Men in power resigning for any cause, and that too on moral grounds, in any developing country can unarguably be nothing short of mythopoeia. That bit of knowledge was never surprising, the fact that a large part of our literate society continues to believe in such myths, just because the Europeans used to do that, is the remarkably baffling part. And notice the past tense when referring to Europeans resigning on moral grounds; even there the winds of change have started to blow wild and free. The new normal is to cling onto power as long as you can by hook or by crook; democracy’s evolution, if at all, is in reverse gear. The celebrity electronic media experts, be it anchors or senior analysts- there being no such thing as a junior analyst, will loudly refute the above observation, simply because they have too. The facade that the ruling elite in a democracy is accountable and dictated by moral ethics must be continued if their own job, in fact their very profession, is to survive. A righteous journalist, if there is such a being, cannot survive or even exist under an authoritarian rule; they purge them in Turkey, China, Russian and the likes, and under military dictatorship in Pakistan they, the journalists, were consigned to oblivion. So for their own interest, which is obviously a good pay package, they must pursue the democracy mantra and all the attached fiction, including accountability. The politicians must also speak the same language. When in opposition they have to keep propagating the illusion of institutions and accountability for it is to their advantage. However, when they are in the driving seat, they have to be creative about dreaming up arguments, which, while maintaining the illusion completely, exonerates them from any misgivings in their day to day business. In this objective of theirs they are aptly facilitated by the very short memories of the masses who seem to very quickly forget that the eventual outcome of any efforts to coral the rich and powerful is almost always nothing. And even if by a quirk of faith, the rich and powerful do get exposed once in a while, so what? It is not as if the masses can do anything; short memories and money are sufficient ammunition for any election. And if that does not work, anything but the truth, the bigger the better, will work just as well; as ably demonstrated by American elections this time. “Penn Jillette, the famous illusionist and larger, louder partner of the Penn & Teller act, is also a bit of a political philosopher. Penn argues that illusionists are much like politicians. They want the audience to look here when the real action is going on there.” Edward H. Crane in his article, “The illusion of Accountability”. With this background, and having been disenfranchised by extreme circumstances almost a decade ago, coupled with an ideological disagreement with the system of universal suffrage, it is rather amusing to sit on the fence and see passions flying all over, wondering whether these common mortals will ever learn. Proponents of both sides furiously debating the proceedings of the superior court, culminating with the coming of winter, resulting in the social media going completely berserk. Some of the content on the social media is beyond the simple definition of the phrase, “Contempt of court”. While the conventional wisdom, perhaps rightly, was unanimous about nothing happening, there were many who hoped against hope. At the end of the day, what everybody does need to come to terms with is that anytime the powerful are taken to task by a system by, for and of them, it is an exception to the rule. In the aftermath of the double financial disasters, because of which trillions of dollars of wealth was wiped out and many a poor in the West, and the middle class, lost their homes or their money in the bank, as in the case of Greece, how many of those responsible paid for their follies or misfeasance? If at all any Banks President, or a rating agency CEO or any top decision maker in the public sector or a politician at the top, which I for one cannot recall at all, did go to jail, rest assured that that person was the exception, if not a scapegoat. And how did the Western governments tackle the situation, they printed more money under the garb of a technical sounding scheme which they handed over to the very institutions responsible for the collapse. And at the end of the day did anybody resign? In our domestic environments many commissions have come and gone, some even came out with a report, which was allowed to be come out, while life goes on at the top echelons of society. The superior court in the past took many suo moto cases and the public enthusiastically supported that era, and even a prime minister lost his job; albeit in substance the mansions could never be accounted for. Ironically, what we don’t seem to understand is that if the objective is to provide justice to the common man, it would be more appropriate if governments invested in improving the police services as well as taking judicial reforms. At minimum, increasing the number of judges simply to ensure that justice is not delayed beyond a reasonable time, which cannot be more than three years, even in Dewani cases, should be the top priority of every successive government. The fact that even the electronic media seems to ignore the biggest plight of the common man is bizarre; I have always wondered why all the news channels and their anchors don’t unite in this particular task of pressurising those in the corridors of power into improving the provision of justice to the common Pakistani. The simple conclusion is that in the Game of Thrones, only a “Stark”, a “Targaryen”, a “Lannister” or similar noble house can sit on the iron throne. And every country has their set of noble houses that have exclusive claim over the right to rule as the king. There are times when usurpers succeed, but at the end of the day that is temporary. If the rest of us were pragmatic enough we would accept that a ruler called by whatever name, a President, a Prime Minister, a Chancellor or any other title is a King and of all the ways a King can be chosen, the ruled electing one is the most ridiculous. I agree this one is below the belt; it strikes at the very mirage that keeps many supporters of democracy hopeful of accountability and evolution. It shatters the image that has been fostered in their mind that this time it is different, things will change, knowing deep down that they never will; after all where is the evidence that they have before. But dear readers, would it not be less hypocritical if we accepted the hard facts, and won’t it hurt less? And we can stop bothering about what is right and wrong and get on with our lives; after all it hardly matters! Sitting smiling on my work station; definitely a blow below the belt! The writer is a chartered accountant based in Islamabad and can be reached at syed.bakhtiyarkazmi@gmail.com