Ahead of the expected pomp and show surrounding tomorrow’s ceremonies in Islamabad to celebrate the annual Defence of Pakistan day, a record number of hangings of murder convicts just in the past week was meant to showcase an important message.
The government of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is eager to demonstrate its newly found resolve in dealing with hardened criminals. It stands in sharp contrast to the time wasted and opportunity of surprise clearly squandered by spending months over eventually futile peace negotiations with Taliban militants. Eventually, Sharif was proven wrong by sceptics of that initiative.
The practice of hangings of condemned militants was resumed in December years after remaining suspended, in the wake of a particularly gruesome Taliban attack at a school in the northern city of Peshawar. In brief, sending convicts to the gallows has emerged under Sharif as a measure which will deter would be murderers.
However, even if the logic of using the death sentence works in theory, the practical dimension of this choice raises fundamentally significant questions. Pakistan’s history is replete with claims from human rights activists suggesting one instance of miscarriage of justice after another. The choice of removing the moratorium on the death sentence to restore eventual calm is indeed easier said than done.
Historically to this day, the 1979 hanging of the prime minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto stands out as a controversial case in point. That event remains surrounded by controversy over the extent to which Bhutto’s hanging was driven by no more than a personal vendetta of the late General Zia ul Haq — the former military ruler who seized power from the late prime minister in a 1977 military coup.
Indeed, Bhutto’s case remains markedly different from the scores of cases of known thugs and criminals now on the death row in Pakistan. And yet, the paucity of iron clad mechanisms to ensure above board and independent prosecutions, remains a significant challenge.
In the run up to the latest hangings, the case of Shafqat Hussain whose hanging has been put on hold for now, stood out as an eye opener. His lawyers argued that at the time of his arrest in a murder case, Hussain was just 14 and therefore under-aged for purposes of prosecution and ultimate sentencing to death.
Moreover, if indeed the hangings are meant to ensure a significant improvement in Pakistan’s overall security environment, circumstances surrounding tomorrow’s Defence of Pakistan day provide ample food for thought. Pakistan’s sufferings have far more to do with the failure of its leaders to set a new and progressively improved path for the country, than the failure to get tough with criminals.
Notwithstanding frequent claims to the contrary by Sharif’s government, notably his Finance Minister Ishaq Dar, Pakistan remains locked in one of the worst periods for its economy. Across the country, widespread poverty stands amply in contrast to the ruling structure’s promises of prosperity waiting to arrive imminently.
Discernible difference
New investments from credible investors have practically dried up while the few making their appearance on the horizon include those ridden with controversy. Defending Pakistan will indeed remain an unaccomplished dream unless the country’s population begins to feel a discernible difference in their quality of life. Clearly, there is a yawning gap between what is evident and what is necessary to make the difference.
Going forward, defending Pakistan will fundamentally be about the country’s success or not in overseeing long overdue internal reforms. It is an idea that will eventually hinge on factors like the future of a robust improvement in literacy levels that remain way too low. In contrast to the officially provided statistics, Pakistan fundamentally remains a country with a majority of illiterates.
Moreover, rule of law was squandered long ago not just with the advance by militants, but also as the footprint of the numerically small VVIPs grew across the country. Since Pakistan’s return to democracy in 2008, the role of the VVIPs in stepping the country back from reforms appears to have only grown.
The most glaring statistical evidence to that emerging reality is found nowhere more than in the figures on inflows from foreign sources. In contrast to 2008 when Pakistan received almost $8.5 billion (Dh31.2 billion) in annual receipts from privatisation, foreign direct investments and investments in the stock market combined together, the figure today by comparison runs in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
The major difference in the overall environment is visibly two-pronged. On the one hand, stories of corruption in high places make the rounds while on the other hand the priorities have indeed shifted dramatically away from where they ought to have mattered the most.
In the run up to tomorrow’s ceremony, the residents of Islamabad have been powerfully reminded of the dismal state surrounding the country’s capital. Large parts of central Islamabad remain dug up and under construction to pave the way for a new fancy bus project. This is just one of the many initiatives by Sharif to drive the focus on physical infrastructure leading to fast trains, highways and other such facilities.
Yet, these initiatives say little about the future of Pakistan’s human infrastructure which continues to suffer endlessly. Across the network of government provided schools, there is virtually no evidence of the state of Pakistan stepping in vigorously to stem the rot. A similar story surrounds the network of officially provided health care facilities.
Clearly, these gaps will always work against the idea of strengthening the defence of Pakistan. Ahead of tomorrow’s events in Islamabad, the hangings may have stirred some controversy. But there are other gaps waiting to be filled as Pakistan goes through one of the toughest periods in its history.
Farhan Bokhari is a Pakistan-based commentator who writes on political and economic matters.
‘Defending Pakistan’ may remain a dream
Even if the logic of using the death sentence works in theory, the practical dimension of this choice raises fundamentally significant questions