The political temperature of Islamabad is rising even as the nights get colder with the onset of winter. The government has started a preemptive crackdown before the much-publicised lockdown. Many Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) workers have been arrested, heavy contingents of the police and the Frontier Corps have been deployed, and the Lal Haveli is being sealed. Somehow, Sheikh Rasheed has managed to get himself promoted from a political non-entity to a nuisance the government would rather not see much of on the November 2 dharna (sit-in) à la lockdown. This must be of immense satisfaction to him. Regardless, it would be interesting to see how events unfold before the main event, but it is quite evident that the government has decided that they are not taking it lying down this time around.
The narrative that a self-serving ruling elite wriggles its way out of every attempt at accountability always sells well in countries like Pakistan where a majority of the population just manages to get by. Frustration is high on the apparent lack of institutional accountability. Imran Khan has managed to capitalise on this by a well-crafted but myopic narrative on corruption and accountability. No doubt, he has struck a chord with a section of the population that will now serve as the subordinate role in this next play of power politics, with Khan playing the chief protagonist.
It is widely accepted that no government should go unchecked, and its malpractices should always be exposed by the opposition. If they cash in on it for political gains it is a normative procedure. To this extent almost everyone in Pakistan would agree with the PTI and its allies. But the downside of their approach is the narrow definition they have for who to hold accountable and how to go about doing it. The terms of reference (ToR) proposed by the opposition are an illustration. The focus of the opposition’s ToR was that investigation on offshore holdings should be started with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif because he is in government and the head of the state. The government wanted a more generalised approach with more names to be included, and hence an agreement on ToR was not concluded.
Surprisingly, the PTI and its cohorts are only interested in this government. All that talk of corruption scandals in the previous government or the one before it rings quite hollow as they are hardly mentioned now. The natural corollary to the above is that you are culpable to alleged acts of corruption only if you are in power. As soon as you complete your term in office the attention deflects to the next government in office. Just manage a successful transition to the next government, and everything will be conveniently forgotten because it is only the incumbent that is of interest to opportunists in the opposition. Pray tell, is this then not a warped sense of accountability?
Over time, Pakistanis have developed trust issues with public service institutions like the judiciary and the police. To them, justice is neither cheap nor readily available. The police culture is vindictive, and so taking to the roads is an obvious alternate and a last resort for them. Interestingly, one friend even pointed out that talk of institutional integrity and accountability accompanied with a due process of law is mostly just bookish knowledge, and that there was no institution even involved in the making of Pakistan. Agreed, I said. But what needs to be understood is that while nations may not require institutions to carve out a country for themselves, they certainly need them to run a country. Hence, the importance of improving upon the due process and those state entities involved in it cannot be emphasised enough. Yet, there is hardly any discourse on national media about improving those ailments that plague public services in Pakistan. Clearly, agenda-setting is defined by viewership rather than the greater good.
Lockdowns and incessant dharnas should be discouraged. It is not in the interest of the civil society, and certainly not the political class of which Khan is a part. Courts are the sole recourse to justice, and that’s how it should be. And in case you are wondering that courts don’t hand out decisions you want them to, please know that that their job is to hand out verdicts on what is presented before them, and not on what we want from them.
If a lack of evidence hinders the court process in giving out sentences to the accused then a gap analysis should be done to improve the process rather than placing a question mark on the institution. Neither the salaried class nor the privileged elite will fear accountability even if a sitting prime minister is ousted because of a sit-in here or a sit-in there. Optics such as accountability might sell to a willing audience, but it will be business as usual, eventually.
The writer is an Islamabad-based professional services consultant. He can be reached at [email protected] and on twitter @rajomer