WITH the dust from the PDM’s implosion still not fully settled, the PTI is now faced with growing dissension from within its own ranks which threatens to expose the latent fissures within the party rank and file. At the heart of this brewing crisis is PTI’s former secretary general Jahangir Khan Tareen. He and his son are facing allegations of money laundering and price manipulation as one of the major players in the sugar industry. Multiple FIRs have been registered against them and their numerous accounts frozen while FIA, the investigating agency, continues to summon them for questioning. Mr Tareen has denied all these charges and says he is being hounded for political reasons. For a year he kept quiet and stayed on the sidelines but since last week, he has started to speak out. In fact, others from within the party also began to vocalise their support for him. First a few Punjab cabinet ministers and parliamentarians accompanied him to the summons, and then more than two dozen federal and provincial parliamentarians of the PTI attended a dinner at his home to show their support.
This should worry the PTI leadership. So far Mr Tareen’s supporters have been careful not to criticise their top leaders and have requested a meeting with Prime Minister Imran Khan in an attempt to persuade him that Mr Tareen is being wronged. Mr Tareen himself has chosen his words carefully and refused to be baited into saying anything unfavourable about the prime minister. However, the number of people standing with him, and their argument that he is being persecuted by people within the party, is reflective of the disgruntlement that is brewing ominously inside the PTI. In terms of power politics, this could have dangerous consequences for the PTI government in Punjab. There are speculations that PTI parliamentarians openly supporting Mr Tareen against their party could constitute a forward bloc inside the Punjab Assembly. With the Usman Buzdar government having a thin majority, a forward bloc could present a clear and present danger for the PTI-PML-Q ruling coalition.
This does not mean that Mr Tareen should not be moved against if he is suspected of wrongdoing. There is merit in Prime Minister Khan’s statement that he will hold everyone accountable regardless of whether the person is associated with his party or the opposition. In this endeavour though, the government has to ensure that the process of accountability is indeed across the board. The evidence so far, unfortunately, is to the contrary. While Mr Tareen is accused of manipulating the sugar prices for profit, there are many sugar barons within the PTI ranks who have not been charged with similar offences. If Mr Tareen is successful in convincing more people in the PTI that he is a victim of some conspiracy, he can create serious problems for Mr Khan.
Power to arrest
A SUPREME Court verdict announced on Thursday spelled out what might be considered a self-evident truth in any well-ordered society. According to the five-page judgement authored by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, a police officer must have due cause to arrest an individual without a warrant and place him under detention. The authority afforded to him by the law to take this action is permissive, not obligatory. At issue was a case concerning the murder of three people who were shot dead in December 2019; five brothers and three unidentified individuals had been nominated in the FIR as the assailants. On March 3, 2020, a sixth brother, who was nominated as an abettor, petitioned the Supreme Court against the cancellation of his pre-arrest bail by the Lahore High Court. The LHC in its ruling had declared such relief to be extraordinary, one that could only be extended to an innocent person implicated in the case on mala fide grounds, but the accused, it said, had failed to prove such ill-intent. The Supreme Court, however, has held that mala fide being a state of mind cannot always be established through direct evidence and must be inferred with the help of the circumstances of the case. The verdict points out that the relevant section of Police Order 2002 lays down this legal position when it stipulates that it is the duty of every police officer to “apprehend all persons whom he is legally authorised to apprehend and for whose apprehension sufficient grounds exist”.
What might seem an obvious truth in a more equitable society needs to be underscored in a country where the coercive power of the state is far too often employed not to maintain law and order, but to control and suppress. A police in service of various pressure groups can round up ‘troublesome’ citizens on the strength of mere allegations or fake FIRs. Political opponents can be conveniently silenced and removed from the public eye in the same way. The manner in which the powers of arrest are exercised has a bearing on the fundamental rights to liberty and due process and therefore must be used judiciously. The Supreme Court judgement rightly asserts that pre-arrest bail acts as a check on the police’s power to arrest people. By assessing whether the material before it is incriminating enough to justify arrest, the courts can be a bulwark against injustice.
Unequal vaccine distribution
IT is in times of crisis that we often see the best — or worst — of humanity. In this regard, the pandemic has put the world’s compassion to test. The rate at which rich nations are buying up vaccines from manufacturers that have a finite supply has been described by the WHO chief as “grotesque”. This week, as the body missed its target of seeing vaccines being administered in every country on the 100th day of 2021, Tedros Adhanom once again called out the shocking imbalance in vaccine distribution between rich and poor countries. He also noted that most countries do not have enough vaccines to cover their health workers or vulnerable groups. Of the over 730m vaccines administered all over the world, some 49pc have been injected in rich countries. In contrast, a mere 0.1pc have been administered in the 29 lowest-income countries.
The fact that developing countries are struggling to vaccinate even at-risk segments of the population, while rich nations administer jabs to even young, low-risk citizens is unacceptable. Israel, which has been lauded for its efficient vaccine roll-out and marvellous Covid-19 recovery, has done so at the expense of the Palestinians, who were deprived of vaccinations simply because Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wished to send doses to countries that had agreed to move their embassies to Jerusalem. Though inequalities have always existed, the pandemic has underscored how self-serving interests and discriminatory policies have further marginalised vulnerable segments. Without equitable vaccine distribution, those in poor countries will suffer greatly in the long run. In many of these countries, life expectancy is low and infant mortality high. These factors coupled with low vaccination rates mean these countries will take years to recover. Economically strong countries ought to aid vaccine procurement and disbursement. Though many leaders in countries with high vaccination rates are congratulating themselves for ‘a job well done’, they ought to realise they are creating a false sense of security. Covid-19 mutations will continue to be a threat, until the majority of the world is vaccinated.
