ being used as an excuse for ever expanding police powers against the citizens of Pakistan.

YouTube appears to be permanently blocked, despite the fact that no one can point to any legitimate reason why limiting access to the site is necessary. This is a relatively minor inconvenience as videos are widely available on other sites, and there are easy ways to access YouTube anyway. The point, though, is that is an early example of the state arbitrarily trying to control what information private citizens can get.

A more alarming example is the growing pressurisation of journalists and media with the most recent case being the firing of Daily Times columnist Mohammad Taqi under direction from Army. Taqi’s case has made international headlines, but it is not the only one. Actually, the media has become increasingly limited in what is reported and the positions that are presented. This is a process that began over one year ago as it was reported in February 2014 that media groups had begun directing journalists not to report anything critical of Army or right-wing political parties like Jamaat-e-Islami and PTI. During this time we have seen those like Ahmed Quraishi and Zaid Hamid returning to the spotlight and preaching a certain agenda.

While the media is increasingly becoming a hyper-nationalistic mouthpiece, Army is expanding its role as well. Civilians in the government are being replaced by military officers, and military courts are being expanded to replace the civilian justice system. Besides Zarb-e-Azb, Karachi Operation also shows no signs of ending as Rangers continue to target liberal political parties while religious extremists continue to terrorise minorities.

In each of these cases, officials and their mouthpieces in the new media justify the expansion of police powers by saying it is necessary for national security. However the latest case was unexpectedly exposed and has revealed what is really going on. Of course I am talking about the announcement that Blackberry will stop providing services in Pakistan due to government demands. As per usual, state officials have said that they have asked Blackberry for help in catching terrorists, but now a Blackberry official has revealed the truth on their website.

The truth is that the Pakistani government wanted the ability to monitor all BlackBerry Enterprise Service traffic in the country, including every BES e-mail and BES BBM message. But BlackBerry will not comply with that sort of directive. As we have said many times, we do not support “back doors” granting open access to our customers’ information and have never done this anywhere in the world.

Pakistan’s demand was not a question of public safety; we are more than happy to assist law enforcement agencies in investigations of criminal activity. Rather, Pakistan was essentially demanding unfettered access to all of our BES customers’ information. The privacy of our customers is paramount to BlackBerry, and we will not compromise that principle.

What we said in July when rumors of Pakistan’s decision started to swirl remains true today: “BlackBerry provides the world’s most secure communications platform to government, military and enterprise customers. Protecting that security is paramount to our mission. While we recognize the need to cooperate with lawful government investigative requests of criminal activity, we have never permitted wholesale access to our BES servers.”

While we are justifiably outraged by the statements from Western politicians that want to monitor all mosques and Muslims, treating everyone as if they are a potential terrorist, our government is doing exactly that already. Is it true that in order to secure the country, we must monitor every citizens as if they are a terrorist threat?

Actually there is another possible reason for blanket monitoring which has been done by totalitarian regimes in the past. By monitoring every citizen closely and reading their messages, totalitarian police states such as Nazi Germany and USSR were infamous for collecting private citizens secrets and using to blackmail them to spy on their neighbors. Is this what we have become already?

There is no question that we are in a fight for our lives against jihadi terrorists and their extremist takfiri ideology. In this fight, Army and other security forces have an obvious role to play, but we must be careful that their role does not seep into every corner of our lives and turn Pakistan into a totalitarian police state.

The Road To Military Rule

Gen Raheel

PPP finds itself being squeezed rather tightly lately. Sadly, the squeeze really comes as no surprise. When Pakistan Rangers first raided 90 earlier this year, the writing was already on the wall. Today, PPP leadership is crying foul over being targeted, but in some ways their troubles are a result of their own doing. When it became obvious that Army was going returning to operations against political parties, the PPP took the strategy of trying to cozy up in hopes of weathering the storm. Did they really think that it would work?

Continue reading

Only as good as our word

Justice Asif Saeed Khosa

“A man is only as good as his word.” My father told me this in all seriousness one day when I was trying to back out of a commitment I had made to a neighbor. It was a bit of drudgery that I had agreed to help out with, and since then my classmate had managed to get tickets to something much more enjoyable. I tried explaining to my father that when I agreed to help, I didn’t know the tickets were going to appear. Circumstances had changed. Circumstances were extenuating. And it wasn’t really that important, anyway, I argued. My father stared at me in stony silence, then spoke: “If you cannot be trusted with something unimportant, how can anyone ever trust you with something that is?” I rode my bike to meet my friend and give him the bad news. He’d have to give my ticket to someone else. I fulfilled my promise, but I did so under silent protest. My friends were having fun and I was tired and dirty. Time works a funny kind of magic, though. If I had backed out of my commitment, I would look back on that day with shame. Actually, I hadn’t thought about this moment in a long time. It came back to me unexpectedly, though, when I read a report about, of all things, military courts.

Continue reading