Daily Times

The European Union (EU) instituted the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) Plus status to encourage countries to commit to improving the status of human rights and good governance. Under it a country with the status is expected to ratify and implement 27 international conventions. Pakistan was granted this status in late 2013. This enabled Pakistan to gain duty-free access to European markets and has helped our textile and garments exports considerably. The economic advantage has been tremendous and, as a Pakistani, one hopes that GSP Plus status continues to benefit Pakistan for years to come.

However, one feels that the objective with which the GSP Plus was granted to Pakistan has remained largely, if not wholly, unfulfilled. Let us consider the first of the 27 conventions, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR is a veritable framework for a progressive democratic society, the kind of society every Pakistani should hope for. To our lasting shame, during the build up to Pakistan’s ratification of the ICCPR, the Pakistani government in 2011 tried to introduce pointless reservations to several articles of the ICCPR. Ultimately, most of these were withdrawn under international pressure.

The two reservations that Pakistan persisted with were vis-à-vis Articles 3 and 25. Article 3 states, “The states parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure the equal right of men and women to the enjoyment of all civil and political rights set forth in the present Covenant.” Article 25 states, “Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in article two and without unreasonable restrictions: (a) to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives, (b) to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections, which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors, (c) to have access, on general terms of equality, to public service in his country.” The country’s refusal to accept the principle of gender equality in these terms absolutely on the one hand and the refusal to allow every citizen to have access on general terms of equality to elected office and to engage in public service in his country has to be read in the context of the discriminatory provisions of the Pakistani legal system as a whole as well as the Constitution.

In so far as women’s equality is concerned, it was dealt a deathblow by General Zia’s government through Article 17 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984, whereby a woman’s testimony in financial matters was reduced half. The second reservation deals with the fact that non-Muslims are unfairly and unjustly barred from becoming the president or the Prime Minister (PM) of the country under the Pakistani Constitution. So long as these provisions stay in our legal system and our Constitution, any promises of equality for women or religious minorities in Pakistan sound hollow.

In terms of Article 25 of the ICCPR, it must be recalled that minorities, especially Christians, in Pakistan have long demanded effective representation and not just token representation. At the moment, the 10 seats reserved for minorities are filled by mainstream political parties according to their sweet will. The representatives who come in through this process do not enjoy the confidence of Pakistan’s religious minorities. Therefore, Pakistan’s 10 million non-Muslims are without any real representation in Pakistan’s parliament and consequently feel marginalised and without a share of real power in the country. Is it any wonder then that Pakistan’s non-Muslim citizens feel like children of a lesser god in their own country?

Even on articles where Pakistan has expressed no reservations, there are countless violations. Article 18 of the ICCPR states: “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.” This corresponds to Article 20 of the Pakistani Constitution but, despite this fundamental right granted to Pakistani citizens, laws such as the pernicious Ordinance XX of 1984, which targets specifically the Ahmedis in Pakistan, continue to exist. One bookseller from that community faces eight years in prison for selling books to his own community. Ahmedis have been arrested and jailed for something as benign as saying the Islamic greeting of Assalamulaikum (peace be upon you). Even otherwise and despite Article 18 of the ICCPR and Article 20 of the Constitution, both of which allow propagation of one’s faith, missionary activities by non-Muslims are stopped by the state. The fundamental right to religious freedom is in practical reality non-existent.

Another area of concern is child marriages, which the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) has endorsed. This violates Pakistan’s commitment under the Convention on Child Rights, which recognises the age of maturity as 18 years. Pakistan’s existing law, i.e. Restraint of Child Marriages Act 1929, places the minimum age of marriage for a woman at 16 years. This needs to be updated through effective federal legislation (since human rights is a federal legislative subject). The National Assembly’s (NA’s) refusal to consider a bill banning child marriage recently on the grounds that the CII considered it un-Islamic shows that the chances of that happening in the near future are very slim.

These are only some of the instances where Pakistan has woefully failed to live up to its international obligations under the Conventions that have been made obligatory by its GSP Plus status. The EU’s Joint Staff Working Document released on January 28, 2016, for some unknown reason, was exceptionally soft on Pakistan in its language, failing to point out these glaring gaps and omissions on the part of Pakistan. As much as one wants Pakistan to have the GSP Plus status, our rulers have shown no interest in honestly implementing the Conventions they were required to. It is hard therefore to escape the conclusion that the GSP Plus programme has failed to improve human rights and good governance in Pakistan.

The writer is a lawyer based in Lahore and the author of the book Mr Jinnah: Myth and Reality. He can be contacted via twitter @therealylh and through his email address yasser.hamdani@gmail.com