Panama is generating a great deal
of interest in Pakistan these days because it has that C-word associated with it that resonates with most middle class Pakistanis. That word is ‘corruption’. A fresh leak on May 9 brings the total number of Pakistanis now linked to offshore accounts to around 400. Karachi hosts the highest number of these people, followed by Lahore and Islamabad. The favourite destinations for these accounts are the British Virgin Islands, the Bahamas and Panama.
In Pakistan the narrative on offshore companies has ranged from completely illegal to now legal but unethical. The concepts of morality, righteousness and integrity were flung about in abundance as the prime minister’s sons, Hasan and Hussain, were named in the first release of the Panama Papers.
That is one of reasons why Imran Khan’s recent revelation of owning an offshore company on the advice of his accountant is a bit startling. And his defence for it is even more so. Are we to believe that money evaded in the United Kingdom is halal but the same done in Pakistan is not? Regardless of which way the money went afterwards the act to avoid or evade taxes leaves no space for a moral high ground. Or are we to differentiate between ‘good’ offshore companies and ‘bad’ offshore companies as more and more leaders of the opposition come to be associated with offshore holdings?
Accountability is good for governance and consequently the public. However, it cannot be selective. Holding one set of benchmark for government and another for themselves, the opposition reminds of how job interviews are sometimes conducted in Pakistan.
In such interviews, one candidate may be rejected for something that is deemed inconsequential for another candidate who got selected. Reasons for this can range from the mood of the interviewer to some reference that worked for the selected candidate. But overall the interview process is considered fair because most of the candidates were not accorded that favour. This approach is anything but just. Justice would be that if room is given to one candidate it should be accorded to even those who are not backed by ‘invisible’ hands.
Hence, there should be no room for selective accountability with the Panama leaks. The current mood of the public is very unforgiving and rightly so. Why must they pay taxes when the rulers and office bearers in government and opposition hide their stash offshore? Government must make progress on this issue, as it not only hurts their credibility, it also hurts their tax collection drive and damages the political process.
Corruption allegations have been centrestage in the past when elected governments have been ousted prematurely. Such interventions have always been detrimental to the country in the long run. This time however any extra-constitutional intervention seems unlikely, because there are already many fronts open for the current establishment with anti-terror operations high on the agenda, as operations are being conducted in Waziristan, Karachi and now even Punjab to some extent. Also, an outgoing army chief, arguably Pakistan’s most popular army chief in recent times, will not risk tarnishing his image by giving tacit approval to anything unconstitutional.
However, things don’t remain the same for long in Pakistan especially as people get disenchanted with the political process very quickly. The fact that politicians wash their dirty linen in public, as is now the case with the Panama leaks, doesn’t help the cause. If the present stalemate continues the best outcome will be that the democratic setup prevails albeit with the civil-military equation further skewed to the disadvantage of the civilians.
The rejection of the terms of reference by the Chief Justice in this regard was the right step forward in the Panama inquiry, as the dillydallying between the government and the opposition could now stop, with actual names being given to the commission. However, what we saw after the prime minister’s address to the parliament was a strange opposition walkout.
Hopefully, the Panama leaks probe would not go the way of the Islamabad dharna (sit-in), which could have been a watershed moment for Pakistan’s electoral process. Tangible results could have been achieved for all future elections if the opposition had seized the moment when it presented itself to reform the structural faults in the electoral system. That attempt went haywire due to misaligned political aspirations that we can ill afford this time.
The writer is a freelance columnist and professional services consultant based in Islamabad. He can be reached on Twitter @raj_omer