Pakistan is a long way from realising the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to which it became a signatory to in September 2015. However, the goals are in line with what Pakistan has to do in order to embark on the path of development and prosperity. By virtue of being goals set out by the United Nations, the adoption of SDGs into national policy would mean international support and even funds in order to achieve them. And while Pakistan’s development outline Vision 2025 is synchronised with the SDGs, perhaps greater focus needs to be given on taking concrete steps in order to achieve them.
Ending poverty and hunger are two important SDGs, and here the shortcomings of Pakistani government are glaringly apparent. It is not just that there is inequality in Pakistan, but that a big part of the population lives under the absolute poverty line i.e. less than 1.25 dollars a day. Pakistan’s own upper limit for measuring poverty stands at Rs 3,030 per adult, which is less than 1.25 dollars a day, and according to that criterion around one-third of Pakistan’s population is poor. This means that a sizeable part of the population is unable to attain even the most basic services such as education, health care, sanitation and access to criminal justice system. Furthermore, this level of poverty exacerbates the problem of food insecurity in Pakistan. And this is where effective governance systems are lacking. Pakistan produces sufficient quantities of food, but as a result of information asymmetries and a lack of proper distribution system, there are people who do not have access to these food supplies.
Unfortunately, it is not just that Pakistan lacks well developed policies and institutions to tackle these issues, but even the articulation of these needs in the national narrative is badly wanting. The mainstream political parties of Pakistan are more occupied with power games at the top than to fight for these issues that plague the majority of the people. And in the absence of a holistic development discourse, the impetus for capacity building and inclusive development does not materialise.
Gender equality is another SDG that needs a great deal of work in Pakistan. Mostly in rural areas but not limited to them, and with greater intensity in lower socioeconomic classes but at the same time cutting across the class divide, a very toxic form of patriarchy exists in Pakistan. In it honour is conflated with control of women, resulting in widespread violence against them. There are cases where women are not allowed to leave the house, and even killed over supposed notions of ‘honour’. In addition to measures aimed at protecting women from this violence and empowering them, education is one long-term method through which this social evil can be completely eliminated. Unfortunately, the state of public education is deplorable, to say the least. Under-qualified teachers, badly devised curriculum, and subpar textbooks are problems that are exacerbated by a lack of schools, whether at the primary or the secondary levels.
These are all issues that demand greater attention from government than they are presently being accorded. And part of the blame also lies on the media, which in the pursuit of sensationalism, does not give these issues adequate space. Palliative remedies such as jingoistic chest thumping is often used as distraction from these issues, while also steering the debate away from them. Needless to say this state of affairs has to change if Pakistan wants to prosper. Work on improving development indicators has to be started so that Pakistan can get the support of international organisations to address these issues. Such work would also help in improving the image of Pakistan abroad as a country that is committed to making the lives of its people better, and helping the world achieve its SDGs. After all, it is such measures that add up to into a transformative force that changes the fate of nations.
What will street protests achieve?
The leadership of two mainstream political parties has once again agreed to launch a country-wide protest movement against the government allegedly due to its inability to take Panama leaks scandal to its logical end. Reportedly, opposition parties have decided to take to the streets in October to give tough time to the government on the issue of Panama leaks after a meeting between Opposition Leader in the National Assembly Khursheed Shah and Jamaat-e-Islami chief Siraj-ul-Haq on September 20.
The decision to protest could be connoted as absurdity on part of the opposition given the present situation in the country. What will be the benefit of street protests other than causing disorder and creating a law and order situation in the country? Despite the availability of other platforms like parliament and the Supreme Court, the idea to get engaged in street protests lacks wisdom. Pakistan is already undergoing a critical situation. Islamabad is having a hard time countering allegations of New Delhi after the terror attack in Uri, Kashmir, while Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif is on a tour to the US to make a speech in the General Assembly session of the UN with an aim to convince the world about his country’s stance on the Kashmir issue. How would the world believe in the stance of the PM when the opposition back at home is expressing no confidence on the elected representative of the country? It would only create a credibility crisis for the PM.
Having said that, holding peaceful protests is the democratic right of every citizen; however, there are certain limits for such protests. Protesting outside the personal residence of the elected leadership reeks of political recklessness, something that is avoidable until all avenues have been checked. So far taking to the streets by the opposition has proved a futile strategy. It has more bad side effects than good. Violent protests badly affect the country’s economy. The opposition needs pragmatism, not some vague ideology to deal with the Panama issue. It would be more suitable for the opposition to wait and knock at the proper platform instead of creating chaos. Ironically, those political parties are talking about accountability that have either ruled the country while facing allegations of corruption or have remained part of illegitimate regimes in the past. Do they believe that the PM can be removed forcibly? It is in the interests of the country that the present rulers should be allowed to complete their term. The masses bear the brunt of these political games. Due to protest calls by the opposition, government cannot focus on the development sector in the country while foreign investment remains elusive due to political uncertainty. It is also the responsibility of government that it should not provide a chance to the opposition to launch street protests. Rather, all issues and differences must be sorted out in parliament.
The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz-led government, like any other government in a democratic set-up, is answerable to the people of Pakistan, and without further ado, the prime minister and his coterie of advisors should devise a mechanism to respond to all allegations of corruption in the framework of transparency and law.*
Political parties and terror outfits
Addressing an event marking the new judicial year 2016-17, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Anwar Zaheer Jamali observed that terrorism is not only generated from foreign elements but also from within the county. He said that such elements get internal support to perpetrate their nefarious acts. “Unfortunately, some political parties support terror elements for personal interests,” said CJP. “This court had observed in cases related to worsening law and order situation in Karachi and Balochistan that contact and relations were found between subversive elements and different political and religious parties,” said the CJP, adding such issues should immediately be addressed. He added that the judiciary and legal community were also being targeted in acts of terrorism in order to threaten this institution entrusted with the responsibility of ensuring justice.
In the recent past, the top court was criticised for unnecessarily intervening in administrative work. However, responding to such criticism, the CJP observed that the judiciary tried to assume the original jurisdiction of suo moto action in order to dispel such impressions. “But keeping in view the constitutional obligations, this court cannot close its eyes and prevention becomes inevitable in case fundamental rights are violated,” the CJP said. Moreover, the CJP said that the judiciary was fully aware of the problems faced by litigants due to delay in disposal of cases. Therefore, several steps were initiated to address the issues of litigants. He urged the legal community to fully cooperate with the judiciary in order to realise the goal of ensuring speedy justice to people.
Links of political parties with terror elements is no hidden secret anymore. Finding of recent times have opened many such links. From violent student federations to allegedly having contacts with terror outfits, political parties have especially used religion for personal gains.
The phenomenon is not recent. Benazir Bhutto was accused of giving birth to the Taliban government. Bhutto, along with her interior minister, Naseerullah Babar, had allegedly supported the Taliban movement, which helped Mullah Omar-led group to defeat Afghan Mujahedeen and establish government in 1996. Religion had been openly misused in dictatorships as well. The reign of General Zia-ul-Haq is an evident example.
In recent times, the situation in Karachi and Balochistan had worsened, and alleged militant wings of political parties had been accused of worsening the situation. Another reason of the misuse of religion and propagation of militant wings is that religious parties despite not being in power enjoy great power in Pakistan. Except for a few instances during cosmetic governments under dictatorships, religious and right wing parties have not been able to establish any sort of real popularity that could turn into electoral power among the masses.
The question here is not just to rid the political parties of their militant wings. It is about a whole culture that has ingrained in both political parties as well as non-democratic elements that have used religion and violence for the justification of their regimes. There is a need to get rid of that culture rather than merely apprehending members of political parties who are alleged to use terror to gain hegemony.
